Mustang Evolution Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have a question about the styling of the Ford Mustang. I was looking at pictures of old mustangs and saw the 1978 Mustang with its bold styling and mini-Trans Am-like styling. Then I saw the 1979 redesign and I didn't even think that it was a Mustang. The design was so bland and so simple. Just hard unintuitve curves and without distinct styling. Why would anyone buy the 1979 version (in record numbers by the way) after seeing how much better the looking the previous version was?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
The Mustang II was smaller with better fuel economy. One of those times when gas prices were surging and people wanted smaller more fuel efficient cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
You could order a '79 model with outlandish pinstriping like on the '78. However, the '79 was a somewhat larger and more practical car, based on the Fairmont instead of the Pinto. Ford must have had a good thing going with it, as they managed to keep the '79 model's basic underpinnings in production until 2004.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
the mustang II was a reskinned pinto and is known as the pretender to the throne...overweight underpowered uninspired styling....the 79 was crisper lighter had more power...more aero friendly hence better gas mileage...and not everyone thought it looked bad...big sales figures bore this out!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
it was a totally new design and a great seller, it also paced the INDY 500, the car you are comparing it to sounds like a King Cobra II, the stock coupes didn't look near that good. both cars were available with the 302 ci V8.

But the best one was the 1986 SVO. It was called the Fox body and used until 1993
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Fox_platform
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top