Good Deal? 2000 Mustang GT Convertible, 63k miles, for $8,300?

aliensquale

New Member
Mar 22, 2011
28
0
0
Wondering what a good deal would be on a mustang gt convertible. I have 3 options that I am looking at right now..

- 2000 GT Convertible, Gold color, 63k miles, $8,300

- 2003 GT Convertible, Dark Blue, 31k miles, $13,000

- 2004 GT Convertible, Black, 40th anniversary, 13k miles, $14,000

What are the best deals you think? any thoughts on the model years 2000 - 2004 in terms of each other? basically the same exact car right?
 
  • Sponsors (?)


so am I better off going with the older 2000 and saving more for around $8k? or being the 2000 has 63k miles on it this might not be a good idea and I should look for something newer?
 
Any years convertible's are pretty much the same. You have the minute differences between model years-exterior and interior changes, the intake manifold issue and the transmission change.

It looks like you are searching for a lower mileage convertible. The only suggestion is don't spend more than $10k, because you can find 99/01 Cobra convertible for around $10k, and they have the IRS and a 320hp DOHC. Look for something you really like. Then if the carfax and etc. check out, go test drive it.
 
Personally, I am partial to the 2001+ model year body lines/exteriors, however for the prices you listed, I would consider the 2000, especially if you do not plan on keeping stock - 63k is pretty good mileage at that price, but not a big fan of the color gold...

When I was looking for mine, I did some serious auto trader looking until I found it - remember, cash is king, and if you're willing to drive a little, there are deals to be had..


Like already said, anything over $10k is too much for these years unless you are talking a cobra..
 
The only suggestion is don't spend more than $10k, because you can find 99/01 Cobra convertible for around $10k, and they have the IRS and a 320hp DOHC.
Whats your locale? That affects prices significantly.
Indeed. An '01 Cobra convertible would go for at least double what was quoted above where I live....even within 1,000-square miles of where I live.
 
a prior poster mentioned that the 2000 would be better for modding over the 2003/2004 model years.. why is that? I thought these cars were basically identical?

is gold a highly sought after color?
 
a prior poster mentioned that the 2000 would be better for modding over the 2003/2004 model years.. why is that? I thought these cars were basically identical?

They are basically identical. The thought of the early '99-'00 Windsor powered GT's being more stout, or desirable from a modification standpoint than that '01-'04 Romeo powered GT's is nothing more than internet fairytales.

The differences between these two engines were minor and mechanical. Neither of which had had anything to do with functionality, or the way they performed. They were all rated at the same 260hp/302tq from ’99-’04.

If it were me, I’d go with the ’01 and later GT. Not because one was any more powerful than the other, but with the earlier Windsor engine, you still take the chance that it’s got the all plastic lower intake manifold on it, rather than the later manifold that had the aluminum cross over section in the front. Won’t make a difference from a power aspect, but it could pose a reliability issue at the most inopportune moment. There were also small cosmetic improvements made to interior and exterior of the later Mustangs. I also prefer the Bullitt style wheels that came on the later mustangs, over the aluminum 5-spoke units on the earlier cars, but that’s really more of a personal preference.
idk if its highly sought after but it is an ugly color

Fixt. :D
 
I actually HATE those buillt style rims.. that's what is turning me away from a lot of the 2002-2004 stangs... the 1999/2000 have those 5 spoke alloy rims which I find MUCH better looking.

anyway to check for the plastic intake by just looking under the hood?

about how many miles do you get on the stock brakes and tires if you drive 'normal' and not burn out everywhere?
seeing some used cars with 30-50k miles makes me wonder if the tires/brakes are about shot unless they have already been replaced ya know..

as for the convertible top material.. so that has always been the same exact top and material from 99-2004? how about the 40-th anniversary edition 2004 convertible top? I thought that was unique material?
 
I actually HATE those buillt style rims.. that's what is turning me away from a lot of the 2002-2004 stangs... the 1999/2000 have those 5 spoke alloy rims which I find MUCH better looking.

IIRC the aluminum 5 spoke wheels are also much lighter than the Bullitt wheels.

anyway to check for the plastic intake by just looking under the hood?

Yep look at the coolant crossover just behind the alternator. It will be either black plastic or aluminum.

Here's the bad plastic crossover:

mmfp_0809_03_z+ford_mustang+stock_pi_intake_manifold.jpg


Here's the upgraded manifold w/ the aluminum crossover (notice the silver part in front where the stat goes).

M-9424-P46.jpg


about how many miles do you get on the stock brakes and tires if you drive 'normal' and not burn out everywhere?

I didn't replace mine until 100K miles.

seeing some used cars with 30-50k miles makes me wonder if the tires/brakes are about shot unless they have already been replaced ya know..

You should plan on replacing brakes especially on a car that is 8-10 years old. Good news is brakes are a relatively inexpensive easy to do repair.

as for the convertible top material.. so that has always been the same exact top and material from 99-2004? how about the 40-th anniversary edition 2004 convertible top? I thought that was unique material?

No clue
 
granted this is brand new in the picture, an aluminum crossover intake will have this on the front behid the alternator like n8 said:

Picture010.jpg



sigh, you and your ninja edits n8 :nonono: at least yall can look at my leg hair :shrug:
 
Those prices seem high at first glance but are apparently in line with current blue book values. Used car prices seem to have been going up recently and SN95s in particular have been bouncing back (my old '96 is worth about a grand more now than it was a couple years ago!) and convertibles always retain a pretty good premium over coupes anyway.

With the mileage on the 03 & 04, they're still practically new. Of course, 60K miles doesn't particularly worry me either since it's just getting broken in.

If that '04 is an actual 40th anniversary package car, that'd be the most desirable to me - limited edition package, lowest miles. It still seems like a lot to spend for a car thats a generation old already though but it should also hold its value better than most.