The owner of this 1982 Ford Mustang GT claims that it could be the lowest mileage example of this model in existence today. He is claiming that the odometer shows 3,500 miles and that these miles are genuine. He purchased the car from the original owner’s estate, and once he was sure that it ran and drove okay, he has decided to part with it. Located in Swanton, Ohio, you will find the GT listed for sale here on eBay. A single bid has opened proceedings at $9,500 in what is a No Reserve auction.
The Medium Red paint on this Mustang has deteriorated, but looking beyond that, the owner says that the car is as it would have been when it rolled out of the showroom. I think that the paint has deteriorated beyond the point where it would benefit from some polish, and I believe that a cosmetic refresh will be required. There is some minor damage to the passenger door, but this would be easy to fix before a fresh coat of paint is applied. There are no apparent signs of rust, and the owner doesn’t mention any problems in the listing. A couple of spots on the car would seem to indicate that the Mustang might have received attention from the good people at Ziebart. If that’s the case, it will have helped its cause enormously. The plastic is in good order, and the original foglights are still mounted in the front spoiler. The glass appears to be flawless, as are the factory alloy wheels. The owner claims that the tires that the car wears are original. If this is the case, I’d be changing them before I attempted any extended journeys.
After reviewing an exterior that generally looks tired, the Mustang’s interior is a bit of a revelation. There doesn’t appear to be much in the way of wear and tear, and if taken in isolation, it makes the mileage claim seem plausible. The seats are in as-new condition, as are the door trims and what we can see of the dash. The carpet hasn’t faded, and there is no wear on the rim. The owner admits that the headliner needs replacing, but he includes a replacement in the sale. Once again, all of the plastic is in excellent condition for a vehicle of this age. The inclusion of air conditioning and power windows should make life on the road pretty comfortable in this classic.
The GT is a numbers-matching car, and it features the 5.0-liter “HO” V8 that is bolted to a 4-speed manual transmission. This motor should be delivering 157hp, which is enough to propel this Ford through the ¼ mile in a flat 16 seconds. We’ve now reached the point with this car where I admit that I’m scratching my head. The mileage claim that the owner makes is extraordinary, and I hope that he holds some form of documentary evidence to support this. If the engine bay is taken on face value, it looks pretty dirty and run-down for a car with such a low reading on its odometer. However, the seller purchased the car from the original owner’s estate, and I get the impression it hasn’t had a lot of use in recent years. The owner has clocked around 200 miles since he purchased it, and he says that the car runs and drives perfectly.
I agree with the owner when he says that it isn’t that common to find a Mustang GT from this era that hasn’t been modified. They generally seem to receive all sorts of tweaks and changes to extract more power from the sweet small block, and the wheels and tires also come in for attention. That is a significant positive with this car. If the odometer reading can be confirmed as genuine, that does make this an extraordinary find. A four-figure reading places this car in elite company among Fox-Body Mustangs. If the owner doesn’t have evidence, that makes it look like a regular 39-year-old GT in need of a cosmetic refresh. What do you think?
Thanks Adam.
This cool Four-Eye gives me an opportunity to make this comment; remember, it’s just my opinion.
When all of us enthusiasts see a claim for low-mileage, the response is usually one of the following: 1) “let’s see the documentation”, 2) the knee-jerk reaction “I don’t believe it.” Often the wish for documentation will prove elusive, unless the previous owner(s) kept records, which often isn’t the case. As for the “I don’t believe it” comment, it seems the collective “we” have a built-in distrust of sellers; often justified, sometimes not.
That said, what does get to me is that the collective “we” seem to think we can make the believability call based on a handful of often poor-quality photos. Or from some small piece of info, which may or may not be pertinent (like saggy door pockets on later Fox Bodies– that is a function of age, not mileage). If we could see the car in person, maybe; but even then, it can be hard.
So my comment notwithstanding, what do I think of this car? “The Boss Is Back,” this is the model appropriately credited with bringing some life back into the muscle car world after a decade of despair. So the car has its cred. From my Fox Body experience, that dark red color was prone to deteriorate, and it looks like this one has spent time outside. But the interior, never known to be high-quality, looks good, based on what we can see– like it wasn’t used much and wasn’t outside. I’m pretty sure the tires, though likely old, are not original. Sagging headliners were common, again based just on age. And the underhood was never known to have had good, long-lasting finishes on various parts; so after 40 years, it looks about like what I would expect, even for a low-mileage car.
All that said, cool car. I would give it a new paint job, detail the engine compartment, and enjoy it. Not many Four-Eyes in original condition, or restored to original.
Thank you, Bob_in_TN! I really appreciate your response and agree with your thoughts. My father bought one of these brand new. I remember him reading about them (and the article was indeed titled “The Boss Is Back”, which was the ad slogan, too, wasn’t it? I think I remember that correctly. I was a teenager at the time, so you can imagine how thrilled I was about it. He bought it over the phone, talking to the Ford dealer about a hour away. It was the only one in the area that had gotten one in.
It was black with the red cloth and vinyl interior. It did have the a/c, but not the power windows, nor the tilt wheel or that style steering wheel, for that matter. It has a leather wrapped (aluminum?) steering wheel.
I remember in the first year, they were only available in three colors: black, red and silver. There was either vinyl or cloth low back seats. I would have sworn the things like power windows and tilt weren’t an option on these, but this one has them. Maybe they just weren’t available on the very earliest ones produced?
He loved the car (we both did) and he bought the ’86 version when it came out and had both for sometime. I am grateful for all the road trip memories that I have with him in them.
You mean bring the original paint with paint correction, so it remains a survivor : ) The days of repainting a car simply because it’s faded are thankfully over.
Who stole the edit feature on this site? That should’ve read; bring back the original paint…..
Some parts of the car scream low miles, the interior looks good and these parts didn’t wear well. Tires and wheels could have been in a garage or basement. The paint is not just faded it’s gone on the rear bumper cover. So it is what it is an old 4 eye, no real performance, needs quite a bit of TLC. I am sure someone will step up and want this car. Sure hope it is inspected thoroughly by the buyer.
Sorry all, but without documentation, I call BS on the mileage claim. Most likely 103500. Just like the Martini Porsche 924 that was featured on Barn Finds a few months ago
That is especially true when condition doesn’t match the claim. As with this car, to me, it’s a moot point, even if documented. The injected cars, which came out a few years later are heads and shoulders above, that’s where the smart money is heading.
Steve R
If left outside and never waxed the paint could fade that bad. Anybody notice the hood rod with red paint a few inches up that looks like overspray? Anybody know these cars well enough to know if they left the factory like that? Also this thing is only 10 miles from. Tempted to go see if the claim is legit.
Besides the prop rod, what about the rubber snubbers on the radiator support, shouldn’t they be black and not painted red?
Steve R
Rubber snubbers on radiator support painted body color is correct. Hood prop rods with weak or missing paint is common.
For real value, miles and condition must match.
If given one or the other, I’ll take condition.
Seems like he would post of photo of the odometer. Were they only 5 digit plus tenths at the time?
On the plus side, the seller has been on Ebay 20 years with no negative feedback.
It would have been a 5 digit odometer in 1982.
After running the Lord Eliis Hillclimb (about 25 miles NE-
of Eureka) in 1982,friends of mine asked me to drive them back
to Eureka,as I was the only sober one.When I came to the first
stoplight in Eureka,I killed it,as while driving on the freeway,it felt
a lot like our Fairmont wagon.Both were built on the same platform.
I should of bought one of these when they were cheap.
Even if it has low miles by the time you repaint it and refresh else that has degraded with time you won’t have anything approaching an original car.
I took out a 1982 Mustang GT for an extended test drive back in 1985 when it was only 3 years old. Dumped the clutch and have never experienced wheel hop like that ever before or since then.
Without a picture of the dash and the odometer, who can tell if the claim is true.
I am going to assume those missing pictures are by design.
Maybe 35,000 miles. This does not look like a car that had essentially 3 months of regular use from new. Even sitting unused for many years, it ought to be much nicer.
Looks like 3,500 miles to me…it’s just unfortunate that it sat outside so long.
Too bad the included vehicle report can’t help to verify the miles.
Above that, I would want to know about the duplicate title. The report says that it gained only it’s second owner in 2020, so it would be good to know how the original owner lost the title.
That car is responsible for reigniting the musclecar wars. In 1982 when that car came out, it was faster than the Corvette and Camaro. Ford engine engineer Wally Beeber had a hand in that!
It’s hard to imagine someone so willing to preserve it by hardly driving it, yet let the appearance go to hell. I suppose a perfect storm of circumstances could occur for this to be true, but it’s hard to swallow.
That being said, the fact that this is the first Mustang GT since 1969, and the car that started the muscle car Renaissance we enjoy to this day, I think it’s way cool. I’d rather have this than a later EFI model.
Saw this on another site a month ago. It is still there. The price is $12,750. A picture of the odometer is included. There is no way the mileage claim is accurate. It is obvious that it was tampered with. So obvious! I’m sorry to comment like this, but if there is dishonesty involved it needs to be called out. I have a screenshot of the odometer but do not feel that there is a need to submit it here. See it on FB Marketplace Swanton Ohio. Cheers!
https://www.google.com/search?q=1982+mustang+gt&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJi9HUr5_wAhWHW80KHT8gDUAQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1920&bih=969#imgrc=FkL33cPHZN1HhM
https://picclick.com/1982-Ford-Mustang-1982-Mustang-GT-3500-Original-144008591895.html
Bob_in_Tn, the reason so many of us question the mileage claims, at least from my perspective, is that it’s difficult to imagine folks buying a nice, often expensive car and then letting it sit most of its life. Exceptions abound to be sure, but not as often as we are supposed to believe. Especially when there seems to be evidence of higher mileage than claimed.
I bought almost the exact same car new, but mine had T-tops. When I was at the dealer looking at 81’s the salesman actually said “You might want to wait for the ’82s. There’s a hot new GT coming that’s supposed to have some real gumption.” I loved driving that car three-speed-with-overdrive and all. Took it on a summer vacation from Philly to the Outer Banks and that was such a fun road trip, especially with the tops off. In early ’84 I sold the car with pretty low mileage to pay for tuition. Great memories from this find!
That’s why they added the quad shocks in ’85. Good aftermarket rear control arms are another solution.
Actually, they added them in mid 84. I had them on my 84 GT.