"John" wrote
Yep. Gives you a 447 with all factory parts. Bolts right in without any mods. A buddy o'mine has one in his '67 Shelby GT500. He yanked the original
428 to build a 600hp beast out of a 427 sideoiler. Low 12's with a C6 in the quarter. Ouch! And he's NO PRO driver, by far!!
average
$11,875
According to the April 2005 Hemmings Muscle Machines: '68 390 4-spd GT fb: $11,000--23,000--35,500 (low, average, high) '69 390 4-spd Mach 1: $11,700--25,300--45,500
No appreciable difference in the drivers; BIG difference in the trailer queens.
Though a CJ would be
Again quoting Hemmings: '68.5 CJ 4-spd non-GT fb:$12,000--25,500--41,000 '68.5 CJ 4-spd GT fb: $13,500--28,000--43,500 '69 CJ 4-spd Mach 1: $14,800--31,800--57,500 '70 CJ 4-spd Mach 1: $14,000--31,000--50,500.
The term has expanded to include cars that are not nuts and bolts replicas. Many a Shelby GT350 clone has tubular control arms, 17" rims, 13" brakes, a stroker engine, etc.
Hot rodders refer to production-appearing combos that never existed as "phantoms."
180 Out
No, those are restomods, or "restored with modifications". That's why that term exists. A clone is a clone. Do not propagate misuse of the word.
That applies to body styles only. A '67 Cougar convertible would be a phantom because they never made one. It has nothing to do with engine or drivetrain substitutions. Again, do not propagate misuse of the term "phantom". You're being counterproductive to the hobby.
"CobraJet" wrote
I would have to agree. The term clone describes an exact duplicate of the original.
This is why I'm very careful about describing my '69 as a "quasi-clone" of a Boss 302. Externally it looks pretty damn close, but look for more than a couple secs and you know it's not real.
It's definitely a restomod, but with a strong flavor of everything "BOSS".
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required