1966-67 HCS 1966 gt

[bblamb]

I am getting ready to buy a 1966 convertible. The seller says that they purchased it believing that it was a true factory GT. The engine code is C. I have read that the GT package would have a A or K engine code. But I also read that neither of the high performance 289 engines were included in the GT package. If you wanted the them you had to pay extra to get the hipo engine. You did get GT badges, GT stripe, front fog lamps, dual exhaust through the rear valance, front disc brakes and the GT gas cap. The code shows that this mustang came out of the San Jose factory. Is it possible that this mustang has a factory installed GT package with a C code 289 CID 2 barrel carburetor? It also has a factory air/smog pump. Was this just on the cars that were produced in San Jose? Thanks in advance for any help

 

[mechanicalguy48]

There is a difference between factory installed and dealer installed items. Numerous sources say the factory did not build GT's in 65/66 with any engine except the A or K code. There are also numerous sources that say they have GT's with a C code engine but those are highly likely to be dealer installed or owner installed after the fact. In your case unless the seller can provide proof the car will never be recognized by any authority as a true GT. I believe Mustang Monthly had an article last year about a supposed C code GT but MCA does not recognize anything but A and K code GT's.

 

[J_Speegle]

....... Is it possible that this mustang has a factory installed GT package with a C code 289 CID 2 barrel carburetor?

NO And I don't believe there has been a documented "dealer GT" found. IMHO if they are not being forthcoming with this detail there are other "things" that they are not telling you also.

It also has a factory air/smog pump. Was this just on the cars that were produced in San Jose? Thanks in advance for any help

No Thermactor systems in 66 were installed at other plants also.

 

[Mustanger]

Years ago I was very interested in a '65-'66 GT, and I did quite a bit of research on this topic ... here's 2 good articles with some food for thought:

http://www.karmustang.com/factory_gts.php#

http://www.kcode.net/GT65-66.htm

... get the facts and you too can be dangerous :wink: ...

 

[Northern Pony]

The two web sites offered by Mustanger, cover it. In the karmustang web site tips #1 and #7 are the best two tips to distinguish a true GT.
As with all mustangs it is easy to add on options and say you have a GT. In 65/66 you will never find a true GT with a C code, and two barrel 289 engine combo. The A code 289 will have the 4 barrel. I have inspected a lot of early GT mustangs using tip #1 and it has never failed.
BoB

 

[mechanicalguy48]

Well Jeff as I said Mustang Monthly did an article not too long ago on a c code GT. It belongs to MCA judge Wally Short so you can be pretty sure he knows what he is talking about.
http://www.mustangmonthly.com/featuredvehicles/mump_0807_1966_ford_mustang_hardtop_gt/index.html

However I agree you wont find another, but its common to see dealer installed GT options, now how you verify that I dont know.

 

[BroadwayBlue]

Well Jeff as I said Mustang Monthly did an article not too long ago on a c code GT. It belongs to MCA judge Wally Short so you can be pretty sure he knows what he is talking about.
http://www.mustangmonthly.com/featuredvehicles/mump_0807_1966_ford_mustang_hardtop_gt/index.html

However I agree you wont find another, but its common to see dealer installed GT options, now how you verify that I dont know.

I don't see that this article disputes Jeff's statement.

Jeff didn't say there weren't cars with dealer installed GT parts. I believe he is saying, there is no documented "dealer GT" in that the full GT package was done. Including wheels, badges, gas cap, foglights, exhaust, suspension (not sure if that is the case in 66), and the A or K code engine.

All the article states is that Wally's car was made to be GT cosmetically.
It was not a "dealer GT" in the true sense of the word.

He bought the parts to make it look like a GT on the "outside".

However, Garner Ford's parts department had all the goodies to turn Wally's new hardtop into a GT on the outside. As many Mustang owners did back then, Wally bought foglamps, GT stripes and badges, and a GT gas cap. In those days, no one cared if it was an A- or K-code factory GT."

The dual exhaust and wheels didn't come until the later restoration and the engine was never an A or K code.

"During the 1998 restoration, everything was done to make the car authentic to 1966, right down to Styled Steel wheels and GT dual exhaust trumpets. "

I see what Wally did similar to someone with a GT/CS and buying Shelby accessories from the dealer and installing them. (Shelby 10 spoke wheels, Valve covers, etc.)

 

[mechanicalguy48]

I wasnt trying to dispute Jeff's statement. The issue about factory installed GT items is a long and complicated one and this judge bought the car new himself and restored to what he bought from the Ford dealer as he said "However, Garner Ford's parts department had all the goodies to turn Wally's new hardtop into a GT on the outside. As many Mustang owners did back then" Now if that isnt a Dealer installed GT options then what is. You are free to decide what you like. I was simply pointing out that this car exists. I dont believe he is trying to fool anyone and it wont sell for GT prices but its interesting isnt it. If you have proof that these items are dealer installed then if your competing in concours they will be accepted. I assume although it doesnt say there that this is the case for Wally's GT. As the banner read "Many Would Say That A C-Code '66 Hardtop Can't Be A GT. MCA Judge Wally Short Begs To Disagree"

 

[Mosesatm]

I wasnt trying to dispute Jeff's statement. The issue about factory installed GT items is a long and complicated one and this judge bought the car new himself and restored to what he bought from the Ford dealer as he said "However, Garner Ford's parts department had all the goodies to turn Wally's new hardtop into a GT on the outside. As many Mustang owners did back then" Now if that isnt a Dealer installed GT options then what is. You are free to decide what you like. I was simply pointing out that this car exists. I dont believe he is trying to fool anyone and it wont sell for GT prices but its interesting isnt it. If you have proof that these items are dealer installed then if your competing in concours they will be accepted. I assume although it doesnt say there that this is the case for Wally's GT. As the banner read "Many Would Say That A C-Code '66 Hardtop Can't Be A GT. MCA Judge Wally Short Begs To Disagree"

My guess is that Wally Short has been overruled by the other MCA judges, and I don't think the MCA has a class for "Dealer Installed GTs".

Wally can beg to differ all he wants but his car is not a GT by any known definition. It's a tribute.

 

[mechanicalguy48]

Your missing the point. Dealer installed options are accepted in concours and street driven concours classes as are other options, judges may require proof. There is no "GT" class either. Wally short is National Head Judge for 1st Generation Mustangs or at least was in 2006 I think Charles Turner is now

 

[Mosesatm]

Your missing the point. Dealer installed options are accepted in concours and street driven concours classes as are other options, judges may require proof. There is no "GT" class either. Wally short is National Head Judge for 1st Generation Mustangs or at least was in 2006 I think Charles Turner is now

It's entirely possible that you're not explaining your point clearly.

The car has dealer installed GT cosmetic parts. All that means is the owner may not lose points in MCA events for having those parts on his car. It doesn't make it a 'dealer- installed GT'.

If it had the GT drivetrain you may be able to make a kinda sorta argument for it being a 'dealer-installed GT' but all it has is the cosmetics. It's like a dealer installing Shelby cosmetics on a T-code. It's not a Shelby, it's just a T-code with Shelby cosmetics.

 

[J_Speegle]

First the subject is likely not one that should be expanded upon on a Cal Spec site IMHO but I'm just a guest

As for the list offered in a response above I would say that none of the list is the best or more important than another since many do not, on their own, prove or disprove a car. Example would be #1 since this only indicates a dual exhaust car and of course these details are replaced and altered everyday somewhere in this country

The determination IMHO comes down to the evidence and comparing those fact to what you expect to see, expect not to see and everything else


As for the "C Code GT" I understand the claims but have never seen the order form, invoice or paperwork that would indicate that a dealer took a new car, removed the emblems, rocker molding and fenders, filled the emblem and rocker holes and installed all the exterior emblems and parts after repainting sections of the car. All of this on a brand new car.

Now Ford did advertise that "you can make your car a GT" in one ad after the introduction of the option but have never seen a car that was completely changed over. Have seen many (and owned a few) where the owner took their used car and added the grill lights or dual exhaust. Would also add that I've seen a number of C code GT's (even T code ones too) that were guilt and shown in the late 70's to early 80's when our understanding was much different from today.

 

[franklinair]

I agree with Jeff Speegle: this issue would be better suited on VMF's forum.

Neil

 

[BroadwayBlue]

I agree with Jeff Speegle: this issue would be better suited on VMF's forum.

Neil

Still makes for good conversation and learning here...
We're notorious for going off topic here :smile:

Speaking of VMF ... have you tried to get on the VMF forums today? It's going to recovery.gov
April Fools joke maybe?

 

[robert campbell]

The authentication of all specialty “Mustangs” has evolved over the years. Certain options and even the pieces of the options have been “adjusted” over the years. For instance, early on the only lens that where accepted by the MCA for 65 Mustang GT Fog Lights were clear in color. Many of these cars had “amber” colored lens on their fog lights. After a few years MCA decided to “accept” amber colored for fog light lens for these cars. Too many cars had them and proof that is how they were “received” from the dealer. Dealer installed or down the line? Who knows….

Now the fun…. Did they come down the line that way or did they have them installed at the dealer? Are they less authentic if the dealer put them on or they came down the line.

I think mechanicalguy was trying to make a point. Who can tell what a car was down the line and how a dealer may have altered it? If you bought it from a Ford dealer and the “option” or even a “part of an option” may have been installed. Ah the fun! I have watched people armed with the “conventional wisdom” of the day dress down an original car owner. Tell him “that part was added” and wrong!! The original owner stands in disbelief. “But that is how I bought it from “Smith Ford”!! Yes, it may have been modified by he dealer. Is it any less authentic?

I have learned to preface my comments with “to my knowledge that is different” or some other term. I agree that in 65 and 66 Ford literature says “A” or “K” code only for a GT. And when resale of a car is considered, cars that meet conventional wisdom will be more accepted. But never discount what a dealer may have done. It was bought from the show room floor as what it was.

I had a friend that had a 65 Falcon that had 1963 window roll up handles on it. It was a one owner car!! He was deducted at a show for that. Later it was found that during a period in 1965 that they ran out of the window roll up handles. It was documented in a “Ford Bulletin” that they ran out in a certain time frame and installed what they had. On the assembly line!!

Wish I had been there during 1965 to 1973! Bet there are many more anomalies out there!! Be opened minded when it comes to “orginality”!

Rob

 

[mechanicalguy48]

I can tell you that when I was at the factory we did cars for the other workers so that they could buy them at the employee lots. Lots of times we added chrome and engines that were never combinations you could buy. It was overlooked by management because they wanted to do it too. I remember and old friend retiree we built a plain jane (on paper) F150 truck for him in the engine garage that had a 390 hipo(hand built), overdrive, special rear end, all the luxury items and every goody we could find. He picked it up at the employee lot for about $1500 and took it too Hawaii with him,,,that was one nice truck. The next owner will never understand where his truck got all those pieces that never saw production.