Visually, a ’66 is distinguished from the ’65 by the rear quarter windows and the brake scoops, which weren’t on last year’s model. The hood and its scoop look the same as before, but last year it was molded fiberglass, this year stamped steel. Inside, the change is more pronounced. The ’65 GT 350s had standard Mustang instrumentation plus a pod atop the dash housing a tach and oil pressure gauge. The steering wheel had a wood rim and considerably less “dish” than the standard wheels, and the horn was operated by a spring-return toggle switch on the fascia. This year, the pseudo-woodrim with phony rivets, and the 5-dial instrument panel of Ford’s Mustang “GT” have been adopted. The “GT” instrumentation includes an oil pressure gauge, so the tach now sits alone on top of the dash. The automatic transmission is a new feature, as are the optional rear seats. A carry-over feature is the use of USAF-style, three-inch-wide seat belts with-metal-to-metal buckles and quick release mechanisms, just like the racing cars.

The changes for ’66 have made the GT 350 more civilized, and we still think it’s a great sports car in the classic tradition, but there are some aspects of Shelby’s metamorphosis that we criticize. Prime among them is the car’s interior appearance—which, after all, is what the driver spends most of his time looking at. It looks too much like any run-of-the-mill Mustang that half-a-million average Americans are using for utility transportation.

We also found fault with the rear seats and quarter windows. Construction of both was rough-and­ ready, and in poor condition after only 5000 miles. The upholstery was beginning to tear, the trim was starting to come loose, and rain leaked around the plexiglass window. The rear seats are none too comfortable, but, surprisingly, better than the last notchback Mustang we drove. But it’s a sports car, not a bloody bus, and besides, few of our complaints would bother the man who only rented the car.

The staff was most impressed with the looks of the GT 350H. It makes any stock Mustang look sick, particularly with those oversize tires and stylized wheels. We were also favorably impressed with the overall performance and general roadability of the car. The engine is lively and responsive, and does a much better job of getting its power to the ground than any of the six “Super Cars” we tested in the March issue (C/D, March ’66).

View Photos

View Photos

About The Author

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.