89 5.0 Lx
- Thread starter wrenchbender
- Start date
justabigkid
New Member
The only reasons I can see the 89 being targeted is that is a mass air car but with no air bags. Just a thought.
This is their reasoning
I wonder what hardware they are talking about here? Mass Air? DO they even know what Mass Air is?
I wonder what hardware they are talking about here? Mass Air? DO they even know what Mass Air is?
strtrcr50
New Member
You have to have an MSN account it seems
1964½ Hardtop
With its long hood and short rear deck, the original pony car was just the right size for a person on the move. Its unique look and attractive $2,300 price tag had Americans running into Ford showrooms like no other vehicle before or since. Surprisingly, for all its original style and sporty design, the original pony car was based heavily on familiar, yet simple, components sourced from the Ford Falcon and Fairlane to keep production costs down. And even though it was equipped with a thrifty, yet somewhat underpowered, 101-horspower 6-cylinder engine, it is still a highly sought-after vehicle today.
1966 289 Fastback
There’s no more handsome devil in the Mustang corral than the first generation of pony cars to feature the lean and mean Fastback body style, which first appeared in 1965. Not only did the Fastback look sportier than the coupe and convertible, it featured a 289-cubic-inch V8 small block engine that developed 271 horsepower. Now, the Mustang featured a level of performance that matched its good looks. For those who wanted more, the legendary Carroll Shelby and Ford collaborated to produce the Shelby GT 350, a fastback specially tuned by Shelby to produce 306 horses in street clothing and around 360 ponies in special GT 350R race garb. Though the ’65 model is sweet, the ’66 model takes top honors in our book thanks to a sportier instrument cluster and more refined design details.
1968 GT 390
By 1967 the Mustang had competition: the Chevrolet Camaro, Pontiac Firebird and a newly redesigned Plymouth Barracuda. Ford responded by creating a new, slightly larger Mustang with an all-new body over pretty much the same first-generation chassis. Ford also dropped in its 390-cubic-inch (6.4-liter) "big-block" V8 engine, which produced 315 horsepower. Though the ’68 didn’t look dramatically different from the ’67, it did feature federally mandated side marker lights and a revised grille. It also featured a few more engine options, including 427- and 428-cubic-inch versions of the big-block V8. The more radical 427 was rated at 390 horsepower, while the more civilized 428 knocked out 335 horsepower. The 1968 GT 390 is most famous for its appearance flying through the streets of San Francisco piloted by Steve McQueen in the blockbuster film “Bullitt.”
1969 Boss 429
Fewer than 1,400 Boss ’9s were built in 1969 and ’70, so the big block’s considerable impact is more symbolic than personally experienced. The Boss series of Mustangs was originally built to qualify the 429 V8 for the NASCAR circuit. It would have been immeasurably easier to drop the required 500 Boss engines in Ford Torinos — the chassis that Ford actually raced in NASCAR — but the Mustang was more popular. The Boss 429 package came with a race-ready 429-cubic-inch V8 engine with ram air induction, an aluminum high riser and header-type exhaust manifolds. Also included were a trunk-mounted battery, race suspension and the best interior Mustang had to offer. It paved the way for massively powerful engines far in the Mustang’s future: Think Mustang Shelby GT500.
1970 Boss 302
Like the Boss 429, the 302 was a serious performance car. Featuring a wailing, canted-valve, small-block V8 engine and a taut suspension to match, the handsome Boss 302 was built to best Chevrolet's Camaro Z28 on the highly visible SCCA Trans Am road race series, and it did a pretty good job. But what it really did was interest a legion of young men in something more than drag racing. A tick over 7,000 Boss 302s were built in 1970, enough to make it available, if not common.
1974 Mustang II
Today, this vehicle is universally detested by Mustang enthusiasts. As a performance car, it was a thorough disappointment. But then, the mid-’70s was an era of fuel shortages, vapid disco music and cars gone sad because manufacturers were struggling to meet new emission regulations. Therefore, the Mustang II was designed to be light, approachable and relatively fuel-efficient. The formula worked, at least at first; the 1974 model sold more than 322,000 copies — good enough for fourth on the Mustang annual sales chart. More importantly, the Mustang II was good enough to keep the Mustang brand alive during a dismal period in America’s automotive history.
1984-’86 Mustang SVO
These vehicles represent Ford’s first serious attempt to elevate the Mustang from mere muscle car into sports car. Built by Ford’s own Special Vehicle Operations (SVO), known today as Ford Racing, the SVO Mustangs were a radical departure from other pony cars on the road. With its own unique appearance (single square headlamps in a grille-free front end, plus a unique dual-plane rear spoiler), the SVO was powered by an intercooled, turbocharged 2.3-liter 4-cylinder engine that knocked out 175 horsepower. It was lavishly equipped, quick and agile. Unfortunately, the SVO went too far. Fuel was cheap and V8s in near-universal demand. The turbo engine lacked today’s sophisticated electronics, buzzing out acceptable power but little torque. It was expensive and even a little odd-looking, but gave precedent to innovative engineering, including upcoming turbocharged EcoBoost performance Mustangs.
1989 5.0 LX
Possibly the Mustang’s greatest conquest came when the dirt-cheap, fast, adaptable, easy-to-live-with “Fox” Mustang (Fox refers to the name of the platform on which this Mustang was built) took the domestic performance crown away from the Chevy Camaro. While it took more than 10 years and a variety of 5.0- and 4.6-liter Mustangs to accomplish, the conquest was complete; Chevy discontinued the Camaro in 2004. We’ve picked the ’89 LX from six years of nearly identical V8 Fox Mustangs (1987-1993) because it was the first to incorporate all the necessary hardware off any Ford showroom floor.
2005 Ford Mustang
Few cars get to relive a 40-year-old sales rush, but the 2005 Mustang did. Styling is the obvious visual explanation of the ’05’s success, but it’s only the beginning. The first Mustang built from a clean sheet of paper, the 2005 was a huge leap forward in refinement, handling and sophistication. After years as a kid’s car, the Mustang returned to the mainstream. This was especially important in the base car, because once again sales volume ensured Mustang’s success. Today’s 2010 Mustang continues the ’05’s progress with a notably improved interior and even more chassis refinements.
2007 Mustang Shelby GT500
Unabashedly potent, the current alpha-stallion carries the highest power rating (500 supercharged ponies) of any widely available production Mustang. More a muscle car than a sports car, the GT500’s rabid following underscores the Mustang’s ability to scratch the traditional performance fan’s throttle bone. On such a short list, the GT500 represents the full stable of modern performance Mustangs, including the excellent daily-driving 2008 Bullitt and limited-edition 540-horse GT500KR. But most importantly, the GT500 carries the reasonably affordable, high-performance Mustang credo to its current maximum incarnation.
Seems to me they missed a couple very important Stangs. 03/04 Cobras should of been on there.
I've seen that list before, and you have to admit its weak and comes off as a list made by someone who isn't really "in" the Mustang crowd. I mean come on, the first 5 cars are cliche muscle car-era Stangs (you don't have to be a Mustang guy to praise those cars), and they make no mention to SN95 cars AT ALL. How do you have a "top 10" Mustang list and fail to mention the Terminator? Seriously?
I also like how they show a 'vert Fox. Is that a 7-Up car? Regardless, Fox verts are the least desirable of all the 5.0s. Why not show a notch? Or the '93 Cobra?
[/rant]
I also like how they show a 'vert Fox. Is that a 7-Up car? Regardless, Fox verts are the least desirable of all the 5.0s. Why not show a notch? Or the '93 Cobra?
[/rant]
I guess my rant isn't over...
Wait, wait, wait. A Boss 429, Boss 302, and GT500 made the list as "standard run-of-the-corral" cars? WTF?
MSN said:
Wait, wait, wait. A Boss 429, Boss 302, and GT500 made the list as "standard run-of-the-corral" cars? WTF?
That is exactly what I was thinking. The list is stupid. A Mustang II is not a great car.The 64,66 and 68 could have been lumped together as the two Boss cars could have been. I guess if you kept the II on there (it was an important car in keeping the name going) that is still three more spots open. The 79 should replace the 89 as significant or mabey even an 86 with the new injection. Then add the 93 Cobra, a 96 Cobra and the last spot to be taken by the 03/04 Cobra. Or mabey instead of the 86/79 idea put in the 96 GT. Its engine was a big change over what a Stang ever had in it before
QUICK91LX
Founding Member
The Mustang II is meaningful because it kept the Mustang alive through the gas crisis of the 70's when economy was the name of the game. How many other big muscular name plates saw their demise in the mid 70's, or if they stuck around they were a shadow of their former greatness. The II even won 1974 Motor Trend car of the year...it has its place in the Mustang world...it may seem like the low point in Mustang history, especially looking at what came before and what has come since, but without it there might very well be no Mustang at all right now...
Well, FWIW, a 302 can be bolted right into a Mustang II (if it didn't already come with one stock), and being that they don't weigh diddly-squat, I'd imagine dropping in a stock long-block from an '87-'95 5.0 Mustang with a decent cam, intake, and carb could make the thing VERY fun to drive for not a whole lotta money ... although, of course, you would wanna upgrade the rear end, trans, and brakes at the same time unless you feel like breaking stuff and/or running into walls... 
But that's all a moot point, as stock for stock, they were the most pathetic of all V8 Mustangs - 120 horses, woooooo! 
What about the '83 Mustang GT where they brought back the 302 after a brief hiatus? What about the 1996 Cobra with the first DOHC 4.6L in a Mustang? (The SOHC GT's 4.6L was certainly nothing to crow about.)
But that's all a moot point, as stock for stock, they were the most pathetic of all V8 Mustangs - 120 horses, woooooo! What about the '83 Mustang GT where they brought back the 302 after a brief hiatus? What about the 1996 Cobra with the first DOHC 4.6L in a Mustang? (The SOHC GT's 4.6L was certainly nothing to crow about.)
Similar threads
