I guess in 1966 Ford decided to get with a silver paint, rather than chrome?
My Scott Drake emblems are this way and at first I thought they were just crappy quality, but I guess this was a true difference in the part from 1965 ( chrome ) to 1966
Can anyone confirm this?
Here I thought I knew a couple things about mustangs
The '66 style was originally an anodized finish, like the 289 fender emblems. This finish is a shiny silver appearance, not as brilliant as chrome.
If my memory serves me right the early GT emblems were made from a ceramic material called cloisone on a pot metal base for the most of the 65 model run. I'm not sure when the change over occured but Ford then starting using a plastic based material for 1966. In my opinion the early 65 GT emblems were much nicer.
I agree, if it wasn't for those damn barrel locks and the risk to remove them, I think I might be inclined to run the 1965 style GT badges...
My thinking is that back in the day (1965) Ford somehow figured out that they were spending too much on the emblems and sought out to make them cheaper for 1966-that said I believe that if I had a '66 GT that I would stick with the '66 GT emblems.
I have a pair of NOS 65 and a pair of 66 NOS ones in front of me and the weight difference is remarkable. I'm sure Ford did it for a cost cutting issue.
According to the Ford master parts catalog, the change from the 65 style emblem to the 66 style emblem was approximately on 10/1/65. The 66 style emblem is actually a 66 Fairlane piece and the Fairlane only used the 66 style and never the 65 Mustang style emblem.
-Fred-
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
