Welcome to Mustang Evolution.
|
  |
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 05:30 PM
|
#1
|
|
  |
|
Favorite mustang year?
|
|
II Proud
Join Date: Apr 2004
City: Tulsa
State: Oklahoma
Posts: 50
|
Whats everyones favorite year/body of mustang?
My list (in order)
1. 1969
2. 1974-1978 and 2005 those have to be tied...
3. 1999-2004 |
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 06:04 PM
|
#2
|
|
|
|
|
|
sʞɔns ʇuǝɹq
Join Date: May 2003
City: Macon
State: Georgia
Posts: 10,761
|
1. 64-66
2. 87-93
3. 05
4. 94-98 and 99-04
5. 79-86
6. 67-68
7. 69
8. 70-73
9. 74-78 (lol, sorry Eos)
__________________
-Jimmy I drive a station wagon.
GO BRAVES
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 06:19 PM
|
#3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Needs turbo.
Join Date: Nov 2003
City: Mt. Juliet
State: Tennessee
Posts: 5,093
|
1.) 1967-1968
2.) 1969-1970
3.) 1971-1973
4.) 1994-1998
5.) 2005-????
6.) 1974-1978
7.) 1964-1966
8.) 1979-1993 [I hate Foxes. Reminds me of the Chevette.] |
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 06:22 PM
|
#4
|
|
|
|
|
|
^needs more bondo
Join Date: Sep 2003
City: Modesto
State: California
Posts: 9,603
|
99-04
05+
94-98
87-93
74-78
64-66, 67-68 and 69
70-73
__________________
-Thomas-
2003 Redfire Cobra - 448whp/435wtq
1990 Eclipse GSX - possibly For Sale (Will fund cobra's clutch and IRS mods!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 06:23 PM
|
#5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
State: California
Posts: 9,197
|
64-66
99-04
05+
67-68 and 69
94-98
87-93
87-93
70-73
74-78 |
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 06:48 PM
|
#6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mustang Evo NEWB
Join Date: Aug 2004
City: millville
State: New Jersey
Posts: 4,935
|
'89-93 hands down my favorite
'05s are very nice though
__________________
1992 Mustang LX hatchback.. 1 of 542 black on black
2003 Regal GS - the beater/daily driver - somewhat stock. No its not a mustang, at least it's blown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 07:02 PM
|
#7
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taking life one day at a time
Join Date: May 2003
City: Simpsonville
State: South Carolina
Posts: 10,970
|
Well lets see
1. 96-98 This was the baddest looking years for the Cobra
2. 68-69 This is where the stang became badd ass
3. 99-04 Would be #2 if for not the wide tuna boat ass end
4. 70-73 Big damn Dinosaurs but are Muscle Metal
5. 94-95 Some of the interiors in these car are as bad as the fox bodies
6. 64-66 The beginning of greatness but better would follow
7. All fox bodies ( Fairmont looking mustangs with crappy interior buthave potential
8. 74-78 This was the low point in Mustangs history (Not to offend anyone)
__________________
Last edited by Danger Dude; 02-19-2005 at 09:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 07:25 PM
|
#8
|
|
|
|
|
|
I need bolts
Join Date: Oct 2004
City: Dallas PA
State: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,513
|
1. 94-98
2. 68-69
3. 89-93
4. 99-04
5. 70-73
6. 64-66
7. 79-88
8. 74-78
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 07:32 PM
|
#9
|
|
|
|
|
|
WTF^^...
Join Date: May 2003
City: Hoover / Florence
State: Alabama
Posts: 27,240
|
the only years that are fugly are the fugly ones as corey mentioned
__________________
2003 REDFIRE COBRA #3938 of 5082 @ 05/27/2003 1 of 414
MGW Shifter, Stingers, JLT, SS Inserts, MM FLSFC & CC Plates, SS Lines, H&R Race springs, IRS Brace, MRT Hood Struts
ME.com Member #29 - 400rwhp/380rwtq
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 09:50 PM
|
#10
|
|
|
|
|
|
sʞɔns ʇuǝɹq
Join Date: May 2003
City: Macon
State: Georgia
Posts: 10,761
|
OMG, you people have NO taste putting my beloved 64-66 cars at or near the bottom of your lists 
__________________
-Jimmy I drive a station wagon.
GO BRAVES
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 10:33 PM
|
#11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
City: Severn
State: Maryland
Posts: 1,805
|
1. 70 coupe or fastback, made for one year and it dont look like a boat of a 71-73 lol
2. 64-66
3. 87-93 (usually just hatchbacks)
4. 79-86
5. 67-69
6. 05+
7. 99-04
8. 94-98
9. 71-73
10. 74-78
__________________
Member #5 of the ME.com 5.0 Club
Current:
1985 Mustang GT Hatchback
Past:
1990 Mustang GT
1988 Mustang LX 5.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 11:12 PM
|
#12
|
|
|
|
|
|
2Quick2BA6
Join Date: Jul 2004
City: Culpeper
State: Virginia
Posts: 158
|
1. 1967-1968
2. 2005
3. 1999-2004
4. 94-98
5. 1964-1966
all the others I don't like a whole lot...and the main reason the 67-68 is at the top is because I love the Shelby GT500....
__________________
1998 3.8L Mods: CAI, Flowmaster dual exhaust with H-pipe, Black Cobra Style headlights, Racer's Choice short shifter -SOLD!
Now cruising in an '03 Nissan Spec V w/ intake and exhaust-hell yeh
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-19-2005, 11:46 PM
|
#13
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
City: Severn
State: Maryland
Posts: 1,805
|
I notice every1 has the 70 in with the 71-73...why!?!?! its not the same nor almost similar body style
__________________
Member #5 of the ME.com 5.0 Club
Current:
1985 Mustang GT Hatchback
Past:
1990 Mustang GT
1988 Mustang LX 5.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 12:39 AM
|
#14
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pizza Lover
Join Date: Aug 2003
City: Arlington
State: Virginia
Posts: 7,495
|
__________________
Don't knock me, I used to have a Mustang.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 05:59 PM
|
#15
|
|
|
|
|
|
II Proud
Join Date: Apr 2004
City: Tulsa
State: Oklahoma
Posts: 50
|
Ha! You have no right at all to shed tears. Try owning a II for awhile.  |
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 06:00 PM
|
#16
|
|
|
|
|
|
II Proud
Join Date: Apr 2004
City: Tulsa
State: Oklahoma
Posts: 50
|
Not to correct your list too much but 69/70 were basically the same body style the only difference was a little different look on the sides of the front nose. So the 67 and 69 would not be in the same body style class it would be 67 and 68 then 69 70. |
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 06:01 PM
|
#17
|
|
|
|
|
|
II Proud
Join Date: Apr 2004
City: Tulsa
State: Oklahoma
Posts: 50
|
I forgot to list the 71-73 that would be my 4th favorite. |
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 08:02 PM
|
#18
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
City: Severn
State: Maryland
Posts: 1,805
|
a 69 coupe/vert and 70 coupe/vert were different, and fastbacks were also different. so to me thats diff body styles.
__________________
Member #5 of the ME.com 5.0 Club
Current:
1985 Mustang GT Hatchback
Past:
1990 Mustang GT
1988 Mustang LX 5.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 08:17 PM
|
#19
|
|
|
|
|
|
II Proud
Join Date: Apr 2004
City: Tulsa
State: Oklahoma
Posts: 50
|
Not too much of a difference, most people can't tell them apart. Not a different body style just a few minor upgrades. It's like the difference between an 86 fox body and an 87 fox body. |
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 08:50 PM
|
#20
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Tech Advisor
Join Date: Jun 2003
City: Burlington, NC
State: North Carolina
Posts: 2,685
|
I owned a 64 1/2, and a 65, first a vert the 65 was a 2+2. Loved them both, but my all time favorite I think was the 70 Mach I, I think it had a lot of improvements over the 69 Mach, and I love all Mustangs, least of all the poor old Musang II, I did own a 75 for a while though, poor little sick MPG beast. 
__________________
 Rick Kilpatrick, AAS Automotive Systems Tech, Alamance Community College, Class of 99. 06 5 speed manual Mustang with Pony pkg : GT Mac Mufflers, true duals with one custom pipe. 2.5" system. GT bumper cover, all installed March 7&8 2006. AFE Stage 1 CAI, Motoblue Underdrive pulley, GT aluminum shifter knob, honeycomb rear blackout panel,and dash kit installed. Roush hood scoop and side window louvers installed. SS taillight trim has been installed, new alum. GT steering wheel installed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-20-2005, 08:53 PM
|
#21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian & proud of it
Join Date: Jun 2004
City: La Vernia
State: Texas
Posts: 2,400
|
05+ and 69mach1 are tied
99-04(Imagine that)
96-98
64-66
85-86 GT's
all the other years
74-78 
__________________
"The LORD shall judge the people:judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me." PSALM 7:8
In Texas? check out www.lonestarstangs.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
