Ugliest Year for Ford Mustang?

What year did Ford put out its ugliest Mustang?

I understand that years ago they produced some nasty looking cars.

Please supply photos if you can.

1974-1978 Mustang II.

Aw, Johnny beat me to it.

I drive a '93 Ford Mustang.

When I tell people this, they usually shake their heads in pity.

Not only nasty looking but a real defect-prone POS. A perfect example of a big corporation trying to improve a great product and ending up ruining it.

I dunno; I thought the angular, slab-sided look from the late 80s - early 90s was pretty horrific.

Yeah, I always hated the Mustangs of the 80’s.

Here is one example.

My dad had a '66 Mustang that was in great condition until my sister wrecked it in '88, about two years before I would have been old enough to drive it. :frowning:

Another vote for the 80’s look that Tangent posted. I drove a '75 Mustang for a year or so in high school (it had been my Mom’s car before) and it was a POS 4-banger, but it didn’t look ugly so much as it was just a powerless pile of metal. Those 80’s Mustangs are just an eyesore, though…

I agree with Tangent…that era’s hatchback looking thing had no business carrying the name Mustang.

I disagree that they were ugly in those days, but they certainly were steaming piles of crap. I had a 1978 for a few years, and it sucked in all possible mechanical ways. I think under the sheet metal it was really just a Pinto. But I still thought it was cute.

As a tie-breaker, I suggest comparing either the late 1970s or 1980s versions of the Mustang with the Ford Fairmont– surely the nadir of the company’s styling efforts.

Looks to me like the 80’s edge out the 70’s on plain, straight sheet metal.

I’m gonna go against the popular opinion here and say that I thought the 4th Generation Mustangs (94-04) were unconscionably ugly.

It’s supposed to be a muscle car. Why were they trying to make it look like a sedan? Ugh. No personality whatsoever.

My 2007 GT, however, is beautiful. :smiley:

The II looked like a Stang sucking a Pinto, man.

The eighties: Mustang, the ugly years.

Hey! I had one of those!

Sold it after a year. It drove like a tank and crapped out on me frequently even during the warranty period. A real dog, not a horse.

I disagree with your disagreement. I remember walking home from school (back when kids were allowed to walk alone) and there was a '70 Mustang Mach II parked along the way that I’d pass every day. I thought it was the coolest Mustang ever. When the Mustang II came out, I was like, 'What? That isn’t a Mustang! :eek: ’ I couldn’t believe what they did to a great car. I just found it ugly. (Of course by the time I got out of high school they’d stopped making them that way; but it didn’t matter because I got a hand-me-down '66 MGB.)

The 1980s Mustangs were not as much ugly as they were nondescript. The Mustang IIs, however, had no redeeming value whatsoever. Hideous, underpowered (even for that time) pieces of garbage.

Back in the '70s, Lee Iacocca, President of Ford Motor Company, introduced the Profit Improvement Program, aimed at increasing gross margins on all cars sold.

This program rewarded people for removing standard features from vehicles, as well as incentivized them to continually rework the cars so that they used less (or less expensive) materials.

So the hood ornament disappeared, saving $20 per car. Floormats became an option. Engines grew weaker and materials were thinner and more prone to failure (think Pinto gas tanks). Profits were improved all up and down the Ford product line, so much so that PIP became a verb: “I pipped $45 off the '76 Mustang by going with plain tires instead of white walls.” “Cool. I pipped $95 off the Lincoln by making the back leg-room 2 inches shorter.”

It wasn’t just that the US auto industry slid into decline in the 1970’s, they aggressively pursued short-sighted strategies such as PIP, which left them with a severe qualitative gap (real and perceived) to Japanese competitors, an image that American companies are still struggling to overcome.

And it’s interesting that the man who appeared on the covers of both Time and Newsweek magazines (and in the same week, nonetheless!) for being the head of the Mustang project was the same person who did his best to kill the Mustang in the 1970’s.

Interesting. But why didn’t Ford go Thunderbird and basically remake the classic version? Everyone on the planet agrees that the 66-72 models were the dog’s bollocks.

They did. the new one couldn’t look more like a '66 if they simply started making '66 Mustangs again. Of course, DOT regulations made them adjust a bit, but Jesus, if you can’t see the obvious styling cues you’re blind.