Options
A Truly Rare Ford Mustang
black mamba
Registered Users Posts: 8,321 Major grins
Here's one you never see. It's a 1963 ( yes, 1963 ) Mustang prototype. One of only 10 made. This one was specially modified by shortening the chassis. As a result, it was designed and fabricated as a two-passenger coupe. Uniquely, the body is made of fiberglass. It was designed by Vince Gardner and assembled for Ford by Detroit Tube.
Other differences from the production model that followed included swapping the 260 C.I. V-8 for a ripping 302 C.I. V-8, fitted with triple carburetors. Wouldn't it have been great to have that engine set-up offered as an option when the car was officially launched?
This car was shown by dealers while on a tour throughout the U.S. In early 1965, after the tour was over, the designer ( Gardner ) stole the car...he believed Ford would crush it. It was walled up in a warehouse in Inkster, Michigan, and not discovered for many, many months. Aetna Insurance had insured the car and had paid off on its loss. After it was eventually recovered, Aetna stored it ( outside ) at their corporate headquarters. One of their executives bought and owned the car for a period until he sold it to the current owners.
I really love the looks of this car....excepting that strange, concave side-roof panel right above the rear wheel and rear quarter panel. I can understand why that particular feature didn't make it into full production, and not just because of how it looks.
Other differences from the production model that followed included swapping the 260 C.I. V-8 for a ripping 302 C.I. V-8, fitted with triple carburetors. Wouldn't it have been great to have that engine set-up offered as an option when the car was officially launched?
This car was shown by dealers while on a tour throughout the U.S. In early 1965, after the tour was over, the designer ( Gardner ) stole the car...he believed Ford would crush it. It was walled up in a warehouse in Inkster, Michigan, and not discovered for many, many months. Aetna Insurance had insured the car and had paid off on its loss. After it was eventually recovered, Aetna stored it ( outside ) at their corporate headquarters. One of their executives bought and owned the car for a period until he sold it to the current owners.
I really love the looks of this car....excepting that strange, concave side-roof panel right above the rear wheel and rear quarter panel. I can understand why that particular feature didn't make it into full production, and not just because of how it looks.
I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
0
Comments
This one, to me, is (almost) ugly.... like a driveway project gone bad.
3 carbs do soften my opinion tho...
I think you're right, Eric. My biggest gripe with this design is centered around the entire roof structure...I'm frankly a little surprised that Ford let this one out of the corral.
But, like you, a tri-power 302 is something I could easily lust after. In 1964, I bought a new GTO that had the tri-power option. I used to take the air cleaners off and jump on that thing. The induction sounds it made were unbelievable....friends used to tell me they could hear that car sucking air from two blocks behind them. I hadn't had the car too long and I installed a 4:10 rear end, did some trick exhaust work to it, and switched the tri-power set-up from vacuum linkage over to mechanical linkage. Man, that thing hauled fanny.
Take care,
Tom
I think the consensus is that this car lacks a little in the beauty department...but then it was intended as a design exercise, as were the other prototypes, and some feedback, they evidently got, steered them toward the final production offering.
The current owner of this car lives just south of me and the documentation he has is quite extensive. It clearly indicates the engine as being 302. C.I. Whether they punched out a 260 or were working with early 302 designs, I don't know.
Tom
While I was never a big Mustang man, there is no doubt that it is one of the most ( if not the most ) successful stories in automotive history. I'm glad to have had the chance to personally see one of the prototypes of such an icon.
Thanks for looking in,
Tom
I'm always pleased to hear from you, Ian. I appreciate the visit.
Tom
Oh my goodness, Rolf. That's such a mean thing to say.:D It's a good thing that Ford didn't hear what our group has had to say about this prototype...there may have never been a Mustang if they had.
Tom
I'm no expert on these issues, Michael, but there legalities that come into play regarding these prototypes and concept cars. In most cases, these kind of cars have not been subjected to the federal approval process and do not conform to the current regulations. Some cars are streetable, while others are simply shells...having no engine or drive train. This Mustang, is, of course, one of those that was streetable.
In most cases, the feds will grant a temporary waiver that allows the cars to be driven on public roads. In return, the manufacturer commits to destroying the car after a certain period....usually a maximum of 1 year after the temporary permit was issued.
More than a few of these cars, by hook or crook, have been spared the death penalty. Most of the time, it was someone " on the inside " that would secret away the car. There's been cases wherein the car was disassembled and the various parts hidden all over the place...only to be re-assembled later as a complete car.
And you're right about some of the issues with what happens with many of these concept cars. They typically don't meet highway standards for safety or fuel mileage, and for liability reasons alone, I imagine manufacturers wouldn't want them on the road. I think some of them end up in a dark, dusty corner of the warehouse, a few end up in museums, and the ones that don't get crushed find their way into friendly hands.
http://www.moose135photography.com
Lensmole
http://www.lensmolephotography.com/
I think you're right, John, about the shortened chassis throwing off the looks of the car. And that c-pillar treatment is a pure disaster.
See you,
Tom
Thanks for the visit.
I believe that with many of these prototype cars, the manufacturers are shopping the body styles a lot more than the mechanics of the car. That's an interesting point you raise about the gas tanks in some early Mustangs. Were these some early production-line cars or was that situation limited to just some prototype cars, like this one?
Tom
The problem exists in production cars built from 1964 to 1970 and changed in 1971. Ford was sued many times, and settled out of court, without much publicity.
Lensmole
http://www.lensmolephotography.com/
I'm surprised to learn they had such issues with the gas tanks and that they took so long before changing the design. I was never a big Ford fan but, being the car freak that I am, you would think that I would have been aware of an issue like that. Thanks for sharing the knowledge.
Tom