Why would anybody buy a mustang?

[shawns fords]

I can understand a desire for power freaks to own a 'vette or a viper. I can understand socialites wanting a lincoln or a cadillac.
But who would want a mustang?
They definitely lack in the 'power/performance' world. They have a back seat too small for any human's use that detracts from performance (they would definitely be faster and lighter without it).
Vettes and vipers hold the road like magnets. But if you accidentally jack up one side of a mustang a bit too high (like for changing a tire) it rolls over faster than a submissive dog.
The viper has a giant 10 cylinder engine and cruises at 180 MPH. The jaguar has 12 cylinders and cruises at 180 MPH. What does a mustang have? Eight? Some actually have four cylinders!
They don't get good mileage. Almost any similarly sized car gets better mileage. They don't compete for power. I saw a neon outrace one.

Surely ford could do a better job in the sports car race than a mustang.

Why would anybody buy a mustang?

where do you get your information? I race atleast once a month in a club type of drag racing and mustangs spank ass all night long, vipers dont even show up for these events, and I could by two stangs for the costo f one of them turds, wait I already have two stangs, have you ever owned one? im guessing not or you would know how much fun it is to drive one. My Nephew took his brand new 2006 Mustang GT to the 1/4 finals, (thats the round before semi finals for those who dont know anything about racing) the first time he ever drag raced ever. he sent corvettes home, motorcycles, and it would have been icing on the cake if there was even a viper in the house. and the car was less than 30k with room for four

[dwbr]

i had a 1995 convertable mustang gt with the 5.0, a few modifications and it ran, i recently rented a 2006 while in Hawaii, i didnt like it, felt like i was sunk down in the seat like an old lady driving, it ran ok, just wasnt comfortable, my son is nuts over them thats all he talks about
________
buy hot box

[shawns fords]

bought my 67 for 350 bucks in 1992 drove it from washington state to texas. and I still have it, love driving it, worked great in the snow, for 7 years right below the continental divide (thats the center of the rocky mountains) through blizzards and much more. hell its gone places my 3 passenger tightly cramped slick wont ever make it too or has ever been

[66fordtrucknut]

I'd buy a new one in a heartbeat, I have a 66' in pieces, and my son's 1st car a fox body 90' beater with a 2.3 is really growing on me, with that 2.3 theres no performance but theres economy and it's dependable.
Charlie

[DV65CustomCab]

Continuing on, as this is sort of a fun debate, actually.

re: GTO. I was surprised at how much the wife and I both liked the Holden Monaro...err...GTO. It's roomy, and very comfortable. Unfortunately, it's also heavy, and price new was WAY too much. On the used market, however, they are a good deal. If not for gas prices and it's likely useless nature in winter, I'd consider one.
I will be curious to see how successful the 4 door G8 is. GM blames the failure of the Monar...err...Goat on it's two doors.

Doc, I've read lots of critical comments on the Mustang and, for that matter, other cars relying on 'retro' styling to make them attractive. I don't understand this criticism, since in the same paragraph you and most others voice the same viewpoint that modern cars are ugly. I concur that they are. If 'modern' means looking like a bar of Irish Spring, then I will take the retro look any day. We've truly reached a point in car styling where they really do look all the same. Camry, Accord, Fusion, Malibu...all the same blah ugly sculpted bar of soap. I may not like a Beetle, PT Cruiser or Mustang for myself, but at least they look good (and unique). Remember, the forgettable Mazda built Probe was supposed to be the new Mustang not that awful long ago. I'll gladly take the mostly-right rwd versions over that any day.

I heartily welcome Dodge's Challenger (what an awesome looking car!) and Chevrolet's unfortunately ugly Camaro so that we may again see the return of the pony car wars.

[Greg D]

I have never had a Mustang I didn't like for some reason.
I drove a 1969 Mustang in 1982 and was as they say "smitten", The 2 I now have are #s 7 & 8. Dang Doc you sure do like to stir the pot, lol. Some folks (JC, lol) don't get my attachment to my 85 GT, wanna go for a ride? The car is fairly useless in fowl weather but then I have a truck to drive too, makes it kind of a non issue. Car is too nice to let out of the garage in the salt anyway. Just watch what these start going for in a few more years.

I have the original MSRP for my 05 GT $27,225.00 which breaks down as such.
$25780.00 2005 GT Coupe Premium 5 speed manual
which over a deluxe,
leather
6 disc 500 watt audio system
power drivers seat

The optional equipment on my car
Interior color accent package $175.00 (the red leather)
Interior upgrade package $450.00
17" Bright machined cast aluiminum wheels $195.00
just lets ya know what coulda been had.
OK if any of you were to seriously consider buying one of these a little advice. If you are gonna mod the car anyway, save some $ and just get the deluxe. If you are going to use it as a daily driver and still want a new Stang SERIOUSLY consider the V6 car with the pony package, rides better, better mileage, generally a little easier to live with, IMHO. Definately a nice ride with the ragtop too.
I HAVE driven the Subaru STi, very fast, corners like it's on rails, terrible car! Horridly uncomfortable & wait til it breaks, $$$$$$$$$$! Which likely ain't gonna be long pushing that kinda power out of that size of a street engine. I also just hate ricer shit.
There is a possibility I will be putting my 05 GT up for sale, I miss it just thinking about it.
I have NO kids at home - don't need a commuter car.
But I can also remember back in 94 hauling my wife at the time & kids around in a 71 Torino GT 429, dang she hated that car, lol.

[dwbr]

i remember my parents say a certain cars was ugly in the 70's .. mavricks, torino, mustang, monte carlos,, etc.. nowa days we say the new cars are ugly,we are just set in our ways and dont like the change, just think when our kids get our ages the old vehicles are going to be todays cars and trucks
________
Jeepster Commando history

[Macon ACE]

I was studying Ford's employee policies when I discovered that the line workers made over $60/hour. I don't make $60/hour. Do you?

No. And neither do they.

[shawns fords]

if it werent for people like myself that have spend tons of money modifying or restoring our Mustangs, there wouldnt even be a restoration market out there where people could by the same products for their ol beat up farm trucks, or whatever else they think is so prescious to themselves. no NOS parts, no camshafts, no junk yards, nothing, people have been restoring these cars since the 70s when most everything else was being thrown out to the boneyards and scrappers and crushers. there would not be the new modern retro design on the new ones if people didnt love them so much. Which in turn brought out concepts of a new Challenger and Camaro. Most the junk built today looks like an electric razor or a jelly bean and you cant tell the difference from one commuter to the other, yet when you see a Mustang, you know its a Mustang, there isnt any other car like it.

[Trukcrazy]

Continuing on, as this is sort of a fun debate, actually.

re: GTO. I was surprised at how much the wife and I both liked the Holden Monaro...err...GTO. It's roomy, and very comfortable. Unfortunately, it's also heavy, and price new was WAY too much. On the used market, however, they are a good deal. If not for gas prices and it's likely useless nature in winter, I'd consider one.
I will be curious to see how successful the 4 door G8 is. GM blames the failure of the Monar...err...Goat on it's two doors.

Actually, the GTO wasn't a failure. It has the kind of aftermarket support similar to the Buick GN and GNX and there is a sense of exclusivity in being a new GTO owner (ours is 1 of 44 built like it). The GTO was the last 3 years of the Monaro platform which began in 97 and ended with the 06 model year so it would have never been a volume seller. Pontiac was just testing the waters and warming everyone up for the return of a FrontEng/RWD Pontiac. It's a shame it is going to be a 4 door, but it will still be nice.

[Greg D]

IMHO there are alot of wrong things in the perfomance car segment. Dodge Charger "4 door!", let alone the fact it isn't available in a 2 door. I believe they get by with this because of the ricer market where performance cars can have 4 doors and it's OK, not with me. Challenger, Camaro, again day late & a dollar short. The Mustang was the first pony car (hence the name for the class) in 65 (technically there are no 64 1/2 Mustangs, there are "early" 65s & "late" 65s). Again they beat the others to the punch with the new S197 cars. Dodge & Chebby are promising more power than the 05 up GT & will likely deliver. Doubt they will come in under 30K though. 30K, lot of dough, yep but also we now live in a world where a new trailer house can cost over double that. Kinda puts things in perspective. Another part of perspective, I just pulled a Kelly on my car, this car sold for a tad over 27K new, average retail listed today as 25K+, not alot of depreciation. LOL, I paid 23,440 for the car. Ther are also not alot of mass produced cars in history that sold like hotcakes for MSRP take it or leave it, 2005 Mustang GTs, alot of places wouldn't deal on V6 cars either.
Some will say Dodge and Chevy took longer because they came out with more power, the Shelby GT 500 is on it's 2nd year too though. The Challenger has been MIA for a long time and if I remember right the Camaro went out of production for awhile recently too. Kinda tough to get excited about a 75 Mustang II but at least they were trying to keep it alive. The reintroduction of the GT in 82 at least was a decent platform for performance, with the 85 GT roller cam cars Ford took over the streets and hasn't looked back since. And look at some of the "trick ponies" that have come out in the last few years of the SN 95 cars - 04 Cobra @ 425 horsepower (before someone corrects me I know they were rated at 390 HP but new cars routinely dynoed @ 425 HP STOCK). They haven't always had all the character of the classic Stangs but there has always been something about the cars that said Mustang. Funny thing is in alot of respects the classic ones so many refer to as being REAL Mustangs were some of the worst of the breed. Ask anyone who has restored one and they will know what I mean. Don't get me wrong I'd love to have a nice 65-68 GT. The Mustang was also the first of the classic performance cars for interest and $ to go nuts on, for better or worse, again the leader.
It has been said ONLY Ford can build a Mustang, kinda sums it up.

[Red62Uni]

well said greg.
Mustang has been alive 40+ years and still around! how about the competition? A car that makes a class of cars deserves respect no matter the year.

[shawns fords]

actually there is a minor difference between 64 1/2 and 65s one is the front fender lines as well as the build dates, new models arent out until september of the early year. 4.64 is when the 64 and 1/2 came out, also most 64 1/2 ran generators instead of alternators as well as 260s instead of 289s. ive owned 65s and my aunt has a restored 64 and 1/2 they are not the same cars. trim pieces as well, the side 1/4 trim was on the 65s but not on the 64s, I better stop now, im getting excited again and start remembering all them little differences between each year from 64-73
oh and Barracudas (also a pony car ) were out before mustangs

[Greg D]

Shawn you are absolutely right about the differences but the titles (should) all say 65 is the point. I am not sure the 64 "barracuda" should count, just a rebadged valiant with a big back window. I know the Mustang was based on the falcon but aside from the body there were alot more differences.

[Trukcrazy]

Just to get me back on the topic here. The Mustang will always be the top dog pony car. I owned several back in the day and would have liked the new one to have been better from the drivers seat, but we were disappointed when driving it. The 40+ years and aftermarket and restoration support it has proves where it stands no matter which version you prefer. I was raised on Ford and it is still my first choice when looking for another vehicle, new or used. Today, I would probably choose the Interceptor Crown Vic or Marauder or one of the performance trucks before the Mustang.

On the topic of insurance, the GTO is cheaper to insure than the 04 Monte Carlo SS we traded in. Great discussion.

[Red62Uni]

the 64 1/2 also has a different lip on the front of the hood and there was no fastbacks. and a few other differences. small but the mustang fans know most of them.

[DV65CustomCab]

I can't believe all the people who think putting a 40 year old name on a modern attempt to duplicate a 40 year old vehicle is ....'cool'.

Using this logic, I guess Ford quit making Mustangs around, oh, 1968 or so. Because those later Mustangs were much larger and thus ruined the 'intent' of the original.
Or did the Mustang actually die in 1974 when the Mustang II came out? Since it actually had a different name, that one may get a pass.
Then in 1979, they changed them again. Those really must not be 'true' Mustangs, because they looked nothing like the original. Yet they were built with the same idea as the genuine article, built on the Fairmont platform just like the 'pure' Mustang was built from the Falcon.
And in 2005 they returned to (gasp!) looking like the original Mustang!
Doc, I just don't get your logic. Especially when you lament the passing of the 1966 T-Bird, which was nowhere even close to the 'original' two seat car that Ford created in 1955. Using your thought process, the '66 was just a shill...a rip-off of a nameplate applied to a car that had nothing to do with the original.

Personally I think Ford died when they killed the Torino, a craft ten times better than any pony.

[Slick Fan]

Actually, I bailed a while ago, buttt...

[ICEMAN6166]

found a big spoon laying around i have not used for a while so i will stir away.

buying any new car or truck is a big waste of money.
all the money i have spent on all the slicks i have comes nowhere near the amount of 1 new vehicle.
car payments,interest, high insurance, plastic, electronics that you cant work on, no thanks.
nothing is made to last anymore, a throwaway society full of throwaway goods.
i will stick with the slicks, no reason to have a new car because the old ones can be made to function just fine.

[bigtrip460]

^ I agree. plus its good to know I did what the PO couldnt do.