So I'm considering buying a 65 tbird, but I know next to nothing about them (aside from the research I've done online) but nothing comes close to getting the opinions of ye ole hamb. Anyone know how these birds fly? Any cl***ic electrical problems, or failure prone mechanicals? the one I'm looking at seems up to par, but I want to get the general consensus on the 65 tbird before I jump on in. I'm only asking because I'm looking to make this my daily. Thanks guys!
okay cars. not very collectible, so watch how much you pay for it. Actually can be purchased for not much money and can be a cool ride.
oh I can't speak to the reliability but its not a desireable year. 61-63 miles better looking, IMHO. I wouldn't consider it for that reason alone. The earlier ones are just so much smoother looking, check it out and you'll see what I mean.
not desireable to most = affordable cruiser. who cares what everyone else thinks, if you like it buy it
Hey, As these were still unitbody construction an inspection of the underside of the vehicle, for and rust or damage is a must. The 300 horsepower 390 engine was fairly trouble free, but don't look for Jap car type gas mileage, as these were heavy cars. Check the front end for bad ball joints and stearing boxes/rams. The flat panels on these years of Thunderchickens jus' scream out for a Watson style paint job! Good luck with your purchase, S****ey Devils C.C. "It's time for another Tea Party!"
Heavy car, close to 5K lbs. 390FE standard with cruisomatic trans (not the C6). The FE is a legendary engine series with tons of parts support. The engine in the 'Bird is level, so the carb pad is flat. If you use an aftermarket manifold you will need a wedge spacer. Not a lot of repro parts, so I hope yours has nice interior trim. I like the look of these. Not as nice as the rocket 'Birds, but cool and low. They have a cool profile. They make electronic replacements for the old electro-mechanical sequential tail light unit. I have one in my '68 Cougar.
Thanks so much!!! that totally helps me! I will be sure to look for those things, yea I'm thinking of trading in my honda for this so I'll have to keep in mind the gas prices. thanks again ~C
I hear what you're saying about affordable, and I'm no expert, if the previous years don't have disc brakes that's a big deal if you need them and have to pay someone to do the conversion. My point is that they all cost about the same to fix, desireable or not, may as well get one that has resale value and might get something back out of. But you can only afford what you can afford. I want her to be able to make an informed decision and wish her all the best. EDIT: I admit I'm a total buzzkill and discourage anybody from buying an old car as a daily unless they're $$$ or can fix it themselves, *OR* most importantly have a backup car. My experience is that if you rely on an old car to get you to work and have no backup, it's a *LOT* of stress and frustration, especially if you're footing repairshop prices to get it fixed, and it WILL need repairs. /buzzkill
its a good thing I won't need a repair shop since I know how to work on cars myself. ;-) thanks for looking out, right now my daily is actually a 55 ford, the honda is my backup car but costs more in parts than ANY old car I've ever owned. I have a dead '02 Volvo in the driveway that was the back up car before that, so, so far my most reliable car has been that "old car" thus the consideration for getting rid of the plastic car. New cars have made me sad :-(
I drove a '65 convert in H.S., front disc brakes, sway away steering column, power everything, it was a great car...gas milage wasn't the best, but it was a comfortable car, it wasn't fast but would cruise all day long at 85mph. never had any wiring issues, like others have said check the front suspension out for worn parts. Brian.
Look for the CLEANEST one you can. Also,check the cooling system.Tbirds like to run hot,so make sure to check that. My '61 has been my daily for the past 2 months and I get between 15 and 20 mpg. If it has Disc Brakes up front(I think '65 was the "change-over" year)you're ahead of the game. As for parts,There's Thunderbird Headquarters,Larrys Thunderbirds and Concours parts. With the exception of some interior colors,ALL parts of the car are reproduced. There's also the Tbird club here on the H.A.M.B. and the forums here; http://www.vintagethunderbirdclub.org/ PM me if you have any other questions.
I had a '65 for a while and I loved it, but they are unibody cars and you want to watch for rust underneath. Even if the body looks good they can have major rust issues on the bottom. If you're buying one you should put it up on a hoist and look over the underside. If it's solid and it's priced right I'd say go for it.
Sorry, but the Cruise-O-Matic IS a C6, as is the Select-Shift, the difference is in the valve body. To that end, the Cruise-O-Matic must be driven in the green dot position, which corresponds to the L2 on most automatics. Read your owners manual. Or don't trust me and burn up your bands. For me, I love the 65-66 T'Birds, had one each. Few odd things with these: the sequential turn signals; wipers are hydraulic motored; locks and trunk release are vacuum (maybe can use Mercedes vacuum motors, cheaper and available from junkyards LOTS easier); and, as mentioned, the front ends, parts for which are hideously expensive. Handling is a mixed bag, these cars are sloppy, real highway barges with no lean control, almost as if they're French. Cosmo
It's a good car but not the one that everyone wants . You will need to watch out for what they are asking for the car because of that . It's still a good driving car !
i have a 65. nice car. really heavy. makes you feel like you are riding around in a sherman tank. the downside is that it has a lot of inertia when you encounter a frictionless plane (ice). gas mileage is pretty ****py, but there are things you can do to help it (aluminum is your friend!). the interior was designed and built by barcalounger, so you will be livin in the lap o' luxury 24/7. also, the power windows are STRONG. it CAN break your fingers if you get them caught. parts are plentiful, but are a bit on the expensive side the 390 is a real workhorse (i think it was originally designed to power freighters) and has plenty of torque if you like tearing trees out of the ground by hooking them to your bumper all told... its one of "those" cars. either you love it or you hate it, but i think that is mostly a styling thing. these cars were built pretty solid, back when people knew how to build things and there are no common electrical issues that i know of.
The more i read this thread the more opinions i see but not much wisdom. Who cares if it's the ONE everyone wants? Barge, bad handling, expensive suspension parts blah blah blah. sounds like every old car. If it's worth it to you buy it. the less rust. the more mechanically sound the better. personally ive had 58, 61 and for a very short while one like yours. all three made nice drivers and semi customs. post some pics and how much. you might get more WISDOM. they scream for lowering and chrome reverse wheels and baby moons....good luck
Sorry, the C6 was introduced in 1966 (hence, C6, if you are familiar with Ford part numbering conventions). The name "cruise-o-matic was a generic sales moniker used on several transmission, beginning with the MX in 1958. The trans used in the 1965 Tbird is the MX. As I said, the automatic trans used in the 1965 Thunderbird is not a C6. This may cause some issues when it comes time to have it rebuilt. Depends on the shop. The bands in my Art Carr FX and my self-built Broader-fortified C6 are just fine, but thanks for your concern.
The Jalopy Journal
