This Mustang had been sitting in a barn for the past 9 years before the current owner got a hold of it. They could have just left it all dusty and tried to sell it as-is in tradtional “barn find” fashion, but instead decided to clean it up and flush all the fluids. That was probably a wise choice because this thing really cleaned up nice! Take a look here on eBay where it’s listed with no reserve!
Whoa, what a transformation! You may have thought you were looking a different car, but you’re not. That barn must have been really dirty! Anyway, the paint looks stunning in the photos. Further investigation proves that it’s a respray and from the looks of things, not very high quality. There are tape lines in the door jams and the corrosion in the trunk was not addressed.
Here’s a shot of the engine the bay. The seller mentions that the car has a letter C in the VIN so it should have a 289 two-barrel in there. Well, it could be a 289, but the air cleaner has a 302 sticker on it. This was obviously an older restoration so I would want to know exactly what I’m getting before bidding.
The interior also has some nice amateur restoration touches too. The aftermarket floor mats and under dash speaker box need to go. It’s hard to tell in the photos, but things look pretty grimy inside. That’s understandable though considering how dusty the exterior was.
The Marti report shows that this car was optioned more as a highway cruiser than a drag racer. The 289-2v, automatic transmission, and 2.79 rear gearing all contributed to better fuel mileage… And slower acceleration. That can all be easily remedied though if so desired. This fastback may be more show than go, but what a looker it is!
Already at 31 grand. I’m out.
At That price, put it back in the barn!
C’mon Jesse! I know that you know the difference between a valve cover and an air filter lid.
It was just a typo. Thanks for catching that Jack!
sitting for nine years and no flat spots on tires, I’m calling BS.
Wats dat poking out of de gas cap?
A Kleenex tissue dispenser perhaps?? Lol.
Keys in the trunk lock cylinder maybe ?????
I think its a roll of ducktape lmao a shed is not a barn but weather in the sandlot or not after the guard dog passed away it was cleaned up nice.
Looks like a olastic water bottle.
Looks like a 67 to me
67 had side louvers ahead of the rear wheel wells.
Somethings not right. Even the Marti report says 1968. A wise buyer would resolve that before money is exchanged.
Steve R
White cornering lamps at the bottoms of both front fenders point to it being a 1968 model.
1968 also had the side lights in the quarter panels. No mention of them being replaced with 1967 panels?
Doesn’t look like dust to me. Looks more like road salt from being driven or trailered a long distance to deliver it to this new buyer that’s flipping it. You can see the salt on the radiator hoses and how it seeped onto the floor pans. Dust doesn’t stick upside down on the bottom of the car.
I agree Karguy about the salt and dirt. Also i think there is no trunk weatherstrip!
I see a trunk weatherstrip UNDER the trunk lid.
Note heater hoses disconnected!
The VIN says it’s a 68, but the rear quarters say 67…should have side marker lights…so either someone replaced the quarters, or there’s a ton of bondo lurking underneath there…and I cannot believe it’s hit over 30 large….
It’s an April build, so it would have originally had the Cougar rear reflectors that just required two holes, not the early style that were recessed into the quarter panel.
Wonder if this car has been rear ended bad and the quarters were replaced with 67 quarters (NO side markers)? The outer trunk floors look like they were crushed, then semi-straightened! I’d want to look underneath at the rear frame rails. Already at $31,200??……..CRAZY!
Some people have way more money than BRAINS!!!!
Here’s that outer trunk floor section I was talking about………..
This side looks even worse………..
So much for, “100% Rust Free Factory Floors” as the seller states on ebay!
JamestownMike,
I agree it looks like that trunk floor was wrinkled up at one time. I believe it’s a ’68 with ’67 style rear quarters. It has the side marker lamps in the front but, not in the rear. It could be an old repair from when it was a daily driver years ago. I also think the “dust” is salt spray from a recent open trailer transport. Here in west central Ohio you see a lot of salt on cars and it looks just like this.
It does look like hammer out. One of welds on left side looks New no paint on it.
At least it appears New in pictures.
Pretty hard to believe
68s had side lights or reflectors front and rear. This is a 67
Read the existing comments first.
Not going to the fish market today, honey.
Regardless of the history or current issues it may have, that is one fine looking vehicle. Imagine it new in 68. My favorite model of Mustang. GLWTS.
But, for how long?
Steve R
Looks like the seller just ended the auction early…
Sold for $31,300.00! Somebody has more money than sense.
No side marker lights means nothing to the year, when our 70 Mustang had the quarters replaced there were no holes for the side marker lights and the shop owner forgot to cut them out before painting the car. We liked it better without them so he had not painted front fenders yet so we had him weld in the fronts and it looks much cleaner. I know they are legally supposed to be there but we have drove it in 4 states already and plan 2 more this year and we have never been stopped for that reason or any other. I see them doing the same thing on a lot of these Velocity shows that do the customize builds.
I had a 68 back in 1973 that I used to go to the drag’s with on (Grudge Night) !
The car was only 5 years old and had a 289 Hi-Po in it with a Hurst comp plus 4 speed with 4/56 gears and Mr Gasket traction bars. It would turn consistant 13’s with street tires and when I went to drag slicks it would turn 11’s with sandbags in the trunk for balast. She would really hook up then and leave the line in a stand. But after a couple of seasons I started to notice crumpling in the trunk area just like this car has. I also twisted the front of the car from the wheel stands slamming down I think.The things are just unibody remember. I sold it after that because it wouldn’t take an alignment and bought a 68 RR which I loved dearly. Just something I thought I would throw at you guys as a possible reason for the trunk crumple. I noticed other guys with the big bucks were running Morroso suspensions on these cars for stiffness.
jw you state that no side marker lights means nothing to the year. that is not true according ford there were no side marker lights on any 1967 mustang’s but every 1968 had side marker lights that were not required in all states.
What I was implying was that with all the modifications done to these cars over the years you can not go by no side marker lights alone. Since this one does look as if it’s been rear ended and quarters replace they could have decided to eliminate them for a cleaner look.
It’s nice, looks like it was bought and brought to sellers home. Looks like there’s definitely good salt penetration in the floors, but first pic shows what a car looks like after being hauled on 6 car open transport. Says it was original to NY so who knows. There are nuts on the intake, so you can be sure there is piss smell inside, maybe a nest in the heater core. Too much hype with bullit Mustang release and the original car coming out of hiding
Fix the rust then maybe a 30,000 car We get a complete redone for that price but it looks good for a find
Yeah getting that car bid up that high smells like the sellers buddy was helping him out to get it that high.
Paint around the door tag