The 2009 Iacocca Mustang so beautiful wish they were more than 45 of them.

[Daniel Roberson]

https://www.mecum.com/lots/PA0819-380004/2009-ford-mustang-iacocca/

 

[skwerl]

And even Iacocca can't make an interior door panel that doesn't fall apart. 4th picture is an embarrassment.

 

[Forty61]

I always liked the front of those but in profile the back half looks just too heavy. I appreciate trying to take the roofline to the edge of the trunk lid but it just makes the back of the car seem so much bigger than it needs to be.

 

[Daniel Roberson]

And even Iacocca can't make an interior door panel that doesn't fall apart. 4th picture is an embarrassment.

Wow, I was so in love with the exterior that the picture went right past me.

 

[07gts197]

I respect it for what it is but IMO the looks are meh. And I agree with Forty61, the ass looks way bigger with the roof that way. It’s almost like a mashup of a 69 fastback and like a 71. The front and rear don’t go together very well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DieHarder]

To each his own. I think it's one of the most awesome Mustang designs I've ever seen. I certainly wouldn't kick it out of my garage...and low and behold, they supercharged it!

 

[MrAwesome987]

That looks terrible. Looks very half baked to me.

 

[Pentalab]

The entire outside of the car looks horrid to me. But heck, it's advertised with..'electric windows' and also 'air conditioning'. The silver colour is all wrong..and even the wheels look bulked up. The back end is beyond horrid...sorta looks like the back end of a city buss.

 

[Aerofinz]

And even Iacocca can't make an interior door panel that doesn't fall apart. 4th picture is an embarrassment.

Looks all Ford to me. Iacocca didn't touch it.

 

[Rick Simons]

It looks like the first Mustang sedan delivery.
Door panel is disappointing.

 

[tjm73]

Looks all Ford to me. Iacocca didn't touch it.

Considering he was fired from Ford in '78.......and retired from Chrysler in '92.....

Also, I'm quite sure Ford had nothing to do with that car either. Well, other than making the car used to convert into that.

 

[gbstang]

Looks all Ford to me. Iacocca didn't touch it.

So what your saying is that the Saleen mustangs are not Saleens? MacClarens? etc..
People have been rebadging cars for years,,this is no different..

 

[tjm73]

These cars were modified, standard Mustang GT's, by a company called Metalcrafters in California. Not a company Iacocca owned or was involved with. Saleens and McClarens were modified by Saleen and McClaren. Saleen, Roush, Shelby, McClaren. All different things than this Iacocca tribute car.

https://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/06...versary-edition-ford-mustang-i/#slide-1665378

 

[Aerofinz]

So what your saying is that the Saleen mustangs are not Saleens? MacClarens? etc..
People have been rebadging cars for years,,this is no different..

See post #9

I was ONLY referring to the door panel.

(tjm73 and gbstang follow-up quotes didn't include my entire post with skrwerl's quote attached)

 

[Aerofinz]

.....

 

[gbstang]

These cars were modified, standard Mustang GT's, by a company called Metalcrafters in California. Not a company Iacocca owned or was involved with. Saleens and McClarens were modified by Saleen and McClaren. Saleen, Roush, Shelby, McClaren. All different things than this Iacocca tribute car.

https://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/06...versary-edition-ford-mustang-i/#slide-1665378

I don't think you understand, it could never say Iacocca without permission...So yes in a way his hands (family that owns the name) must have had input... Just like today, its like saying a new Shelby is not a Shelby because Carroll Shelby has not had his hands on it....

 

[tjm73]

But Shelby was involved in the GT500 program right up until 2012 when he died.

Licensing a name is a lot different than the product being designed and conceived by the guy with the name.

This is an interesting car, but not particularly special. And not worth a bunch more money than any contemporary GT. A 2009 Roush or Shelby should pull more money. IMO.

"Rare" does not always equal higher value.

 

[edw794]

just exactly what was shelby's involvement with the s197 gt500s? it seems the car was almost totally engineered, designed, and built by ford svt and carried shelby's name due to a licensing agreement and marketing value.

 

[tjm73]

https://www.shelby.com/en-us/History#2005

 

[Aerofinz]

This is an interesting car, but not particularly special. And not worth a bunch more money than any contemporary GT. A 2009 Roush or Shelby should pull more money. IMO."Rare" does not always equal higher value.

It sold for $71,500. Two years ago.