New Fod thunderbirds (a few yeare ago)

[Pete 2004 LS V-6]

How much like the LS and Jag S Type is the new Ford Thunderbird of a few years ago? A friend of mine purchased two of them one he drove home about twenty miles and parked and the other one (anniversary addition) he had delivered (no miles) and has not titled it. He put them on blocks and covered them. He will leave one each to his two daughters when he dies. I'm thinking there may not be any parts 20 years from now. How many of them did they build? Just curious.

 

[joegr]

They are very similar. I would say that keeping them and planing on them being worth a lot in the future was a bad move. You can barely get parts now, let alone 20 years from now. Some of the parts will die just from sitting there. He would have been much better off to take the money he spent on them and invest it somewhat conservatively in a trust for his daughters. I really doubt that cars from the 80s on up will ever hit the values of some well preserved cars from the 60s and older.

 

[LS4me]

Dr

How much like the LS and Jag S Type is the new Ford Thunderbird of a few years ago? A friend of mine purchased two of them one he drove home about twenty miles and parked and the other one (anniversary addition) he had delivered (no miles) and has not titled it. He put them on blocks and covered them. He will leave one each to his two daughters when he dies. I'm thinking there may not be any parts 20 years from now. How many of them did they build? Just curious.

The "Bird" is nothing more than a 2-door LS. Body panels are different but everything else is virtually the same; with minor exceptions like shocks, seats, steering wheel.... Unique things like that. That said, LS and 'Bird parts are pretty much interchangeable. The 'Bird was produced on a similar line at Wixom, only slower.

Agree w/Joe. It will never reach the value of a 50's or even early 60's 'Bird.

 

[Pete 2004 LS V-6]

So what I'm seeing is no parts on down the road. I thought it was a stupid move on his part to start with.

 

[jerrym3]

Dr

Agree w/Joe. It will never reach the value of a 50's or even early 60's 'Bird.

I also agree, and I've got both a retro TBird and an LS.

The car does get a lot of looks, but that necessarily isn't going to equate to future value. (There are many cars that I look at when I go to car shows, but I wouldn't buy one.)

Those buyers that bought the 2002 for inflated prices figuring on a big payback in the future are starting to see the reality. While I don't use my 03 as a daily driver, I didn't buy it to make a future profit. But, even though it'll never get a lot of money when my kids sell her, I still just can't myself to take her out in nasty winter weather. (It's been in the rain twice, both times on business trips to New England.

Fondest memory, driving up the Mount Washington Auto Road, New Hampshire, top down.

The LS is a better handler. Acceleration, identical, although the Bird gets heavy with the hardtop on.

 

[FDR]

I think a pretty common pattern is any special vehicle purchased to be intended as a future classic is doomed to remain a mediocre investment. So many cars become classic because most owners treat them like underwear and either trade them in with no thought or wreck them, leaving the few well-preserved examples to shoot up in value. With the 30 and under crowd beating the piss out of LSes, we may just see a comeback in value (but still less than invested). It's like finding an unmolested CRX. We just have to wait long enough for it's performance to be left far enough behind that we can say "it performed well for it's time"

The LS is a better handler. Acceleration, identical, although the Bird gets heavy with the hardtop on.

I'm unfamiliar with Birds and what they came with. Any chance swapping in Sport LS shocks would help the handling? Sway bars? Springs? Or is at in the lack of a roof?

 

[1LoudLS]

Or is at in the lack of a roof?

I would bet that is the main contributor... you loose a lot of structural rigidity with out a roof, and they usually do the best they can by adding a brace to the underside but its not the same. this is usually tru of any car not designed from the ground up to be a roadster... for instance, most modern corvettes have extremely rigid chassis for convertibles/targas as the chassis was designed to be topless

 

[jerrym3]

I think a pretty common pattern is any special vehicle purchased to be intended as a future classic is doomed to remain a mediocre investment. So many cars become classic because most owners treat them like underwear and either trade them in with no thought or wreck them, leaving the few well-preserved examples to shoot up in value. With the 30 and under crowd beating the piss out of LSes, we may just see a comeback in value (but still less than invested). It's like finding an unmolested CRX. We just have to wait long enough for it's performance to be left far enough behind that we can say "it performed well for it's time"



I'm unfamiliar with Birds and what they came with. Any chance swapping in Sport LS shocks would help the handling? Sway bars? Springs? Or is at in the lack of a roof?

LS suspension would most likely improve the TBird's handling, but that's something I wouldn't seriously consider.

The Bird was designed to be a top down boulevard cruiser with acceptable acceleration and handling. I've done a few little appearance mods and added ww tires, but that's about the limit for me.