dirtybuck
Well-known member
You're about to meet one of your competitors.
Move Over, Mustang!
- Thread starter dirtybuck
- Start date
Help Support :
william637
Well-known member
My closest friends
Are die-hard Mustang fanatics. I enjoy bating them into racing by referring to their cars as a "Rustang 5.slow". It just never gets old.
And as much as I love my Camaro, I really hate to admit the pictures of the 2015 Mustang look pretty interesting.
Are die-hard Mustang fanatics. I enjoy bating them into racing by referring to their cars as a "Rustang 5.slow". It just never gets old.
And as much as I love my Camaro, I really hate to admit the pictures of the 2015 Mustang look pretty interesting.
I had a '65 Mustang, a notchback with 289, automatic console shift, but no power steering -- it didn't need it either. I bought it in May of 1978, and it was in great shape with only 46K miles on it. I loved driving that car. Off-white with blue interior. Surf City, here we come!
I later came to suspect that maybe the car actually had 146K on it when I bought it, but it performed well and I drove it until 1986 when it so badly needed a rebuild that I knew it would never pass a smog test.
I don't regret selling it. I had my fun with it. The roadways around here are so nuts that I feel safer in a car with all the modern safety features.
I later came to suspect that maybe the car actually had 146K on it when I bought it, but it performed well and I drove it until 1986 when it so badly needed a rebuild that I knew it would never pass a smog test.
I don't regret selling it. I had my fun with it. The roadways around here are so nuts that I feel safer in a car with all the modern safety features.
I just inherited this 1965 Mustang Convertible.
My cousin Patty (now 83) had a '68 Camaro in White, bought new. May still have it; will have to ask when I see her again.
My mom's friend Elizabeth had a very early production Mustang, in Prairie Bronze. According to her and her husband (who was high up in Ford), it was made in the first couple months after introduction. They had it restored sometime in the early 80's, made much easier by the connections he had at Ford and with OEM suppliers. Don't know what became of it after their passing.
My mom's friend Elizabeth had a very early production Mustang, in Prairie Bronze. According to her and her husband (who was high up in Ford), it was made in the first couple months after introduction. They had it restored sometime in the early 80's, made much easier by the connections he had at Ford and with OEM suppliers. Don't know what became of it after their passing.
I bought a 66 Mustang convertible in 1975 for $75. Trunk was totally rotted out, electrical system always had issues. Had a High Performance 289 with a 4 speed and 130,000 miles. It would not pass state inspection when due so I sold it for $75. I always wanted a Vette and finally got it in 84 and it is still sitting in my garage.
Prairie Bronze
I remember a co-worker friend of my mom's bought a brand new 64-1/2 Mustang in that color. My dad and I both went crazy over it. It was our first up-close look at one.
I remember a co-worker friend of my mom's bought a brand new 64-1/2 Mustang in that color. My dad and I both went crazy over it. It was our first up-close look at one.
IMO the topic discussion speaks for itself. Move Over.......
Gee Jeff, isn't this the direction about 75% of the thread go most of the time?
(ducking & running?)
Kevin
Gee Jeff, isn't this the direction about 75% of the thread go most of the time?
(ducking & running?)
Kevin
Kevin, personally car porn never gets old. I was just commenting on the relative popularity of Mustangs vs. Camaros (or Firebirds etc). At least where I grew up a Camaro was what one bought when they couldn't find or afford a Mustang. The Mustang was often imitated but nobody ever came up with a better overall design. Classic Mustangs were light as a feather and the only way GM and others could compete (performance-wise) was by increasing the engine size.
whirlcool
Well-known member
But at least GM used a newly designed chassis and newly designed parts rather than cobbling together a car from the spare parts of an economy car... Falcon. Camaro was technologically ahead of Mustang for a number or years.
"But at least GM used a newly designed chassis and newly designed parts rather than cobbling together a car from the spare parts of an economy car... Falcon"
I'm not clear from Wiki's page what original design basis Ford used for the Mustang. If someone else reads it differently I hope they chime in, but imo it indicates the design is actually a remodeled 1955 T-Bird 2-seater. Apparently the model was a poor seller because of the lack of seats, so Ford remodeled it as a 4-seater (but with much less backseat legroom than was usual at the time), and it became known as the "T-5" or Mustang.
As for sharing component lines among models, in some or many cases Ford's competitors designed new systems simply because they had no existing ones to use from other models at the time. Ford's production lines for Falcon/Fairlane/etc apparently weren't broke so Ford saw no reason to fix them, and the car's long-term performance speaks for itself imo.
en.wikipedia.org
I'm not clear from Wiki's page what original design basis Ford used for the Mustang. If someone else reads it differently I hope they chime in, but imo it indicates the design is actually a remodeled 1955 T-Bird 2-seater. Apparently the model was a poor seller because of the lack of seats, so Ford remodeled it as a 4-seater (but with much less backseat legroom than was usual at the time), and it became known as the "T-5" or Mustang.
As for sharing component lines among models, in some or many cases Ford's competitors designed new systems simply because they had no existing ones to use from other models at the time. Ford's production lines for Falcon/Fairlane/etc apparently weren't broke so Ford saw no reason to fix them, and the car's long-term performance speaks for itself imo.
Ford Mustang - Wikipedia
whirlcool
Well-known member
Look at a 64-1/2,65' or 66' Mustang. Then look at a 64' Falcon. Same dashboard, chassis and base engines. Lots of shared components. Ford wasn't sure the Mustang was going to work. So they developed it as cheaply as they could by developing it from Falcon parts. The result was a car that was the right time, the right place and the right price in the marketplace. I remember when the Mustang first came out. In April of 64'. The Ford showrooms were packed. It did turn out to be a runaway hit.
The whole story is in the link....
www.curbsideclassic.com
The whole story is in the link....
Automotive History: Ford's "Falcon Platform" - From Falcon To Versailles In 18 Different Wheelbase, Length, Track And Width Variations - Curbside Classic
(first posted 3/26/2013) The Ford Fox and Chrysler K-Car platforms are both well-known for their many variations on the same basic underpinnings. They were stretched, folded and mutilated into an […]
dirtybuck
Well-known member
My dad worked for GM up until '72 when the El Paso office closed down. One of the most memorable cars he brought home was a replica of the '69 Camaro Indy pace car. OMG!! That sucker could run. We had it for the weekend and thoroughly enjoyed it. We even got my dad to do a "peel out" with it. Neighbors weren't too thrilled with the squealing noise but really didn't say anything more about it after some of them came over and looked at the car.
I also knew three people who ALL had a blue '68 Camaro at one time or another. And of course, one was a convertible with a white top (reminiscent of the one on "Bewitched").
(So william637, I take it you like the new "Fusion Coupe"?
You would not believe how many times I've heard that term used for the new Mustang.)
I also knew three people who ALL had a blue '68 Camaro at one time or another. And of course, one was a convertible with a white top (reminiscent of the one on "Bewitched").
(So william637, I take it you like the new "Fusion Coupe"?
You would not believe how many times I've heard that term used for the new Mustang.)
My Great Uncle owned our local Ford dealership and somehow always got one of the first of the first and a 64.5 Mustang looked just like my mothers 64 Falcon inside. I am sure they hated me hanging around the dealership, but too bad, I am family. The appliance salesman always drove me away from their places. After the dealership was sold after his passing, I went to GM and never looked back.
fester
Well-known member
Whirlcool knows his stuff.
That Falcon style front end was a weak point for the 'Stang. Chevy had a similar set up in the ChevyII / Nova platform untill, IIRC, 68, when they canned that for the Camaro style. It took a bit of work to make early Mustangs compete in the twisties. Just look at the scenes in Bullet. Front end all over the place! The GM was no prize pig, but had the edge over Ford in that area. I had a 72 Nova with a rat under the hood. I had to put a sway bar near as thick as your wrist to subdue body roll in a turn. That thing was a beast!
That Falcon style front end was a weak point for the 'Stang. Chevy had a similar set up in the ChevyII / Nova platform untill, IIRC, 68, when they canned that for the Camaro style. It took a bit of work to make early Mustangs compete in the twisties. Just look at the scenes in Bullet. Front end all over the place! The GM was no prize pig, but had the edge over Ford in that area. I had a 72 Nova with a rat under the hood. I had to put a sway bar near as thick as your wrist to subdue body roll in a turn. That thing was a beast!
"Just look at the scenes in Bullet. Front end all over the place!"
Especially out of context that's a hilarious statement imo. All cars should be forced to use Bullet as a minimum handling standard. lol
I agree with the point though. As a 24-year owner of a '70 302 I can vouch for the claim that they were front heavy with relatively poor handling. Actually it wasn't that the engine/etc was heavy, but the overall weight of the car wasn't much, and the rear end was incredibly light.
Especially out of context that's a hilarious statement imo. All cars should be forced to use Bullet as a minimum handling standard. lol
I agree with the point though. As a 24-year owner of a '70 302 I can vouch for the claim that they were front heavy with relatively poor handling. Actually it wasn't that the engine/etc was heavy, but the overall weight of the car wasn't much, and the rear end was incredibly light.
Interesting article on the first production model being sold
Detroit Free Press - Breaking news, sports, business, entertainment
Detroit Michigan news - freep.com is the Detroit Free Press. News about Detroit, as well as headlines and stories from around Michigan.
archive.freep.com
Similar threads
