FYI FORD - MustangSteve's Ford Mustang Forum
The Internet's Most Knowledgeable Classic Mustang Information
IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT CLASSIC FORD MUSTANGS, YOU HAVE COME TO THE RIGHT PLACE!
MustangSteve has over 30 years of Mustang experience, having owned 30 of them and restored several others. With the help of other Mustangers, this site is dedicated to helping anyone wanting to restore or modify their Mustang.... THERE ARE NO DUMB QUESTIONS!!!!!
Visit MustangSteve's web site to view some of my work and find details for:
FYIFORD Contributors' PICTURES - Power Brake Retrofit Kits for 65-66 Stangs - Classic Mustang FAQ's by MustangSteve - How to wire in a Duraspark Ignition - Mustang Ride Height Pictures and Descriptions - Steel Bushings to fit Granada Spindles to Mustang Tie Rods - Visit my EBAY store MustangSteve Performance - How to Install Granada Disc Brakes MustangSteve's Disc Brake Swap Page - FYIFORD Acronyms for guide to all the acronyms used on this page - FYIFORD Important information and upcoming events

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

8/05/2025 3:57 PM  #1


1964-1/2 Mustang unibody vs a 1964 Falcon unibody

Gentlemen, please excuse my ignorance. I own a 1964 Falcon (powered by a 1966 Mustang 289-V8 and mated to my Ford toploader with a MS clutch cable kit) but have been lectured by a car meet acquaintance concerning the subject matter. I have owned a few Falcons and Mustangs and never concerned myself with chassis similarities. I would purchase parts for the particular car on which I was working.
My question: Was the 1964-1/2 Mustang chassis identical to the Falcon unibody? I have a feeling there will be several responses to my mundane question.
Sincerely,
Tom M.

 

8/06/2025 5:28 PM  #2


Re: 1964-1/2 Mustang unibody vs a 1964 Falcon unibody

Nope, the 64 Falcon and 64.5/65/66 Mustang chassis are not identical.
The Mustang was based on the Falcon underpinnings to a good degree, but the chassis are different dimensionally and in many details. Even though the overall lengths are the same, the Mustang wheelbase is shorter and the chassis is narrower. Many shared bits, but chassis are not identical.  


65 Fastback, 422W, Roller C4, 14" front discs, 9" rear,  front coilovers, SorT A-arms
 

8/06/2025 6:31 PM  #3


Re: 1964-1/2 Mustang unibody vs a 1964 Falcon unibody

Weirdly even though the chassis on the mustang is narrower the frame rails are 1" wide apart. When I was converting my 65 to V8 steering linkage I was thinking of using an extra 66 Mustang center link but it's too wide. The tie rods, sleeves, pitman and idler arms are the same but not the main link. I measured my 66 Mustang and the Falcon clearly different.

 

8/06/2025 9:45 PM  #4


Re: 1964-1/2 Mustang unibody vs a 1964 Falcon unibody

The Falcon also lacks the front lower crossmember that goes under the oil pan. Falcon inner fenders are much taller.


Money you enjoy wasting is NOT wasted money... unless your wife finds out.
 

8/07/2025 11:23 AM  #5


Re: 1964-1/2 Mustang unibody vs a 1964 Falcon unibody

Great information, gentlemen. I appreciate the detailed answers.
TM

     Thread Starter
 

Board footera


REMEMBER!!! When posting a question about your Mustang or other Ford on this forum, BE SURE to tell us what it is, what year, engine, etc so we have enough information to go on.