Go to car


Latest Comments
Car: 40811   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "looks like a 1995 Hot Wheels..."
Car: 97340   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "still sitting there, two flat tires now and has tr..."
Car: 93456   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "older customers, means (usually) the cars ended up..."
Car: 98683   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "this reminds me of small town Kansas. I don't hate..."
Car: 26574   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "I actually used to talk to escort_lx on msn back i..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Linkage
Plates
Bling Bling
Photo
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images

 Other

Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
FAQ
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

0 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List

 Login

Username:

Password:


Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password



This image has expired.

Final Stats:

Total Votes 592
Average Score 2.60
Verdict Not Rice



Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=14613
Submitted by: stang392
Comments: 41  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 2  (View)
Submitted on: 11-15-2002
View Stats Category: Car
Description:
Very first production Mustang


   Comments

Showing page: 1 of 3
[
1 2 3 ]

#1
11-15-2002 @ 09:29:40 PM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
Ford had to "bribe" the owner with a brand-new Mustang to get him to sell it back to them, he loved the car that much

#2
11-15-2002 @ 09:30:01 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
It was owned by some Army person...he drove it a LOT, but Ford realized they should probably have the first Mustang for posterity, and offered him the 1,000,001st Mustang built in return.

#3
11-15-2002 @ 09:30:34 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
yep they screwed up and sent this one to a dealership in Canada if i remember right

#4
11-15-2002 @ 09:30:53 PM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
#2, Good thing too, the car was living in some northern climate, and had a bit of fender rust when they got it back

#5
11-15-2002 @ 09:31:47 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
The first Mustang was a bit bland looking, really. I find it hard to believe the first one was a convertible.

#6
11-15-2002 @ 09:35:44 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#5, as hard as it may be to believe, it was. seen the story about on some TV show

#7
11-15-2002 @ 09:36:31 PM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
#6, That' was "Hisory's lost and found" saw the same episode, so I knew the car too the instant I saw it

#8
11-15-2002 @ 09:37:22 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#7, yeah that was it

#9
11-15-2002 @ 09:37:41 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#7, Same here.

#10
11-17-2002 @ 11:54:30 AM
Posted By : 95T-Bird Reply | Edit | Del
Any one know if it was a six or eight?

#11
11-17-2002 @ 11:57:28 AM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#10, I believe it is a 6. I don't think the V8 was immediately available when the Mustang was first released...

#12
11-26-2002 @ 10:32:19 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
looks like it has the V badge on the fender, so i would guess it was a V8 (260)

#13
11-26-2002 @ 10:33:52 PM
Posted By : ricerocketboy Reply | Edit | Del
nope, 260's came out for the '65 model year.

#14
11-26-2002 @ 10:34:23 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
Yep, it's a V8.

#15
11-26-2002 @ 10:35:29 PM
Posted By : ricerocketboy Reply | Edit | Del
Shows ya how much I know about classics.

#16
11-26-2002 @ 10:35:48 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#13, to FORD they all were 65s, only collecters and car nuts call early 65s 64 1/2. and the first V8 in the stang was the 260, which was soon replaced by the 289

#17
11-26-2002 @ 10:36:40 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
If I'm not mistaken, 289s came out for 1965, all '64s had 260s. Or was the 289 optional in '64?

#18
12-25-2002 @ 04:09:11 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#17, there were no 64's see #16

#19
12-25-2002 @ 04:16:58 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
#18, There were changes made to the car in late 1964. Hence, I consider cars built from April-late 1964 as '64s and all cars being built right before 1965 as '65 models.

#20
12-25-2002 @ 04:19:03 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#19, eh

Showing page: 1 of 3
[
1 2 3 ]


Login to leave a comment

Classifieds 
Click here to post your own classified ad






Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Thursday, October 31, 2024 10:26:20 PM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Ricecop. All rights reserved.