Topic: Identifying 65-68 Antenna Differences

[67gtasanjose]

I understand that the 65-66 Antennas were different than the 67-68 version AND that a service replacement can be different also.

After a basic search, I have not found any discussion about identifying these differences while scouting for a replacement antenna. I understand the typical reproduction antenna closer matches the 65-66 version too and a member has mentioned a 67-68 version MAY show up one day in the future. All this is good to know but...

HOW DO WE IDENTIFY AN ORIGINAL 65-66 version as compared to a 67-68 version? (I have my eyes on a NOS one that has a C7 round base but not sure about the rest)

[Bob Gaines]

I understand that the 65-66 Antennas were different than the 67-68 version AND that a service replacement can be different also.

After a basic search, I have not found and discussion about identifying these differences while scouting for a replacement antenna. I understand the typical reproduction antenna closer matches the 65-66 version too and a member has mentioned a 67-68 version MAY show up one day in the future. All this is good to know but...

HOW DO WE IDENTIFY AN ORIGINAL 65-66 version as compared to a 67-68 version? (I have my eyes on a NOS one that has a C7 round base but not sure about the rest)

it will not rattle, the 67/68 will have the ball section collapse althe way flush to the next section . On the bottom side the ground plain section will have a C7 engineering number . I am out of town this weekend and typing on my I phone is tedious plus no access to picture files. I hope this helps.

[67gtasanjose]

it will not rattle, the 67/68 will have the ball section collapse althe way flush to the next section . On the bottom side the ground plain section will have a C7 engineering number . I am out of town this weekend and typing on my I phone is tedious plus no access to picture files. I hope this helps.

This helped, This is as I remember it being so confirms what I suspected as true.
NOW, if we added pictures, pictures of the 65-66 version, pictures of a 67-68 version and what commonly available in the aftermarket too wouldn't hurt

[rodster]

I knew I took pictures of my 68 antenna for a reason.   

I'll post these as an example of what was on my 68, maybe someone has better examples but it's something for now.

[67gtasanjose]

I knew I took pictures of my 68 antenna for a reason.   

I'll post these as an example of what was on my 68, maybe someone has better examples but it's something for now.

Thanks Rod. Your 68 has the same ink stamping as my original 67 has and otherwise is in about the same condition (bezels). My original mast was snapped off as a result of s freak accident when somebody while carrying a VW bus on a forklift didn't see my car till he had gouged all the way down my original hood, through the antenna and right wiper blade and inverting my windshield (this happened back around 1990) so I no longer had an original refference for the mast itself.

Bob's description helped also and I ordered what is being claimed as a NOS 65-68 version but I see a C7 bezel in the pictures. The ball is resting on the center section so it sounds correct for my needs. I'll post mroe pictures when it arrives behind the wake of that recent Florida hurricane (maybe Wednesday?)

[67gtasanjose]

Using my 67 original cable over again, I bought this antenna. Not a Repro anyways, Looks like it was made by WARD with  FoMoCo logos and numbers on parts, original slightly different in hidden areas mostly.

Any thoughts?

[outlawincorporated]

image attached of a July 1965 date stamp on a aerial out of a NOS C6ZZ radio kit I have........

regards.

PHILL BERESFORD.
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.

[outlawincorporated]

Also have another aerial dated 6 64 from a 641/2  radio kit I have on hand as well. plus it has other markings as well in the 2nd attached picture.

regards.

PHILL BERESFORD.
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.

[Bob Gaines]

All of the details below the surface are good and fine but the most visible details are the most important ones IMO. The mast on the topside is the most visible portion of the assembly. Notice the 67 68 antenna mast collapses down the the second section. The 65/66 will not collapses down to the second section. The 65/66 style mast is what the repro market has duplicated for all 65-68 Mustangs. The 65/66 style is the most common service replacement also.

[67gtasanjose]

All of the details below the surface are good and fine but the most visible details are the most important ones IMO. The mast on the topside is the most visible portion of the assembly. Notice the 67 68 antenna mast collapses down the the second section. The 65/66 will not collapses down to the second section. The 65/66 style mast is what the repro market has duplicated for all 65-68 Mustangs. The 65/66 style is the most common service replacement also.

Then I indeed found a "mostly correct" service replacement for my 67, going by your description. Things that are different are hidden areas and at a glance, not at all noticeable. Another thing to note about this replacement, it has no "rattle", it also has a white/grey greasy residue on the mast that indicates it has grease inside (like factory used, reproductions not known to use the grease) and the upper mast collapses down as pictured for the 67-68 version (Bob) you showed.

[Bob Gaines]

The 67/68 version is the harder of the two to find. The repros rattle otherwise they would be fine. Monroe Withers is ram rodding a effort to get Danial Carpenter to make some good ones up. Hopefully not just the 65/66 style . ARE YOU LISTENING MONROE?   

[CharlesTurner]

The 67/68 version is the harder of the two to find. The repros rattle otherwise they would be fine. Monroe Withers is ram rodding a effort to get Danial Carpenter to make some good ones up. Hopefully not just the 65/66 style . ARE YOU LISTENING MONROE? 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but Monroe passed away a few weeks ago :-(

[67gtasanjose]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but Monroe passed away a few weeks ago :-(

  Sudden? Seems only a few weeks (10 weeks ago maybe?) no mention of trouble   

[Bob Gaines]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but Monroe passed away a few weeks ago :-(

What a shocker. I last talked to him at Carlisle in May. RIP

[CharlesTurner]

Sudden? Seems only a few weeks (10 weeks ago maybe?) no mention of trouble   

I heard he passed in his sleep. 

He inspected a car for me about 5 months ago, told me he was in the process of buying the building he had been renting.  Really nice guy, was just starting to get to know him better.