By saying brand-new, we don't mean that this Ford Mustang GT was recently rebuilt. It's new--like it only has 1626 miles on the odometer. It's a time capsule from 1989. Duncan Imports is selling it for $25,900.
Get all the latest Classic Motorsports news in your mailbox six times a year. Subscribe …
1,626 miles? How does that happen?
Jerry From LA wrote: 1,626 miles? How does that happen?
They drove it just enough to realize what a steaming pile of crap a stock fox-body is, then parked it out of frustration for how much it depreciated in such a short time?
I have a friend with a brand new 3rd gen Z28 what ever year that was, I hadn't seen it in 10 years but then it had 5 miles on it. His grand mother bought it for a graduation present, and his dad had bought him a new Truck, so he parked it.
In the mid to late 80's the Mustang GT was one of the hottest cars the average person could buy. They handily outsold their F-Body competition, and helped to turn thousands of kids into gear-heads. By today's standards they weren't super fast, but in their day they more than held their own. They were faster than a Starion, N/A Supra, N/A Rx-7, E-30 (of any sort), and the N/A 300z--- but for some reason we love those cars, but hate the Mustang? The V-8 Fox-Body Mustangs performed well on the street, strip, and road-courses / autocross.
They also earned a place on C&D's 10 Best list.
To call them a steaming pile of crap isn't fair. They are well loved, and have become collectible---especially pristine examples like this---- as nearly all of them were worn hard and put away wet. They weren't for everyone, but hundreds of thousands of people bought, and loved them.
In reply to Joe Gearin:
In all honesty Joe I lusted after them too, as my first car was a '72 Mustang I acquired in '86. I've never driven a fox-body in anger/competition, but by all accounts they come up short vs. the 3rd-gen F-body stock-for-stock. The interior also feels far more outdated.
A part of me would still like to own one, but not without ~$10k to re-engineer the suspension...and at that point there are so many better cars to choose from. I have several close friends who drag race fox-bodies, which they seem to do well at and are apparently better suited? There are certainly plenty of fast autox ones too, but when I compared it to the C4 Vette, the Vette is a better chassis for a similar price/condition.
Pete--- I agree with your points, and no..... I don't want a Fox bodied Mustang, but I figured I'd defend their honor a bit. I do enjoy driving them.....because they always goad me into being irresponsible. I just CAN'T drive a V8 Fox Body without doing donuts....... something about those cars just brings out the hooligan in me. 
I love cars that do that......even if they are crappy in some ways.
I worked for a lawyer while in high school and college. His son had a black GT hardtop--and this is back when they were new. Back then, it was pretty much the coolest thing.
Pete Gossett wrote:Jerry From LA wrote: 1,626 miles? How does that happen?They drove it just enough to realize what a steaming pile of crap a stock fox-body is, then parked it out of frustration for how much it depreciated in such a short time?
As a current and hopefully soon past owner of a Fox body I approve of this message
Joe Gearin wrote: In the mid to late 80's the Mustang GT was one of the hottest cars the average person could buy. They handily outsold their F-Body competition, and helped to turn thousands of kids into gear-heads. By today's standards they weren't super fast, but in their day they more than held their own. They were faster than a Starion, N/A Supra, N/A Rx-7, E-30 (of any sort), and the N/A 300z--- but for some reason we love those cars, but hate the Mustang? The V-8 Fox-Body Mustangs performed well on the street, strip, and road-courses / autocross. They also earned a place on C&D's 10 Best list. To call them a steaming pile of crap isn't fair. They are well loved, and have become collectible---especially pristine examples like this---- as nearly all of them were worn hard and put away wet. They weren't for everyone, but hundreds of thousands of people bought, and loved them.
Everybody puts their hate and love where they think it is deserved. In their day they were a hot car. That was then, and there is no way "I" would pay $25,900 for one now. Though I wish somebody would pay half of that for mine.
GTXVette wrote: I have a friend with a brand new 3rd gen Z28 what ever year that was, I hadn't seen it in 10 years but then it had 5 miles on it. His grand mother bought it for a graduation present, and his dad had bought him a new Truck, so he parked it.
First World Problems
You don't need to put 10k into the suspension...MM has their full package listed at $4.8k. My street '93 cobra has the MM panhard/torque arm, koni yellows, front coilovers, rear ta springs, and not much else (maybe, $2k in parts) and believe me, I pass more cars on track here at NOLA MSP than pass me up. I'm running a PM3L in my '93 LX, and with front coilovers, rear ta springs, and gutting the heck out of the car, it's a blast on track. It's kind of nice passing up expensive (or even what was formerly expensive) hardware in what is basically a dressed up Ford Fairmont 
In reply to Pete Gossett:
I love it. Steaming pile followed by I have never driven one. Seriously? I see this attitude a lot online. It's usually followed by so and so car with "X" modifications is faster than a Mustang. Are they a "steaming pile" and yet they effectively "set the bar" for performance? The dissonance is nearly overwhelming!
I owned and drove Foxbodies back in the mid 1990s. Are they perfect cars, nope. Were they fast, reliable, and easy to maintain, Yes. Is the suspension a compromise, Yes. In a properly maintained car, you cannot exceed it's limits on the street without breaking all the laws. 
These cars were drag raced, auto crossed, and road raced in their prime with good results considering their humble origin. Heck, a lot of them are still out there actually being driven in anger. That is why clean ones are near impossible to find. Granted, $25k is pushing the envelope, especially in that color. I could see high teens or low $20s. The 93 Cobras are already up there even with some miles.
One final observation, I never had the funds to take one on a road course back in the day, but I am certain it would be loads fun to run one on track, warts an all.
Adding a re-engineered suspension is fine, but I don't think a Fox body car is going to automatically fly off the road and explode just because it's in stock form....
I think this car will sell to the right person, someone who always wanted one back then and now has the money to buy one that's still essentially new. It has always worked this way - old cars eventually become collectible and their value goes up.
Joe..The 5.0 liter Mustang was revolutionary in its time..All we needed here in Tampa Fl was a short belt and bumped timing to lay waste to Trans Ams,Iroc-zs.All Mazda RX 7s Turbo or not.300 zxs Turbo or not Starions and Eclipse Turbos also..My personal fav to destroy were Corvettes (see my handle name) I once took out 6 Vettes back to back in my lil LX without even a cool down..Ahhh..those
were the days..Now my blown LX is too fast for the street to really enjoy..
I'm no suspension guru, but we took our '94 Mustang GT to The $2015 Challenge and bested all but two turbo charged Miatas in the autocross portion. Our basic setup was 315 tires, and to keep said tires from rubbing. I keep hearing how Fox bodies are bad autocrossers, but our results really don't seem to reflect that. (Though in all honesty the sound of the Mustang from inside did remind me of my 1970 F-100. Chug chug chug :-)
I'd love to have it. I have a bunch of cars and none of them get a lot of miles, except my DDs, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy the hell out of them. When you have so many things tend to change, and you don't drive them individually as often, but you get to enjoy a larger variety.
I think the 5.0s were a key part of the pony car wars, and I think they hold up well. Honestly, I thought my E36 328is (5spd, sport package) felt a lot like my Fox Body Mustangs with less brake dive, a stiffer chassis, and better brakes. Considering it was 5 years newer than the newest Fox and cost significantly more when new, I don't think it's a bad trade-off.
The 3rd Gen F-Body was probably the better car (I've never driven one), but the Mustang sold well and developed a huge aftermarket.
So... I guess there's no explanation as to why the car has only 1,626 miles on it?
Hatch. Hate it. Notch? I'd kill your first born child for one. But then again, I'm not quite right in the head.
Yeah, they were the hot car of the '80's. I was a Mustang guy having a '65 and '70. I would have loved to have had a GT. One of my buddies bought a new '83 right out of HS, and it was definitely fast for it's day (and handled soooo much better than my Boss 302). There wasn't much new that would keep up with it in a straight line. It sounded good too. They were always tail happy, but it wasn't too difficult to keep it going in the right direction. Now, would I pay that much to have one now, no. But I bet there is someone that will. I'm all for preserving low mileage stock examples of cars.
You'll need to log in to post.
