Just traded my 67 GTA for an 2006 "Pony Package"

LIZARDKING · Oct 22, 2005

NADA low book 20-22k.

NADA high book 42-45k.

I suspect a hoax, or he took it to the dealer in boxes.

bigcat · Oct 22, 2005

tylers65 said:
If it had a 390 in it, you got taken to the cleaners.
If it had a 289 in it, you got taken to the cleaners.

lets see some pics of it, before we decide what an "above average weekend driver" is. might be a bondomobile with shiney paint to some, might be a show car to others......

Sanctus · Oct 22, 2005

yeah before you judge if it was a good idea or not you didnt exactly see the car now did you? but i have to agree that you could have sold it privately and at least gotten enough money for a new gt convert and slap some chump change to spare if if was a weekend driver... just my opinion.. this is why you look around at every option before you buy things....

Exhooah · Oct 22, 2005

Not a hoax

I have had my GTA for a couple of years and it has provided me with lots of of enjoyment. But, and there is always a but, it's no longer practical. I would love to be in the position to have a car that sat in the garage and waited for a sunny Saturday, however I need a car I can drive in the winter, rain, to Walmart and so on. I wouldn't sell this car unless I got something I'd enjoy just as much. As for selling outright and buying a 06 'Vert GT for cash, I say where were all you money bags when I needed you. I listed the car for sale right here on Stangnet on August 10th:

http://classifieds.stangnet.com/showproduct.php?product=22133

491 hits and not a single email, the only calls I got were from online classic car dealerships that wanted to consign my car and take some of the profit. Had a few local tire kickers that were hoping to steal it from me for under 10K
but no serious lookers. The problem seems to be; it doesn't need any work to be an sunny day driver (so it's not cheap) and it's never been "frame off" restored, so people with the big bucks to spend are willing to spend a little more to buy one that has.
The dealership, cash and discount on the Pony, is giving me about 18K - that's true book value. On the open market I was down to $16500 and still couldn't generate enough interest to get people to come look at it or even email me. I for sure wasn't going to give it away, so here I am. Happy to get my asking price and a new 06 Pony Edition for about 3.5K. If I could swing it, believe me I would have both in the garage.
When the dealer is finished restoring the 67 it will be better than new (I've seen his collection) and the car deserves it. We're making the trade Monday, so anyone of you nay sayers that think I'm being taken at 18K and believe I could sell the car for the price of a new 06 GT send me an email. If you act now you can still buy it for $33,000
By the way, the 06 V6 has more horses than a 67 289. Hence the muscle car statement.

shooterm1 · Oct 22, 2005

Exhooah said:
- making the trade Monday, so anyone of you nay sayers that think I'm being taken at 18K and believe I could sell the car for the price of a new 06 GT send me an email. If you act now you can still buy it for $33,000

By the way, the 06 V6 has more horses than a 67 289. Hence the muscle car statement.

Good for you. I like your style

stanmckinney · Oct 22, 2005

An automatic was available in 1965 and 1966 in GT model cars. I once owned a 1966 silver blue GT with an automatic. Also, if you will check the book Mustang Does It! you will see that GTs could also be had with automatics. Thus, the comment about the 1967 being the only Gt with an automatic and thus the GTA is not correct. Without doing a little simple research I can't tell you precisely why there was a GTA other than the fact the A does stand for automatic.
Maybe there was no special reason other than to say it was an automatic. But it certainly was not the only classic GT with an automatic.

LIZARDKING · Oct 22, 2005

Ok, I never visit the classifieds. Nice car, to bad you let it go. I hear you, same with my parents 67 coupe they has since new. They didnt want to let it go, but they just didnt need a Sunday driver.

Welcome.

tylers65 · Oct 23, 2005

stanmckinney said:
An automatic was available in 1965 and 1966 in GT model cars. I once owned a 1966 silver blue GT with an automatic. Also, if you will check the book Mustang Does It! you will see that GTs could also be had with automatics. Thus, the comment about the 1967 being the only Gt with an automatic and thus the GTA is not correct. Without doing a little simple research I can't tell you precisely why there was a GTA other than the fact the A does stand for automatic.
Maybe there was no special reason other than to say it was an automatic. But it certainly was not the only classic GT with an automatic.

While totally irrellevant to the conversation, you are correct.

The point is still that no matter what, an appreciating asset was traded (not straight accross) for a depreciating asset.

If the originator of this thread could not get what he wanted for it, it was due to lack of trying and/or patience.

I have seen standard 1968 coupes with modest restoration go for $16,000. Just because it had a for sale sign in it and was posted on a free internet forum does not insure that the right buyer will come along.

FWIW, your happiness is the only thing that should really matter. The fact that this car will be restored to factory spec is good enough reason to make a trade.

In the end, I congratulate you for making a choice that is both good for you and the car.

I hope the 2006 brings you as much joy as the 67.

PolkThug · Oct 23, 2005

tylers65 said:
While totally irrellevant to the conversation, you are correct.

Its relevant because you said:

tylers65 said:
1967 was the only year that a GT was available in a classic with an Automatic Tranny.

So he corrected you:

stanmckinney said:
An automatic was available in 1965 and 1966 in GT model cars.

Blakthorn · Oct 23, 2005

in the end of reading all this, i agree with the thread starter, he may of not got what everyone believes he shouldve gotten for the car, but he got what makes him happy and whats better for the car in the end..

199 · Oct 23, 2005

Damm your should have keept both my dream is to have a 1967-68 fastback mustang red with white interior, and my current stang white with red interior

tylers65 · Oct 23, 2005

PolkThug said:
Its relevant because you said:

So he corrected you:

Someone asked what a 67 GTA was.

GTA was only offered in 1967 and I explained it in a way that may not have made the besat sense to everyone.

The toppic of conversation is that he traded one. Not what years they put an automatic in a GT.

If you ask Ford, they never actually offered this option besid4es 1967 but if you ask Ford, there was never really a 1964.5 Mustang as they are ALL 1965 Mustangs as far as they are concerned.

Now, if there is anything else that I maight have said that you would like to single out just to push buttons, please bring it to my PM. I will be more than happy to straighten it out for you.

The Fang · Oct 23, 2005

WOW what a story! Congrats on the new pony.

bvor · Oct 24, 2005

Good story Exhooah. I say whatever makes you happy is the best decision for you. Don't let other peoples opinions spoil the thrill of getting a new '06.

I faced kind of a similiar choice. I didn't have a '67 GTA, but I did have a '68 Vert (http://raisingkahne2004.tripod.com/album/) that I sold in December so I could order an '05. At the time people said I was nuts too. The sad part of my story is that I haven't ordered one yet! Guess that's what a new house, new Explorer and new baby will do! ) Should have the new car ordered shortly though!

Exhooah · Oct 24, 2005

I understand

Your in my boat bvor, and I knew if I sold the car and let the money sit that it would disappear slowly but surely and I'd never get the new Mustang.

351CJ · Oct 24, 2005

tylers65 said:
The point is still that no matter what, an appreciating asset was traded (not straight accross) for a depreciating asset.

A 67 GTA is only an appreciating asset if it sits in a garage and is rarely driven. If it is used as a daily driver, it will depreciate as it will take more $$ to keep it pristine than can be had selling it.

04DarkShadowGT · Oct 26, 2005

Congrats to you man, but I woulda held out for a GT. Heck even a GT coupe imo is better than a sixer vert.

stanmckinney · Oct 26, 2005

Don't mean to offer an irrelevant opinion again, but the first Mustangs were all titled as 1965s. Collectors refer to the 1964.5s because there are some differences -- a generator instead of an alternator, the hood at the front is slightly different and I believe a couple other small things are also different.
The simple fact remains, though, that Ford never sold a 1964 or a 1964.5 Mustang. The first ones were all officially 1965s.

Just traded my 67 GTA for an 2006 "Pony Package"

LIZARDKING

Active Member

bigcat

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

Sanctus

Member

Exhooah

New Member

shooterm1

New Member

stanmckinney

LIZARDKING

Active Member

tylers65

I've got your tool right here!

PolkThug

Member

Blakthorn

Member

199

New Member

tylers65

I've got your tool right here!

The Fang

Member

bvor

New Member

Exhooah

New Member

351CJ

New Member

04DarkShadowGT

Member

stanmckinney

Similar threads

Just traded my 67 GTA for an 2006 "Pony Package"

Active Member

start with the upper hole, and if more traction is

Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

I've got your tool right here!

Member

Member

New Member

I've got your tool right here!

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency