Disclosure: This site may receive compensation when you click on some links and make purchases.

In Dry Storage: 1977 Ford Maverick

It’s hard to believe that Ford originally thought that folks who were looking at imported cars would be swayed by a Maverick, but it’s true. This 1977 Ford Maverick looks like a nice car in its own right, imports notwithstanding. This blue sedan is listed on eBay in Raymore, Missouri with no bids at the opening price of $900. That’s surprising given how nice this car looks and that there is no reserve.

Isn’t this a sweet Maverick? Sure, it has double the doors that most people want, or at least that they publicly say that they want. And, it has bumpers that look like they came off of a Hitachi EH5000AC-3 mine truck. Ok, that was an exaggeration. I think this is one nice looking Maverick, it’s about as elegant as a Maverick can get without it having a white vinyl top and opera lights, and the driver wearing white shoes.

1977 was the final year for the Ford Maverick in North America. This car was parked “in dry storage for many years” and the seller also says it “hasn’t been waxed in years and needs to be.” It looks pretty good to me the way it is. It isn’t perfect, of course, but for being 41 years old it’s nice, reeeeeeeal nice.

Other than the front driver’s side of the seat needing a re-stretch (don’t we all) the interior looks great. Dirty floor mats and carpets that could use a good cleaning are easy to fix. The headliner looks like new as does the back seat. That fabric is fantastic. The trunk looks good but the seals could use some help. NADA lists the average retail for a 1977 Ford Maverick 4-door sedan as being $2,175.

A 302 V8 would have been great here – this 250 inline-six would have had just under 100 hp. You can see that this car also has AC but I’m assuming that it isn’t working. The seller does say that it “Runs and drives fine. Fluids are good, battery is new and I cannot see anything needing to be repaired or replaced.” The seller reemphasizes, “car runs and drives fine. But hasn’t been driven much over the last 20 years or so. If you’re planning on flying in and driving it home 2,000 miles, I’d suggest allowing yourself extra time to check the fan belts and hoses.” Are there any Maverick fans out there?

Comments

  1. Avatar KEVIN FLORES

    I’d reckon this car will offer parts for a sportier coupe Maverick. I’d part it out for my Mavericks, I know that.

    Like 0
    • Avatar Miguel

      Why would you part out a perfectly good car.

      There are Maverick parts everywhere.

      Like 2
  2. Avatar LAB3

    An honest survivor on a working man budget! If it books at $2200 and you can get it for that (or less) then it might be worth holding on to for awhile. Sure, it’s a four door with a six but if it’s as solid as it looks the value can only go up.

    Like 1
  3. Avatar Ken

    Man what a nice, clean, good looking handsome car. I for one love the 4 door sedans. ( sorry friend) 2 door cars are useless and impractical. I’d spend days buffing the $&@$ out of it and bring out that deep blue. I like it

    Lets see where the hammer comes down. That’ll be the market value

    Like 1
  4. Avatar Gay Car Nut

    I think it’s an awesome looking car. I find the Ford Maverick sedan more attractive than the Maverick 2 door. And I like the bumpers. It may not please everyone, but so what? As long as they’re there, and the car runs like it should.

    Like 1
  5. Avatar Rustytech Member

    I was not a big fan of the later Mavericks, but this car looks great. It would be the near perfect daily driver, decent if not overwhelming acceleration, and good fuel economy. Both belts are still connected to the A/C so it may still work with a little work.

    Like 0
    • Avatar That AMC Guy

      If you look at the engine bay photo you can see that the AC service port caps are missing. Schrader valves don’t necessarily seal 100% so most or all of the refrigerant charge may have leaked out over time. (Of course there are plenty of other potential leak points as well.)

      Like 0
    • Avatar Jose Delgadillo

      Don’t be too sure about the “good” fuel economy. I sold my ’70 Mustang coupe with a 250 cid six and auto a couple of years back because the gas mileage was so low. Even with radial tires I found that fuel economy at sustained 60 mph. only netted me 15 mpg. I did a lot of research in several older road test magazines as well as a Popular Mechanics owner’s survey and found that was pretty typical. It would be easier and cheaper to improve fuel economy with a 289 V8. Hot Rod magazine modified a ’66 fastback and achieved approx. 23-24 mph. The earlier 200 sixes were more efficient than the 250 cid unit.

      Like 0
  6. Avatar John T

    Another nice car in decent shape. Too bad its an automatic. Where do you find these Scotty G? Really enjoy your many posts on the simple basic Old School sedans and wagons.

    Like 0
  7. Avatar Alan

    I am always For All original Non hot rodded or modded vintage cars. Beautiful Maverick. this is my 73 Mustang Hardtop coupe has 8,600, original miles
    https://www.connorsmotorcar.com/vehicles/258/1973-ford-mustang

    Like 0
  8. Avatar Casey

    Weren’t the bumpers son the Maverick supposed to be retractable or something like that?

    Like 0
    • Avatar dweezilaz

      Casey: to protect the body work. They absorbed impact. Some manufacturers used a shock absorber type mounted to the back [see AMC products like the Pacer and 74 and up Matador 2 door].

      FED standards because of consumer complaints about the flimsy little chrome blades prior to the regulations that allowed hundreds of dollars of damage to happen in minor parking lot mishaps.

      They added weight and length,which makes a 75 Nova or Granada or Maverick the size of a current Dodge Charger today as far as length goes.

      The original compacts were approx 180-186″ in length. The “compacts” of the mid 70s were 195-199″, the size of a Fairlane or a Comet.

      The FED regulations started with a 2.5 mph crash standard that went to 5 mph later in the decade. They had to pass without crushing body work or safety equipment such as lights and turn signals.

      Like 0
    • Avatar Ken

      Even more simply put, those bumpers were mounted on shock absorbers as opposed to being bolted onto the frame directly which is not really safe

      Like 0
  9. Avatar CanuckCarGuy

    Yet another underrated Ford well worth collecting…my grandfather had a ’71 coupe, same colour as this one; it was his pride and joy.

    Like 0
  10. Avatar Beatnik Bedouin

    I have to keep reminding myself that cars like this are now 41 years-old – much like the ’30s/40s cars my friends and I were looking for in the early-to-mid-1970s – and that there’s a different generation of enthusiasts who see cars like this Maverick from a totally different perspective.

    In saying that, it would be a nice, entry-level collectable for someone that would be fun to drive and easy to maintain.

    Casey, those were the 5 mph bumpers that were required by US Federal law.

    Like 0
  11. Avatar Mike Russell

    I was born in 1966, so I have a fondness for the older vehicles. My Dad & brothers used to bring me to junkyards when I was young & I’d check out all the cars. This site is awesome & brings back tons of memories. Keep up the excellent work!

    Like 0
  12. Avatar Ben T. Spanner

    These were nasty when new. Fleet queens. My friend had a new V8 company car, he nailed it getting on a freeway and the fan lunched the radiator. The sixes were slow and drank gas. My father in law talked my Wife’s sister into buying one new. She was a single mother with four kids. No room, crappy milage and lot’s of problems.

    We had better experience with the fleet Granadas,

    Like 0
  13. Avatar Ben T. Spanner

    These were nasty when new. Fleet queens. My friend had a new V8 company car, he nailed it getting on a freeway and the fan lunched the radiator. The sixes were slow and drank gas. My father in law talked my Wife’s sister into buying one new. She was a single mother with four kids. No room, crappy milage and lot’s of problems.

    We had better experience with the fleet Granadas,

    Like 0

Leave a Reply to John T Cancel reply

RULES: No profanity, politics, or personal attacks.

Become a member to add images to your comments.

*

Get new comment updates via email. Or subscribe without commenting.