Well, I'm a new member to this forum but not new to knowing what it's like to have that special car that you take pride in owning, even when it is driving you up a wall because it won't cooperate with your latest and greatest idea or add-on gadget. In the attached photos you will see a yellow 1972 Maverick. I've had it about 2 months. But what's that red shadow on the other side? OK, you got me, I'm a closet 06 Mustang GT owner and here's photos to prove it. I got it 2 years and 1 transmission (automatic) ago. And what's that car on the trailer? Only the Shadow knows......it's a 1970 AMX built by the long since out of business American Motors Corporation (AMC). The AMX in the photo was built by me in 76 -77. .It was a tricked out car with a full rollcage, 343 cid engine, Dana60 rear axle with 5:38 gears, ladder bar suspension, BW Super T-10 4 speed trans and 11" slicks. Back then the car ran low 11s and actually made one pass at 11.70 on 7 cylinders due to a dropped valve. So you are sitting there wondering what does an AMX have to do with this and what does a guy with a slightly modified (details later) 06 Mustang GT want with an antique Ford Maverick? Simple - you can build a supersonic Mav for the price of one upgrade to the Mustang. The Mav came with a rebuilt 302, hi-po cam, ported heads, headers, high-rise intake with a performance carb, kick butt exaust system and C-4 tranny. All of that for less than the the cost of a supercharger for the Stang - $5,000 and up. I love my Stang but the Maverick is a better platform for a fun, fast, killer supercar. Using my experience from my AMX days, the Mav is in for some serious chassis mods and the engine (some engine) should be pumping out 500+ horsepower. Well I'm out of time so you'll have to wait for my next posting to find out what condition (stage) the Mav is in. Here's a clue - when the dust settles, the 72 Maverick will be faster than the AMX (and Z06 vetts)!
Welcome to the board. You can come out of the closet now. There are a number of Mustang owners on here also. I have a 95 GT, myself.
Welcome, you have come to the right place. You have an interesting group of cars. I had two friends that owned an AMX. My wife had a '76 Gremlin when we met. I have a '69 Mach 1 and a '05 Mustang GT convertable.
well i can tell you right now i'm quite jealous of the AMX. besides a 69/70 mach 1 the 68/69 AMX is my dream car. i know a guy who just bought one to restore and a guy who has one of the nicest AMC's in the world (1970 Javelin 390 4 speed) and i'd about give my left nut for one.
Why a Maverick? It's great to hear all the comments about the AMX and I do miss it a lot. Had to sell it in 1988 because I got reassigned to a USAF base in England. So why am I into this Maverick kick - simple, it's a great platform to start with and there is an enormous amount of Ford experiance out there. The main drawback of most of the Mavs is their 4 lug suspension. That can be changed if you think your mods are going to be too much for the small rear axle. My AMX had a custom built Dana-60 with Strange axels and spool, and 5:38 gears. That was about $500 in 1975, today it's closer to $2000. Bear in mind I was building a "bullit proof platform" that would handle anything you threw at it. If you are going to put some serious money in an engine, be sure you have a platform that can handle it. Well, I got side tracked for a moment - back to the Maverick decision. It was supply and demand - the good AMC engines came out in 1966 and AMC died about 1986. A short run for shure. I took a realistic look at what was out there today and it was pretty obvious that the powerplant choice was Ford or Chevy. The hook was set 2 years ago when I saw this fantastic red and white 06 Mustang GT in a used car lot. The salesman told me they could not sell it because it had the 5 speed auto trans in it. Well, one test drive for me and that was all it took. Then I got hooked on modular engines - 2 years later and several thousand dollars pumped into performance mods and I got a wake-up call. The transmission was cooked - it had a 3000 rpm stall converter in it and not enough external cooling to handle the extra hp from the power adders. I had to replace both the trans and converter. Which brings us full circle back to the Maverick. Rather than spend $5,000+ dollars on a supercharger for the Mustang, I bought the Maverick that already had a great deal of work done to it. The modular engines make a lot of horsepower but you can get caught up in trying to add the next "hot" item to your Mustang so it looks,runs and sounds like the Shelby Cobra in the showroom that's at or above $100,000. What I want to see is that Cobra in my rear view mirror!
It's great that you went the route of maverick instead of a mustang i see far too many of them on the road compared to the mavericks and the mavericks are far cheaper. it's really great to see theres such a large community of people who love these as much as i do. i got a smoking deal on mine when i paid 100 dollars for a one owner 72 maverick grabber. and i have the same intentions as you do. to see whats waiting in the rear view. i'm only 20 and have owned several cars and trucks one being a 1972 AMC JAvelin SST which i never should have sold. and the maverick is my favorite so far with the light weight and how snappy a pumped up 302 can be it's a ton of fun to show up the guys in their hondas who think theyre fast. my other car (daily driver) is a 1991 Ford Taurus SHO PLUS and it's also a lot of fun.
Howdy and. Wow what a great topic. my bro has a 69 AMX for the last 30yrs. its a 390, 4 gear with a 391 posi I think. he has drag raced it, raced it in road courses, pilon racing, street raced (when youngand stupid). Now its on a rotiserie being restored back to original. Its a numbers matching engine and drive train. Only patch panels needed are on the floor where a larger hole was cut to work the ford box(Trans), and 1 hole about 3in round by the heel pad on the drivers side. Color is coral. Only 1 repaint in 30 yrs. Its been a slow process as he has a real lg house and property to look after. he will be curious when I tell him of this post.
Ahhhhh, the cars I had and wish I still did. 1950 Oldsmobile Holiday Coupe/1957 J2 tri-carb/Jetaway Hydramatic. 1939 Ford Custom/300B Hemi/1949 Pontiac Hearse 3 speed. 1956 Chevy Bel Air hardtop/breathed-on 283/Powerglide. 1964 Plymouth Fury/stage III 426 cross-ram wedge/4 speed. 1969 AMX/390/4 spd. 1970 Duster/340 6-pack/726 clutch-flyte. 1960 Austin-Healey BT7/VERY breathed-on 289/4 spd. toploader. That damn bug keeps getting me and now I'm off looking for a nice Maverick. Probably will be another mistake at 66 but I claim to be the world's oldest teenager. My goal? To live forever. So far, I'm right on track.
Thanks for all the great replies and intrest in my other cars of days past (except the 06 Mustang GT which is doing just fine). Although this is a Maverick/Comet web site, we all need to respect how everyone is a participant in a hobby/culture that is older than dirt. In any society there are the old timers (elders), the newbees and wannabes. What makes car lovers unique is there is no real stereotype to identify who is doing what in the garage. I started out loving hot cars 40 years ago in the 60s. I had race cars that ran mid and low 11s in the seventies and after that the military and family dominated my life up until two years ago and I was able to finally get an 06 Mustang GT for myself. As I have pointed out in other posts, it takes a lot of money and new technology to make a mod motor put out 500+ hp. Not to mention car payments and insurance. I was happy to find the Maverick when I did. The trans (5 speed auto) was going out in the Mustang after less than 2 years of weekend racing. It had some good stuff in it too. C&L cold air intake, tuned shortie headers, TCI 3000 rpm stall converter, 3:73 gears and rear traction links. The torque converter and trans have been replaced and now that I have the Maverick, the Mustang is back to being a daily driver - and a hot looking one at that. The Maverick looks cool too, but mechanicaly it is your worst nightmare. From day one the car shook badly and the first thing I noticed was that the driveshaft was too short!! No problem - I now have a superduty driveshaft that was custom built to fit the car. Still had bad engine shake - and the starter died the second week I had the car. No problem - put in a new starter. Starting the car drove shivers up your spine due to the grinding of the starter and flexplate gears. As best as I could figure out, the engine had the wrong flexplate. After taking the bottom cover off the trans, my guess was right - the flexplate was the wrong size and had the wrong ballance weight on it. But that is as far as I got today - tomorrow the new flexplate goes on and that should let the engine be the beast it is. The engine sounds as mean as any that I have ever dealt with but being out of ballance kills it like pulling some plug wires off. Tomorrow, the beast will be out on the streets and running like a wild stallion (no pun intended). Now just ask yourself this - how would you feel after buying this car that shook like an earthquake and you had no experience with cars - and your buddies were no help either. I was pretty angry that someone could be so sloppy and clueless but in the end I got what I wanted even though fixing the problems was such a pain in the ass. Well, that's a bad episode that's done and over with, tomorrow we'll see just what the ol' girl can do with that 5.0 under the hood !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had a similar problem with mine exept my starter was wrong not my flex plate. luckely when my starter crapped out i had just got done with lunch next door to the local K'nechts and i was able to switch it out right there. now i have the problem of old fuel build up in my fuel tank breaking loose and plugging my carb. therefore my next step is to pull the tank (third time) and this time take it in and have it boiled.
