I saw it go by as I sat at the light, and for a moment I wasn’t sure just what I’d seen: Was that a Mustang or a Maverick? Or a mashup of the two? I knew I needed to catch it and check it out, but the light was long, it was a ways down Chambers already, and traffic was a bit thick (for Eugene). But I’m intrepid, so I gave it my best shot.
Well, the left lane was turning out to be slower than the right, and a Ford pickup passed me there, closing off my intended move into the right lane.
I figured I’d better get as many shots as I could on the go, because this might be hard to actually catch stopped. Sure enough, the driver took a right turn at this little street just coming up, and I was stuck in the left lane. I figured he was gone, as there was no easy or quick way to pursue him further. At least I got a pretty good shot of the Mavi-Stang. And quite a nice job of it that someone did here.
I turned right at the next intersection, and on a lark, turned right again at the next cross street. There it was, gassing up at a station a half block down. A lucky break. I asked the owner if he’s mind pulling over after he finished filling his tank, and of course he obliged. Folks don’t spend this much time customizing their cars to turn down the chance for a bit more attention.
The owner, a young Latino guy (Miguel, I think), did all of the work himself, and was justifiably proud of it. And he was quite honest about what’s under the hood: a 250 CID six.
The interior is definitely more Maverick than Mustang.
The area of the rear window that was filled in is showing some stress cracks. Miguel said he’s just about to repair that and give the Mavi-Sang a new paint job, in time for the summer car shows and cruises.
The Maverick certainly was the closest thing to an original Mustang in terms of size, using the same track width and other key platform aspects of the original.
CC ‘built’ a better Mustang II using the Maverick’s wheelbase, which resulted in a longer front end and better proportions than the actual Pinto-based Mustang II. And the weight of two really wouldn’t have been any different.
The rear three-quarter view is the most effective one in terms of the deception, don’t you think?