cool things with wheels, since 2006
it's a 1970, not 1969 (I have a 69).
be patient, and go back and read what I wrote. I never say the year of the Mustang. I know what year it is, and so does everyone else. I only mention the year of the Camaro taillights. See? Now... isn't that odd to use Camaro taillights? On a Mustang. Yes, they are a big improvment in looks over the original Mustang taillights, but borrowing from Chevy parts? huh.
oh yes, aplogoies....but you are right. don't like it either. too weird.
Not a 1970. It's the model after 1970. 1971-1973 not sure which year. I think 71.
very weird, almost sacrilegious. But they do look good.
If Freaker is referring to the Mustang year then he's wrong there too. This is a '71-'73 body style. The ones car mags called "BEHEMOTHS"! I always thought they were cool though. The only thing that was hard to work with on them was the rear glass. Really strange looking at things behind you with the inside rear view. Everything seemed very flat looking.Now as for the Camaro tail lights? Yes, they do look better than what Ford had originally. And I think what Chip did with the rear spoiler, perhaps widened it a bit, helps in that look. Sacrilegious? Yes maybe Dean, but I like it too.
meh...the paint is amazing, the style has been Foosed. The rear end is HUGE. I'm not digging it.
It is weird. If I saw this at a local car show on a car that the owner had done himself, I'd be inclined to like the imagination of it. But with the resources that Close has at his disposal it comes off kinda lame.
That should be FOOSE not close, darn auto correct
Fastest way to improve the looks or performance of a Ford?Put GM parts on it.(somebody had to say it...)
HA! You kill me! I snorted coca cola out my nose!
least it doesnt have a chevy engine.and everyone knows that all the best built cars have a Ford nine inch axle.