05 Mustang, the next classic?

Discussion in '2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by Fubak, Mar 31, 2004.

  1. after listening to all the contrasting viewpoints, i think a nice looking 05 gt might be worth its weight in gold in the year 2025. i mean there is the artsy side with the retro dash...imagine wood panel instead of aluminum. these cars are not typical cookie cutter 05's with high tech gagets...there are no navigation systems...etc. these cars are like rock n roll, and i can't wait to get one and keep it!
  2. Maybe a '66 6-banger 3-speed coupe isn't collectible to you, but it IS collectible and classic to 95% of the car-enthusiast-public, which pretty much trumps your opinion, which is just that, an opinion, and a fairly ill-founded one at that, considering that I just watched a 1967 Mustang fastback, 289-2v with hardly any options, but with only 7 original miles (it's a real car, I'm familiar with it), get bid up to $32,000 on ebay (no-sale) a few weeks ago. So, what was that comment "maybe in 100 years V6's and 289's will be worth SOMETHING"????? I'd say $32 grand for a 289-2V 3-speed manual with no power steering or brakes is "something"! Your view of what's "classic" is highly elitist. The cars you hang your hat on are just more EXPENSIVE classics, gold-chain classics, rarer and more performance oriented, but their existance in no way diminishes the status of the more mundane models one iota, IMHO. It doesn't have to be limited production to be a classic. Would you argue that the '57 Chevy is NOT a classic collectible? They built a ton of them. Or how about the Model T or Model A Ford, not a classic collectible?? Again, dollar value and rarity and classic status are NOT all attached at the hip. If you offered up a pristine 1909 Ford Model T (worth about $25K) and a pristine 1965 Shelby GT350 (worth quadruple these days) for display at the Smithsonian, and they only had room for one car, the "T" would be considered a FAR more significant, "classic", and the Shelby would be turned away. In fact, the little 6-banger and 289 Mustangs had an infinitely more significant impact on society and the automotive industry than any Boss or Shelby ever did, and will always be considered classics. Their rarer and far more valuable Shelby and Boss brothers are simply rare and highly-desirable versions of what is, in-full, a classic marque.
  3. But I agree with MOST of what you said. What I was disagreeing with was the statement that anything over 20 years old is a classic. I said it is not that broad, that a car has to have some automotive signifigance to be a "classic". That is hardly an extreme position.

    True, there is no governing body to define "classic" (thank goodness). But neither is the definition so broad as to include every piece of junk on the road that is over some target age, either. There is some broad acceptance that some cars are - or will be - classic, and some won't.

    But to the question of this thread - "Will the '05 become a classic??" The only possible answer is "It is too early to tell." Possible decades too early. Nobody thought the '65 would become a classic until the late 80s. I know I didn't, and I have owned one since May 1964.
  4. By the way - 65 and 66 Shelby's ARE 289s. (Well, all except one 200 that has been on the show circuit - but that one has a doubtful pedigree.)

    Both the GT-350s and many real Cobras are 289s.

    All Mustangs, Shelby and Cobras from 65 to 73 are considered Classics by most collectors.
  5. Saying only pre emissions vehicles are / will be classics in 50 years is ridiculous. With many hybrids already on the road and electrical vehicles around the corner, gasoline powered cars in general, let alone performance ones, will become collectible IMO.

    I can already hear it.

    "Here it is man, my 2011 Mustang GT. You know it was the last year it came with the internal combustion engine, huh ? Ah, the good ol' days !"
  6. I agree with those who think it can become a classic and here is my reasoning.

    Unfornutely I will use a Mopar because this one floors me. In the late 70's Dodge came out with the "Little Red Express" pick up. They were basically a regular Dodge truck with a few extras thrown in as a package. They were not to my recollection serial number specific. Last year I saw one in mint condition sell in an auction for well over 4 times what this was worth brand new. It was only about 25 years old, but the rarity of it now made it worth more. The guy who owned it parked it 20 years ago and was grinning ear to ear at the price he got. I would have never bought it but someone felt it was worth it and that's the important part. My 1975 plain jane Monte Carlo, I sold it for $4500 after only paying $1500 when it was nearly new. Time will tell and too soon to judge if the Mustang will be worth anything. I am buying one and hang on to it for a very long time, not with intention to sell, only with intentions of enjoying it.
  7. If CLASSIC = Monetary Value then,

    Besides Quality and Condition, Rarity has EVERYTHING to do with value when dealing with Antiques. There are virtually collectors for everything under the sun. Furniture, Art, Toys, Baseball cards, Matches, etc. the list is endless. when you have these obessive collectors vying for something that is in severe limited quanity, Price will go up to reach the equilibrium. With a limited quantity of product, Demand goes up = Price goes up. The product holder for the rare item gets to pick his price because it cannot be had anywhere else. less sellers produce less compeitition.

    Obviously there are different variables that effect price as well. Political influences during the time of the release of the product, Age of the product, Historical significance, and so on. But utimately all these different variables ultiimately effect the rarity of the product. For example, a 17th centry musket has a high value because mainly it's rare because its old, has historical significance, and is high quality.
  8. I think I am going to print out this thread, store it in a corked bottle, and read it again in like 25 years. That will be classic. :D
  9. Who said that "Classic = Monetary value"???? I find that totally oversimplified, and false at face value.

    Monetary value is the sum of MANY factors, classic status being just one of the many, as you pointed out later in your post. The early VW Beetle, the Ford Model T and A, the 64 1/2 Mustang, are all classics by any measure, and all relatively inexpensive to buy.

    Secondly, rarity does not have "everything" to do with value. A 1972 AMC Matador is probably a rarer vehicle on the face of the earth today than a Hemi Cuda. So "rare", all by itself, means zero. Rare only works when it's the kind of rare YOU WANT. I'm always laughing at ads that brag "rare bench seat", or "rare straight-6-cylinder SS Impala" (you actually could get a 6-banger SS Impala in 1964) trying to squeeze a buck out of the word "rare", when it's the actual rareness of the car that makes people walk the other way. Or the Medium Lime Mustang with brown vinyl roof and vermillion interior, 6-cylinder 3-speed, with 8-track and dog-dish hubcaps, with the Marti Report framed and displayed on the dash proudly stating "ONE OF ONE MADE!!". Wow, that's rare. Must be a CLASSIC! MUST BE WORTH A FORTUNE!! LOL.... Classic applies to such a wide variety of stuff, you can't set standards based on just rarity, or just value, you can't be so simplistic. There's always an example out there that will shoot a big hole in your standard. Look how much dough people are blowing on top-restored 55-57 Chevys these days. When new, they were the common man's car, mass-produced, and cheap. Today the well-restored ones bring $40-$80K depending on bodystyle and options. Twice the money that it would take to buy an equally well-restored, and much rarer, and much fancier/high quality, 55-57 Caddy or Olds. So classic has less to do with rarity, or quality, or performance, and more to do with emotion, heart, and heritage, which the lowly little Mustang, IN ANY TRIM, has in abundance.
  10. Agreed. Or as I phrased it "automotove significance", which the (I'm not going to call it "lowly") wonderful Mustang has in abundance. Certain trims, or options, are valuable and popular, but with or without, they are still the vaunted "MUSTANG!!!"
  11. I was being a tad sarcastic when I said "lowly", in context with the dissing the plain-jane Mustang (that made all the money that allowed Ford to play around with low-production performance toys) was taking.
  12. Try looking for a 65 Mustang Convertable or Fastback..... They're pretty pricey, even when they look like swiss cheese. Then add a K-code engine and 4 speed. If you found one for under 20k that wasn't totally trashed, I'd be impressed.

    Even 6 bangers age getting more expensive. People are looking for good 6 banger just to drop a v8 and have a weekend cruiser.

    Shelby's are more expensive and more rare, but that doesn't make the regular 65 - 66 models any less desireable.

    The 65-66 models may not be worth tons of money like shelbys, but they are collectable and getting more expensive. In fact, the 65 - 66 Mustangs are so popular that you could practically build a car with repo parts.
  13. Actually you can. They even make the bodies now in fiberglass. Kinda sad but true.
  14. Who really knows the future of retro???

    While it is a great question to ask; who knows the future value of retro cars. Will the most current T-Bird be a classic? My guess is that they will be thought of a fine cars to own, but not as classics. Maybe a curiosity in future eyes, when vieiwng some examples of new retro cars. The T-Bird looks OK, and if sold for $25k, may have been a fari price. Bill Ford has stated that he would like to see a 50 gas tax added, so they can move forward with hybrid cars. I am now re-considering buying a Ford product. We are taxed enough for gas and don't need the rich kid telling Washington we need more taxes, thank you. If people want a hybrid, Toyota and Honda have them. They developed them without my 50 cents a gallon contribution. I don't want a car that takes two engines and extra batteries to run. Those little devils sneek up on ya, as they are so quite, and more like an electric cart.

    :flag: Loren
  15. I love all the Mustangs from the 60s. Most of the mustangs from 70 to 98 were disgusting. Though, alot of people here have made their Fox Body mustangs look beautiful. I guess you could say that about any car when you're dealing with enthusiasts. The current ( 99-2004 ) models and the 2005 are definitely amazing...
  16. No offense taken :D You are correct. The early model coupes, which made up the vast majority of sales, were produced just as much as and maybe even more than the current model mustangs. And for that reason, coupe prices arent really going up much. Fastback prices on the other hand are skyrocketing. For example, there were only 53,000 '67 fastback in standard interior, and 17,000 in luxury interior. And how many of those actually survive today? Coupes will NEVER be able to compete. I didnt really emphasize this at first, but the big problem is lack of available options on current cars. There are only 2 body styles now, coupe and vert. You aren't able to really choose from a wide selection of engines like you were able to in the early days. Therefore, the cars nowadays are pretty much the same. Youve got the V6, GT, and Cobra. In the early days, you could choose from like a 170, 200, 260, and 3 different models of a 289. Later on, they introduced the big block, and personalization grew. You could get standard interiors, bench seats, pony interiors, and the list goes on. The coupes of yesteryear wont be appreciating much. Its the low produced fastbacks, verts, gt's, bosses, shelby's, machs, etc that are the real collector cars. I do think that its possible that the new bullitts will appreciate well, but unless ford provides options like they did in the 60's, i dont see the value going up much at all. It will appreciate, but not to the degree that the early cars will.

  17. You are correct in many ways. I bought my fastback 2 years ago, and today, if i were to look for the car in the same condition, it would be over twice as expensive. And mine was a 6 cyl fastback which i converted to V8.

    And yes, i pretty much built this car up with new parts. Pretty much the only original parts on it are the doors, quarterpanels, roof, trunk, and some frame parts:D
  18. ummm mustangs = poor mans fast car....gotta give ford a little credit, pop on a supercharger and straight line performance on any GT can hang with the camaros (newer),vettes, etc
  19. Well, almost. Not to pick a nit, but you never had a choice between the 170 or 200 - they were at different times. Same with the 260 and the smallest 289. The 170 and 260 were offered for the first 6 months, along with two 289s. Then they were dropped for the 200 and the 289 2v.

    But your point is well made. You also had a choice of 3 different transmissions with all but the 289 HiPo. 3 or 4 speed manual, or 3-speed automatic. (Want rare? 6-cylinder with a 4-speed! Wasn't very popular.) HiPo came only with a 4-speed. 3 different wheel sizes, even!!

    There were also dozens of other option choices, which meant you could tailor the car to your own wants. Two interiors, in many colors, two exterior packages, then there was the GT package, which really made it three. That is one of the major things that made it so popular, and which Ford is missing out on today.

    And with modern computer technology, it would be infinitely easier to make those choices available today. I think they are missing out on a lot of potential sales appeal, by pinching pinnies.