SlimeGold 69 15 Report post Posted February 12, 2010 (edited) http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2010-Mustang-GT-1969-Shelby-GT-500-CS-by-Retrobuilt_W0QQitemZ190371039868QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item2c52ff8a7c Edited February 12, 2010 by SlimeGold 69 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Angel 24 Report post Posted February 12, 2010 interesting Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
468stang 11 Report post Posted February 12, 2010 fugly. Just my .02. Front side view looks like a Pontiac. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BuckeyeDemon 211 Report post Posted February 13, 2010 not my thing, but i really thing they did a good job with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
70Mach03 12 Report post Posted February 13, 2010 The company is getting ready to release a version based off a 1969 Mach 1. There should be a cover shot and story coming in a issue of Mustang Monthly soon according to one of the magazine writers I was talking to recently. It you look at the scoop behind the door you'll see they've already got it nailed for a 69 fastback. Here's their website: http://www.retrobuilt.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klevor 10 Report post Posted February 15, 2010 Not too bad. What is it exactly. I would drive it though. It is retro to say the least. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d.reese 13 Report post Posted February 15, 2010 Not too bad. What is it exactly. I would drive it though. It is retro to say the least. I agree! does the CS stand for Custom Shelby? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Truck 12 Report post Posted February 15, 2010 Not too bad. What is it exactly. I would drive it though. It is retro to say the least. Website says they start with a Mustang GT, and they only mention bodywork. It's probably not much hotter under the hood. It's a shame because the body is pretty "wow" but there's something about the lip of the hood/fenders that ruins it. Are all GT's that small in the back? Those seats look like they're no good for good 'action'. Do the kids still do 'action in the back' these days? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverjade 35 Report post Posted February 16, 2010 Please do not ban me, but I always thought the "stock" 69 body front end looked a lot better than the 69/(70) Shelby body front end. I do appreciate Shelbys. They just wandered a little too far, probably for marketing, in my own small opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SlimeGold 69 15 Report post Posted February 16, 2010 (edited) Please do not ban me, but I always thought the "stock" 69 body front end looked a lot better than the 69/(70) Shelby body front end. Not that I wouldn't love to have one, but I can agree with you. Too many scoops going on there is what I allways thought (5 just on the hood!) and reminds me more of a 71-72 front. To be honest I always thought the front of a 68 Shelby was ugly as hell. So I'll get banned with you if it hapens..lol. The 67 was the best looking IMO. . Edited February 17, 2010 by SlimeGold 69 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silverjade 35 Report post Posted February 22, 2010 Guess what I saw at the Mid-Florida Mustang Club Show on Saturday? The big news? The builder/owner says he has the tooling created to put a traditional '69 front end on the 2010 model. When I find photos on his website I will link it. IMG_0357.jpg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pakrat 1,043 Report post Posted February 22, 2010 Great idea, mediocre execution. Something about it just doesn't scale right and that huge underbite on the front bumper has to go. It looks more like a Quarter Horse than an actual Shelby and I can't believe it is going to be numbered as a Shelby, way to whore out even more than thought possible Carol, just when I think you hit bottom, surprise. The tailights do not look like 2010 to me either, they look like the previous style. BTW, the reason the looks of the 67' Shelby seems to have peeked is because that was the last year that Carol had real control, by 68' it was little more than a testing ground for Ford to see their new ideas for the next model Mustang. That's why you can see so much of the 67' and a little 68' in our stock 69's and a little of the 69' in the stock 71'-73'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
70Mach03 12 Report post Posted March 24, 2010 Well if you get the April 2010 issue of Mustang Monthly magazine this car is on the cover in red. Also I got an e-mail from Donald Farr (the editor) saying that Retrobuilt, the company builting this, has completed their prototype of a "retro-version" 1969 Mach 1 built from the 2010 Mustang and they hope to have photos soon in a future issue. And if you do happen to buy an issue of the April Mustang Monthly, check out the pictures and article on page 22. :shifty: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rewind351 11 Report post Posted March 24, 2010 I don't know what to think on the Shelby/2010 pics...:001_huh: Well if you get the April 2010 issue of Mustang Monthly magazine this car is on the cover in red. Also I got an e-mail from Donald Farr (the editor) saying that Retrobuilt, the company builting this, has completed their prototype of a "retro-version" 1969 Mach 1 built from the 2010 Mustang and they hope to have photos soon in a future issue. And if you do happen to buy an issue of the April Mustang Monthly, check out the pictures and article on page 22. :shifty: I would be really interested in seeing th Mach1 version. That would be cool to have my 69 Mach1, a 2010 GT, and one of the "retro-version". But that's what dreams are for.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
69RavenConv 286 Report post Posted March 25, 2010 And if you do happen to buy an issue of the April Mustang Monthly, check out the pictures and article on page 22. :shifty: Bill Hamilton and the Infidel Racing Team? Bill Hamilton... where have I seen that name before??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wantahertzdonut 10 Report post Posted March 26, 2010 It looks like it's missing something from the front end in that side shot. Then again I don't like the new Mustang anyway, mostly because of the back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites