When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
you are correct they still weren't as good as the later ones but I have driven a 63 and a 65 in the past frequently and the 65 is a Cadilliac. hehehe.
But hey I'm restoring these old girls so I can play with the old metal, not just a classy body, so the 1964 is that much funner then a 1965.
And motor swapping in a 65, I didn't know you were one of them Joe.......
interesting dueller, but is that frame stretch in the very back? behind the axle?
And snow, maybe a guy wants too swap in a 390 or 428, hard to do in a truck that originally had a 292. lets not even talk bout a 460 or any sort of diesel.
o crap man, 350's go in there like a hot knife through butter.(I'm kidding, I swear to the Lord)
so then where do tehy make up the diffrence when swapping a 65 body to a 79 frame. I believe FordBoyPete has done that swap. or jowilker would know. there was no talk of having to shorten the frame in order to do swap bodies
LOL thats the truth. I think the whole shift linkage was changed and 1964 was the last year for a optional hydralic clutch linkage.
Was 65 the first year for the Custom Cab type guages? I know 61-64 had Custom cabs, but if I remeber right 1965 custom cabs had a different guage setup rather then the circle speedometer.
The only factory bolt holes that lined up on my 71 4x4 were the very first two at the front of the box and the very last two at the rear of the box. All other holes would have to be redrilled . That is if you're puttting a 65- 66 box on the 67-72 frame. Not sure on the 2wd frames havnt measured them yet but im sure someone has lol. All the cab mounts worked perfect.