Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Claimed mileage of Fox bodies for sale

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    "Runs great, just needs a headgasket..."

    "Drives great, just needs a transmission..."

    "Stopped running, haven't checked to see what is wrong with it...."

    I could go on and on.

    Stevo
    Originally posted by SSMAN
    ...Welcome to the land of "Fuck it". No body cares, and if they do, no body cares.

    Comment


    • #17
      That's not as bad as all the 65-68 Mustangs whose owners claim "all original, numbers matching, only 120,000 original miles, no rust, almost every factory option," etc.. THAT shit gets old. It's crazy how CL is littered full of 40 year old cars that were only driven 3k miles per year.


      Originally posted by dblack1 View Post
      If they are like mine then they might be actual. I've got one that has ran exactly 2 years since it was removed from police service in the mid 90's.
      Wanna sell it? PM me if so.

      Comment


      • #18
        There is a big difference between 100k and 200k. If the Fox clock says 14,000 and runs great it either has a new motor or 114k not 200-300k. If you cant tell other than the Odometer than you don't need to buy the car, or have a certified person to inspect the drivetrain and or pull cluster to see if it is original matching vin # and count the flips. cuz your puttin a new motor in anyway

        Comment


        • #19
          I've seen plenty of 200k foxbodys and 4.6 cars that ran great!

          Comment


          • #20
            What's retarded is that starting in 1992 (maybe it was 1993?) New York State required cars sold in that state to have "million mile" odometers. So all new Fox body Mustangs sold in NY in 1992 and 1993 have the million mile odometers, and not the certified Police ones either. Just like any other cluster except room for another digit. You see them pop up on Ebay from time to time.

            Why didn't Ford just install them in ALL Mustangs? It was obvious by then that was the direction all manufacturers were headed anyway.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Whiteboy View Post
              Hasnet been driven in 11 years!
              Hasnet stangs... very rare

              Comment


              • #22
                My 2004 Nissan Titan has 140000 miles on it and runs like a champ.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Silverback View Post
                  My 2004 Nissan Titan has 140000 miles on it and runs like a champ.
                  155k on my tacoma and is the same the day i bought it....running wise anyways.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by gts95 View Post
                    What's retarded is that starting in 1992 (maybe it was 1993?) New York State required cars sold in that state to have "million mile" odometers. So all new Fox body Mustangs sold in NY in 1992 and 1993 have the million mile odometers, and not the certified Police ones either. Just like any other cluster except room for another digit. You see them pop up on Ebay from time to time.

                    Why didn't Ford just install them in ALL Mustangs? It was obvious by then that was the direction all manufacturers were headed anyway.
                    i've seen California foxes with the same odometer

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by mstng86 View Post
                      155k on my tacoma and is the same the day i bought it....running wise anyways.
                      minus all the beer stains and weed burns

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by talisman View Post
                        Ran when parked, ac just needs to be charged, highway miles, xxxx invested!, are all pretty much bullshitt to look for that should raise red flags about a seller either being full of crap or trying to up the perceived value of a car that is probably worth less than they are asking. I mean, ran when parked, 30 years ago? Who gives a shit? Does it run NOW?
                        These are some of my favorites, as well.

                        An old friend used to compare the highway mile statement to a slut trying to convince someone she may have been fucked a lot, but only by guys with little dicks!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Whiteboy View Post
                          I've seen plenty of 200k foxbodys and 4.6 cars that ran great!
                          Thats your opinion.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by mstng86 View Post
                            155k on my tacoma and is the same the day i bought it....running wise anyways.
                            Pull a valve cover

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by hotrod66stang View Post
                              That's not as bad as all the 65-68 Mustangs whose owners claim "all original, numbers matching, only 120,000 original miles, no rust, almost every factory option," etc.. THAT shit gets old. It's crazy how CL is littered full of 40 year old cars that were only driven 3k miles per year.
                              That's especially funny since ford didn't put VIN's on those engines. "Numbers Matching" is a GM thing.

                              Whether it's 20 years old or 40 years old, unless it's really rare or in some sort of amazing super-low milage condition, anything over 2 decades old should be judged by condition, not miles. Think how many fox bodies have received substantial restoration work in the last 20+ years? What difference does milage make on a car with a full rotisserie restoration?

                              You know what the milage reading is on my '66 title? N/A

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by BLAKE View Post
                                That's especially funny since ford didn't put VIN's on those engines. "Numbers Matching" is a GM thing.
                                I thought all numbers matching meant was that the VIN corresponded to the installed options, IE.. tranny, motor, trim.

                                That's it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X