Mustang Monthly values, 73 351 2V?

Did anyone notice the weird pricing guide for the '73 351 2V? They showed it higher that's a 4V--substantially higher. Must be a misprint.

Is it the Ram Air option?

Yes, that "jumped out" at me also!

It could very well be related to the oft-stated opinion of the advantage the 2V heads have over the 4V heads on the street.

While "Mustang Monthly" numbers seemed to be for all 5 ratings as it relates to the Fastbacks with 351 2V and 351 4V, respectively, they price the 351 4V Convertibles and Coupes much higher than the 351 2V Convertibles and Coupes.

So, the "anomaly" seems to apply to Fastbacks.

...but yes, it is a very interesting article.

BT

That is just weird...Out of the 30,000 mach 1 fastbacks made...Only 6,500 got 4v clevelands......So the rest of the 30,000 had to get the 302 and the 351 2v....That alone should make the 4v 351 worth more.....I know only the 2v got the ram air in that year....But it was hardly rare enough to be worth alot more than a 4v....I think its a mess up..Cause all of the value price guides put 4v 1973 over 2v....and it costed more to get the 4v option in your car..and they made more 2v cars plain and simple....plus 4v had more hp...Maybe your right rocket...having to do with the idea that 4v's dont work on the street {rolls eyes}

Now was they just talking about fastback? Or fastback mach 1's? In either case i dont see how or why...Besides maybe the author owned a 351 2v? lol Nothing wrong with a 351 2v...But there is a reason 4v's costed more and less ordered...should make them worth more over all.

I don't have the magazine with me, but IIRC it did not specify ram air.

Here is a scan of the two relevant pages:





BT

Wow...I think its a typo...Or they just made up the list on there own...Cause why on earth would a 71-72...351 2v mach 1.....be worth 11,000 dollars less than a 73 mach 1 351 2v? we know they made the 351 2v in 73 with ram air..But it still costed less to buy than a 4v cleveland back in 1973..and they made more of them...why on earth would they price it much higher than the highest decked out version of the mach 1 in 1973 and worth waaaaay more than any of the previous 2v stangs...just cause of the ram air? ..geesh...But i do have to say...This is the only value guide i "ever!!" seen state a q code over a H code in value...177 horse option worth more than a 266 hp model..mmmmm Something not right here..lol

That's not wierd everyone knows the 2v is more desirable! Thank you Mustang Monthly!

Funny that this was brought up. I just read that issue Saturday and was thinking the same thing:dodgy: So, I wrote to MM with my concerns yesterday about it being a misprint, but have not heard anything yet.:sleepy: When I get a response from them I will post their comments ASAP !!!!

Funny that this was brought up. I just read that issue Saturday and was thinking the same thing:dodgy: So, I wrote to MM with my concerns yesterday about it being a misprint, but have not heard anything yet.:sleepy: When I get a response from them I will post their comments ASAP !!!!

Click to expand...

Ya i would like to hear my self....Why is a 71-72 mach 1 351 2v...worth 11,000 less than a 73 mach 1 2v..lol

Ya i would like to hear my self....Why is a 71-72 mach 1 351 2v...worth 11,000 less than a 73 mach 1 2v..lol

Because a 73 is only 39 years old.

Jim

I love my Cleveland 2V so I'm just going to say YAHOO! MM!!

I'd be happy to trade anybody their 4v heads for my 2v ones, straight up. That's a fair deal right? Thanks mustangs monthly.

Ya i would like to hear my self....Why is a 71-72 mach 1 351 2v...worth 11,000 less than a 73 mach 1 2v..lol

Click to expand...

Because a 73 is only 39 years old.

Jim

LOL, not mine, it turned 40 on oct 20th.

So what's the #1 to #5 ratings? I think my car is worth more than i think it is.

These seem off and too generic. No additional $$$ for 4speed, AC , ram air etc?????

I dont trust mustang monthly all the time anyways....Specialy when it comes to our years...I emailed the editor a few times...Cause they always state our mustangs are almost 4,000 pound curb weight.....I said curb weight is only average 3,200 pounds for a 71-73 mustang....They emailed me back and said...Well we had one on the drag strip scale and it was 3700 pounds!! i emailed back and said..Still thats not quite 4,000 pounds..And let me guess the car was full of gas and had a driver sitting in it?..i said curb weight means the car sitting there empty...Not even oil in it...Gas is very heavy..People are too..And he said..Well we will look into it...I said Ford still has all the official curb weights and you will be quite suprized that 70 and 69's are heavier than the so called fat body stangs.....Never heard from the editor again..lol.

And yes..Very generic like 71mach says...Even worse than Nada...lol

Ya i would like to hear my self....Why is a 71-72 mach 1 351 2v...worth 11,000 less than a 73 mach 1 2v..lol

Click to expand...

Because a 73 is only 39 years old.

Jim

Click to expand...

LOL, not mine, it turned 40 on oct 20th.

So what's the #1 to #5 ratings? I think my car is worth more than i think it is.

Here is the portion of the article that explains the ratings:



BT

Ah, okay. I am probably a 4 going towards a 3. So not so far off of what I expected.

I like nada. Mine is a 2.

Heavily optioned. Nada average is 42k!!!!!


Forgot this