Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / June 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

1965 Mustang underhood dimensions

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Rod - 08 Jun 2005 21:06 GMT
I am looking for the under hood dimensions for a 1965 ford mustang.  Does
anyone have them or publish them online somewhere?  Just looking for the
width, front and rear of engine compartment, fender mounting bolts as well
as the diag and length measurements.

Thank you

--

Rod March

______________________________________________________________________

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message, including any
attachment(s), contains information that may be confidential,
protected by the attorney-client or other legal privileges, and/or
proprietary non-public information. If you are not an intended
recipient of this message or an authorized assistant to an intended
recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and
then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution,
or reproduction of this message and/or any of its attachments (if
any) by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
one80out@hotmail.com - 09 Jun 2005 00:35 GMT
I don't know the answer to your question, and I doubt there's a web
site anywhere that has  the answers.  But there's one thing you ought
to know about the '65-'73 Mustangs, that your reference to "width,
front and rear," suggest you might not know.  That is, that the
suspension is designed so that the springs ride in what are called
"shock towers," on top of the upper control arms.  These shock towers
are the single most important feature of the engine compartment,
because it's the distance between them that determines how large an
engine you can fit.

If you find out how wide a 351 Windsor or Cleveland is -- information
which IS available on the web -- you will know that the distance
between the shock towers is slightly greater than that dimension,
because these engines will squeeze into a '65.  If you find out how
wide a 390/428 is, then you will know that the shock towers are not
quite that far apart, because a 390 or 428 won't fit.

Also, if you find out how long a 351 is, the distance from the firewall
to the radiator support is  about two times that much, minus 5-10
inches.  I know this because I just swapped a camshaft for a neighbor
kid and I was able to stab it in without having to raise up the engine
for clearance.

180 Out
Spike - 09 Jun 2005 00:45 GMT
Are you quite sure about the C fitting into a 65/66? The W will, but I
was under the impression that the C won't.

>I don't know the answer to your question, and I doubt there's a web
>site anywhere that has  the answers.  But there's one thing you ought
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
>180 Out

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
66 6F HCS - 09 Jun 2005 03:09 GMT
> Are you quite sure about the C fitting into a 65/66? The W will, but I
> was under the impression that the C won't.

It can be done, but you have to notch the shock towers.
Signature

Scott W.
'66 HCS Mustang 289
'68 Ranchero 500 302
'69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W
ThunderSnake #57
http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/

Spike - 09 Jun 2005 05:02 GMT
Oh, OK. That makes sense in light of what I had thought about the
differences between the W and the C.

>> Are you quite sure about the C fitting into a 65/66? The W will, but I
>> was under the impression that the C won't.
>
>It can be done, but you have to notch the shock towers.

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Rod - 09 Jun 2005 14:16 GMT
>I don't know the answer to your question, and I doubt there's a web
> site anywhere that has  the answers.  But there's one thing you ought
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> 180 Out

I'm not trying to fit another engine in this car, I was just trying to run
down the under hood dimensions so that I could properly straighten the right
front inner apron and right shock tower.  The car was hit directly in the
headlight bucket on the right front corner and it appears that the tower has
flexed in some what.

Thanks for the info
RichA - 09 Jun 2005 02:41 GMT
>I am looking for the under hood dimensions for a 1965 ford mustang.  Does
>anyone have them or publish them online somewhere?  Just looking for the
>width, front and rear of engine compartment, fender mounting bolts as well
>as the diag and length measurements.
>
>Thank you

I'd say it's about 2" between the shock towers!  :)
-Rich
Rod - 09 Jun 2005 14:21 GMT
>>I am looking for the under hood dimensions for a 1965 ford mustang.  Does
>>anyone have them or publish them online somewhere?  Just looking for the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> I'd say it's about 2" between the shock towers!  :)
> -Rich

I only wish I could compact this rust bucket in to a 2" cube;)
SVTKate - 09 Jun 2005 14:26 GMT
Hey Rod,
Just out of curiosity, do you work at a body shop?
If not, call one of them. They might have the specs you are looking for in a
book somewhere.

Kate

| >>I am looking for the under hood dimensions for a 1965 ford mustang.  Does
| >>anyone have them or publish them online somewhere?  Just looking for the
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
|
| I only wish I could compact this rust bucket in to a 2" cube;)
Rod - 09 Jun 2005 15:08 GMT
> Hey Rod,
> Just out of curiosity, do you work at a body shop?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Kate

Yes, I do.  We've got dimension manuals for 1938 to present and even under
body dimensions for the mustang, but nothing with the under hood dimensions.
I may have to start calling around.  I've got the original crash manuals
(actually crash manuals the span from about 1949 to present) that have this
car in it from Mitchell and Motor, unfortunately, back then they did not
provide under hood dimensions.

I've got a 1967 mustang sitting here as well, for what appears it's third go
around at rust repair.  I see that the floor pans are the same from 64-73, I
may have to take some comparative measurements and see if the under hood
dimensions are similar or the same.  I'd venture to guess that maybe the
shock towers are the same between the two models.  However, the front aprons
are not.

Rod
Foo Bar - 09 Jun 2005 16:25 GMT
> I've got a 1967 mustang sitting here as well, for what appears it's
> third go around at rust repair.  I see that the floor pans are the same
> from 64-73, I may have to take some comparative measurements and see if
> the under hood dimensions are similar or the same.  I'd venture to guess
> that maybe the shock towers are the same between the two models.
> However, the front aprons are not.

It is my understanding that you can fit a significantly larger engine in
the 67 - 68 than in the 64 1/2 - 66.  The shock towers would have to be
further apart for that to be the case.

Thomas
SVTKate - 09 Jun 2005 18:48 GMT
OH OH OH!
I just had  thought!

Ping Bill S in the big block group, he may know!!
alt.hi-po.big-block-ford-mercury

He knows his Mustangs.

Good luck to you!

Kate

| > Hey Rod,
| > Just out of curiosity, do you work at a body shop?
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
|
| Rod
Spike - 09 Jun 2005 20:02 GMT
Do I have this right? The right headlight got smacked and you think
the shock tower on that side was pushed back? If this is the case, why
not measure the opposite side? Wouldn't work if both sides got
shifted, but it would seem reasonable that if only one side did, then
the measurements for the opposite side would give you the info you
need.

>> Hey Rod,
>> Just out of curiosity, do you work at a body shop?
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
>Rod

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Rod - 09 Jun 2005 20:59 GMT
> Do I have this right? The right headlight got smacked and you think
> the shock tower on that side was pushed back? If this is the case, why
> not measure the opposite side? Wouldn't work if both sides got
> shifted, but it would seem reasonable that if only one side did, then
> the measurements for the opposite side would give you the info you
> need.

Yes, it was hit in the right headlamp bucket.  Trouble is, the tower is in
more so than it is back and the front aprons, are asymmetrical.  The strut
rods going from the cowl to the front aprons are asymmetrical as well.  It
would be easy enough to find the centerline and take a measurement from the
good side and compare to the bad side.  It wouldn't tell me how far in it is
compared to if it were back as well.  Front to back measurements are hit or
miss, with out measuring points and documented specs, it's hard to tell if a
point on the left side of the car is symmetrical with the right side.

I've since decided to give it my best effort without the use of dimensions
and have the front apron, radiator support and right from fender temporarily
installed and have a good fender to door gap.  If the hood fits, I'll call
it a day.

Rod
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.