Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've got a '69 sportsroof GT project car under cover in my yard.
It's one of 4700 or so made that year according to Kevin Marti.

I just found a '69 Mach I in my neighborhood that I can pick
up for about what the GT cost me.

I won't go into the details of the work required, let's just assume
the work's been done and the cars are restored to very nice
daily driver status already. I'm looking for personal opinions
as to which car you would prefer to own. In your own opinion,
would you prefer a somewhat uncommon '69 GT, or a more
common Mach I?

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,287 Posts
My opinion is that the Mach is more desireable over an equivalent GT. I would snap up a 390 or 428 car in a GT though. The GT is rather plain looking compared to the Mach I

Paul
1965 Mustang 2+2
1989 Mustang GT Convertible
MCA #27261
MCA certified judge for 65's and late models
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,372 Posts
I vote for the GT for the rarity. In the long run, I think you would net a larger return on your investment. just my .02 cents worth...which aint much!

Shannon a.k.a. The ShanMan! /forums/images/icons/cool.gif
66' Vintage Burgundy C-code coupe
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1571656&a=12306481&p=42935059&Sequence=2.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,482 Posts
n/m

Tom Kubler, Long-time Mustang Enthusiast & San Antonio Mustang Club Founder
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I should have clarified:

GT: 351W, 2V, FMX, PS, PowerDisc, GT suspension
Mach: 351W, 2V, C4 (originally a 4 spd), manual steer/drums

The GT will need extensive sheet metal work, body state on
Mach is unknown.

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Appearance- wise the differences are cosmetic mostly recognized by Mustangers, to me it's a tossup; But, if it were me I'd be going with the best factory performance package between the two.
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
i go with shanman! rarity would be the best it would just make you stand out! but that is only my opinion because i like being different than everyone else!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
514 Posts
I'd have to say the Mach 1 in this case. Normally a 69GT would rate higher with me but I hate automatics and to make the GT worth your while you need to keep it all original.

http://216.71.48.244/archive/mikecar.jpg



65 Fastback 289 4spd in storage :-(
91 CRX Si... A.K.A. my go-kart with AC!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
762 Posts
Tough call Rich...If the GT had a 390, it would be a no brainer. I might go with whatever car needs less sheet metal work. But, if you bought the Mach, you could always sell the GT to help finance the Mach restoration.

Either one..tough call !!!

JJ
69 Fastback 302 2v 3sp. trans.
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1605599&a=12251632&p=44630868.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Yeah, if I bought the Mach I'd definitely sell off the GT.
As for the original equipment making the GT worthwhile,
I'd likely rebuild the steering and replace the brakes with
modern calipers anyway since the original equipment is
pretty beat. So it wouldn't be a concourse restore on the
GT anyway. Maybe I should sell it to someone who would
want to restore it to its original splendor...



Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I vote GT!!!
I like the originality...
T


1966 C-Code Convertible, 59 Edsel Villager
Charlotte, NC
New Cars Have No Soul.
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Based on all the information you gave, I'd go with the one with the better body! If the same, then I'd go with the GT.



Cecil Bozarth

1966 GT Coupe (Tahoe Turquoise with black pony interior)

1994 GT Convertible
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Opinions are all subjective, but I would go with the GT just based on the rarity of the car.
Mike

69 428CJ R Code
73 Q Code convertible
72 convertible 302 auto
 

·
Registered
1969 Mustang GT Convertible
Joined
·
567 Posts
I think the interior should decide it. Everyone knows how nice the standard Mach I interior is. If the GT has a standard interior, I'd vote for the Mach. If the GT has the Deluxe Interior Decor group interior, I'd vote for the GT.

69convert
1969 Mustang convertible
351W 2V, FMX, Deluxe Interior
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
how many machs did they make in '69? 70k? Go with the GT. As they both are 351 cars, I would definitely go with the rarer of the two.

70 Mach 1 (351C 4V 4-speed) I've been restoring since '96. 95% complete. Also have a '68 HT (289 2-speed) that I restored between '97-98 and is FOR SALE! The VMF has proven to be an invaluable resource for information, humor and excellent advice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
The GT.Down here there as common as Frog's feathers!"G"
Greg

Never go into a Battle of Wits Unarmed!

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1589603&a=12101731&p=43846223.jpg
Regards From the Great South Land.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
According to the Kevin Marti sheet the PO supplied for me, there were about 4000 GTs produced in 69.
But do I only get the benefit of this "rare" status if I restore the car to original condition? In other words,
if I make changes (upgrade from factory discs to aftermarket discs, engine rebuild, suspension upgrade)
will I be destroying the uniqueness of the car? I'd hate to think so. I'd rather sell it to someone who would
want to do that kind of concourse restoration. Now if it were a GT350 or GT500...that might be different.

Rich
'67 C-code 'vert (Dees67)
'69 GT FB (project car)
Check out my band: Brickyard Blues
 
G

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I'd go for the GT. Just my preference!! Have fun!!

65 coupe 302
(rebuilding a 351W)
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top