# Ugliest Year for Ford Mustang? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 30, 2010, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666 "2010-09-30T22:40:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/61 "2012-09-16T10:17:10Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > They’re going to a live axle when they dump the retro look in [2015](http://www.insideline.com/ford/mustang/2015/2015-ford-mustang-will-shed-retro-skin.html). Ugh. That’s not a Mustang, that’s a Jaguar! That car might get my vote as the ugliest Mustang, not because its necessarily ugly per se, but it just doesn’t say “Mustang” to me. And I was off by a year or two on the independent rear suspension. I knew I had read it was coming down the pike at some point, but I’d rather they keep the live rear axle if it means not sacrificing the soul of the car. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/62 "2012-09-16T16:25:14Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Ugh. That’s not a Mustang, that’s a Jaguar! > > That car might get my vote as the ugliest Mustang, not because its necessarily ugly per se, but it just doesn’t say “Mustang” to me. > > And I was off by a year or two on the independent rear suspension. I knew I had read it was coming down the pike at some point, but I’d rather they keep the live rear axle if it means not sacrificing the soul of the car. I was thinking more Maserati (didn’t Ford use to own that). I’m not sure that’s the actual design. I like that they plan to round out the body curves instead of the hard edges seen on the 2012 design. I would imaging that there will be some “Mustang” traits to the final design. ---
**Author:** ![missred](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/missred/32/14096_2.png) [@missred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/missred)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/63 "2012-09-16T16:32:47Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > They’re going to a live axle when they dump the retro look in [2015](http://www.insideline.com/ford/mustang/2015/2015-ford-mustang-will-shed-retro-skin.html). Good lord, does that car look like it’s fixin’ to whoop some ass! It doesn’t look like the current crop, but I do like the style. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/64 "2012-09-16T17:01:07Z")
OK, maybe that is the design. [Different view of the same car](http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/2015-ford-mustang-speculation-begins-with-sexy-new-renderings/). you can still see some pony in this. Quite a change. I’d like to see it in black. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/65 "2012-09-16T17:40:16Z")
On Yahoo today, [10 Wimpiest Muscle Cars Ever](http://autos.yahoo.com/news/10-wimpiest-muscle-cars-ever.html?page=1) On the first page, the 1978 Ford Mustang King Cobra. > [@](#): > > Ford’s legendary performance car hit its nadir with the downsized Pinto-based Mustangs of 1974–1978, called Mustang II. Although this generation of Mustang came with a V-8, it was a 302 cid V-8 with a mere 139 hp. Yes, you read that right. Second-gen Mustangs pumped out just 19 more hp than you’d get from the 1.6-liter four-cylinder in today’s Ford Fiesta. > > But that’s not the most embarrassing part of the Mustang II… \ ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/66 "2012-09-16T18:07:13Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > On Yahoo today, [10 Wimpiest Muscle Cars Ever](http://autos.yahoo.com/news/10-wimpiest-muscle-cars-ever.html?page=1) > > On the first page, the 1978 Ford Mustang King Cobra. A Fiesta weighs 600 lbs more. And for the price of a cam and some headers you had an easy 300 hp Mustang. It was a 100 mph car in the 1/4 mile. Yes it was a rusting cheap POS but at 300 hp it was 1 hp per 9.7 lbs. It also had staggered shocks on the back so it was a good launching car on the track. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/67 "2012-09-16T18:19:21Z")
I’m not sure such changes were legal for a street car in California at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/68 "2012-09-16T18:29:09Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > I’m not sure such changes were legal for a street car in California at the time. probably not in Ohio either but it’s not quite the nanny state as CA. In fact, we got rid of the EPA checks because they were a waste of time. People were burning gas on an unnecessary trip to prove that a computer continually tunes a car every second it’s driven. The 70’s and 80’s must have sucked in CA. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2012, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/69 "2012-09-16T18:45:40Z")
I was driving a '66 MGB in the early-'80s, so I didn’t have the EPA rules to worry about. No smog equipment on my car, so I got the full 95 hp. ---
**Author:** ![Spud](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spud/32/347_2.png) [@Spud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spud)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/70 "2012-09-17T13:33:22Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > No, it’s the THIRD most beautiful you have seen, until you take a gander at my 2008 GT Premium in vapor metallic paint: Ok, sure… yours can be second. 😛 I just don’t get you hard top guys… it’s like having a hot girlfriend but you can’t take her top off. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/71 "2012-09-17T13:58:17Z")
> [@Spud](#): > > I just don’t get you hard top guys… it’s like having a hot girlfriend but you can’t take her top off. Unlike cars, when you take her top off, she won’t give you MELANOMA! Always slather on sun block _before_ pressing the retract button. Or drive topless only at night. But remember, you’re _still_ a target for meteorites. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/72 "2012-09-17T14:10:14Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > OK, maybe that is the design. [Different view of the same car](http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/2015-ford-mustang-speculation-begins-with-sexy-new-renderings/). > > you can still see some pony in this. Quite a change. I’d like to see it in black. OK, now I like this variant a lot more than the red one. They aren’t really the same car. The hood is different, and so is the grille, fog lights, side mirrors…and on this one, I quite like that rear end! It doesn’t really scream “Mustang” to me but I still think it looks cool. > [@Spud](#): > > Ok, sure… yours can be second. 😛 > > I just don’t get you hard top guys… it’s like having a hot girlfriend but you can’t take her top off. I’ve never been much of a convertible guy. Plus hardtops handle better. I also like the seamless look having a roof the same color as the rest of the car. ---
**Author:** ![Spud](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spud/32/347_2.png) [@Spud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spud)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/73 "2012-09-17T17:54:09Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > I’ve never been much of a convertible guy. Plus hardtops handle better. I also like the seamless look having a roof the same color as the rest of the car. A front strut bar makes a world of difference in body flex so the handling difference is small at worst. As long as the top is down (most of the time)… there is no difference in roof color. 🙂 Plus I get to drive the beauty queens in the parades. ---
**Author:** ![ministryman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@ministryman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ministryman)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/74 "2012-09-17T19:00:44Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > [1974-1978 Mustang II](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ford_Mustang_II_(Centropolis_Laval_%2710).jpg). +1!!! Mustang my ass. More like the Ford Gelding line… ---
**Author:** ![FordTaurusSHO94](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f07891/32.png) [@FordTaurusSHO94](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FordTaurusSHO94)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/75 "2012-09-17T19:26:10Z")
> [@Spud](#): > > A front strut bar makes a world of difference in body flex so the handling difference is small at worst. Welded in sub-frame connectors make the biggest difference, depending on the year. If you’re talking about 05 or later cars, they don’t really need sub-frame connectors or strut tower bars. For coupes at least, I’m not sure about convertibles. I remember reading somewhere that the stock 05+ chassis was something like 30% stiffer than a Fox chassis with a 6-point cage. I hope if the new ones are IRS, they don’t wheel hop. I’d prefer a solid axle though. ---
**Author:** ![Spud](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spud/32/347_2.png) [@Spud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spud)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/76 "2012-09-17T19:52:55Z")
> [@FordTaurusSHO94](#): > > If you’re talking about 05 or later cars, they don’t really need sub-frame connectors or strut tower bars. For coupes at least, I’m not sure about convertibles. I’ve got an '06 convertible and trust me… they need the strut bar. There are some rail road tracks that run at an angle and before my strut bar, if I hit them at any speed the car was all over the place. No issue at all after adding the bar. ---
**Author:** ![FordTaurusSHO94](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f07891/32.png) [@FordTaurusSHO94](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FordTaurusSHO94)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/77 "2012-09-17T21:22:44Z")
The 04 and under coupes were like that! They’ve come a long way since the Fox chassis. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/78 "2012-09-17T23:55:17Z")
> [@ministryman](#): > > +1!!! Mustang my ass. More like the Ford Gelding line… I had one that looked like that and I had one like [this](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.allfordmustangs.com/photopost/data/3235/medium/100_0171.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.allfordmustangs.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/53570&h=600&w=800&sz=465&tbnid=dZjyxP8Dnbrk5M:&tbnh=92&tbnw=123&zoom=1&usg=__0OQJ7V-B1d_Sb0NczX0bi_5Ivzs=&docid=cAvPSM_3saHAFM&sa=X&ei=NrdXUOuFLoePyAGrqYG4Ag&ved=0CCgQ9QEwAg&dur=689) with a shaker hood scoop. It was fun to drive. The sedan version should never have been made. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/79 "2012-09-18T00:01:17Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > I’ve never been much of a convertible guy. Plus hardtops handle better. I also like the seamless look having a roof the same color as the rest of the car. I’ve never understood the love of convertibles either unless you’re in a parade. I HATE the rag top look and just don’t see the thrill in driving with the noise and the sun beating down on you. ---
**Author:** ![Dread\_Pirate\_Jimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dread_pirate_jimbo/32/3897_2.png) [@Dread\_Pirate\_Jimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dread_Pirate_Jimbo)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666/80 "2012-09-18T00:16:03Z")
> [@GreasyJack](#): > > I’m surprised nobody voted for the '71-73s. They had the gigantic motors, but aesthetically they’d completely deviated from the pony car concept and were well on their way to following the T-bird into bloated full-size coupe territory. The Mustang II was actually truer to the original Mustang concept, but failed in execution like so much else Detroit attempted at the time. The downsize was much maligned, but I doubt a Mustang the size of a '73 with smog-choked engine options would have been much better received. I have to agree with this. The [71-73](http://www.fordmustangmania.com/images/1971mustang-coupe.jpg) models were a total departure from the original design and, while the Mustang II might have been a POS, it at least bore more than a passing resemblance to the 60s model, if more cartoonish. > [@GameHat](#): > > [My 2007 GT](http://s689.photobucket.com/albums/vv256/GameHat/?action=view¤t=Mustang.jpg), however, is beautiful. 😃 > [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > No, it’s the THIRD most beautiful you have seen, until you take a gander at my 2008 GT Premium in vapor metallic paint: > > [http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/MyCar001.jpg](http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/MyCar001.jpg) > > [http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/002-1.jpg](http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/002-1.jpg) > > [http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/004-2.jpg](http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/004-2.jpg) > > [http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/MyCar002.jpg](http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/MyCar002.jpg) > > Especially when compared to what I used to drive: > > [http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/PA240013.jpg](http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp360/sgenetti77/PA240013.jpg) Both very nice looking cars! I actually prefer that body design very slightly to that of my 2012. But gosh, [my baby](http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d24/Calgaryjimbo/HPIM6990.jpg) sure is shiny! 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ugliest-year-for-ford-mustang/555666.md?page=5)