My tail light issue was caused by the tabs in the light bucket resting on each other which meant I never got tail, only the brake light. Pried them apart and shaved a bit off of one and it's still working.
@BULLITT65 thank you for your feedback. In the interest of improving this article, what factual issues can we address? I enjoy taking people's feedback and updating the article and I will take your advice to heart and send this over to a couple of Mustang experts here at Hagerty.
Well I could make a list I suppose, but what is the point since you already published the article. If there are "Mustang experts" at Hagerty, why aren't they editing the article prior to it going out? The video was ok, doesn't really point out trouble spots to look for though, and value associated with originality, and previous improper restorations, or mods to the body.
I do consulting for 1st gen Camaros, and 64.5-66 Mustangs, among others. I do not know the credentials of who wrote the article or oversaw it. Most of the stuff I see Hagerty put out with its own owners, is stuff on the MG, the Corvair, or a 70/80's BMW. I assume they cover these cars because they own, and know them. It looks like there aren't any in house editors that currently own and know 1st gen mustangs, or 1st gen Camaros, based on the articles Hagerty has put out. Just because a guy owned one at point does not make him qualified to write about them IMO. If I were to write an article it would be based on my knowledge of restoring and preserving them over the last 25 years. This most recent article looks like you read about mustangs off of a couple of different sites on the internet and then put an article together. I can write about pregnancy and having a baby from what I read on the internet, but it is going to come across different and be more factual if a mother wrote it. I look forward to hearing back on this. Thank you
@BULLITT65 To be perfectly honest, since this is my article: I am a Fox Mustang fan, so yes that implies I am a bit too young to know all the details of the original Mustangs first hand. I emailed some experts internally and they gave me some details that I will address in the next 2-3 hours.
Some background info: Since these Buyer's Guides are a weekly affair (We have a new video every Sunday) it's impossible to get them vetted by multiple people in the company in a timely manner. This is why we have these conversations here: this isn't a print magazine, we publish a lot of articles and fix mistakes on the fly. I can, and have already, made edits to the article. (I have no input on the video.)
So if you make a list of flaws/issues, post them here, I will verify them: Either internally or via books like the Standard Catalog of American Cars. I'll try to squeeze any new info into our (approximate) word count limit.
Probably best to remove the section. The Crusie-O-Matic was a follow on to the Ford-O-Matic in 1958 and as you point out the name got rehashed in Ford marketing. The point being regardless of Ford marketing names, the Mustangs came with C4 automatics, "C4" being the colloquial term for the small block automatic transmission designed in 1964 (Ford part number system "C" decade of 1960, "4" being the specific year)
Thank you for your feedback, I sincerely appreciate it.
Regarding D vs A code, the newer A does have a little more compression (0.2) and 5 more ponies. I really think that's enough to refer to it as new. Unless the Standard Catalog of American Cars is flat out wrong in their specs, we are probably gonna have to agree to disagree on that.
Regarding generator/alternators, yeah, that's a great point that only takes a few words to add. So I just did. Thank you for that.
One very minor - but missing here - change in the '66 model year. '65 six cylinder models had four bolt 13 in. wheels. '66 six cylinder models had four bolt 14 in wheels.