Voting preferences, religion, pineapple on pizza – the list of things we argue about as a culture is near endless (and growing by the day.) The four-eyed Mustang is an example of how in automotive enthusiast culture, we can also find bones to pick, but thankfully ones that won’t disrupt holiday gatherings. The Fox-body Mustang sported a set of headlight lenses like this 1986 Mustang GT convertible listed here on craigslist that still triggers some pleasant debate today about which era you’re a fan of, and while most seemingly fall in line with the later design, some people (like me) still love the outliers. This GT convertible also features the preferred manual gearbox and some recent updates with an asking price of $14,000. Thanks to Barn Finds reader Mitchell G. for the tip.
The seller claims this Mustang is “…98 percent restored,” which is a statement that only serves to inspire more questions. What part of it wasn’t restored? What area of the car is that two percent of work contained to? The bodywork looks sound as does the convertible top, and the car’s California location would seemingly suggest rust has never been an issue. The white paint with the black trim and top is a pleasing combination, and from the top photo, you can see it rides on a set of aftermarket wheels and perhaps even has a lowered suspension (though, the seller does claim it is “stock.”) The Mustang sits nicely over the larger wheels, but I’d like to know if the stock 15-inch wheels are included.
One area you see the distinct difference between the two generation of Fox body is in the interior. For me, this is the bigger influence in a decision about which generation of Fox to buy as the four-eyed model does feel like a significant step back in time, both in terms of design and quality. The instrument binnacle clearly traces its heritage back to the late 70s, and while the Fox body in general wasn’t exactly a high watermark for interior quality, the later cars might feel a bit more acceptable in an era where even econoboxes have stitching on the dash. The seller’s car doesn’t appear to be restored on the inside, as you can see some basic cosmetic flaws and seats that look original (and nicely preserved.)
One detail I’d bring back if this were my Mustang is the black stripe in the center of the hood. This was a hallmark of the four-eyed GT package, and while it’s not a huge deal that it’s not present, it’s one of the first things I noticed. It also suggests that the Mustang may have been repainted, as the finish is quite glossy and I could see someone opting not to recreate the original design once the body panels were gleaming white. Still, it’s easy enough to replace, and presenting this Mustang with that detail in place and sitting on factory wheels could make it an even more compelling buy. Do you think this is a fair price for a clean four-eyed Mustang GT?
Nice car. Don’t think it’s lowered, like the wheels, good drivetrain, it doesn’t really need a stripe,and good looking, 4 lights and all. In this condition the asking price is not out of bounds.
Since you asked Jeff, the four-eyes are my favorite Foxes. This one looks good. A manual transmission convertible, very desirable. This tire and wheel package is attractive, but with seemingly every Fox riding on aftermarket wheels, I’m fine with the stock wheels.
Interesting to look back…. by 1986, it was becoming apparent that the traditional American muscle car, as illustrated by the Mustang, wasn’t going to die via the Malaise Era. And look what happened from that point forward.
It definitely appears to have been lowered a bit to my eyes. I’d also wager heavily that it’s been repainted. Not only is it missing the GT blackout hood decal, but it’s missing the luggage rack that was standard on convertibles starting in 1986 (because the center stoplight was placed under the spoiler-like crossbar), and the holes in the trunk lid have been filled.
The seller is mighty proud of the passenger side of the car. After 100K miles what does the driver’s position look like? I would expect noticible wear on the seat’s bolster along with in the foot well. A peek or two under the hood would be useful as well. The seller doesn’t provide enough information to truly value the car.
Trunk lid has been replaced — ’86 would have the luggage rack and third brake light, though some may prefer the cleaner look without them.
Though located in CA it’s wearing Oregon SP (Special Interest) plates so apparently not registered/titled in CA. No underhood/underbody shots could mean mods that would keep it from passing CA smog (required for a sale/registration in CA). Makes you wonder why they didn’t post an engine photo at least.
The car does not have California plates. If it is not registered to the seller and/or he doesn’t have a smog certificate to hand you when money is exchanged, I’d walk. You can’t complete the transfer without one, many sellers leave it up to the buyer, if the car is not in the sellers name there is no recourse for the new owner.
It’s been on the market for 24 days and is located within a 2 hour drive of 6 million people.
Steve R