Terrible twos

  • Sponsors (?)


  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ugly?
I would limit the ugly part of the II's to the bumpers in my completely unbiased opinion. (lol)

Ahem..(steps on to the soapbox)..

I know I have said this before, but unlike the foxes, SN's, and land yacht years, these II's at least actually look like a Mustang, not a fairmont, an import or a Galaxie.
And before someone mentions it, they do not look at all like pinto...also my completely unbiased opinion.... :)

I still don't get people who call down the II styling but don't say anything about styling (or lack thereof) of the fox body (yes I have owned some, last one was a VorteC Supercharged black 5 spd 93 gt) Nice cars, light and perform well.. look nice.. but styling? ... there really isn't any. The SN's could literally be a Mazda. The slab-ish 71 to 73's are stretched nose LTD's.

Am I being harsh? perhaps, but no less harsh than the uninformed opinions which label the II as a Pinto. Heck, I would rather own a Pinto than a 71 to 73 Mustang or even an SN for that matter..

Everyone has their reasons for liking a particular year of Mustang and it doesn't always meet with other people's approval or tastes, but I really don't understand the II bashing, especially by the Mustang community, when there are far far worse examples of styling or lack of styling in the Mustang world.

(steps back down off the soapbox.)
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: 4 users
beb411e37029f52c499ac855ce7d1bdd.jpg