GT verification revisited

dunc289_old · January 9, 2010 at 10:47 AM

As covered in previous threads, for the benefit of new members and remind the older heads, GT's have been bogus'd and the

kars that are for sale from time to time are under intense scrutiny to verify the true GT from the wannabe. How useful is the buck tag in this? Why did Ford use it so randomly? and what are the defining details of a true GT? What is the date that GT's began to be made/offered? I am looking for a 66' 09K with GT package. My current K has the buck tag. If it's not there, what do we need for solid verification? <img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

jwc66k · January 9, 2010 at 12:13 PM

In my case, on one of my GTs, the original window sticker. A build sheet, if found, would work as well. Outside of that there is no single, common and unique item that can be used. Note my use of "single" "common" and "Unique". Buck tags were not used in San Jose, fog lights were an option, dual exaust plates were standard on "K" cars, heavy duty suspension was an option, and there are more. What it takes is several unique items to be present or installed in a certain way. What may happen is you will determine that a car is not a GT.

Jim

jeller68 · January 9, 2010 at 12:18 PM

The 65-66 GT are so easy to clone. Here is a great reference for the true GT's to be born with.

http://www.angelfire.com/film/fly4fude/actic.html

BlueK_old · January 9, 2010 at 1:02 PM

checkout the link below for help on identifying 65/66 GTs

http://www.karmustang.com/product.php?pr…&cat=278&page=1

mcfly_old · January 9, 2010 at 1:59 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Buck tags were not used in San Jose, <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

My kar was built in Dearborn and does not have a buck tag.

There are no sign of and as far as I know never had one.

Is this correct or am I missing one ?

Also were crush tubes only on GT cars or GT and Ks alike ?

Mike

Edited by - mcfly on 01/09/2010 14:01:15

5F09C_old · January 9, 2010 at 3:01 PM

"Factory" duel exhaust = crush tubes. You are correct GT's and K's in 64-66.

Edited by - 5F09C on 01/09/2010 15:03:03

Edited by - 5F09C on 01/09/2010 15:03:41

Richard P. · January 9, 2010 at 3:47 PM

1966 Dearborn Mustangs DIDN'T have a buck tag. I have a 1965 convertible and a 1966 fastback from Dearborn and neither ever had a buck tag.

J_Speegle_old · January 10, 2010 at 2:27 AM

One must consider that when inspecting a possible factory GT that it is not only a list of features you must confirm are there but everything you see that should not be there must be considered also. Its the total of the findings that will lead one to a logical conclusion

Just a thought

cobraboy · January 10, 2010 at 3:47 AM

Perhaps the experts would care to compile the two lists side by side, so the information is readily available in one place.

A list of should haves................. A list of should not haves

Edited by - cobraboy on 01/10/2010 03:48:13

jeller68 · January 10, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Of the 7273 K codes produced in 1965 and 5469 in 1966 and NO documentation of the breakout of Fastbacks,Coupes, and Converts. Then how do we know only 4% of these cars were GT's ?

Your thoughts

jwc66k · January 10, 2010 at 12:25 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Of the 7273 K codes produced in 1965 and 5469 in 1966 and NO documentation of the breakout of Fastbacks,Coupes, and Converts. Then how do we know only 4% of these cars were GT's ?

Your thoughts

You've mixed apples and oranges - the percentage of Mustangs with the GT option (aka Performance Image Option - PIO) is 2.7 for 1965 and 4.2 for 1966. These percentages are for both "A" and "K" code cars. The figures were published by Ford Sales and Marketing and not from assembly line numbers. The number of Mustang "K" cars produced for 1964 thru 1966 (and 67) are from a different source. Again, no assembly line numbers exist for Ford products before 1967 except for total body types per year.

Jim

kar-nut_old · January 10, 2010 at 12:59 PM

What is the origin of 7,273 for 1965 & 5,469 for 1966 K-Code's produced?

dunc289_old · January 10, 2010 at 2:24 PM

Jim, as you say, the K code numbers came from a different source, but this is where readers are looking to identify that " source ", so if you can post that source, or reputed source, it would be beneficial. Thanks. There may be more than one estimate from more than on source. Anyone? <img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

dunc289_old · January 10, 2010 at 2:27 PM

And Jeff, would you help us with those things you understand should NOT be there? Thanks.<img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

jwc66k · January 10, 2010 at 3:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Jim, as you say, the K code numbers came from a different source, but this is where readers are looking to identify that " source ", so if you can post that source, or reputed source, it would be beneficial. Thanks. There may be more than one estimate from more than on source. Anyone? <img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

"The High Performance Mustang" by Tony Gregory, Fourth Edition, page three, second paragraph, first sentence. Take up any disputes with Tony.

The percentage figures are from "Mustang Does It" by Ray Miller, page 320. The same applies to Ray about disputes.

I suggest you buy both http://www.abebooks.com .

ISBN-13: 978-0-615-13362-1 or this forum for "The HP Mustang",

ISBN 0-913056-09 for "Mustang Does It".

Any other questions, see the Chaplain.

Jim

jwc66k · January 10, 2010 at 3:39 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

And Jeff, would you help us with those things you understand should NOT be there? Thanks.<img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=images/icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

The first would be bondo filled holes on the inside rear of the front fenders where the standard Mustang or 2 + 2 emblems would go on a non-GT car.

Jim

jeller68 · January 10, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Is this accurate ?

PRODUCTION STATISTICS:

1965 – 7,273 of the 680,989 of the Mustangs built (1.0%)

1966 – 5,469 of the 607,568 of the Mustangs built (0.9%)

1967 – 489 of the 472,121 of the Mustangs built (0.1%)

3 Year Total = 13,214 of the 1,760,678 Mustangs produced (.75% less than 1.0%)

jeller68 · January 11, 2010 at 4:26 PM

Oddly enough, Just about every 65-66 K code I see for sale has all the GT trimmings on it.

With only 4% of these being true GT's this is a little misleading.

jwc66k · January 11, 2010 at 6:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Oddly enough, Just about every 65-66 K code I see for sale has all the GT trimmings on it.

With only 4% of these being true GT's this is a little misleading.

Apples and oranges again.

The marketing figures for GTs in 1965 are 2.7 percent which comes out to about 18,000 cars. The combined "A" and "K" code totals are about 102,000 of which you may consider half the "A" and "K" code cars to have been built before the GT option was introduced. That comes out to about 35 percent of "A" and "K" code 1965 Mustangs could have the GT option, or about 36,000 Mustangs.

For 1966, the combined "A" and "K" code engines would be about 67,600 and 4.2 percent of that is about 28,400 cars with the GT option.

My percentages are rough and are derived from page 316 of "The Mustang Production Guide, vol 1", and the math was done on a TI pocket caculator, while drinking a glass of 2005 Robert Mondavi Private Selection Cabernet Sauvignon while waiting for the dishwasher to finish.

Jim

jeller68 · January 11, 2010 at 6:31 PM

Jim,

I beleive they call that "Multi-Tasking"

Thanks for the info.

Participate now!