Another example of modification fail .
Is this considered fox fail? 4-eyed front end
This looked like it started life as a mustangII, and ended as mustang poo.oodance:
Look at the rear quarters. Look like mustang II.
Either that or a 70 notch. Looks like he stretched the front end to accommodate the wheelbase.
These piss me off too:
I saw one of these Kit equipped cars going the other way on the I state. I thought that I had to be seeing things, because the quarters had that stupid flat hump. I just assumed it was another guys' failed attempt at hacking up a mustang to make it different, ( who around here does that I wonder? ) I had no Idea it was a kit.
This looked like it started life as a mustangII, and ended as mustang poo.oodance:
Look at the rear quarters. Look like mustang II.
Either that or a 70 notch. Looks like he stretched the front end to accommodate the wheelbase.
Oh come on man! You have to know that it was a 69-70 Coupe.
Mustang II, really?
"Either that or a 70 notch. Looks like he stretched the front end to accommodate the wheelbase"
JEEZ! Who am I? Obi Wan Mustangkenobi?!!!How am I supposed to scrutinize a flaming piece of crap like that thing. ( It's hard enough to try and guess what it is, much less what it once was.) Anyway, I thought I already guessed that as my second.
"Most stupidest dumb"?
Huge cowl hoods on otherwise stock or mildly modified 302s. This is a common one. If there are guys out there running 8-second 427 ci Foxes with stock hoods, why on God's green Earth are you running a 4" cowl with your 302 junk and a GT40 intake?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?