Motion GSX hits Ebay!!

[Chevy454]

[ QUOTE ]
So, $611K? How funny is that? I don't know if the old Mustang would have spanked this car as well, but with an extra $500K or so in the motor and drivetrain it probably would have...

I guess you know what they say about a fool and his money...

[/ QUOTE ]
midas: That's a horrible example of determining worth...I wouldn't give $500 for your clapped out '86 Rustang, but some fool down the road might mistake it for a real musclecar and offer you $5000 for it... it boils down to who will ante up, and how much they're willing to give.



[ QUOTE ]
From highway speeds, it was no contest-- The Mustang would walk away.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I bet if you'd have given that GSX an overdrive gear like your Rustang had, it would've been a different story...

[rare1]

"Rustang" that's funny right there!

[1970Bluel78]

I really don't want to be in the middle of this one but Chev454 The 5.0 Mustang is certainly a Muscle car and was (is ) responsible for keeping Muscle cars alive in the 80's and 90's to some degree. I know Die hard Mopar,GM guys that got them and realized just how fast you could go on the cheap. If you got to the strip during those years they were everywhere. I dated ( briefly ) a girl that owned a White 1970 GSX. Would smoke the tires with almost no effort. Torque was unreal but it was a heavy car and did not win much on the street around here.....ah the memories.....

[king_midas]

Aaah, Rustang. That was some car... Made me forget my '69 Z fairly quickly. Bought the '86 GT with 36K on the clock, and paid $4,300. Those were the days. Better than the old days, I'd say. Saturday nights were never the same; many a once-mighty from the muscle car era saw my Rustang's taillights.

I immediately went looking for a Rustang after I got shellac'd by one in my '80 Z. I worked all f-ing fall and winter building a winner engine for that thing, and was quickly and convincingly whipped by a 5-speed LX. I dumped the overweight chump right afterwards, and that was that.

And dusting off that GSX happened in Rustang gears 3 and 4 on the highway; if the GSX would have had overdrive it would have probably flown apart, me would thinks. Unless those GSX spoilers were functional? Ha, no way... Probably as well executed as the hood scoops. And traction-- Maybe that's why the GSX ate my dust? Rustang hooked up pretty good w/o slicks, and once out of first, forget it. Nah, the highway pull says horsepower, so that's probably not the case either. I vividly remember another good one-- My brother was fixing the oil gauge on a friend's '71 Corvette, with a 454 and automatic (3.55's). You know, it had that "Big block Vette" aura to it, and it felt fast. So up against the Rustang it went. Bye bye Vette...

That Mustang was over a second faster in the quarter than my '80 Camullet ever was with 3.73's, and the best I could hustle the '69 to was 14.28. In the '69, I didn't have 4.33's, as I had to drive the stupid thing, and maybe that would have made it a bit closer, though I would probably have just offed myself after driving it a few times. Boy, they both like to rev; the Chevy with no torque at all, but like it was schizo-mad about the lack of torque and would wreck itself just to do it (a la, be careful with the throttle), and the Ford like it was on a strong-arm mission and speaking with the voice of the Gods. Made me a quick believer that modern HP is good HP. Now, where's that $3,500 Z (as it should be)?

It is a value for determining worth, because if it's worth $611K to go slower than a clapped-out Rustang (or whatever stupid thing you said), that in my book makes one a fool. Of course, it will go in some guy's collection and will never be driven, so who cares anyway.

Maybe I can pick up a $1,500 Rustang and run somebody with a '69 Z for pinks; then I don't have to pay the price of admission to have loud pipes and stripes again. I'm throwing down the gauntlet!

[Chevy454]

[ QUOTE ]
It is a value for determining worth, because if it's worth $611K to go slower than a clapped-out Rustang (or whatever stupid thing you said), that in my book makes one a fool.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm telling you, it's not...at Memphis a few weeks ago, I raced an early '80s Chevy 2-door...this thing was ROUGH, but was stock as a stone except for the engine bay...I talked to the guy for quite a while, and he told me he had $500 in the car, and I totally believe him, as I was all over that car...but the thing runs low 12s at like 108mph or something! He bought the car with a blown up engine for like $50, and threw a couple hundred bucks at a junkyard 400sbc, just to drive to/from work and beat on every once in a while.

But, there was also the usual host of 5.0s and 4th gen Camaros at the track that night, running their 13s and 14s...so does that make the value of those 5.0s and late model Camaros/Firebirds worth less than $500?

I'll tell you what, I'll spot you the cash just to watch you get laughed at (or swung at!) if you'll seriously walk up to them and explain to them how their cars are only worth $500 and they should sell them for that!

[PPPJJJFFF]

The 70 GSX may not have been the fastest production built in 1970. That I know. But his has the looks, low production #'s and performance which through "Buick" into the musclecar scene. And quite respectively: headbang:

To come onto this web-site and tell us how well a 1986 mustang runs is to me, a little comical.

I will say for $40.00 or so. This Buick got alot of lookers. Hopefully it will find a new home!

Patrick

[Belair62]

[ QUOTE ]
Aaah, Rustang. That was some car... Made me forget my '69 Z fairly quickly. Bought the '86 GT with 36K on the clock, and paid $4,300. Those were the days. Better than the old days, I'd say. Saturday nights were never the same; many a once-mighty from the muscle car era saw my Rustang's taillights.

I immediately went looking for a Rustang after I got shellac'd by one in my '80 Z. I worked all f-ing fall and winter building a winner engine for that thing, and was quickly and convincingly whipped by a 5-speed LX. I dumped the overweight chump right afterwards, and that was that.

And dusting off that GSX happened in Rustang gears 3 and 4 on the highway; if the GSX would have had overdrive it would have probably flown apart, me would thinks. Unless those GSX spoilers were functional? Ha, no way... Probably as well executed as the hood scoops. And traction-- Maybe that's why the GSX ate my dust? Rustang hooked up pretty good w/o slicks, and once out of first, forget it. Nah, the highway pull says horsepower, so that's probably not the case either. I vividly remember another good one-- My brother was fixing the oil gauge on a friend's '71 Corvette, with a 454 and automatic (3.55's). You know, it had that "Big block Vette" aura to it, and it felt fast. So up against the Rustang it went. Bye bye Vette...

That Mustang was over a second faster in the quarter than my '80 Camullet ever was with 3.73's, and the best I could hustle the '69 to was 14.28. In the '69, I didn't have 4.33's, as I had to drive the stupid thing, and maybe that would have made it a bit closer, though I would probably have just offed myself after driving it a few times. Boy, they both like to rev; the Chevy with no torque at all, but like it was schizo-mad about the lack of torque and would wreck itself just to do it (a la, be careful with the throttle), and the Ford like it was on a strong-arm mission and speaking with the voice of the Gods. Made me a quick believer that modern HP is good HP. Now, where's that $3,500 Z (as it should be)?

It is a value for determining worth, because if it's worth $611K to go slower than a clapped-out Rustang (or whatever stupid thing you said), that in my book makes one a fool. Of course, it will go in some guy's collection and will never be driven, so who cares anyway.

Maybe I can pick up a $1,500 Rustang and run somebody with a '69 Z for pinks; then I don't have to pay the price of admission to have loud pipes and stripes again. I'm throwing down the gauntlet!

[/ QUOTE ]

We don't give a crap about 86 Mustangs here...try a Mustang LX site or something.

[markjohnson]

It's a neat car but that's crazy money for a car without some kind of race history. It's hard to believe that this Buick is probably the valuble Motion car on the planet currently. If this car is worth that much, than what kind of value is being placed on that famous Rallye Green 1969 Motion Camaro that went to Mexico when new that has the super low miles? Surely that car is more well known and sought-after. That being said, 1970 Buicks are very cool. I had one about four years ago and can still hear those hood scoops hissing like a snake, sucking in air at an idle while standing in front of the car. Very cool!

[Belair62]

I don't think anyone said it's worth that much....its just an E Bay auction...

[rare1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Aaah, Rustang. That was some car... Made me forget my '69 Z fairly quickly. Bought the '86 GT with 36K on the clock, and paid $4,300. Those were the days. Better than the old days, I'd say. Saturday nights were never the same; many a once-mighty from the muscle car era saw my Rustang's taillights.

I immediately went looking for a Rustang after I got shellac'd by one in my '80 Z. I worked all f-ing fall and winter building a winner engine for that thing, and was quickly and convincingly whipped by a 5-speed LX. I dumped the overweight chump right afterwards, and that was that.

And dusting off that GSX happened in Rustang gears 3 and 4 on the highway; if the GSX would have had overdrive it would have probably flown apart, me would thinks. Unless those GSX spoilers were functional? Ha, no way... Probably as well executed as the hood scoops. And traction-- Maybe that's why the GSX ate my dust? Rustang hooked up pretty good w/o slicks, and once out of first, forget it. Nah, the highway pull says horsepower, so that's probably not the case either. I vividly remember another good one-- My brother was fixing the oil gauge on a friend's '71 Corvette, with a 454 and automatic (3.55's). You know, it had that "Big block Vette" aura to it, and it felt fast. So up against the Rustang it went. Bye bye Vette...

That Mustang was over a second faster in the quarter than my '80 Camullet ever was with 3.73's, and the best I could hustle the '69 to was 14.28. In the '69, I didn't have 4.33's, as I had to drive the stupid thing, and maybe that would have made it a bit closer, though I would probably have just offed myself after driving it a few times. Boy, they both like to rev; the Chevy with no torque at all, but like it was schizo-mad about the lack of torque and would wreck itself just to do it (a la, be careful with the throttle), and the Ford like it was on a strong-arm mission and speaking with the voice of the Gods. Made me a quick believer that modern HP is good HP. Now, where's that $3,500 Z (as it should be)?

It is a value for determining worth, because if it's worth $611K to go slower than a clapped-out Rustang (or whatever stupid thing you said), that in my book makes one a fool. Of course, it will go in some guy's collection and will never be driven, so who cares anyway.

Maybe I can pick up a $1,500 Rustang and run somebody with a '69 Z for pinks; then I don't have to pay the price of admission to have loud pipes and stripes again. I'm throwing down the gauntlet!

[/ QUOTE ]

We don't give a crap about 86 Mustangs here...try a Mustang LX site or something.

[/ QUOTE ]