A few of the comments that stood out to us yesterday:
“@Treetrimmer is spot-on. Ford’s own memos state that the purpose of this group of these GTs was not to introduce the Mustang, but to introduce the first-ever offering of the availability of the GT Package. That’s why the 60 cars were not 1964 1/2 models. They were 1965 models because that’s the year in which the GT Package was first offered.
In reference to a different comment, comparing them to pace cars, etc. reveals they are not so alike for several reasons. Mainly, the introduction…”
14
WCBBatVette commented on No Reserve: World’s Fair Batch 1965 Ford Mustang Coupe GT A-Code 289
“The 4.08 rear end coupled with the 5 speed ZF makes any Pagoda 230,250,280 a sports car with far better acceleration, and also legs for the highway without the typical high revs of the 4 speeds. A 4.08 could not work in a 4 speed, since with even their 3.xx rear ends they are spinning to fast for highway speeds.”
22
mserpe commented on 32-Years-Owned 1968 Mercedes-Benz 280SL 5-Speed
“I was a young car-crazed teen and recall when the Monza came out for the 1975 model year. I thought it was an awesome looking design. When this Mirage package was announced I was really excited! Yeah, it was just a 305, but it was all about the styling for me. Really neat to see one here on BaT!”
8
JayKay2430 commented on 1977 Chevrolet Monza Mirage
“C&C T-Tops were as good if not better than factory. Loved the glass to glass look that GM adopted for the 3rd gen cars. I used to install those on 2nd and 3rd gen F-bodies in the 80’s through the 90’s. Way better than the tiny Hurst and American aftermarket Hatches. GLWTA.”
17
johnnyvett commented on 24k-Mile 1981 Chevrolet Camaro Z28