Another automotive AHC: Make a better Mustang II

[phx1138]

Critics have roasted the '73-8 Mustang for being a warmed-over Pinto. IMO, the styling was pretty good, & the size was right. (Some prefer a Maverick platform, with 103" wheelbase; IMO, that's bigger than it needs to be.)

What would it take to make the (more/less) OTL 'stang II a real winner? The obvious is a hotter V8 option, which is problematic in the period. A turbo or supercharger on the 2.8 (like the Capri turbo?) would be a good call. Something like the '84 'stang SVO turbo 2.3 with intercooler & Ranger dual-plug heads & distributorless ignition, putting out around 205hp, backed by a 5sp manual, would be, too.

I'd be inclined to add 'glass hood (with '85 Turbo T-bird scoop & ram air), 'glass fenders, chin air dam, better brakes, stiffer suspension, & better bucket seats. If it's using the Pinto platform, moving the fuel tank is a must...

Is the Mustang II doomed to be a dog? Or could it have been improved?

 

[marathag]

Don't call it a Mustang, for starters. It just isn't one.

For the powerplants that Ford was willing to put under the hood for 1973 between EPA emissions and MPG requirements there will be no decent V8 from Ford for a Decade, and same for I4 or V6.

Ford won't have a Five Speed until the early '80s, so there is no rescue there, and there isn't even something they can borrow from Europe or Mazda.
At's mostly 3 speed, with a few 4

Fuel tank was fine, as the the 'compact' lines of the Falcon and later Mustang, along with all the Fairlanes, used that fuel tank setup with the floor of the Trunk being the top of the gas tank, and they had the filler behind the License Plate frame

Ford cheaped out with the shock location, that was all, and enough to make the Pinto into the rolling bomb(and no, it wasn't that bad)

Ford being cheap is a reoccurring issue.

Turbos and Carburetors didn't mix well, see the Olds Jetfire, and BMW 2002. 1973 is just too soon for what Detroit was willing to do with engine controls, let alone Ford
Ford is no Porsche at this point. They were into Personal Luxury. Performace was at the back of the bus.
It took a decade to get rid of Point and Condensor ignition.

Fiberglass is out, as a good part of the Country is cold where that early resin didn't hold up well to impacts, and it's not a rich man's toy like a Corvette that gets put awy for the Winter.

Stop importing the Capri from Ford of Europe, and use this name for a 'sporty' small car that will be made at Deerborn or San Jose on the Pinto Body, with sporty looking body, with no real performance, like a VW Karmann Ghia


Mustang nameplate just goes away for now.

 

[SwampTiger]

Dump the Pinto chassis for the two door Maverick chassis. Cut down the 302 V8 into an even fire version of the Buick V6 as the mid range engine. basically a 234 CID. Ford had enough engine expertise to develop more efficiency in this engine. The 2.3 engine was sufficient for the chassis as a base engine. Turbocharging or supercharging are options for later. Grab Bosch fuel injection for top level models. Better yet, grab the 2nd generation Capri with restyled front and rear, built in the USA. Either way, increase displacement on the 302 by stroking and raising the deck slightly, not to 351 Windsor levels.

 

[marathag]

Cut down the 302 V8 into an even fire version of the Buick V6 as the mid range engine. basically a 234 CID. Ford had enough engine expertise to develop more efficiency in this engine.

Recall in my post where I said Ford was Cheap?
That strikes that out, when they have the 2.8L V6 with the tooling paid for over in W.Germany.

I wish Ford would have had the forethought to make a V6 from the 351W cast in Aluminum, that would have been so much better than that nasty 4.0L from Germany

 

[phx1138]

Dump the Pinto chassis for the two door Maverick chassis.

You don't think the Mav's too big for a '70s car? Or are you satisfied it's enough smaller than the G1 'stang?

Better yet, grab the 2nd generation Capri with restyled front and rear, built in the USA.

You mean this one?

Give that the 289 or 302 in even mild "SVO" tune, you've got a winner. (Turbo 2.3 or 2.8 would do very nicely.) I wouldn't touch the styling much, either.

Cut down the 302 V8 into an even fire version of the Buick V6 as the mid range engine. basically a 234 CID. Ford had enough engine expertise to develop more efficiency in this engine.

I'd be disinclined to develop a new engine for this. Tuning the 289 or 302 hotter, sure.

Either way, increase displacement on the 302 by stroking and raising the deck slightly, not to 351 Windsor levels.

In the European Capri, IMO that's not necessary.

The 2.3 engine was sufficient for the chassis as a base engine.

I lean toward making the 2.8 the base engine & not even offering the 2.3, unless it's an *SVO option (as described): this is a Mustang, not a Maverick.

Turbocharging or supercharging are options for later.

Soon, if I had my way.

Grab Bosch fuel injection for top level models.

Absolutely.

Don't call it a Mustang, for starters. It just isn't one.

The goal is to make it worthy of the name.

For the powerplants that Ford was willing to put under the hood for 1973 between EPA emissions and MPG requirements there will be no decent V8 from Ford for a Decade, and same for I4 or V6.

Even a fairly stock 302, in a car as much smaller than the first-generation 'stang as the Capri is, would be pretty nice. Think 302 Vega.

Ford won't have a Five Speed until the early '80s, so there is no rescue there, and there isn't even something they can borrow from Europe or Mazda.

I could live with a Toploader, or something like it, with the C3 (C4?) as an extra-cost option.

Fuel tank was fine, as the the 'compact' lines of the Falcon and later Mustang, along with all the Fairlanes, used that fuel tank setup with the floor of the Trunk being the top of the gas tank, and they had the filler behind the License Plate frame

Ford cheaped out with the shock location, that was all, and enough to make the Pinto into the rolling bomb(and no, it wasn't that bad)

Improving the handling would probably require that to be changed anyhow, so...

Fiberglass is out, as a good part of the Country is cold where that early resin didn't hold up well to impacts, and it's not a rich man's toy like a Corvette that gets put awy for the Winter.

It worked in some earlier hi-po cars. Don't like it? Use aluminum. I'm flexible.

 

[marathag]

Even a fairly stock 302, in a car as much smaller than the first-generation 'stang as the Capri is, would be pretty nice. Think 302 Vega.

But the Vega had acceptable weight distribution. Pinto and Mustang II, not so much. And that's with the 2300 in it.
Only gets worse with a Castiron V8, even with the 302 being one of the lighter options.
The proper way to get a small car like that to get decent traction would be to have a rear transaxle, and while you are at that, make it independent.
But there was no way Ford was spending that kind of $$$ for a cheap import fighter.
Front suspension was fine, good even. Not much to do with the rear leafs, though. with more $$$ Ford could have done a coil two link with trackbar.

Ford spent enough money to get the suspension to fit in a small amount of space, handling was secondary. It just had to handle better than a VW Beetle, and it did that.

 

[phx1138]

But the Vega had acceptable weight distribution. Pinto and Mustang II, not so much. And that's with the 2300 in it.
Only gets worse with a Castiron V8, even with the 302 being one of the lighter options.

I'd guess the Vega would've been nose-heavy with an iron 302, & something like the ZL-2 (?) option (aluminum 302) would've been almost as insane as the ZL-1 427.

there was no way Ford was spending that kind of $$$ for a cheap import fighter.
Front suspension was fine, good even. Not much to do with the rear leafs, though. with more $$$ Ford could have done a coil two link with trackbar.

Not for the OTL Pinto, nor even OTL 'stang II. TTL, with the 'stang as a prestige model, IMO, there's good reason to spend it. It didn't really have to corner, much, unless you want to aim at the Trans Am--& honestly, the T/A wasn't exactly a canyon-carver, either.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

It seems Ford initially planned to build the Mustang II on the Maverick platform, the image below being one of a number of proposals before they opted for the OTL Pinto-based version. - https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/what-if-cc-builds-a-better-mustang-ii/

Also wonder whether the OTL Pinto-based Mustang II could have been repurposed as a little brother to an ATL Maverick-based Mustang II with more Ford Capri / Mercury Capri styling cues?

 

[SwampTiger]

Ford South Africa built a Gen I V8 Capri. the Capri Perana. Also turbo charged 4 and V6 engines were developed in Europe.

A Maverick based Mustang would have more room and have been a less drastic down-sizing of the classic Mustang. GM trundled along with the Camaro and Firebird despite the fuel crunch and EPA strangulations.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

It is interesting to existing Ford Pinto / OTL Mustang II carries over similar engines as the European Ford Capri (albeit strangled by US emissions regulations), which leads to the question of whether Ford could have merged the Ford Pinto with the European mk3/4/5 Ford Cortina thereby allowing the former to spawn 4-door saloon and 5-door estate models whilst allowing for a Pinto-based Coupe variant to form the basis of smaller compliment to the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II.

 

[SwampTiger]

Much like previous timelines on European cars in the US, this is quite doable if the auto makers choose to adapt the design to US regulations.My sister's first car was a Cortina wagon. Not sure how it got to the states. It was clapped out by 1971. Not a bad car, just worn out.

 

[phx1138]

It seems Ford initially planned to build the Mustang II on the Maverick platform ....

Also wonder whether the OTL Pinto-based Mustang II could have been repurposed as a little brother to an ATL Maverick-based Mustang II with more Ford Capri / Mercury Capri styling cues?

I could happily see a "junior Mustang" on the Pinto platform, if the new 'stang is Mav-based.

That said (& maybe I'm biased), I'd rather the '70s saw a Capri-based 'stang. I've always liked the smaller 'stang better, & a tuned 289 or 302 that carries into the '80s has long-term benefits.

A Capri-based 'stang would be a better drag car, too. It could be a better handler. And it's almost certain to be more attractive in Europe. (AFAIK, 'stang sales there were never great. This should help.)

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Much like previous timelines on European cars in the US, this is quite doable if the auto makers choose to adapt the design to US regulations.My sister's first car was a Cortina wagon. Not sure how it got to the states. It was clapped out by 1971. Not a bad car, just worn out.

I could happily see a "junior Mustang" on the Pinto platform, if the new 'stang is Mav-based.

That said (& maybe I'm biased), I'd rather the '70s saw a Capri-based 'stang. I've always liked the smaller 'stang better, & a tuned 289 or 302 that carries into the '80s has long-term benefits.

A Capri-based 'stang would be a better drag car, too. It could be a better handler. And it's almost certain to be more attractive in Europe. (AFAIK, 'stang sales there were never great. This should help.)

The likely platform for an ATL Pinto/Cortina plus Coupe derivative below the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II would be via the mk3/4/5 Cortina platform as opposed to the earlier mk1/2 Cortina, which was apparently not as well regarded in North American compared to the UK.

The story with the Ford Capri is a bit weird as far as platforms are concerned since it reputedly carries over much from the mk2 Cortina yet have read of the larger Cortina-based Ford Corsair also playing a role in the development of the Capri.

It is then a matter of what eventually replaces the mk3 Ford Capri after 1988 or prior below the ATL Maverick/Fox-based Mustangs, the only RWD option being a more upmarket 2-litre+ Capri coupe replacement derived from the Sierra and related larger Scorpio (aka Ford DE-1) platforms from 1982-1998 both known in the US as the Merkur XR4Ti and Merkur Scorpio respectively. Possibly a 4WD variant derived from the related Ford Sierra RS Cosworth and Ford Escort RS Cosworth, followed later by a smaller Ford Cougar/Mondeo-sized development of the Ford DEW platform from 1998 and beyond (differing from the 5th gen Ford Mustang by being smaller, featuring 2-litre+ to V6+ engines and having more sophisticated suspension).

 

[phx1138]

The likely platform for an ATL Pinto/Cortina plus Coupe derivative below the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II would be via the mk3/4/5 Cortina

What I'm thinking is, if the Mav platform is used for the 'stang, the OTL Pinto is more/less untouched. If the Capri (or Cortina) is the *Mustang, it replaces both OTL Pinto & Mustang II (or wipes out Pinto entire, with a base *Mustang II taking that niche).

It is then a matter of what eventually replaces the mk3 Ford Capri after 1988 or prior below the ATL Maverick/Fox-based Mustangs, the only RWD option being a more upmarket 2-litre+ Capri coupe replacement derived from the Sierra and related larger Scorpio (aka Ford DE-1) platforms from 1982-1998 both known in the US as the Merkur XR4Ti and Merkur Scorpio respectively. Possibly a 4WD variant derived from the related Ford Sierra RS Cosworth and Ford Escort RS Cosworth, followed later by a smaller Ford Cougar/Mondeo-sized development of the Ford DEW platform from 1998 and beyond (differing from the 5th gen Ford Mustang by being smaller, featuring 2-litre+ to V6+ engines and having more sophisticated suspension).

I could happily see a Scorpio-based Mustang with the turbo 2.3 (2.9?), or NA DOHC 4.6, & 4wd, & avoid the Merkur mess completely. A *Cougar in similar trim wouldn't be bad, either.

Avoiding the '79 styling is a must, IMO. That was so boring, it made a '70 Rambler Rebel look exciting.😮

 

[marathag]

Avoiding the '79 styling is a must, IMO. That was so boring, it made a '70 Rambler Rebel look exciting.😮

But look what the other guys were doing

 

[phx1138]

But look what the other guys were doing

I was.

 

[marathag]

1979 Camaro Sales 282,571 Sticker $4676 to $6115
1979 Mustang Sales 369,936 Sticker $4484 to $5216

 

[phx1138]

1979 Camaro Sales 282,571 Sticker $4676 to $6115
1979 Mustang Sales 369,936 Sticker $4484 to $5216

1974 Camaro Production: 151,008 total. Base price for six-cylinder was $2,827, while base V-8 $3,039

1974 Ford Mustang II Production: 385,993 units. Price: $3,134 Standard Coupe, $3,480 Ghia Coupe

Styling doesn't govern price.

 

[marathag]

Styling doesn't govern price.

But people liked the change to the Fox Body
1975 188,575
1976 187,567
1977 153,173
1978 192,410 $3824 to $4523

But we already knew that the II was a dud overall in hindsight, hence this thread. the '73 'Big' Mustang had sold 134,867, '72 125,093 '71 149,678

Now the Fox Mustang was a lot more money, look at double digit inflation for that.

Despite the Sporty name, Ford was targeting the II against imports, and to meet the new EPA requirements, not the Camaro or other performance autos when they were planning in 1972-1973. No V8, but it just had to look sporty with the stripes and all. Only having a 95mph top speed wasn't seen asa problem, thanks to Tricky Dick's 55MPH Speed limt.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

What I'm thinking is, if the Mav platform is used for the 'stang, the OTL Pinto is more/less untouched. If the Capri (or Cortina) is the *Mustang, it replaces both OTL Pinto & Mustang II (or wipes out Pinto entire, with a base *Mustang II taking that niche).

The idea is the ATL Pinto and mk3-5 Cortina either share a common platform (think larger Ford equivalent of GM T-Car which in GM terms would be the GM U-Car aka mk1 Vauxhall Cavalier / Opel Ascona B) or the ATL Pinto is more influenced by the mk3-5 Cortina as far as spawning a smaller more Capri-like coupe below the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II (and 4-door saloon / 5-door estate variants) is concerned.

An ATL Pinto-based coupe could still carry over the Ford Capri name for the North American market despite only being exteriorly similar to the European Ford Capri, reminiscent of how the Ford Granada refers to two completely unrelated cars in North America and Europe respectively (with the European Ford Granada being replaced by the Ford Scorpio from 1985).

I could happily see a Scorpio-based Mustang with the turbo 2.3 (2.9?), or NA DOHC 4.6, & 4wd, & avoid the Merkur mess completely. A *Cougar in similar trim wouldn't be bad, either.

Avoiding the '79 styling is a must, IMO. That was so boring, it made a '70 Rambler Rebel look exciting.😮

Ideally the related Sierra would form the basis of a smaller Capri-replacement in Europe from the 1980s until around 1998 (as well as North America in place of the Pinto or Cortina based small coupe) though would be moved upmarket (e,g, 2-litre to 2.9-3.0-litre V6+) due to the rise of the Hot Hatches during the 1970s-1980s that were heavily cutting into the sales of small RWD coupes (and led to the latter being replaced with arguably exterior attractive yet dynamically inferior FWD coupes e.g. Ford Probe / Cougar and Vauxhall / Opel Calibra, etc).

Not sure about the notion of a Scorpio-based Mustang III and Mustang IV though agree the Ford Fox / SN95 platforms would have needed to have been more sophisticated in terms of engines and suspension for the European market, though the Scorpio did not appear until 1985 with the smaller related Sierra itself only appearing in 1982.