Ugliest Mustang.

Wart

I'm Mad as HELL and I'M not Gonna Take it ANYMORE!

Founding Member

Sep 1, 1998

408

3

58

NE Ohio

Dec 1, 2003

#1

• Dec 1, 2003

• #1

Geez, big wonder the II came out with 47+%. in that other poll.


So when the car manu love kicking around is removed, Your free to tell what you really think.



Don't be shy.

PS: I didn't rinish reading the other thread.

 

C

chromehorse11

Founding Member

Dec 26, 2001

285

0

0

Brockville, Ontario, Canada

Dec 1, 2003

#2

• Dec 1, 2003

• #2

Geez, it's pretty tough actually picking. I consider myself a Mustang fanatic and find things i like in every model. Not trying to be a brown noser or anything, but it's true, i would never decline a Mustang from any year!
With that being said, if i absolutely HAVE to pic my least favourite, i guess it would end up being the '71-'73 years. Not really sure why, cause there is some kick a$$ nice ones around. Maybe their tied with the early 80's as being my least favourite. I don't know, like i said, i like them all. If your a true Mustang enthusiast, shouldn't that be the case?

 

Wart

I'm Mad as HELL and I'M not Gonna Take it ANYMORE!

Founding Member

Sep 1, 1998

408

3

58

NE Ohio

Dec 1, 2003

#3

• Dec 1, 2003

• #3

Wrong forum.


This will teach me to post at 4 am with a handfull of windows open.

 

E

electricgreen

Founding Member

Apr 9, 2002

1,140

0

36

Western NY

Dec 1, 2003

#4

• Dec 1, 2003

• #4

Ouch-47.06% on the big bodies. Oh well. I really don't think there's a particular body style I actually dislike, but I went with the early sn95's-94-98, since I guess that is my least favorite...

 

1

1badII

Member

Aug 5, 2003

796

0

16

Durham, North Cacalaky

Dec 1, 2003

#5

• Dec 1, 2003

• #5

I never was a fan of the 65/66's. But, they're included with the 67-70's, so that's out. I voted the 87-93's. I just think they're bland looking.

 

jcp123

New Member

Nov 1, 2003

408

0

0

Tyler, TX

Dec 1, 2003

#6

• Dec 1, 2003

• #6

gotta go with '87-'93's. can't do '79-'86, cuz i mean i cant call my birthyear mustang ugly...i just cant!! lol. the '99-up ones are my runners up, followed by '96-'98...i like all the ones from '65-'78, yes that includes '71-'73. they are very muscular looking cars and my dad has a '73 mach 1 that absolutely ROCKS. just my $0.02

 

98CobraClone

New Member

Feb 28, 2003

592

0

0

Ripley, Ohio

Dec 2, 2003

#7

• Dec 2, 2003

• #7

I can't vote for any of em as the ugliest since in my family the mustangs are as such:
65, 66, 66, 73, 73, 77, 77, 77, 78, 78, 80, 84, 88, 92, 98

Got pretty much all of the body styles aside from the 67-68 / 69-70 and 99+

 

Project 77

Founding Member

Jun 30, 2002

370

2

16

Bernville PA

Dec 2, 2003

#8

• Dec 2, 2003

• #8

My vote went with the 71-73. I drove a 71 Mach 1 a few years ago and couldn;t see out of the back window...AT ALL. They were huge, and to me a pony car should me smaller, more agile, and quick. I LOVE the 76-78 Cobra's and 78 King Cobra, LOVE the 85-86 4 eye'd Fox mustangs, and i like the 94-98 Mustang. Drove a '02 GT that belongs to a friend of mine the other week and that was awsome....the incredibly smooth power delivery.

 

Blue coyote

Founding Member

Sep 14, 2002

347

0

16

North America's hemp-basket, BC, Canada

Dec 2, 2003

#9

• Dec 2, 2003

• #9

I didn't put a vote in, but that's because I dislike any of the "Fair-stangs" (fox-chassis). They're all basically hopped-up Fairmont's with a shorter wheelbase. I'm also not too fond of the pre-1970 fastbacks. The newer generations are a bit too "rounded off" for my liking, but at least an attempt was made to recapture the Mustang look.

 

C

cobraii74x

New Member

Aug 27, 2003

253

0

0

Altoona, PA

Dec 5, 2003

#10

• Dec 5, 2003

• #10

I voted for the 79 - 86. I just don't think the front ends were that of a true mustang, they didn't look like they were going to attack, as all the other mustangs do. my bro had a 79 capri and i liked that but thats about as far as it goes for any fox body. Just remember. Any mustang is a mustang toooooo ( sorry whoever coined the phrase )

 

L

LXXVICOBRA

Founding Member

Jul 10, 1999

506

1

0

Central NY State

Dec 6, 2003

#11

• Dec 6, 2003

• #11

Well, overall I dislike the '94 models the most, I really hated those taillights in the first few years of that style car, and felt the scallop section looked awkward in relation to the body lines, unlike on the II where it seems to look "right". The 99+ models are much more stylish in my eyes, than the 94-98's, while retaining the same basic shape.
As for ugly...I'd say any Mustang that runs into the backside of a Hummer could be immediatly be considered in that catagory. It's just a matter of physics!

 

Apsychotic

New Member

Dec 5, 2003

92

0

0

Dec 7, 2003

#12

• Dec 7, 2003

• #12

79-86

I think that the 79- 86 had a few years there that were less appealing to me, not sure why, as some of them looked very sharp. I just keep picturing a 1981 stang w/ ragged out tan interior lots of body rust, and a 4 popper w/ an automatic tranny, no hubcaps on plain wheels, and bald tires. Oh, I almost forgot, covered w/ mud, and a big #3 in the back glass. You know the one I'm talking about!! lol.

 

8

87_GT_Vert

New Member

Dec 6, 2002

117

0

0

Winnipeg,Mb,Canada

Dec 15, 2003

#13

• Dec 15, 2003

• #13

Why can't I vote 74-78??

 

Blue coyote

Founding Member

Sep 14, 2002

347

0

16

North America's hemp-basket, BC, Canada

Dec 15, 2003

#14

• Dec 15, 2003

• #14

87_GT_Vert said:

Why can't I vote 74-78??

Click to expand...

Because its a poll on the Ugliest, not the most beautiful and under-appreciated


Just jekin' yer chain. No offense intended....

:canflag:

 

8

87_GT_Vert

New Member

Dec 6, 2002

117

0

0

Winnipeg,Mb,Canada

Dec 15, 2003

#15

• Dec 15, 2003

• #15

Blue coyote said:

Because its a poll on the Ugliest, not the most beautiful and under-appreciated


Just jekin' yer chain. No offense intended....

:canflag:

Click to expand...

Haha, its all good. I don't mean any offense to MII owners either I was just curious. While they are my least favorite I don't hate them in any way. They just dont quite "do it" for me. :canflag:

 

Blue coyote

Founding Member

Sep 14, 2002

347

0

16

North America's hemp-basket, BC, Canada

Dec 15, 2003

#16

• Dec 15, 2003

• #16

87_GT_Vert said:

They just dont quite "do it" for me. :canflag:

Click to expand...

That's how I basically feel about the whole "Fox-chassis" era. I've seen a few (and even owned a couple) that looked okay, but they keep reminding me more of a sporty Fairmont than a Mustang.

Just for the record, I'd be WAY happier owning a Pinto wagon with a 2.8 and a Rad 4-speed (or a 302/C4 even) than ANY car based on the Fairmont. Just my own opinion of course.

 

8

87_GT_Vert

New Member

Dec 6, 2002

117

0

0

Winnipeg,Mb,Canada

Dec 15, 2003

#17

• Dec 15, 2003

• #17

Blue coyote said:

Just for the record, I'd be WAY happier owning a Pinto wagon with a 2.8 and a Rad 4-speed (or a 302/C4 even) than ANY car based on the Fairmont. Just my own opinion of course.

Click to expand...

Ouch, LOL. There are actually 2 pinto's around here that are done up pretty good, one of them is 351w powered and I believe the other has a 460. One of them is tubbed the other isn't, I forget which one is though. Maybe i'm crazy but no matter how fast they are I could never give up any V8 Stang for a Pinto. No matter what you do to it, it's still a pinto, and it's still a complete eye sore. Ah well, not everyone likes the Foxbodies, I LOVE mine but to each their own. Do you have any pics of your car Blue coyote ?

 

Blue coyote

Founding Member

Sep 14, 2002

347

0

16

North America's hemp-basket, BC, Canada

Dec 15, 2003

#18

• Dec 15, 2003

• #18

No, sadly. My II has been sitting with no drivetrain for about 9 years. I never seem to have the time or money to devote to it. Its a 78 T-top fastback. Emerald Green with white interior. It was originally a 302/C4, but I'm thinking of dropping my Rad 4-speed into it, along with the "Built-to-the-NUTS" 2.8 out of my trail rig BII (200 hp and about a 7K redline). If I tried to bump the power any further, I'd have to do a few thousand in machine work to keep the crank inside the block (the engine came out of a 76 Pinto, after it torqued the front subframe over 8" out of true and blew the back window right out of the car....That's BEFORE I added an MSD6A, headers, dual cats and glasspacks, and full dual 2.25" pipes)

I have to move in another month and a half, so the trail rig is being stripped anyway....

 

Eos

Oh Heather Oh yeah... I want your pink taco

Jun 13, 2003

734

3

0

oklahoma

Dec 15, 2003

#19

• Dec 15, 2003

• #19

87_GT_Vert said:

Ouch, LOL. There are actually 2 pinto's around here that are done up pretty good, one of them is 351w powered and I believe the other has a 460. One of them is tubbed the other isn't, I forget which one is though. Maybe i'm crazy but no matter how fast they are I could never give up any V8 Stang for a Pinto. No matter what you do to it, it's still a pinto, and it's still a complete eye sore. Ah well, not everyone likes the Foxbodies, I LOVE mine but to each their own. Do you have any pics of your car Blue coyote ?

Click to expand...

check out our members rides section, all of the II's on here look great