The Ford Thunderbird is one of the most storied nameplates in blue oval history. It has long been synonymous with the most striking designs, powerful engines, and unabashed opulence. Perhaps those reasons (and more) are why the thirteenth generation TBird, effectively a modern luxury car built to cash in on the then-burgeoning retro theme craze that was overtaking the automotive industry at the time (hello, VW New Beetle), was such a bit of a flop. Its shortcomings notwithstanding, the Thunderbird still deserves better than being shoved in the backyard like this 2003 example listed here on eBay with an opening bid of $2,500 and no reserve.
The Thunderbird started with an incredible design. There is no denying that Ford’s designers came very close to perfectly executing what a modern-day Thunderbird would look like when reincarnating the nameplate. The miles-long trunk lid, porthole windows in the hardtop, classic script lettering – it was all bang-on. The V8 engine was lifted from its corporate sibling Jaguar, relying on the wonderful 3.9-liter AJ-V8 DOHC. Leather seating surfaces and two-tone touches seemed to bring it all together inside the cabin. Why, then, was the Thunderbird such a failure that it ends up in a sorry state like this, and even decent drivers struggle to sell for $10,000?
It really came down to the overall driving experience after so much hype and excitement over the model’s relaunch had subsided. Like so many other products that could have been great, Ford fumbled the execution after performing a marketing blitz that put the Thunderbird on every baby boomer’s radar as the car to have. If you didn’t want to own a Corvette and found the Miata too small, here was a convertible that offered performance, prestige, and luxury, all under an iconic brand like Thunderbird. However, it was soon apparent upon sitting inside the Ford simply raided parts bins for much of the production running gear and trim and assembled it all with a halfhearted effort. Rattles, wind noise, and cheap switchgear all undermined the prestigious positioning.
The powerplant was good for 280 horsepower and 286 lb.-ft. of torque, but it wasn’t particularly sporting. The 5-speed automatic with Tiptronic-style shifting was an appropriate transmission to pair with the engine, but road test editors complained at the time that it was neither sporting nor particularly smart. Again, another opportunity lost to deliver a memorable driving experience. While Ford nailed the design, that seemed to forget that people can’t see what the car looks like once they’re in it, which is when the quality of the driving experience and materials really needs to take center stage. This Thunderbird would still make a stunning summer driving for someone, so hopefully, it’s removed from this Maryland backyard soon.
A sad end to what was once considered the epitome in “Gentlemans Cruisers”( sorry ladies). Another half baked attempt to regain some glory with a retro edition of a classic, and failed miserably. Not sure about the motor, a 390 it isn’t, while probably a nice car to drive, just didn’t have the following. While a tad cheaper( almost $40 grand) than the Corvette( $43grand), but it never had the former zing, and faded away into the abyss for unwanted cars in 2005.
These words described the problem: Advanced Jaguar V-8: An engine with lots of noise lousy acceleration and an engine that only a service-writer could love.
If Ford REALLY WANTED TO CELEBRATE THE T-Bird, they already had the solution in house and a predecessors. The predecessors were the Lincoln LSC Sport Coupes and the Chassis was a Mustang with a Ford 4-Cammed V-8, with an updated body from the 2nd generation LSC. It didn’t need to be a convertible (how many years were the Thunderbirds convertibles)
Pretty sad!! Have fun with that biohazard…
Lovely mold and who knows what else…
I disagree on the styling. It was bland. A rolling sleeping pill. Ford half-a**ed it in my opinion.
Oh, and this example? A parts car.
Exactly. The rear end wasn’t bad but the front end looked like… You ever pet a cat, and you pulled back on the fur on its forehead gently and its eyes kind of look like the front of this car? They could have done so much better with the headlights on this one. Would have transformed everything. And it wouldn’t have cost that much more to upgrade some of the switchgear on the inside to something a little bit more special.
I disagree. I love this design. What else were they supposed to do? It was 2003. Get a kit car if you want an authentic reproduction or the original better still. I’m seriously tempted. A good power washing and if the engine at least turns over…
A buddy is pulling his hair out chasing electronic gremlins in one he’s bringing back to life that was sitting for years… He told me the car has 2 computers…
Newer cars like this are not designed to just sit out in the elements like this. Way worse than cars built before they became computer controlled. So many other gremlins to deal with.
It’s like rust issues were replaced by electronic issues.
Ford wanted to end it earlier, but they had to save face and have the 2005 50th anniversary models.
I heard this directly from a Ford dealer at the time.
He also said they should have found a way to make it a 4 seater.
Jaguar’s 3.9 V8 was the only engine offered 2002-2005.
Just wow….. in today’s world of selling items online for not wanted items plus the easy process to donating to charities that one decides lets park this under a tree in the mud and make it a compost for rust. I don’t get it with mold in interior and leaves under hood to retain water…
I just wish your daddy would’ve taken your t-bird away sooner as this screams no fun fun fun.. ;-(
13 Generations?
How about 11.
Key Thunderbird Generations (1955–2005):
1st Gen (1955–1957): The “Classic” two-seater.
2nd Gen (1958–1960): “Square Bird” – added rear seats.
3rd Gen (1961–1963): “Bullet Bird”.
4th Gen (1964–1966): “Flair Bird”.
5th Gen (1967–1971): “Glamour Bird” – suicide doors on sedans.
6th Gen (1972–1976): “Big Bird”.
7th Gen (1977–1979): Downsized “Torino-based”.
8th Gen (1980–1982): Smaller, boxy styling.
9th Gen (1983–1988): Aerodynamic “Aero Bird”.
10th Gen (1989–1997): MN12 platform, SC models.
11th Gen (2002–2005): Retro-styled two-seater.
5th through 11th should be considered Garbage Birds. I loved the 56 Baby Bird. Owned as ’60 Square Bird and unfortunately had a 2002 Nightmare Bird. Practically gave it away.
Wrongo Mr. Schmitt…1983-88 and the MN12s (in SC form anyway) were damned fine cars. Especially the ”Jellybean” Birds. The automotive press gave these cars extremely high praise, often remarking on the ‘Benz-Like’ build quality. My ’84 Turbo Coupe was at the top of the cars I have owned.
I do agree about the 2002-2005 models nice styling with garbage Lincoln LS (Which were really nice cars as long as you didn’t cross the 100,00 0 mile barrier) mechanicals. Just my .02
“Selling for a recent widow.” Hard to believe that a car like this would just be parked outside to rot, but that sentence tells us there was probably a sad story as to how it ended up there. Unfortunately, I’d hate to try to get the mold and mildew out of it. This would take a lot more restoration than it’s worth.
Widow probaby hated her dead husband, so she took his pride n joy and parked it with the skunks.
Had a few bad marriages there Johnny B?
I had two bad ones …then found out you could get wedding cake at the store.
A sad end for this ‘Bird. And, if you can find average condition ones for around $10,000? Send them over to Ohio. Dealers are asking double that, around here.
Agreed. Def not finding a decent retro for 10k.
When they came out, they pushed them hard at some dealerships. Problem was it failed on so many fronts. Retro look – failed, performance – failed, sporty to drive – failed, comfortable to drive – failed. I like T-birds, have owned my last one since 1995. There was serious talk that the 3 DOHC 4 Speed 1997 prototypes ran at the Hot Rod Power Tour would be produced in the 1998 model yes, we all know they killed the T-Bird at the end of the 1997 model year. I drove one of the Baby Birds once, it didn’t impress me. It was uncomfortable (I’m tall), it wasn’t sporty to drive, and it had too many rattles etc. for a new car IMO.
We bought our 2004 new off the showroom floor. Merlot (Maroon) with the black top and interior. My wife and I are of average height. Definitely NOT for tall folks. We absolutely loved the ride and the seats fit well. The transmission was a bit quirky as it would acclimate its shift patterns to the driver (aggressive/passive). Ours had the optional SST shifter. If a passive wife (I mean driver) came behind a more aggressive driver (😳), the shifts would be more harsh for a few miles. We had that car for 15 years and had no problems to really annoy us until the “computer” that controlled the throttle body went out. Aftermarket units didn’t “geehaw” with the factory computers. Could find NO OEM throttle body units new or from salvage yards unless you had a core. Our dealership had thrown our OEM unit away when they installed the aftermarket unit. Traded ours in for a new 2019 Mustang GT. My Step- Mother-In-law just sold her 2005 for $16K (private sale)! Good luck to the new owner!!!! Will definitely need it!
Very Sad to see!
Back then I met a guy that said he would have bought one of these if it had a V8 in it. I hadn’t paid attention to them, but later found out it had the Jag V8, which is almost a V8, until it breaks down. Up to $2900
Jags Always Guarantee Unlimited Astronomical Repairs
Good to see the mileage on this, this car was used. Not at all surprising that a car sits as one grows old and passes away. With the mileage, they enjoyed this.
This has bids? Who would even consider buying this? Maybe for parts?
good for parts. i a sure some rodent has been feasting somewhere in that ride
I’ve never driven one of the ’55-’57 baby Birds, but a couple folks I know who have have told me that the driving experience did not live up to the expectations created by the styling. Any one with experience agree or disagree?
I totally agree! I have a 1956 model. Drives just like a 70year old car (drive train is mostly stock but does have electronic ignition, aluminum radiator w/electric fans, and electric fuel pump)! The floor is nearly flat, the seat has near zero back support and the top takes two people to raise/lower! The ride isn’t too bad. The looks stand out better than the practicality and performance but seeing that the car is only 3 years older than myself, we sorta have a bond that just makes me smile (and it doesn’t constantly tell me what I need to do or what I haven’t done like modern vehicles do!). My wife isn’t a fan of the car but, when the old man and the old Golden Retriever get into the old car with the top down, it doesn’t get much better for me.
I don’t know a lot about these Thunderbirds, but I would have used the suspension and drive train from an earlier Mustang GT. In addition, get rid of those awful wheels and put on GT wheels. Take off the flush-mounted headlights and taillights and give them more of the 57 Thunderbird look.
$3000 is a reasonable price, but as stated above, why not buy a driver that doesn’t need work for $10,000 or less?
Definitely needs a restomod in the drivetrain department. I haven’t seen one yet, but I expect to soon.
Besides the retro T-Bird there where
others ,some did well,some not.Chevy HHR,SSR,PT Cruiser, Prowler, and Crossfire.
All junk!
A COMPLETE TURD – HARD PASS !!
What circumstance would cause a classic like this to molder in a backyard, not even covered? Tis pity.
One of the worst things you can do is park on car on grass/dirt. The moisture comes up from the ground and destroys the underside. Back in the day my brother had a 240Z and rented a home with a dirt driveway. The floorboards were gone after a year, the car was only 3-4 years old at the time.
I never felt that the design captured the overall look of the 55-57s. Yes, there were a handful of CUES…but small details a design maketh not. It was a bland and even ugly design that I refused to call a “retro” look, because again, it did nothing to reincarnate the look of the originals. I think most people agreed with me, because these cars didn’t sell very well and the collector market isn’t exactly sending prices through the roof. Sorry to be a little unenthusiastic… Generally, “retro” cars proved NOT to be overly successful, because as they say, you can’t re-heat a souffle.
Pretty sure that Mustang, Camaro and Challenger fans would disagree.
has nobody picked up on this yet……the location is CALIFORNIA,MARYLAND……….hello, anyone……i am calling scam
“California, Maryland, is a rapidly growing community in St. Mary’s County known primarily as a defense and technology hub, driven by its proximity to the Patuxent River Naval Air Station. It is characterized by its suburban feel, extensive shopping along Route 235, and access to the Chesapeake Bay and Patuxent River for recreational activities.”
I guess they aren’t allowed to sell cars?????
Google Maps is your friend. Don’t be so quick to judgement.
Good Lord! Enough of this latest trend of posting up vehicles completely trashed up. “Opening Bid $2500”?? That should be the closing bid…if that, considering the condition this thing is in.
I am currently looking for a smaller pickup for a daily driver and it is just mind boggling that somebody expects to get top dollar for something with the interior looking like they have been dumping their trash in it because they quit paying to have their garbage picked up.
Can’t please everyone I guess. If we post a nice car, people complain that it’s not a barn find. If we post a project, people say it’s junk. Maybe that is part of this site’s appeal though.
No you can’t please them all, but I consider an article with 45 posts something that got the groups attention.
And for every one of the posts that says “You shouldn’t post this”, there are at least 2 of us that are very glad that you did.
Variety is what makes this place great.
Nowhere do I say “don’t post it”.
I think it is actually kind of comical to see the shape some of these are in.
Let “the market” straighten out sellers who seem too lazy to hook the hose up and turn on a vacuum cleaner.
I don’t get it, What is so hard about making the car look presentable? California is in Mary’s County
Exactly Don!
Bought my wife a North Carolina Blue one a few years back. Famous for intake manifold leaks, but one we got that replaced, fantastic experience with that car. A huge range of aftermarket kits to help with the big headlight design and great suspension upgrades available. The car was very comfortable on long journeys and was pretty responsive as well.
I thought they did a fantastic job visually but even the original cars from the 50s fell short against the corvettes.
There are so many crashed mustangs available for parts to make this bird fly like it was supposed to , drop in a real v8 with the appropriate transmission while removing the unreliable boat anchor and all the jaguar unreliable electronic junk and really get the gyus at c&c ´s attention
I would be ashamed to publish pictures like these without at least some effort to clean it up. But….that’s just me! I’d gamble $500 cash!
And…as been said before, “All the other bidders on this vehicle are just paying for their education”. Been there, done that, got the “T”-shirt!
SOLD for $3805.
21 bids.