Ford's CEO Wants the Next Mustang to Be a Poster Car

[DeluxeStang]

The sales jump only indicates how badly the 71-72 were selling.. And how badly Americans needed a car with better gas mileage. Something called the Arab Oil Embargo. All the cars were V8s.

The Mustang II consisted of a 2.3L 4-cylinder engine (88hp) and a 2.8L V-6 engine (105 hp). The V-8 engine was a thing of the past. As such, the 1974 Mustang II was significantly underpowered when compared to previous model years

From a performance standpoint it had none. It sold. But not to ANY performance buyer. The secretary's were buying them up. I was driving during those times. It was a real POS .

As all American cars in that era were pretty shitty. The Mustang II and Gremlin held the trophy as some of the worst of the bunch.

Revising history doesn't change the facts.

This is what I was driving in 1976. The Mustang II wilted in it's company. Even the z-28 was a turd by previous and later standards. And it had pretty poor construction. But it was light yrs ahead of Ford at the time. Not a good period for the American auto.

Yeah, one of my uncles owned a pacer, another owned a bright yellow pinto wagon with fake wood paneling. People always say they don't make 'em like they used to. Thank God for that.

Sponsored

 

[Hack]

The sales jump only indicates how badly the 71-72 were selling.. And how badly Americans needed a car with better gas mileage. Something called the Arab Oil Embargo. At the time all the cars were V8s. In summer of 1975 gas was rationed. 10 gals limit. For cars getting 8-10 mpg.

The Mustang II consisted of a 2.3L 4-cylinder engine (88hp) and a 2.8L V-6 engine (105 hp). The V-8 engine was a thing of the past. (yes, the II had an available V8, all 139hp of it and a Cobra ) As such, the 1974 Mustang II was significantly underpowered when compared to previous model years

From a performance standpoint it had none. It sold. But not to ANY performance buyer. The secretary's were buying them up. I was driving during those times. It was a real POS .

As all American cars in that era were pretty shitty. The Mustang II and Gremlin held the trophy as some of the worst of the bunch.

Revising history doesn't change the facts.

This is what I was driving in 1976. The Mustang II wilted in it's company. Even the z-28 was a turd by previous and later standards. And it had pretty poor construction. But it was light yrs ahead of Ford at the time. Not a good period for the American auto.

I always liked that generation of Camaro. At least the styling was good, even though the basic body hadn't changed since 1970. Ford spent more money on restyling the Mustang - too bad they didn't leave it alone after 1970.

I don't think I'm revising history. You know how cheaply made the 1965-1973 Mustangs were if you lived through that period. Yes they had optional engines that made more power. And I agree the styling was better in the early cars.

But the 1973 Mustang wasn't very good either.

 

[Firsttexan]

I always liked that generation of Camaro. At least the styling was good, even though the basic body hadn't changed since 1970. Ford spent more money on restyling the Mustang - too bad they didn't leave it alone after 1970.

I don't think I'm revising history. You know how cheaply made the 1965-1973 Mustangs were if you lived through that period. Yes they had optional engines that made more power. And I agree the styling was better in the early cars.

But the 1973 Mustang wasn't very good either.

My wife had one of those in a convertible. I wasn't a big Ford fan until the post 1990 Foxbodies. Mainly because of how they drove and their interiors. Dank and cheap. Of course Shelby's and Mach 1s were exceptions to that rule.
I loved my Camaro. They were built better than anything else at the time imo. But was always wishing it was a 70 1/2. By 74 they got too heavy.

I had a 79 Z-28 later, It had the super T-10 trans and 3.73 posi and a 160hp 350 . I put a built 427 with a low rise 3x2 Corvette tri-power intake. It all fit under the stock hood. Was hard to beat at the time. Ate 69 Z-28s for breakfast.

 

[DeluxeStang]

I always liked that generation of Camaro. At least the styling was good, even though the basic body hadn't changed since 1970. Ford spent more money on restyling the Mustang - too bad they didn't leave it alone after 1970.

I don't think I'm revising history. You know how cheaply made the 1965-1973 Mustangs were if you lived through that period. Yes they had optional engines that made more power. And I agree the styling was better in the early cars.

But the 1973 Mustang wasn't very good either.

I think my biggest issue with these cars is the massive overhangs. I want to say it was Chip Foose who did a sema build of one of these. It looked so much better with a shortened front end.

 

[Firsttexan]

I think my biggest issue with these cars is the massive overhangs. I want to say it was Chip Foose who did a sema build of one of these. It looked so much better with a shortened front end.

Ya for some reason Ford added huge overhangs in the late 60s. Everyone was racing to see who had the longest hoods. 1970 Pontiac Grand Prix won that race. I think it was longer than the Eldorado.

 

[Hack]

I think my biggest issue with these cars is the massive overhangs. I want to say it was Chip Foose who did a sema build of one of these. It looked so much better with a shortened front end.

They were big cars. The only car I've ever sat in where I couldn't reach the pedals with the seat all the way back. My dad owned a 1972 4 door Caddy, and it had less front seat room.

 

[Firsttexan]

They were big cars. The only car I've ever sat in where I couldn't reach the pedals with the seat all the way back. My dad owned a 1972 4 door Caddy, and it had less front seat room.

My Mom had a 74 Thunderbird. HUGE car! 429 4brl! Would light those Michelin radials to dust!

 

[LSchicago]

The sales jump only indicates how badly the 71-72 were selling.. And how badly Americans needed a car with better gas mileage. Something called the Arab Oil Embargo. At the time all the cars were V8s. In summer of 1975 gas was rationed. 10 gals limit. For cars getting 8-10 mpg.

The Mustang II consisted of a 2.3L 4-cylinder engine (88hp) and a 2.8L V-6 engine (105 hp). The V-8 engine was a thing of the past. (yes, the II had an available V8, all 139hp of it and a Cobra ) As such, the 1974 Mustang II was significantly underpowered when compared to previous model years

From a performance standpoint it had none. It sold. But not to ANY performance buyer. The secretary's were buying them up. I was driving during those times. It was a real POS .

As all American cars in that era were pretty shitty. The Mustang II and Gremlin held the trophy as some of the worst of the bunch.

Revising history doesn't change the facts.

This is what I was driving in 1976. The Mustang II wilted in it's company. Even the z-28 was a turd by previous and later standards. And it had pretty poor construction. But it was light yrs ahead of Ford at the time. Not a good period for the American auto.

Oil embargo didn't start until after the 73 Model year. It happened starting in October of 73, once the 74's were already on the lot. The oil embargo was perfect timing for the new downsized Mustang 2 though. Almost as if Ford had a crystal ball.

 

[LSchicago]

My Mom had a 74 Thunderbird. HUGE car! 429 4brl! Would light those Michelin radials to dust!

All 223 HP/355TQ. I had a few of the 68/70 T-birds with 360HP/480Tq. They hustled those cars around pretty well.

 

[LSchicago]

SAE gross numbers. And they "hustled around" to what...a 15 or 16 second quarter?

16 seconds flat for the 68-71's. Still way better than the 74's 18.2 second quarter. To a 16 year old they were plenty of fun at the time. My 71 MKIII used to beat up on the new 83 Camaro Z28 & Mustang GT's too. Not that they were fast, nothing really was in 83.

 

[oneheadlite]

16 seconds flat for the 68-71's. Still way better than the 74's 18.2 second quarter. To a 16 year old they were plenty of fun at the time. My 71 MKIII used to beat up on the new 83 Camaro Z28 & Mustang GT's too. Not that they were fast, nothing really was in 83.

...I believe that it was around this time and these cars that I heard "time it
with a sundial" the first time........................

 

[LSchicago]

...I believe that it was around this time and these cars that I heard "time it
with a sundial" the first time........................

The Malaise era, when cars couldn't get out of their own way.

 

[Firsttexan]

All 223 HP/355TQ. I had a few of the 68/70 T-birds with 360HP/480Tq. They hustled those cars around pretty well.

Hers was not that fast. Actually it was a 1973.

What made it such a burnout king was its weight and the 429s torque combined with non-posi rear end. Floor it and the car just stood there. Right Michelin would just disintegrate. Filling intersections full of smoke. Mom couldn't figure out why here tires didn't last.

 

[LSchicago]

Hers was not that fast. Actually it was a 1973.

What made it such a burnout king was its weight and the 429s torque combined with non-posi rear end. Floor it and the car just stood there. Right Michelin would just disintegrate. Filling intersections full of smoke. Mom couldn't figure out why here tires didn't last.

In 72 they dropped from 360HP gross to just 224 net. Compression dropped from 11:1 to 8:1. 71 was the last good year for the 429/460 engines.

 

[nrc]

Farley has been the best thing to happen to Ford in a long time. All manufacturers need a genuine car guy (or gal) at the helm.

Yeah, a genuine car guy at the helm of a company that has one (1) genuine car in its lineup. And he's about to restyle that one to look like a truck.

Sponsored