Actually, history tells a different story. The Mustang has never the baddest "dog" on the road, but it's outsold and outlived ALL of its competition.
65-66: All you could get was the 271 h.p. 289 hipo. Super trick machine, but... at that time GTO's and Chevelle SS's laughed as they blew by. Sure they were a bit bigger, but a tiny '66 327-350 horse Chevy II would make a dinner out of a hipo as well. Did it hurt Mustang sales or image? Naw... And don't toss the "Shelby" card, because the limited production and high price positioned them against Corvette, and that wasn't a pretty picture either.
67-68: Ford ups the ante with a big block, BUT, uh, the S-code 390-4V wasn't exactly a hemi. GTO's, Chevelles, 442's, and 440 Mopars still ruled the road. Shelby's had hot 428's (and a handful of 427's in '67), but again, priced in Corvette territory where 427-435h.p.'s roamed. In late 68, you could get a 428CJ GT, which was a rocket and won the NHRA stock championship. So Ford was finally stepping up to bat. What did they get as a result? Sales were trending DOWNWARD.
69-70: Mustang's muscle heyday. However, even with the 428SCJ drag pac option, Camaro's were packing aluminum headed 396-375h.p., or you could order a COPO 427, or you could get a 450h.p. LS6 Chevelle, or the Stage 1 Buick (those were underrated gorillas!), and all those cheap and plentiful 440-Magnum and 440-6pack Mopars running around. Hemi Mopars were pricey, just like the Boss 429 was. The Mopar Hemi was much stronger stock. So Mustang was in the game. But only slightly less than 4,000 428-powered Mustangs were sold in 1970. Most Mustang performance-minded buyers were scooping up the new 351 Clevelands, which were hot, BUT, nowhere near the lead of the performance pack for the time. So it's obvious that the folks who were seeking ultimate horsepower and performance were buying elsewhere, not at Ford. Another piece of trivia, Ford had a hard time unloading their production of 849 Boss 429's in 1969. The last couple hundred sat in Detroit while the dealers were trying to sell the ones they already had. That's why Ford only built 500 in '70, the exact amount require by NASCAR, and not a single unit more.
71-73: All there is to talk about really is 1971. Boss 351 and 429CJ. Both right near the top of the heap, but that was the last gasp, not a whole lot of those models were built, and by 1972, with the exception of the lower-compression R-code 351, the muscle was sagging like your granny's tricept.
74-78: Need I say more? GM's F-bodies owned those years for performance and handling.
79-84: Ford launches the Fox, and aims squarely at the F-bodies. They have super sales success, despite the fact that GM consistently has the fastest and best handling car in their arsenal.
85-93: Here's where Ford basks in some glory. Solid sales, and king-of-the-hill performance (Grand Nationals cost too much and didn't handle for shat). Good times, but America had always loved and embraced Mustangs prior to that, and they would continue when they fell back behind again. In '93 GM launches all-new F-body that runs circles around the Mustang, straight line or curvy.
94-02: More years of stock vs. stock, Mustangs being last in every race. Did it matter? NO. More people bought Mustangs, modified them to beat the F-bodies, and that was that.
2002, F-body bites the dust, Mustang lives on, and launches this coming September with really NO direct competition.
Even if DC or GM do come out fighting with new cars, America's love affair with Mustang goes WAY WAY beyond stat sheets and performance figures. Not that Ford won't give them one hell of a fight, and make a good competition out of it. It's just that it's not "do or die" as pony542 infers it may be. Mustang has historically not been the hottest ticket off the showroom floor. But gearheads gravitate towards Mustangs nonetheless for so many other dominating reasons. You can always modify anything, so people prefer to start with a car they love, even if it needs some "warming up". They'll start with Mustangs.
65-66: All you could get was the 271 h.p. 289 hipo. Super trick machine, but... at that time GTO's and Chevelle SS's laughed as they blew by. Sure they were a bit bigger, but a tiny '66 327-350 horse Chevy II would make a dinner out of a hipo as well. Did it hurt Mustang sales or image? Naw... And don't toss the "Shelby" card, because the limited production and high price positioned them against Corvette, and that wasn't a pretty picture either.
67-68: Ford ups the ante with a big block, BUT, uh, the S-code 390-4V wasn't exactly a hemi. GTO's, Chevelles, 442's, and 440 Mopars still ruled the road. Shelby's had hot 428's (and a handful of 427's in '67), but again, priced in Corvette territory where 427-435h.p.'s roamed. In late 68, you could get a 428CJ GT, which was a rocket and won the NHRA stock championship. So Ford was finally stepping up to bat. What did they get as a result? Sales were trending DOWNWARD.
69-70: Mustang's muscle heyday. However, even with the 428SCJ drag pac option, Camaro's were packing aluminum headed 396-375h.p., or you could order a COPO 427, or you could get a 450h.p. LS6 Chevelle, or the Stage 1 Buick (those were underrated gorillas!), and all those cheap and plentiful 440-Magnum and 440-6pack Mopars running around. Hemi Mopars were pricey, just like the Boss 429 was. The Mopar Hemi was much stronger stock. So Mustang was in the game. But only slightly less than 4,000 428-powered Mustangs were sold in 1970. Most Mustang performance-minded buyers were scooping up the new 351 Clevelands, which were hot, BUT, nowhere near the lead of the performance pack for the time. So it's obvious that the folks who were seeking ultimate horsepower and performance were buying elsewhere, not at Ford. Another piece of trivia, Ford had a hard time unloading their production of 849 Boss 429's in 1969. The last couple hundred sat in Detroit while the dealers were trying to sell the ones they already had. That's why Ford only built 500 in '70, the exact amount require by NASCAR, and not a single unit more.
71-73: All there is to talk about really is 1971. Boss 351 and 429CJ. Both right near the top of the heap, but that was the last gasp, not a whole lot of those models were built, and by 1972, with the exception of the lower-compression R-code 351, the muscle was sagging like your granny's tricept.
74-78: Need I say more? GM's F-bodies owned those years for performance and handling.
79-84: Ford launches the Fox, and aims squarely at the F-bodies. They have super sales success, despite the fact that GM consistently has the fastest and best handling car in their arsenal.
85-93: Here's where Ford basks in some glory. Solid sales, and king-of-the-hill performance (Grand Nationals cost too much and didn't handle for shat). Good times, but America had always loved and embraced Mustangs prior to that, and they would continue when they fell back behind again. In '93 GM launches all-new F-body that runs circles around the Mustang, straight line or curvy.
94-02: More years of stock vs. stock, Mustangs being last in every race. Did it matter? NO. More people bought Mustangs, modified them to beat the F-bodies, and that was that.
2002, F-body bites the dust, Mustang lives on, and launches this coming September with really NO direct competition.
Even if DC or GM do come out fighting with new cars, America's love affair with Mustang goes WAY WAY beyond stat sheets and performance figures. Not that Ford won't give them one hell of a fight, and make a good competition out of it. It's just that it's not "do or die" as pony542 infers it may be. Mustang has historically not been the hottest ticket off the showroom floor. But gearheads gravitate towards Mustangs nonetheless for so many other dominating reasons. You can always modify anything, so people prefer to start with a car they love, even if it needs some "warming up". They'll start with Mustangs.