Another automotive AHC: Make a better Mustang II

[phx1138]

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.

I don't disagree that makes sense. My thinking is, looking at the OTL 'stang II (& Oil Shock), a smaller, Capri-based car makes the most sense: lighter, better handling, cheaper to run, probably cheaper to buy. The *Mustang III can reasonably be bigger.

That said, a *Mustang, *Pinto, & *Cortina sharing a platform, with common parts, would not be a bad thing, especially if (frex) the *Mustang can use *Cortina brakes & rad. (This offers opportunities for *Cortina police cruisers, too.)

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 live with that. I tend to want the Capri name for the North American Merc, which, in the above scenario, would be the *Cortina (with the *Cougar a mildly-reskinned *Mustang), but otherwise...

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).

I'd be fine with that. Probe-esque styling never really appealed to me; I actually kind of liked the looks of the Merkur...

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.

IMO, the Scorpio was dynamically appropriate for the Mustang niche, & had the right powertrain(s)--tho lacking a V8, & a S/DOHC 4.6 would take care of that. Sharing European tech & engineering in NAm & European markets makes sense to me, especially if you're applying the Cosworth spec where possible: a *Scorpio Cosworth as the *Mustang III beats the OTL Merkur, Scorpio, & SVO 'stang all hollow.

It could also be a nightmare for the Camaro & Firebird...

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I don't disagree that makes sense. My thinking is, looking at the OTL 'stang II (& Oil Shock), a smaller, Capri-based car makes the most sense: lighter, better handling, cheaper to run, probably cheaper to buy. The *Mustang III can reasonably be bigger.

That said, a *Mustang, *Pinto, & *Cortina sharing a platform, with common parts, would not be a bad thing, especially if (frex) the *Mustang can use *Cortina brakes & rad. (This offers opportunities for *Cortina police cruisers, too.)

Envisage the ATL North American Pinto-based Ford Capri would not butterfly away the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II, the NA Capri would eventually be replaced by a Sierra-derived coupe* while the Maverick-based Mustang II would either be replaced by a more sophisticated Fox / SN95 platform from 1978 or an earlier Ford Scorpio-based platform from 1982 (same year as Sierra).

The ATL Ford Pinto would not necessarily be merged with the mk3-mk5 Ford Cortina, rather the former would ideally be influenced by the better aspects of the latter.

*- Ideally envision the European version of the Ford Sierra-based Ford Capri-replacement resembling a more modernized OTL mk3 Ford Capri**, whereas the North American version would resemble a more tasteful composite of an enlarged Ford EXP (or failing that from the 1985 facelift) and smaller OTL Mustang III (or failing that from the 1987 facelift).

**- The Irmscher Manta Omega prototype for example resembles a modernized version of the Opel Manta B.

IMO, the Scorpio was dynamically appropriate for the Mustang niche, & had the right powertrain(s)--tho lacking a V8, & a S/DOHC 4.6 would take care of that. Sharing European tech & engineering in NAm & European markets makes sense to me, especially if you're applying the Cosworth spec where possible: a *Scorpio Cosworth as the *Mustang III beats the OTL Merkur, Scorpio, & SVO 'stang all hollow.

While South African versions of the smaller Ford Sierra in XR8 form did carry over the 5-litre Windsor V8 that could have potentially slotted into the Ford Scorpio, it is not 100% certain whether the Ford Modular V8 engine would have fitted into the mk2 Ford Scorpio. Otherwise see either the Jaguar AJ-V8, (an ideally reliable) Duratec V6-based V8 (aka 3.4-4-litre Ford SHO V8) or Volvo V8444S V8 engines being used for European versions of the Ford Capri and larger Ford Mustang, though it is possible the smaller Capri differs from the larger Mustang by being limited to 60-degree V6/V8 engines at most or just 2-litre+ inline-4/5s and 60-degree V6s.

 

[phx1138]

Envisage the ATL North American Pinto-based Ford Capri would not butterfly away the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II, the NA Capri would eventually be replaced by a Sierra-derived coupe* while the Maverick-based Mustang II would either be replaced by a more sophisticated Fox / SN95 platform from 1978 or an earlier Ford Scorpio-based platform from 1982 (same year as Sierra).

We may have some miscommunication, here (or I'm just confused ). I imagine the Capri-based *Mustang leading to a 4dr (same relationship as the OTL 'stang & Grenada [?]), which I'm calling *Cortina (for lack of a better name offhand ), making the OTL Pinto moot. (If this happens after the Pinto's OTL introduction, & I confess I haven't looked, you're right, it wouldn't disappear completely.)

Ideally envision the European version of the Ford Sierra-based Ford Capri-replacement resembling a more modernized OTL mk3 Ford Capri**, whereas the North American version would resemble a more tasteful composite of an enlarged Ford EXP (or failing that from the 1985 facelift) and smaller OTL Mustang III (or failing that from the 1987 facelift).

Not the biggest fan of the EXP, tho it's not hideous. I lean toward about an '85 T-bird, if it's a sedan. For the *Mustang III, a (somewhat) smaller version of the '93 (or so) Mustang works for me. (It's probably ahistorical for the styling trends of the period it would be introduced in, tho...😮 )

While South African versions of the smaller Ford Sierra in XR8 form did carry over the 5-litre Windsor V8 that could have potentially slotted into the Ford Scorpio, it is not 100% certain whether the Ford Modular V8 engine would have fitted into the mk2 Ford Scorpio. Otherwise see either the Jaguar AJ-V8, (an ideally reliable) Duratec V6-based V8 (aka 3.4-4-litre Ford SHO V8) or Volvo V8444S V8 engines being used for European versions of the Ford Capri and larger Ford Mustang, though it is possible the smaller Capri differs from the larger Mustang by being limited to 60-degree V6/V8 engines at most or just 2-litre+ inline-4/5s and 60-degree V6s.

I wasn't thinking the 4.6 would be too wide.😮 (Could the Capri platform be widened without undue cost? Or making it unsuitable for European/British sales?) Relying on 60deg V8s wouldn't trouble me, & an earlier 60deg *SHO V8 in the Mustang would suit me nicely. (Offer it in the *Cortina as a sleeper, even more. ) I suspect a V6 being the hot ticket in a Mustang would be a non-starter until well into the '90s (& maybe ever)...but hotter straight 4s & V6s would get my vote, even if the V8 ends up being a pretty boring iron OHV design from the '60s.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

We may have some miscommunication, here (or I'm just confused ). I imagine the Capri-based *Mustang leading to a 4dr (same relationship as the OTL 'stang & Grenada [?]), which I'm calling *Cortina (for lack of a better name offhand ), making the OTL Pinto moot. (If this happens after the Pinto's OTL introduction, & I confess I haven't looked, you're right, it wouldn't disappear completely.)

Am operating from the assumption the Pinto appears as in OTL though like the similarly sized mk3-mk5 Cortina, also forms the basis of 4-door saloon and 5-door estate (if not 5-door hatchback) bodystyles. The Pinto-based North American Ford Capri would be smaller compared to OTL Mustang II to both place it below the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II as well as being of comparable dimensions to the European Ford Capri, thereby allowing the North American Capri to carry over engines as small as the 1.6-litre Kent (like the OTL Pinto and akin to the OTL European Capri that itself featured engines as small as a 1.3-litre Kent/Crossflow).

The Maverick-based Mustang II would differ from the existing Maverick by utilized 2.8-litre Cologne V6s+ or at worst the 2.3-litre Lima as entry-level engines in place of the Maverick's Thirftpower Straight-6s, with the ATL Mustang III (like the OTL Mustang IV) likely doing without inline-4s as entry-level engines in order to not encroach on the Sierra-based coupe replacement for the North American Capri.

The Pinto-based North American Capri would eventually be replaced in the early-1980s by a Sierra-based coupe (entailing production of the Pinto-based Capri ceasing in 1980-1981), the Maverick-based Mustang II meanwhile would utilize a more sophisticated version of the Fox / SN95 platform from the late-1970s where the entry-level engine is a V6 (or by an earlier Scorpio-derived replacement that would have entailed the Maverick-based Mustang II remaining in production a few more years after the OTL North American Maverick ceased production in 1977 - leaving a gap of 5-8 years for an ATL Scorpio-based Mustang III to appear that could have otherwise been filled by a more sophisticated Fox / SN95 based Mustang III from 1978).

Not the biggest fan of the EXP, tho it's not hideous. I lean toward about an '85 T-bird, if it's a sedan. For the *Mustang III, a (somewhat) smaller version of the '93 (or so) Mustang works for me. (It's probably ahistorical for the styling trends of the period it would be introduced in, tho...😮 )

Had the mid/late-80s facelifted version of the OTL EXP and Mustang III in mind.

I wasn't thinking the 4.6 would be too wide.😮 (Could the Capri platform be widened without undue cost? Or making it unsuitable for European/British sales?) Relying on 60deg V8s wouldn't trouble me, & an earlier 60deg *SHO V8 in the Mustang would suit me nicely. (Offer it in the *Cortina as a sleeper, even more. ) I suspect a V6 being the hot ticket in a Mustang would be a non-starter until well into the '90s (& maybe ever)...but hotter straight 4s & V6s would get my vote, even if the V8 ends up being a pretty boring iron OHV design from the '60s.

Cannot say in the case of the Sierra and larger Scorpio with the Modular V8, perhaps they would still with the Windsor V8 before being superceded by Ford DEW platform-derived replacements.

The European Ford V6s in OTL were pretty potent though could still see the restricted North American V6s playing a role in the North American Pinto-based Capri and Maverick-based Mustang III, things were a easier for the US Ford V6s during the 1980s and 1990s+.

 

[phx1138]

Am operating from the assumption the Pinto appears as in OTL though like the similarly sized mk3-mk5 Cortina, also forms the basis of 4-door saloon and 5-door estate (if not 5-door hatchback) bodystyles. The Pinto-based North American Ford Capri would be smaller compared to OTL Mustang II to both place it below the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II as well as being of comparable dimensions to the European Ford Capri, thereby allowing the North American Capri to carry over engines as small as the 1.6-litre Kent (like the OTL Pinto and akin to the OTL European Capri that itself featured engines as small as a 1.3-litre Kent/Crossflow).

I can believe that. My preference, tho, is getting rid of the Pinto. If I could, I'd put it, the Bobcat, Mustang, Cougar, Lincoln Versailles, Ford Granada (or Maverick), & Merc Monarch (or Comet) on the same platform: the UK Capri.

The Versailles, Granada, & Monarch on the Mav platform makes sense, too: it's a bit bigger, so maybe just "shrink" the Mustang/Cougar & (maybe) badge a commuter version Pinto/Bobcat, both (all 4) on the Capri.

The Maverick-based Mustang II would differ from the existing Maverick by utilized 2.8-litre Cologne V6s+ or at worst the 2.3-litre Lima as entry-level engines in place of the Maverick's Thirftpower Straight-6s, with the ATL Mustang III (like the OTL Mustang IV) likely doing without inline-4s as entry-level engines in order to not encroach on the Sierra-based coupe replacement for the North American Capri.

That works for me. I see the base Mustang II as about 150hp V6. (If you're worried about gas mileage, buy a Fiesta.)

The Pinto-based North American Capri would eventually be replaced in the early-1980s by a Sierra-based coupe (entailing production of the Pinto-based Capri ceasing in 1980-1981), the Maverick-based Mustang II meanwhile would utilize a more sophisticated version of the Fox / SN95 platform from the late-1970s where the entry-level engine is a V6 (or by an earlier Scorpio-derived replacement that would have entailed the Maverick-based Mustang II remaining in production a few more years after the OTL North American Maverick ceased production in 1977 - leaving a gap of 5-8 years for an ATL Scorpio-based Mustang III to appear that could have otherwise been filled by a more sophisticated Fox / SN95 based Mustang III from 1978).

I'm thinking the Scorpio-size platform could appear sooner. The Sierra is near enough in size to the Capri (& Maverick) it need not happen at all.

Had the mid/late-80s facelifted version of the OTL EXP and Mustang III in mind.

I actually think the later model is boring. The earlier model, with headlights pulled back a bit (& round), could have a 240Z/E-type vibe that wouldn't hurt a *Mustang.

That said, looking at the OTL UK Capri, it's near enough the OTL Mustang II I wouldn't tamper with it much--tho, if I had my way, I'd probably use the OTL Cortina TC Mk 3 styling (& rectangular headlights).

Looking at this, that offers the option of a Cortina "Ranchero", with available V8.

Cannot say in the case of the Sierra and larger Scorpio with the Modular V8, perhaps they would still with the Windsor V8 before being superceded by Ford DEW platform-derived replacements.

The European Ford V6s in OTL were pretty potent though could still see the restricted North American V6s playing a role in the North American Pinto-based Capri and Maverick-based Mustang III, things were a easier for the US Ford V6s during the 1980s and 1990s+.

I'm not opposed to using the Windsors, just thinking the S/DOHC is a better call. If the 4.6 needs the shock towers moved, or something, don't.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I can believe that. My preference, tho, is getting rid of the Pinto. If I could, I'd put it, the Bobcat, Mustang, Cougar, Lincoln Versailles, Ford Granada (or Maverick), & Merc Monarch (or Comet) on the same platform: the UK Capri.

The OTL mk1/mk2 Ford Cortina did not do well in the US with only the Canadians getting the mk3 Ford Cortina until 1973, it is uncertain whether a locally built mk3-mk5 Ford Cortina would have done better in place of the OTL Ford Pinto. However it would have been better for the latter had it been influenced by the former including spawning its own exteriorly similar equivalent of the European Ford Capri.

I'm thinking the Scorpio-size platform could appear sooner. The Sierra is near enough in size to the Capri (& Maverick) it need not happen at all.

Have doubts the Scorpio-size platform could appear sooner in the late-70s compared to OTL, 1982 is probably the earliest which still leaves a 5 year gap between the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II and an ATL Ford Scorpio-based Mustang III. Ideally want to keep the Capri and Mustang from merging with each other for as long as possible.

I actually think the later model is boring. The earlier model, with headlights pulled back a bit (& round), could have a 240Z/E-type vibe that wouldn't hurt a *Mustang.

That said, looking at the OTL UK Capri, it's near enough the OTL Mustang II I wouldn't tamper with it much--tho, if I had my way, I'd probably use the OTL Cortina TC Mk 3 styling (& rectangular headlights).

The later EXP and Mustang III models have a similar styling theme that was present in Ford Europe at the time during the 1980s though it would have needed further refining for the latter. Unfortunately retro styling was not in at the time so cannot see the mk2-mk3 Ford Capri styling being carried over for its ATL Sierra-based replacement, the same goes with the ATL Pinto-based North American Ford Capri.

I'm not opposed to using the Windsors, just thinking the S/DOHC is a better call. If the 4.6 needs the shock towers moved, or something, don't.

It is dependent on whether the Modular V8 fits into the later Sierra and Scorpio models before they are replaced by the DEW platforms and utilize the Jaguar AJ-V8 (or some other V8 option in Europe).

 

[phx1138]

The OTL mk1/mk2 Ford Cortina did not do well in the US with only the Canadians getting the mk3 Ford Cortina until 1973, it is uncertain whether a locally built mk3-mk5 Ford Cortina would have done better in place of the OTL Ford Pinto. However it would have been better for the latter had it been influenced by the former including spawning its own exteriorly similar equivalent of the European Ford Capri.

Not as a Pinto (& maybe not as a Cortina), but as a Mustang? Bearing in mind the Pinto-based 'stang II OTL was smaller than the Capri & Cortina.

Have doubts the Scorpio-size platform could appear sooner in the late-70s compared to OTL, 1982 is probably the earliest which still leaves a 5 year gap between the ATL Maverick-based Mustang II and an ATL Ford Scorpio-based Mustang III. Ideally want to keep the Capri and Mustang from merging with each other for as long as possible.

Not seeing a need to separate Capri and Mustang, given the size of OTL's 'stang II. I have in mind growth from Capri to something like Mav (maybe Fairmont?) for the *Mustang III (in '82?) & Scorpio when it's ready...but TBH, if the Mustang (& Cougar) never got bigger than the OTL Mav, I wouldn't be unhappy about it. Nor if it encouraged a smaller, tighter Camaro/Firebird (with stock turbo 4.3?). If this led to a *SHO Granada/Fairmont, & was answered by a GN Regal, in '81 or '82, I'd be very pleased, indeed. If it meant the '81 X-bodies (& later Z24 Cavalier) were better, & got 3.4s (& DOHC 3.4s!), even better. (A Buick *Beretta {Somerset?} with a stock 5.3 would be a dream come true. )

The later EXP and Mustang III models have a similar styling theme that was present in Ford Europe at the time during the 1980s though it would have needed further refining for the latter. Unfortunately retro styling was not in at the time so cannot see the mk2-mk3 Ford Capri styling being carried over for its ATL Sierra-based replacement, the same goes with the ATL Pinto-based North American Ford Capri.

I imagined late Cortina styling or the *Mustang III to start:

The '79 or '82 (whenever) next generation, IDK; nothing from Ford in that period really inspires... This (in a 2dr) wouldn't displease:

The EXP (if it happened at all) would be a clean sheet, & there's at least a chance it doesn't get quite the frog-eyed styling of OTL. Round headlights, I know, aren't likely...

It is dependent on whether the Modular V8 fits into the later Sierra and Scorpio models before they are replaced by the DEW platforms and utilize the Jaguar AJ-V8 (or some other V8 option in Europe).

European spec Sierra/Scorpio, I really couldn't say, so the prospects of the Jag or Volvo V8 are pretty much a black box, to me. A Jag-engined Mustang/Cougar (or *Fairmont) has an appeal--but it makes me think Jag'd be debasing the brand (even if Ford owned Jag TTL), which, IMO, would be a bad call. (The other side is, with British labor relations as they are, could Coventry produce enough of them? Or do you anticipate them being built in the U.S.? {Canada? })

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Not as a Pinto (& maybe not as a Cortina), but as a Mustang? Bearing in mind the Pinto-based 'stang II OTL was smaller than the Capri & Cortina.

The OTL Mustang II was actually longer than both the Capri and Cortina, whereas the Pinto was of similar dimensions to the Capri and Cortina. Envision the ATL Pinto-based Capri being of similar compact dimensions to the OTL Pinto as well as the European Capri and Cortina.

Not seeing a need to separate Capri and Mustang, given the size of OTL's 'stang II.

Would beg to differ as see the ATL Pinto-based Capri and ATL Maverick-based Mustang II as cars of different dimensions and separate roles, the rough GM Europe equivalent would be the Opel Manta and Opel Commodore Coupe / Opel Monza.

I imagined late Cortina styling or the *Mustang III to start:

To clarify was referring to Ford Europe's1980s styling language beginning with the mk2 Ford Fiesta, mk3/mk4 Ford Escort, Ford Sierra and Ford Scorpio.

 

[phx1138]

The OTL Mustang II was actually longer than both the Capri and Cortina, whereas the Pinto was of similar dimensions to the Capri and Cortina. Envision the ATL Pinto-based Capri being of similar compact dimensions to the OTL Pinto as well as the European Capri and Cortina.

Overall it might be. Wheelbase of the Pinto (& so 'stang 2) was only 96"; Capri, a tick under 101; Cortina Mk 3, 101.

Would beg to differ as see the ATL Pinto-based Capri and ATL Maverick-based Mustang II as cars of different dimensions and separate roles, the rough GM Europe equivalent would be the Opel Manta and Opel Commodore Coupe / Opel Monza.

Maybe I'm seeing a smaller *Mustang as a good thing, when there was strong OTL resistance to it being so small. If that's true, the Mav platform makes more sense.

I'm looking at a pure sedan (as the *Fairmont, *Grenada, whatever) taking the OTL Pinto commuter role, sharing the *Mustang II platform (in the same way as the Falcon did before & Fairmont after, OTL).

To clarify was referring to Ford Europe's1980s styling language beginning with the mk2 Ford Fiesta, mk3/mk4 Ford Escort, Ford Sierra and Ford Scorpio.

The Fiestas & Escorts are boring. The Mk 1 Sierra isn't terrible, but the headlight treatment is too peculiar for me. The Scorpio is...okay. I'd reject any of them for anything like a Mustang. I'd hope for something closer to an '80 Chevy Monza notchback--& even that's kind of dull. (A quick Google doesn't turn up anything Ford's likely to build I actually like. Except, maybe, the TR-7, & the flip-up headlights are a non-starter.)

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Maybe I'm seeing a smaller *Mustang as a good thing, when there was strong OTL resistance to it being so small. If that's true, the Mav platform makes more sense.

I'm looking at a pure sedan (as the *Fairmont, *Grenada, whatever) taking the OTL Pinto commuter role, sharing the *Mustang II platform (in the same way as the Falcon did before & Fairmont after, OTL).

If by Fairmont you are referring to the Australian Falcon-based model that is basically a segment larger compared to the European Granada, it is like trying to make a sedan with a sub-compact / compact commuter role despite being based on the Ford LTD's Panther platform.

The ATL Maverick-based Mustang II would have probably gone over much better compared to the OTL Pinto-based Mustang II, however the latter would have probably been able to tap into a new niche had it been anything other than a Mustang (and ideally exteriorly resembled the European Ford Capri).

Update: My Bad regarding the US Fairmont and US Granada, even so only believe an ATL Maverick-based Mustang II would have been better received as opposed to an ATL Pinto-based version.

The Fiestas & Escorts are boring. The Mk 1 Sierra isn't terrible, but the headlight treatment is too peculiar for me. The Scorpio is...okay. I'd reject any of them for anything like a Mustang. I'd hope for something closer to an '1980 Chevy Monza notchback--& even that's kind of dull. (A quick Google doesn't turn up anything Ford's likely to build I actually like. Except, maybe, the TR-7, & the flip-up headlights are a non-starter.)

It is too early for Ford to go down the retro route at this point in time during the 1980s unlike the OTL 5 generation Ford Mustang, however agree it is a challenge for Ford across both sides of the Atlantic to style a suitable styling theme for a pair of coupes.

 

[WILDGEESE]

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?

From a Mussie fan

I think the main problem was Ford's downsizing of engine sizes due to emissions and high fuel prices.

Personally they should've just carried on with the large engine pony car and gradually evolved the 1971-73 series through the 70's . It's interesting to note that GM's Pontiac brand did just that with their 'Firebird' series and sold very well all through the 70's and early 80's.

REF: oldcarmemories@YouTUBE

 

[marathag]

not opposed to using the Windsors, just thinking the S/DOHC is a better call. If the 4.6 needs the shock towers moved, or something, don't.

More like towers gone
4.6L DOHC 30"
460 26"
4.6L SOHC 25 5/8
351W 21"
302 18 3/4

 

[phx1138]

If by Fairmont you are referring to the Australian Falcon-based model that is basically a segment larger compared to the European Granada, it is like trying to make a sedan with a sub-compact / compact commuter role despite being based on the Ford LTD's Panther platform.

Update: My Bad regarding the US Fairmont and US Granada, even so only believe an ATL Maverick-based Mustang II would have been better received as opposed to an ATL Pinto-based version.

Yep, it's the U.S. market car I meant; hadn't noticed Oz had one, too...

I agree, the Mav would've gone over better than the Pinto; I'm trying to split the difference to the Pinto, which appears too small to me, & the Mav, which is a bit big for my liking.

If the 351 is destroked, or if it can be tuned for better mpg without sucking on power, I might be able to live with the Mav.

The ATL Maverick-based Mustang II would have probably gone over much better compared to the OTL Pinto-based Mustang II, however the latter would have probably been able to tap into a new niche had it been anything other than a Mustang (and ideally exteriorly resembled the European Ford Capri).

A Pinto-based *Capri & a Mav *Mustang? That might work.

How's this grab you: apply everything used in the Mustang engine program(s) on the *Capri? In short, get something like a *Capri SVO/SHO.

I think the main problem was Ford's downsizing of engine sizes due to emissions and high fuel prices.

Personally they should've just carried on with the large engine pony car and gradually evolved the 1971-73 series through the 70's . It's interesting to note that GM's Pontiac brand did just that with their 'Firebird' series and sold very well all through the 70's and early 80's.

I don't think a *Mustang II with about a 327 would be a bad idea; bigger, IMO, you're getting into real mpg issues in the Oil Shock era.

IMO, the 302 in the OTL 'stang II wasn't wildly small. What it needed was a bit more attention to power & overcoming the limitations of the smog gear.

That it's a Mustang is why I think a 4 (unless it's a hot 4!) is a bad idea. That it's an era of gas lines & limits is why I'd say, focus on smaller (& better!) engines & cars: steal a march on everybody.

4.6L DOHC 30"
460 26"
4.6L SOHC 25 5/8
351W 21"
302 18 3/4

😮😮 I didn't realize the 4.6 was so wide. (Or the 302 so narrow.)

It is too early for Ford to go down the retro route at this point in time during the 1980s unlike the OTL 5 generation Ford Mustang, however agree it is a challenge for Ford across both sides of the Atlantic to style a suitable styling theme for a pair of coupes.

I'm not suggesting anything retro (much as I liked the '02 T-bird). I have to wonder, tho, if there aren't unbuilt Bertone or Pininfarina projects Ford could make a deal to copy. (None of the TC by Maserati nonsense, shipping chassis back & forth. )

Failing that, adapting the OTL 'stang II (which isn't ugly), & hoping they manage it without turning it into a Ford Landcrab. (Or without getting AMC's "unfinished AMX" effect.)

 

[marathag]

IMO, the 302 in the OTL 'stang II wasn't wildly small. What it needed was a bit more attention to power & overcoming the limitations of the smog gear.

And what was done for MPGs. Some had Rear ends with 240 gears in them. Forget about any decent performance, especially with the C4 Auto.

 

[TheMann]

Starting from the Mustang II:

As slow and ugly as the thing was, as others say, it was the right size for the era and while slow as molasses it got far better mileage, and in 1974 that was kinda an important detail. Is it possible to put it on the Maverick chassis and make a bigger car? Sure, but does that have a benefit in the environment? Doubtful. And as Marathag points out, Ford was shockingly cheap at the time, and the Pinto was the ultimate expression of it.

But the Mustang II being a crappy Pinto with a different body reputation would likely be a reason to change matters. If a V8 is too heavy (likely), then you go with V6 or supercharged inline-four power. Avoid turbocharging - too complex for a car at this price point in the mid-1970s. A Roots-blown four-pot would certainly make the car quicker (and can you imagine a Mustang II with factory SUPERCHARGED font on the hood?) and holds it over until the Fox-body car arrives. A Toploader would probably be overkill on any Mustang II, but you want a good four-speed on this on every model, and preferably both disc brakes and radial tires. The brakes and tires are stretching it a little bit, but most performance-oriented Mustangs had front disc brakes and Goodyear was betting the farm on radial tires, so this is not entirely out the realm of possibility. Even if the thing is slow as hell in a straight line, it makes it all up in the corners....

As for the Capri, assuming of course you can get it to sell (it's chief problem next to this Mustang II), ditching the four-banger if a supercharged four-cylinder Mustang comes out would be wise. Marketing the car as the European sports coupe (which Ford did - wisely) should give you some success, but make sure to not overdo it and keep up with the times. Late-'70s versions should have fuel injection (Bosch preferably, because it works) and all should get the better brakes and tires as soon as is realistically possible.

 

[phx1138]

As slow and ugly as the thing was

Slow, yes. I'd disagree on ugly.

it was the right size for the era and while slow as molasses it got far better mileage, and in 1974 that was kinda an important detail.

That's my argument for the UK Capri over the Mav, since IMO the Pinto platform made it a bit small. However, with better performance, I wouldn't oppose keeping that size.

If a V8 is too heavy (likely)

Maybe. Too thirsty seems more likely, & too thirsty to provide real performance, virtually certain.

then you go with V6 or supercharged inline-four power. Avoid turbocharging - too complex for a car at this price point in the mid-1970s. A Roots-blown four-pot would certainly make the car quicker (and can you imagine a Mustang II with factory SUPERCHARGED font on the hood?) and holds it over until the Fox-body car arrives.

I'd say a blown V6, & avoid the 4s entirely--but... A reskinned *Pinto on the same platform, as a commuter (with a hi-po 4, not quite SVO, option), wouldn't hurt.

For the *Mustang II, I'd also suggest a screw blower, if it wasn't too early for it, rather than the Rootes. Could one of the later Paxtons be used?

I'd make FI standard, too--on everything.

you want a good four-speed on this on every model, and preferably both disc brakes and radial tires. The brakes and tires are stretching it a little bit, but most performance-oriented Mustangs had front disc brakes and Goodyear was betting the farm on radial tires, so this is not entirely out the realm of possibility.

I'd agree with all of that. Brakes, I'd look hard at the Ranch Wagon (Galaxie-sized?) front brakes & Lincoln Versailles rear discs, & the wagon rad, & wagon axle (but not the 9"; the V6s won't put out that much torque), all standard.

As for the Capri, assuming of course you can get it to sell (it's chief problem next to this Mustang II), ditching the four-banger if a supercharged four-cylinder Mustang comes out would be wise. Marketing the car as the European sports coupe (which Ford did - wisely) should give you some success, but make sure to not overdo it and keep up with the times. Late-'70s versions should have fuel injection (Bosch preferably, because it works) and all should get the better brakes and tires as soon as is realistically possible.

I'd absolutely use Bosch FI.

If the *Mustang II is Pinto-based (-sized), tho, I don't see the Capri as good or necessary: it'd be bigger. That might as well be the OTL Granada (& clones).

 

[marathag]

A Toploader would probably be overkill on any Mustang II, but you want a good four-speed on this on every model

Considering that they could live happily behind the Big Blocks, on a race track?
Yeah.
But that's 100 pounds that will probably outlast the rest of the car.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

A Pinto-based *Capri & a Mav *Mustang? That might work.

How's this grab you: apply everything used in the Mustang engine program(s) on the *Capri? In short, get something like a *Capri SVO/SHO.

That would work, though by the time the OTL Mustang SVO appeared the ATL Pinto-based Capri would have been replaced by the Sierra-based Capri successor.

As for the Capri, assuming of course you can get it to sell (it's chief problem next to this Mustang II), ditching the four-banger if a supercharged four-cylinder Mustang comes out would be wise. Marketing the car as the European sports coupe (which Ford did - wisely) should give you some success, but make sure to not overdo it and keep up with the times. Late-'70s versions should have fuel injection (Bosch preferably, because it works) and all should get the better brakes and tires as soon as is realistically possible.

Envision it being a smaller Pinto-based Capri rather than the European Capri that carries over the exterior styling of the latter (in place of both Pinto-based Mustang II and Mercury Capri) yet slots below a Maverick-based Mustang II, loosely akin to the Ford Granada referring to two different vehicles in North America and Europe.

The ATL North American Pinto/Sierra-based Ford Capri and ATL Maverick/Fox-based Ford Mustang having a similar relationship to GM Europe's Opel Manta and Opel Commodore Coupe / Opel Monza Coupe.

 

[TheMann]

I'd say a blown V6, & avoid the 4s entirely--but... A reskinned *Pinto on the same platform, as a commuter (with a hi-po 4, not quite SVO, option), wouldn't hurt.

The problem with a V6 is, as Marathag points out, it makes the weight distribution rather bad unless you're using a transaxle or an aluminum-block engine, neither of which are on the cards for the Mustang II. A V6 in the car would have to use a European engine (Ford in the United States only made inline-six engines at the time, which are way too long and heavy for the car), which presents its own issues. A blown inline-four is just easier an option to develop and presents fewer issues. A supercharged 2300 as the base engine and the V6 as the option (using a four-barrel carburetor), with the blown 2300 making about 130 hp and the V6 making about 155-160.

For the *Mustang II, I'd also suggest a screw blower, if it wasn't too early for it, rather than the Rootes. Could one of the later Paxtons be used?

Screw blowers are more expensive to make and are in this case overkill. A Roots-type is easier (and less expensive) to make, though knowing that Paxton centrifugal-type superchargers were a dealer-installed option for the Mustang, it may be possible.

I'd make FI standard, too--on everything.

Too expensive, and mechanical fuel injection systems in the early 1970s were fairly unreliable. Let that come a few years in the future.

I'd agree with all of that. Brakes, I'd look hard at the Ranch Wagon (Galaxie-sized?) front brakes & Lincoln Versailles rear discs, & the wagon rad, & wagon axle (but not the 9"; the V6s won't put out that much torque), all standard.

All possibilities, but bear in mind a) it has to fit and b) the heavy-duty components are likely to be more expensive. That said, Ford did want the Mustang II to score in the marketplace so it may well be possible. But all of those components would be wasted unless you get better rubber underneath it, so Goodyear Eagle tires are pretty much needed here.

 

[TheMann]

Considering that they could live happily behind the Big Blocks, on a race track?
Yeah.
But that's 100 pounds that will probably outlast the rest of the car.

No argument there, but I don't think a BorgWarner T-18 is any less overkill and what else is there for the rear-drive Mustang II?