Re: Which mustang is the LEAST desirable?

Strangely enough, about two weeks ago, my daughter Kristen saw a little blue Mustang II Ghia, and fell head over heels in love with it.

I suppose beauty is in the eyes of the beholder... My mom had one just like it. I'd have it, but I'd stuff a big block in it and dump it on it's nose and put some real meat on the rear end!

As for the least, I have never really liked the looks of the fastbacks and the hatchbacks (ducking for cover)

Kate

98 Cobra Drop Top (this body style is MY most desirable)

| I ranks as one of the poorer mustang designs/clour schemes I've seen. | | | Some friends of mine LOVE the 65-69 mustangs but despise the FOX body of the | 80s and 90s. | | Its all personal taste and I would like to read which styles are not the | most desirable. | | Kirk | | |

Reply to
SVTKate
Loading thread data ...

at 02 Jul 2003, SVTKate [ snipped-for-privacy@excite.competitive] wrote in news:jCIMa.142$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com:

Same here, 94-98 with a preference for the 94-95 years due to the taillight design mostly. Although a 64-65 is on my wishlist and would be just as desirable. :-) Maybe I'll get the best of both worlds in the new 2005 model. I keep hoping...

Reply to
Paul

Love the Fox body. Newer ones look too much like ricers (really ducking and running for cover but finding none)

Matt

89 5.0 GT vert (ok so I'm prejudiced)

Reply to
Matt

.

I never had a problem with the IIs. If anything, they look more like Mustangs than the 79s did. It's unfortunate that they came about when cars were being choked to death by crude emission controls.

John

66 2+2 >
Reply to
John Del

No need to duck and run; your opinion is as valid as anyone else's. I always thought the Fox bodies looked like Nissan Sentras, but they're better than those things Ford put out through most of the seventies with "Mustang" pasted on 'em. For me, the most desirable Mustangs were the sixties and nineties; least desirable were seventies and eighties. Give or take a few years, of course for each decade.

All a matter of personal choice, obviously. But those sixties-era Mustangs were *sweet*! And the nineties-era Ponies come closest to the original marque. To me, at least. YMMV.

Reply to
MC

The least desirable Mustang is any Mustang with a V6 or a non-turbo four banger in it!!! There is no such thing as an undesirable 5.0, period!

Reply to
Mike

Mustang IIs are the least desirable. It seems the Mustang enthusiast are broke down like this:

First Gen 1964 1/2- 73: Show cars in pristine condition. Seems like most of them don't like anything after 73. I guess you could even divide those into two camps. The early first and the later. I say the majority are into the early part. They restore the 6 bangers too!

Mustang II 1974-78: Nobody likes these for the most part! The least desirable!

Third Generation aka Fox Bodies: 1979-93: 79-85, it just kept getting better. The in 1986, the rebirth of the Mustang Movement was at hand. The first fuel injected Mustang. People bithced at first, but these cars had so much potential. Then 87, and the rest is history. These cars,

87-93 IS the reason there is still a Mustang. A new generation took to them... and raced them! These cars will be the most desirable in the future and will command the best resale. Maybe like 69 Camaros? People have compared these cars to the 80s-90s 55 Chevy as well. Okay, nuff said. I'm sure people will add on...

94-03: I think the jury is still out. 99+ do pretty well. And we will have the 03 Cobra, Mach I, and Bullitt being future collectibles. Time will tell. 94-95 and 96-98 Cobras and GTs? Not sure how desirable these will be in the future.

Just my $.02.....

MC wrote:

Reply to
Kirby

On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 00:44:46 -0500, "Mike" wrote something wonderfully witty:

As long as you understand that there are more six bangers out there then anything else and that your opinion is nothing more then yours. The current V6 is better then the first generation 289's.

Reply to
ZombyWoof

fox bodies. they never looked like mustangs to me. they really saved the car from extinction, though, so im glad they are there, and glad they created the vast aftermarket. . tim

95 mustang gt 5spd
Reply to
Rosco1211

Hello,

I have strange taste, but my favorite mustang is the 74-78! And I actually liked the ghia better than the hatchback. It kinda looked like a mini-monte-carlo. I love the way they look. I like the fox bodies in the "glass headlight" era, 79-86 (although I have heard them referred to as a "big escort"). I do like the 67-68 too but I am too poor to do anything with one of those! I honestly don't much care for the newer 94+ ones, but I am a wierdo like that. I hate change.

CoogarXR

1983 351w Project
Reply to
CoogarXR

I fell in love with the SN95's with the first glance. I've got a '95GT and wouldn't trade it in for the world. To me, the '94-'95 years were the best years since the early, early '70s. In '96, the design started going downhill to me. They got rid of the tigerstripe taillights! Yeah, the three verticle stripe are more traditional, but they weren't as sexy or aggressive.

Then in '97, they blocked off the mach side scoops. Yeah, they didn't do anything (except *maybe* create a little drive noise - that's what a friend in a '98 Cobra told me, but I don't notice any - Engine too load :)), but it looks pretty chessy to have it completely blocked off like that. And then, in my opinion, they changed the interior for the worse in '98. Got rid of the dash clock (great place to put meters), the cool molded flip down cover for the accessories power outlet, and the "ejector seat button" (i.e. the lighter under the flip up trash bin).

Took a long time for the '99+ models to grow on me. They didn't get the look right until '03, if you ask me. And the fake scoop covers looked really bad up close.

But still, I'd have to say the Mustang II years were the worse.

--Larry

-------------------------------------------------------------------- It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper. -- Rod Serling

Reply to
Larry Dennis

(Pulling out heat seeking missle)

I had a fox body, and traded it in for my '95GT. I don't regret getting the '95GT, but do regret trading in the fox body. Should have come up with the extra cash somehow. But I think the SN95 was a much better looking car than the fox body. True, if you only care about getting to the 1/4 mile mark faster, then the LX fox body is the way to go. But as far as styling, the sn95 has the fox body beat. The sn95's look more like the old '65s than the fox bodies. Before you start flaming me, look at a sn95 picture next to a '65 pic in the same position. All the styling cues from the '65 are there, and more faithful to the '65 than in the fox body.

Now with that said, I can see were some might call them "ricey". They looked more stylish than any car Ford had produced before. And to people too use to the boxy look, that screamed import - which to them said rice. I can see their line of thought. I think it's wrong, but I can see it. Also, more ricers have taken to the sn95s. I've seen more riced out sn95s than fox bodies, but I have seen riced out fox bodies. And everytime I see a riced out Mustang, I think there should be deed restrictions on cars - and I hate deed restrictions!

--Larry

-------------------------------------------------------------------- It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper. -- Rod Serling

Reply to
Larry Dennis

I don't know what the world may need, but a V8 engine is a good start for me!

Long live the 302! Or atleast mine (123K miles, and still going strong)

--Larry

-------------------------------------------------------------------- It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper. -- Rod Serling

Reply to
Larry Dennis

I happen to like the King Cobra. Out of the Mustang IIs I think the Cobra stood WAY OUT. I would not call it beautiful. Different is the word I would use.

Reply to
Mulatz

oh, forgot to mention my least desirable. My least desirable has to be the newer style. I just don't like the look of them for some reason. Too trendy probally...I dunno, but then again I own a II so what the heck do I know about desirability? ;0)

Reply to
emtecca

Better how? I was around when the first gen 289's came out and they were quite potent with the proper massaging. I remember a 65 289 Mustang Suoer Stocker that ran in the low 12's. I think it is sacriledge for any manufacturer to stick an under-powered engine in a "sporty" car just to sell more cars off the performance image of the properly equipped versions. I say the same thing about V6 Camaros and Firebirds too, and the Fiero was a total joke! If they had stuck the Grand National turbo 3.8 in it, it would still be in production!. I have nothing against V6's as long as they are powerful enough to put some "oomf" in the sporty cars makers put them in. I would have no problem with a turbo V6 in a Mustang, or even a n/a V6 5 or 6-speed with 250+hp because the V6 version would be quite a bit lighter than the V8. You're welcome to buy whatever you want, but I wouldn't own a Mustang, Camaro, Firebird or any other sporty car with an underpowered engine. If someone gave me one, I would immediately sell it or trade it for a V8 car.

"ZombyWoof" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Reply to
Mike

How about the brand new Cobra the rich little old lady down the street bought to drive around town at 15 mph?!? It may not be undesirable, but it sure as heck is useless!!!

Reply to
Mike

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 06:10:59 -0500, "Mike" wrote something wonderfully witty:

Let's see. How about durability, quality, and if I remember correctly even base horsepower. You immediately start talking about properly massaging something. Anything can be made better by proper massaging. It has nothing to do with the amount of cylinders. A properly massaged 4-banger can hold it's own quite nicely as well.

The Fiero was not killed off because of it's engine size. Matter of fact more 4-bangers were sold then the six. The issue of it's death was marketing and product focus. It was also an experiment. If you know anything about how cars are brought into production, you would know it has almost little to nothing to do with the enthusiast. There are a couple of exceptions to this rule, such as the Prowler, Viper, and the new GT40. But my God man look at the prices of these cars. The Fiero was sold to the top brass as a commuter car as was the original Mustang. It has to do with product viability. Cars for the masses, high volume = lowered price. Do you think the Cobra would exist if the base Mustang didn't? Even if it did, do you have any idea what it would sell for?

Take a look at some of the web sites dedicated to Mustang V6 hop-ups you maybe surprised at exactly how false you paradigm is.

Reply to
ZombyWoof

Heh... a familiar quote. ;-)

I agree. My recent aquisition, a 1988 Mustang LX 5.0 5-speed coupe with

71,200 original miles, still had the stock spart plugs and wires on it upon purchase. I've since tuned it up and it runs strong (though it wants something... there's some hesitation).. and hopefully it'll keep going.

My two cents on the discussion..

I dislike the II more than most, but I'd have to lump the 72-73 Mustang (except convertible) in with the II's as far as desirability in my eyes. They were getting too big even in 69.. by 71 or so they were boats.

I like the '64.5- 68 cars... any of them. Fastbacks, coupes, 6-bangers, doesn't matter.

I've had too many Fox-body Mustangs to not like them.

3 - 1983's 1 - 1984 1 - 1985 1 - 1986 1 - 1987 2 - 1988's 1 - 1990

All of them were in various states of repair. Three convertibles, two 3

4-cylinders, 1 V6, 4 automatics.

I currently own an '88 LX 5.0 5-speed coupe, '85 GT 5.0 CFI/AOD, '97 Cobra, and an '89 Probe GT turbo-4 5-speed

I like the styling of the newer cars as well... I fell for my '97 on this day last year and haven't regretted my decision yet. I love the foxes and hated the SN-95s when they first came out. Too refined, too much nicey nice stuff.

Personally, my favorite Mustang since the '67-68 Fastback would be....

1986 Mercury Capri RS 5.0 5-speed w/ McLaren rear spoiler and an '83 hood with scoop. (Yes, I know, not functional)

I had one of these, but the body was starting to rot a bit underneath and it needed a decent amount of help.

Has all of the things I like. SEFI, 4-eyed face with a mean front air dam, the bubble hatch with some semblance of spoiler (which vastly improves the look of the bubble), and the flared quarters/fenders that give the Capri a meaner looking stance. A dashboard that screams race... no pretty knobs, switches, nothing. Just some gauges. The car just screams aggression, and it's hard to lay off of the throttle.

JS

Reply to
JS

Yeah, just remember that the ONLY reason the GT Mustang exists is because of the 6 cyl. - Chevy found that out the really hard way. Every V8 Mustanger should give the thumbs up to all the 6 cyl. Mustangs because without them, (and the 4s before them), Ford would have dropped the GT a long, long time ago.

BRad

Reply to
Brad

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.