New platform

oh9mustang · Sep 8, 2009

Dark fire
The 302 mustang started in 1968. In 1974 when the II came out there was no V8 offered, I liked the body style and was going to by one, until the guy says no V8, I will not drive a 4 cylinder mustang. The car was a pinto with a Mustang body on it. If you think this sub par Mustang was a Mustang saver, go right ahead. The 1974 Mustang II Mach1 had a V6 in it. I was embarrassed.

oh9mustang · Sep 8, 2009

5 0 brian
I agree. I also liked the looks of the car, The 74 turned me away.
Later I built a 78 Mach, I put a 540 cubic inch in it with a B&M C6 and it scared the craaap out of me, I drove it once before I sold it. I'm guessing low 9s with no roll bar or safety equipment.

ct07gt · Sep 8, 2009

DarkFireGT said:
That "piece of crap" introduced the 5.0L to the Mustang world, introduced a new suspension system that is still in use today, was Motortrend's Car of the Year, tripled the sales numbers from the previous year, and of course, it kept the Mustang name alive. They sold over a million of them. Hardly a piece of crap. The right car for the right time.

I think we, meaning most people on this forum, have learned that some people aren't worth arguing with. I agree, there was pretty much nothing produced during that time that was not awful.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

ct07gt
So you think the Mustang II introduced the 5.0 also? Or maybe it's not worth arguing about, maybe cause the Mustang II didn't introduce the 5.0. Maybe you can find a 1974 Mustang II V8. Never mind, some people just aren't worth a discussion. Go make your own thread.

ct07gt · Sep 9, 2009

When did I say anything about the Mustang II, I just said pretty much everything made between around 72 and the late eighties was pretty much awful. There were a few decent cars but not many.

DarkFireGT · Sep 9, 2009

oh9mustang said:
ct07gt
So you think the Mustang II introduced the 5.0 also? Or maybe it's not worth arguing about, maybe cause the Mustang II didn't introduce the 5.0. Maybe you can find a 1974 Mustang II V8. Never mind, some people just aren't worth a discussion. Go make your own thread.

My bad. Before 1975, it was referred to as 302. As far as I know, 1975 was the first time it was also referred to as the 5.0L. This was not the same 302 that was put in Mustangs in the early 70's. It was the early version of the famed 5.0L of Fox body and early SN95 enthusiasts.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

1986 was the first year Mustang had electronic sequential fuel injection. The 302 ,except for Boss, is a 302. The difference is the heads and intake, 4"bore 3" stroke, Just a stroked 289. They are called the Windsor series, 221, 260, 289, 302. Pull the heads/intake off a Fox Cobra 5.0 and put a set of heads and intake from a 1968 302 on it and it will drop right in the 1968 mustang.
If you want to make a case for the introduction of the "5.0" it would be Lincoln. The Throttle body fuel injection was on the 1980 302 Lincoln.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

ct07gt

I asked you a question.
Do you think the Mustang II introduced the 5.0? to which you have not given an answer.

You come to my thread and start with "some people aren't worth arguing with" and then you agree with a post by Dark Fire that says, " That "piece of crap" introduced the 5.0L to the Mustang world"
So I asked you if you also think the Mustang II introduced the 5.0 , to which you replied "When did I say anything about the Mustang II" No one said you said anything about the Mustang II. You agreed with Darks post so if you agree then it's your opinion also.
Like I said, Go start your own thread somewhere, You didn't contribute anything to this one anyway, just some negative BS.

ct07gt · Sep 9, 2009

The part I was agreeing with was that the cars built during that period were pretty awful for the most part. I was not arguing with you about the introduction of the 5.0 or anything to do with the Mustang II, I couldn't care less about the Mustang II. I would guess that you are probably correct saying that the '80 lincoln was the first with the 5.0, I have no idea what engines were available during the mid to late '70.
You just seem to get pissed whenever someone has an opinion other than yours. I can understand correcting someone when they post something that is incorrect, but there is no reason to try to make them feel as stupid as possible.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

I missed that mind reading class in college. You said you agree.
"I agree, there was pretty much nothing produced during that time that was not awful."
The I agree, is a thought after that is another thought.
As far as making someone look stupid, that's an opinion, I wasn't trying to make anyone look stupid, If stupid is what they or you feel well that's up to you.
What am I feeling now?

And once again go start your own thread, your not contributing to this one.
I'm sorry, Did I make you feel stupid? I must have been pissssed.

DarkFireGT · Sep 9, 2009

Ok. For the sake of arguement I will concede the 5.0 to you. What about all the other points I made? Doesn't matter. This is not a Mustang II diss thread. It's about a new style for the current Mustang.

edit - sorry the message was typed on my phone. had some misspellings.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

I agree, And that would be I agree with your whole statement.
If you will look at that picture a few posts up you will see me and My MustangII. I liked the styling, I got turned off in 1974 when I went to buy a new one. I drove my 69 Mach1, 428 SCJ into the dealership and asked about a Mach1, It had a wimpy V6 in it and no V8 available. I started to laugh at the sales person as I walked away I looked at my beast of a Mach 1 and was embarrassed for Ford on the new Mach 1 for sale.
Now if Ford would make a S197 the size of a II I would be happy.

GreyDiesel · Sep 9, 2009

I had thought the S197 (or DC2?) was too large before I bought one, now I am used to it. But I was surprised to see, one day at the track, it actually looked to be larger than a 69 Mustang. 69 Mustangs always look like bohemoths in photographs, but up close they are pretty good compact size.

Its tricky for me. I like smaller cars, as they are typically more nimble, but you know, I fit in the S197 really well. (6'7") It could be that a car any smaller would not fit. Plus I do like all the room in the engine bay for easier access.

They certainly dont need the huge-o trunk. Baby got back.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

GreyDiesel
someone with an actual opinion, on the S197. Amazing.
Being 6'7" I can see that a small car would not be your foray, Given that, I would also hope you could see that the majority are not 6'7" and maybe, just maybe wouldn't mind a smaller car.

GreyDiesel · Sep 9, 2009

totally.

I am just glad the S197 was made, so at least I can fit in something that is performance oriented.

You'd be surprised though, the actual size of the car does not often translate into interior room. I can fit pretty well in a VW golf, but wont fit in a many mid size sedans.

oh9mustang · Sep 9, 2009

GreyDiesel
A very good friend of mine was 6'8" and 325lbs , we called him "Big Man" geee I wonder why. He was killed by the enemy while I was in the Army. He couldn't fit into anything, but he understood that most were not like him. The mustang S197 is a big car, and is good for some, But a smaller Mustang is what the Mustang is all about, The Classic is not a big car, The Mustang II is not a big car, the Fox is not a big car and the SN95 is not a big car. The S197 is a big car by any Mustang that came before it. Some people like the big mustang, that’s fine, but that's not the mustang I remember.

fallenauthority · Sep 10, 2009

oh9mustang said:
GreyDiesel
The mustang S197 is a big car, and is good for some, But a smaller Mustang is what the Mustang is all about, The Classic is not a big car, The Mustang II is not a big car, the Fox is not a big car and the SN95 is not a big car. The S197 is a big car by any Mustang that came before it. Some people like the big mustang, that’s fine, but that's not the mustang I remember.

But you bought one?

oh9mustang · Sep 11, 2009

I had a 06, 08 and now a 09, I never said I don't like the S197.
I also owned a 65, 67,68, 69, 78, 79, 89,01, 02, 04.
I like Mustangs, That don't mean I wouldn't like a smaller version of the S197.

444DHQ · Sep 16, 2009

I have a 1980 Giha "M" code wich is a 302 not a "H" code wich was a 258,A stroked down 302.
Its pretty small,you can't put a full size suit case in the trunk,but it does have a full size spare not a doughnut.
OH ya it has an aluminum intake with a two barrel carb,with dual exhaust,All Stock !!!
So they did make an effort in the 80s if you had the money$$$$$.

Next year it will be rebuilt and givin to my daughter,There is not one dent or scratch,Just a tired engine.

Thanks !!

Vulcan420 · Sep 18, 2009

wow, oh9 you say you've owned 13 diff mustangs - seems an unbelievable amount of cars for someone of your age.

New platform

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Playing with my wife's really makes me want one.

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Playing with my wife's really makes me want one.

Banned

New Member

Banned

New Member

Banned

New Member

Banned

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency