As a former Mustang II owner, I also appreciate your video. My silver 1976 coupe had the 2bbl 302 V8 and automatic transmission. As rough as it was by the time I got it in 1989, it was still a great car but mine had a lot of miles and needed repairs; mostly easy stuff that I could do in the driveway and learn how cars worked. I got my share of abuse from other car guys; especially the Mustang purists who loved to talk down about the Mustang II model in general. It was a fun car to drive and tinker with. A few minor inconveniences like a very small back deck so I couldn’t put 6x9 speakers back there so I had to get creative. I’ve had many other cars, 3rd Gen Econoline vans and even a 94 Bronco, but I still miss that Mustang II.
@@guntherultraboltnovacrunch5248 No interest. I prefer the older Ford, Chevy and Dodge designs and durability. I want to own a vehicle for more than a few years. I still own my 93 Tempo that I bought in 1996, a 94 Bronco that I bought in 2009 (nearly 300,000 miles now) and my 87 Econoline that had been my daily driver since 2018. Minimal maintenance and repairs keep them running reliably without all of the complicated technology that only causes headaches later.
The Mustang II was a really good car and always got a bad rap in my opinion. As someone who grew up in the 70's these cars, along with the Vega/Monza and Dodge Colts were everywhere. The real reason Ford started working on the Mustang II wasn't because of the Gas SHortage, it just coinsided with the gas shortage, the real reason is because Iococca wanted to get the Mustang out of the Muscle Car Wars and put the Thunderbird and Torino into it, he wanted to move the Mustang into a economy performace market as a a JDM killer because he was watching Datsun, Honda and Toyota climbing in sales and he could see the shift in market away from big cars and into economy performance.
Thanks for putting this bit of information out there. People just assume that the oil crisis of the time was the driver behind the shift, the reasons you stated are, in fact, the primary ones. A roommate of mine owned a 1978 coupe, V6 automatic, and it drove and handled beautifully. I always wished it had been a 4-speed manual,,though...
Ford and Mopar dropped out of Racing the summer of 1970, because they got a mandate from the white house. That is what Killed the Muscle car. Ford hung on for one more year, then every car built was a turd. Orders came in 1970 that all cars had to meet a ridiculous standard by 1974. Nixon told the car manufacturers. Time to take the money you are spending on winning races and use it to build clean air and safer cars. There was also a 5 mile per hour bumper Mandat at the same time. Iacocca was not impressed with Knudson making the Mustang into a Torino size car, He had his designers re make it. if the manufacturers could have built Performance cars, the public would have bought them. After having Cars with 450 hp, on body wanted the 200 hp turds that had to be built to meet emiction standards. cars run bad had no power and got horrendous milage. washing ton killed the Muscle car.
@@mylanmiller9656 Nah, they were still muscle cars all the way up to the 2002. They just weren't the High Performance BIG ENGINE Muscle Cars that people were used to, The Olds Omega and Pontiac Ventura from 75-79 had a special edition package that you could order that came with a 400, The same with the A-Body Monte Carlo/Grand Prix/Cutlass, they came with 400, the 6th Gene T-Bird/3rd Gen Cougar (72-76) had a 390 in it.... the 87&88 Buick Grand National was the fastest American Car production car ever built for 20 years and it had a Turbo V-6 in it, and I DARE anyone try to say that wasn't a "Muscle Car", they were just trying to figure out how to get performance and still build factory Muscle Cars and stay within the emissions mandates.
@@TheREALOC1972 You have a real strange idea of what a Muscle car is. A car that won't move out of its own tracks is not a muscle car. Tell someone that has owned a 450 hp car, he has to drive a 200 hp turd, it doesn't go over too well. Most of the guys I chummed around with that had Performance cars, just give up on the car thing, when Manufacturers quit building real Muscle cars.
They did have cool graphics, Jill car on Charlie Angels. I was a kid in the 70s so who didn't appreciate the Angels .Although my pick was Jaclyne Smith.She also had the Mustang. 🙂
The Roman Numeral II designation was normal for Ford. Around the world there were other Roman Numeral models including the Bronco II and LTD II. There were numerous concept car models that went up to III. In-fact, the original Mustang concept car was called the Mustang I, which is actually important. The Mustang I was REAR engine and had functional intakes on the sides. The final Mustang design was the conventional front engine rear drive, but the Mustang I design queue with the side vent remained. While the rear V4 engine was made for the European Ford Taunus, it was mechanically related to the Taunus V6 that came in the Mustang II. The Mustang II really did go back to the original concept for guidance, which was a light sporty car, not a knuckle dragging muscle car. The side vents are an echo of a V4 sport car closer in concept to a Miata than a drag racer. Google “Mustang I concept” Nice video
I had a 1978 Mustang II and have to agree with you. It was one model of Mustang that was under appreciated. For the record, I rather liked my Mustang II for many reasons, and missed it after it had an untimely end in 1992.
@@shylitoe3251 I used to surprise and beat a few gt's back in the mid to late 80s. Now it's even meaner. Not gonna keep up with these new GTS but it will surprise most folks.
I had a Cobra II, it had a 2bbl on top of the 302.i swapped that out for a Holley 4. The car was plenty fast for me. The most unreliable part for me was the voltage regulator. But I did have to change the flywheel once because of wee little fractures. In winter I would need extra weight in the back.
I bought a new 1975 Mustang II Mach I with the V6 and 4 speed and LOVED IT! Had it not been for the Mustang II series, Mustang might not have survived all these years!
I am the second owner of a 1975 Mustang II, and my father has owned his 1978 Mustang II Mach 1 since new. I've had to defend my love of these cars for years. I am so glad they're finally getting a second chance and a restored reputation. I absolutely adore my 75. It's a base model coupe, with the 2.3L and a 4 speed. I've done a lot of work to get it to the point now where it revs past 7k rpm and I'm hoping to get it back on the dyno in a few weeks to see if I've cracked 100hp to the rear wheels with it yet.
I lived in Guadalajara, Mexico, in the mid 1980s. Cars didn't get smog checked over there. My uncle owned an auto shop, and I saw many of the V8 Mustang 2s get Edlebrock intake manifolds, Holley carburetor and headers. I imagine they had aftermarket cam shafts as well. I remember going for a ride in one that was wicked fast.
You researched your stuff and created a great blog on the 1974 to 1978 Mustang II. This car along with the 1975 to 1980 AMC Pacer got a bad rap also. Very good post keep up the good work sir!
I've had my Mustang II coupe since 1988. It's always been my favorite car. It currently weighs 2450 lbs, so it's a bit quicker than it was when new. The 500+ horsepower helps too. p.s. To correct your video statement @ 3:58 "The fastest Mustang II from the factory" It was not the King Cobra. The King Cobra was the best handling factory Mustang II, due to it's heavier springs and shocks, the fastback is 200 lbs heavier than the coupe. Also, the manual V8 cars came with a 50 lb flywheel to help with off the line acceleration, which added even more weight, as well as a ton of inertial losses. Therefore, the fastest Mustang from the factory was a 302 automatic coupe, with zero extra options. Just a plain jane V8 coupe. Compared to other cars in the mid to late 70s, that setup was not slow.
We are the 2nd owner of a 75 Ghia coupe. GREAT little car. Also do not forget the huge contribution the Mustang II made to the Hot Rod community. Even my 46 Ford has Mustang II front and rear suspension. Thanks
People tend to neglect the fact that in the early 70s they switched the horsepower ratings from gross to net…in all actuality a Mustang II with a 302 V8 was fairly comparable in terms of power output to a standard 65-66 with a 289. All you really would need to do with a Mustang II to make it feel significantly more powerful is swap out the small 2 barrel carburetor for a 4 barrel and change the restrictive exhaust with something more free flowing. Personally my favorite old school Mustangs are the 71-73 fastbacks but I’ve always thought these ones looked good too and didn’t deserve the hate 🤷
A stock Mustang II 302 had similar power as the early 2bbl 302 fox mustangs and the II was lighter, but everyone seems to be unaware of that, too. And they all love the foxes and hate the II for being "weak". lol
I remember when these were new cars, I thought it had nice styling. Not to square or too round. You could easily up the performance with low restriction exhaust or engine mods.
I had a 77 Ghia v8 version for a while, thought I would mention what I have never seen in these reviews. But my car had an excellent ride with no feel of the small bumps in the road that I was used to feeling with my other cars, vbug, Japanese and Swedish cars also a couple large American wagons.
Had a 74 and stuffed a ‘71 351W and fmx into it. What a blast blowing off 340 Challengers with it. No hood scoop, just dual mufflers dumped at the axle.
i had a 75 mustang 2 it was the only automatic i ever owned, hell..i liked it just fine even tho the 302 was weak it would still catch a wheel between 1st and 2nd.
Well done! I like the history behind the car, and the comparison of the performance with the original Mustang releases. My first car was a '78 Mustang II Ghia 4-banger, and it was so awful but I loved everything about it!
I had a '74 Mustang II, Mach 1. Since the '74 didn't offer a V8, mine had a 2.9L V6, 4 speed. One day my sister was telling me how slow it was so I stopped and waited for the traffic near me to get out of site and "drove it like I stole it" spinning the tires a good bit on takeoff and barking them in second, eased up, looked at her a said, seems okay to me. 😊 I'm a huge fan of small cars and would like to have another Mustang II. I liked the hatchback like my Mach 1, but I thought the Ghia coupe was the most attractive of the trio.
The Mach E blows! The Mustang 2 was the right car for the 70s. It’s just the 70s sucked for car guys. I mean a Corvette only had about 180 hp. And cost three times as much as a Mustang.
So I bought a Mustang II recently and the era, it's a really great handling car. Now it's not a 911 but for an American car wow it's surprisingly good and very fun.
The cartoon caricature of a Mustang on tiny tots tires with amusement park bumpers. The Pro Stock guys went back to the Pinto because it was more aerodynamic. It did however have a great front suspension setup that could be put into something less embarrassing, but the aftermarket has that now so there really is no need in these things anymore.
I had a 1977 Mustang ii with a 2.7L V6 great car. I drove the wheels off that car by the time Mustang quit running it had well over 250k on her again, a great car. I wished that I still had her.
Finally a fair treatment of the Mustang II. As he said, it was not just a tarted up Pinto. Part of the cause of this was that Ford did put the Pinto 4-cyl. engine in it and the Mustang II was just too heavy for that. That little engine just had to work too hard. My '75 Mustang II (automatic) actually got worse mileage than my '68 Mercury Cougar with a 302 c.i. V-8. the Mustang II with the 6-cyl. or V-8 was a good (and good looking, in my opinion) car. We were a Mustang family, including a '66 convertible, '74 Mustang II Mach 1, '75 Mustang II, and '85 GT convertible. I'd love to get the new one, but they are priced more in the Corvette range now. Oh, and I agree with your assessment of the Mach-E. Might be a decent SUV (I don't know - I hate SUVs), but it's not a Mustang!
If you bought any car from any Brand 1974 to 1982 it was a Turd 455 engines with less than 200 hp. it was not until the 1983 GT that someone made a car with reasonable performance. It was sad times and thanks to the Mustang II, Mustang Survived it.
Bro I am from Adelaide South Australia 🇦🇺 l ABSOLUTELY loved your review on the Mustang ll , when I was a kid in Brazil 🇧🇷 there was one of them I always loved that car , I think to me is one of the best thing ever as it’s gorgeous and it’s small and it’s economical plus it’s a legendary iconic Mustang anyway, as a 67 Shelby Cobra 🐍 to me this Mustang ll ain’t no less than any mustang as it’s still classic still unique and this is the car model that carried the Mustang torch 🔦 away through the petrol crises this a VERY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT mustang that carried the Mustang Badge from muscle through the petrol crises and without it maybe Mustang would’ve not survived it deserves HEAPS OF RESPECT from others mustang owners i really insist that every Mustang enthusiasts RESPECT this little Pinto/Mustang as pinto in Brazilian language means “ Penis “ this is the Mustang Penis answer to petrol crises
@@riogrande163 neither of which would fit well The LS would because of its compact pushrod design. The all aluminum engine wouldn't throw the weight balance off either which is why its the engine of choice for engine swappers in every small car from Porsche 944s Miatas and even older Mustangs
My first car was a 78 California Special. It had a 2.8 v6 4speed. It wasn't the fastest car I had driven at the time. I had plenty of time behind the wheel of a 68 318 Barracuda and a 71 318 Dodge demon. Now getting to the point of my story, I raced 3 different automatic, 82 to 84 z28 cameros and beat all of them by at least a fender length. The point of this story is, I would choose a mint condition 1978 king cobra over any other Mustang except a 1969 cobra jet. After all, the 78 king cobra looked BAD ASS!!!
The Mustang was envisioned from the beginning as an inexpensive and sporty car for everybody. The Mustang II applied that same formula and adapted it to the changing 70's. And honestly, I think it looks pretty good, especially in its fastback form.
If Ford had not changed from the 1973 style model when they did Mustang would have been Dead by 1976 Just like Javelin, Challenger and Cuda. Chevy still made Camaro because Ford built the Mustang.
@@mylanmiller9656 The Camaro and Firebird were almost discontinued after a somewhat disastrous 1972 model year. And the Z28 Camaro was briefly discontinued for 1975 and 1976. The Mustang wouldn't have been able to survive the 70's if it didn't adapt to the changing times. Cars like the Toyota Celica and Datsun Z were popular, and Ford wanted the Mustang to compete against those. And Ford's instincts proved to be correct.
It was made bigger for the boss 429 that it never got, but if they had just gotten rid of the struts and towers they would have not needed a bigger car, the 427 sohc is wider than the boss 429 ,and will fit in the Mustang 2, seen it done,
@@charleslinlow4859 The engine bay isn't small. People have swapped a 429/460 into them, they've swapped 4.6/5.4, they've swapped a Coyote into them. The engine bay is HUGE. There are no shock towers in the way, unlike the older Mustangs. The only small area is the transmission tunnel, which they simply cut out and replace with a larger tunnel. The same needs to be done when they go to a C6 auto or Powerglide with larger SFI bellhousing.
I would love to see Ford come out with the Mustang III and give me the cheap every mans sports car back. If they can come out with the Maverick and give the brokies a truck in the modern car market they can give me a Mustang II again.
So the mustang 2 is a smaller lighter mustang still capable of a v8. And by today's standards I don't have to put in the 70s 302. I can put in whatever I want
71 mustang is way worse than the Mustang II. It made no sense as a car, like why not buy a Torino? And people who talk shit on the Mustang II make me lmao because the fox body is literally the same negatives except it's also ugly. In reality i'd rather have a Nissan Z or a Toyota Celica than one of these but still i'd rather have either of those than a Fox Body as well.
It was the worst Mustang, there is no argument there. Just because it sold decent, doesn't put it above other Mustang generations and comparing it's sales to a Corvette is laughable as the buying pool for a Corvette is tiny. Sales, did you know the 1978 Oldsmobile Cutlass sold 520,279 units? The F body (Camaro/Firebird) sold over 1.5 million in the same time period 74-78, also in 77 and 78 the Camaro itself outsold the Mustang. The Mustang II isn't the sales champ you try to make it out to be.
if it was not for the Mustang II Your Trailer Park Camaro wouldn't have even been around. Gm was considering canceling them all together. They kept it going because the mustang was selling strong.
@@mylanmiller9656 The Mustang II and the F bodies are not even in the same class of cars and you think the Mustang II forced GM to keep the F body around? Talk about being delusional.
The Mustang Mach E is not a Mustang! Car enthusiasts call a 4 door a parts car As far as I am concerned the Mach E is not even good for that because nothing interchanges.
i have owned every style of mustang since they were built and I liked them all but the only one that I owned and didn't like what it looked like was My 1983 GT. For a mustang it was sad. I bought an 88 the outside looked better, and the Dash layout was horrible. My favorite was My 1969 Mach I Just wish it would have had better power steering. The slave cylinder was a leaker. The new cars look nice and have power, but their electronics are atrocious.
@@mylanmiller9656 Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. The foxbody looks nothing like a chrysler K-car. In fact, the fox hatchback has quite contemporary styling in line with the AMC Spirit, nissan s12, mk3 supra, and Ae86 Corollas.
IMO, the styling is better than the foxbody. I always thought the foxbody looked like your basic generic sporty hatchback. It really had no mustang DNA in the styling. At least the Mustang II kinda looks like a mustang.
Expensive? No Cool? No Quick? No Reliable? No Will you buy it? *No.* It was a acceptable car, but it wasn't a Mustang, but still better than the MACH-E
@@riogrande163 Yes, but I don't want to drive a rebadged Pinto. For the same price of those Mustangs 2, you can buy a Mustang from the early 2000s or 90s, and it will be better at anything, starting from the design to comfort and performance
@Nic-uk9cf But it's not just a rebadged pinto, you're thinking of the mercury bobcat. The mustang ii is a larger and heavier car, and the pinto never had a v8. however it's going to cost you money no matter what you build. Also a 302 windsor in the mustang 2 has way better dollar per horsepower than a 4.6 mustang.
As a former Mustang II owner, I also appreciate your video. My silver 1976 coupe had the 2bbl 302 V8 and automatic transmission. As rough as it was by the time I got it in 1989, it was still a great car but mine had a lot of miles and needed repairs; mostly easy stuff that I could do in the driveway and learn how cars worked. I got my share of abuse from other car guys; especially the Mustang purists who loved to talk down about the Mustang II model in general. It was a fun car to drive and tinker with. A few minor inconveniences like a very small back deck so I couldn’t put 6x9 speakers back there so I had to get creative. I’ve had many other cars, 3rd Gen Econoline vans and even a 94 Bronco, but I still miss that Mustang II.
Have you ever owned a Toyota, Honda, Acura or Lexus?
@@guntherultraboltnovacrunch5248 No interest. I prefer the older Ford, Chevy and Dodge designs and durability. I want to own a vehicle for more than a few years. I still own my 93 Tempo that I bought in 1996, a 94 Bronco that I bought in 2009 (nearly 300,000 miles now) and my 87 Econoline that had been my daily driver since 2018. Minimal maintenance and repairs keep them running reliably without all of the complicated technology that only causes headaches later.
Great video. The Mustang II doesn't get the respect it deserves.
The Mustang II was a really good car and always got a bad rap in my opinion. As someone who grew up in the 70's these cars, along with the Vega/Monza and Dodge Colts were everywhere. The real reason Ford started working on the Mustang II wasn't because of the Gas SHortage, it just coinsided with the gas shortage, the real reason is because Iococca wanted to get the Mustang out of the Muscle Car Wars and put the Thunderbird and Torino into it, he wanted to move the Mustang into a economy performace market as a a JDM killer because he was watching Datsun, Honda and Toyota climbing in sales and he could see the shift in market away from big cars and into economy performance.
Thanks for putting this bit of information out there. People just assume that the oil crisis of the time was the driver behind the shift, the reasons you stated are, in fact, the primary ones. A roommate of mine owned a 1978 coupe, V6 automatic, and it drove and handled beautifully. I always wished it had been a 4-speed manual,,though...
@@Shaundalfthegrey The 1973 oil crisis happened late enough in 1973 that the 1974 model year was actually already underway.
Ford and Mopar dropped out of Racing the summer of 1970, because they got a mandate from the white house. That is what Killed the Muscle car. Ford hung on for one more year, then every car built was a turd. Orders came in 1970 that all cars had to meet a ridiculous standard by 1974. Nixon told the car manufacturers. Time to take the money you are spending on winning races and use it to build clean air and safer cars. There was also a 5 mile per hour bumper Mandat at the same time. Iacocca was not impressed with Knudson making the Mustang into a Torino size car, He had his designers re make it. if the manufacturers could have built Performance cars, the public would have bought them. After having Cars with 450 hp, on body wanted the 200 hp turds that had to be built to meet emiction standards. cars run bad had no power and got horrendous milage. washing ton killed the Muscle car.
@@mylanmiller9656 Nah, they were still muscle cars all the way up to the 2002. They just weren't the High Performance BIG ENGINE Muscle Cars that people were used to, The Olds Omega and Pontiac Ventura from 75-79 had a special edition package that you could order that came with a 400, The same with the A-Body Monte Carlo/Grand Prix/Cutlass, they came with 400, the 6th Gene T-Bird/3rd Gen Cougar (72-76) had a 390 in it.... the 87&88 Buick Grand National was the fastest American Car production car ever built for 20 years and it had a Turbo V-6 in it, and I DARE anyone try to say that wasn't a "Muscle Car", they were just trying to figure out how to get performance and still build factory Muscle Cars and stay within the emissions mandates.
@@TheREALOC1972 You have a real strange idea of what a Muscle car is. A car that won't move out of its own tracks is not a muscle car. Tell someone that has owned a 450 hp car, he has to drive a 200 hp turd,
it doesn't go over too well. Most of the guys I chummed around with that had Performance cars, just give up on the car thing, when Manufacturers quit building real Muscle cars.
They did have cool graphics, Jill car on Charlie Angels. I was a kid in the 70s so who didn't appreciate the Angels .Although my pick was Jaclyne Smith.She also had the Mustang. 🙂
The Roman Numeral II designation was normal for Ford. Around the world there were other Roman Numeral models including the Bronco II and LTD II. There were numerous concept car models that went up to III.
In-fact, the original Mustang concept car was called the Mustang I, which is actually important. The Mustang I was REAR engine and had functional intakes on the sides. The final Mustang design was the conventional front engine rear drive, but the Mustang I design queue with the side vent remained. While the rear V4 engine was made for the European Ford Taunus, it was mechanically related to the Taunus V6 that came in the Mustang II. The Mustang II really did go back to the original concept for guidance, which was a light sporty car, not a knuckle dragging muscle car. The side vents are an echo of a V4 sport car closer in concept to a Miata than a drag racer.
Google “Mustang I concept”
Nice video
I had a 1978 Mustang II and have to agree with you. It was one model of Mustang that was under appreciated. For the record, I rather liked my Mustang II for many reasons, and missed it after it had an untimely end in 1992.
The ll looked more like a "Mustang" than the Fox body ever did
yeah except the foxbody was actually buildable and loved by even chevy onwers lmao
@@shylitoe3251 I used to surprise and beat a few gt's back in the mid to late 80s. Now it's even meaner. Not gonna keep up with these new GTS but it will surprise most folks.
@@shylitoe3251 the ll is extremely buildable. Mine is proof for certain.
@@shylitoe3251 maybe the Chevy guys liked it but the sales numbers say it was mediocre at best Fox mustang had 1 good year..
@@shylitoe3251 I would take an SN 95 over a Fox any time, should have been called box, they forgot the styling.
Good points. I am happy the underrated Mustang II is getting some love.
I had a Cobra II, it had a 2bbl on top of the 302.i swapped that out for a Holley 4. The car was plenty fast for me. The most unreliable part for me was the voltage regulator. But I did have to change the flywheel once because of wee little fractures. In winter I would need extra weight in the back.
I bought a new 1975 Mustang II Mach I with the V6 and 4 speed and LOVED IT! Had it not been for the Mustang II series, Mustang might not have survived all these years!
Great content!! You did your homework!
thanks Jesse
You can make mustang 2s really cool AND you can make em fast.
I am the second owner of a 1975 Mustang II, and my father has owned his 1978 Mustang II Mach 1 since new. I've had to defend my love of these cars for years. I am so glad they're finally getting a second chance and a restored reputation. I absolutely adore my 75. It's a base model coupe, with the 2.3L and a 4 speed. I've done a lot of work to get it to the point now where it revs past 7k rpm and I'm hoping to get it back on the dyno in a few weeks to see if I've cracked 100hp to the rear wheels with it yet.
I lived in Guadalajara, Mexico, in the mid 1980s. Cars didn't get smog checked over there. My uncle owned an auto shop, and I saw many of the V8 Mustang 2s get Edlebrock intake manifolds, Holley carburetor and headers. I imagine they had aftermarket cam shafts as well. I remember going for a ride in one that was wicked fast.
You researched your stuff and created a great blog on the 1974 to 1978 Mustang II. This car along with the 1975 to 1980 AMC Pacer got a bad rap also. Very good post keep up the good work sir!
Thanks for watching!
I've had my Mustang II coupe since 1988. It's always been my favorite car. It currently weighs 2450 lbs, so it's a bit quicker than it was when new. The 500+ horsepower helps too.
p.s. To correct your video statement @ 3:58 "The fastest Mustang II from the factory" It was not the King Cobra. The King Cobra was the best handling factory Mustang II, due to it's heavier springs and shocks, the fastback is 200 lbs heavier than the coupe. Also, the manual V8 cars came with a 50 lb flywheel to help with off the line acceleration, which added even more weight, as well as a ton of inertial losses. Therefore, the fastest Mustang from the factory was a 302 automatic coupe, with zero extra options. Just a plain jane V8 coupe. Compared to other cars in the mid to late 70s, that setup was not slow.
We are the 2nd owner of a 75 Ghia coupe. GREAT little car. Also do not forget the huge contribution the Mustang II made to the Hot Rod community. Even my 46 Ford has Mustang II front and rear suspension. Thanks
People tend to neglect the fact that in the early 70s they switched the horsepower ratings from gross to net…in all actuality a Mustang II with a 302 V8 was fairly comparable in terms of power output to a standard 65-66 with a 289. All you really would need to do with a Mustang II to make it feel significantly more powerful is swap out the small 2 barrel carburetor for a 4 barrel and change the restrictive exhaust with something more free flowing.
Personally my favorite old school Mustangs are the 71-73 fastbacks but I’ve always thought these ones looked good too and didn’t deserve the hate 🤷
A stock Mustang II 302 had similar power as the early 2bbl 302 fox mustangs and the II was lighter, but everyone seems to be unaware of that, too. And they all love the foxes and hate the II for being "weak". lol
I remember when these were new cars, I thought it had nice styling. Not to square or too round. You could easily up the performance with low restriction exhaust or engine mods.
That a pretty good video young man. Great to see the younger generation loving their old cars.I was getting worried that it might die off.
I love '70s Mustangs! The Boss 302, 351, and 429 were great. So was the Fox Body of 1979, which would continue for a couple of decades!
EVERYTHING was slow at that time.
I had a 77 Ghia v8 version for a while, thought I would mention what I have never seen in these reviews. But my car had an excellent ride with no feel of the small bumps in the road that I was used to feeling with my other cars, vbug, Japanese and Swedish cars also a couple large American wagons.
This has always been my favorite mustang.
Had a 74 and stuffed a ‘71 351W and fmx into it. What a blast blowing off 340 Challengers with it. No hood scoop, just dual mufflers dumped at the axle.
Now that! That must of been fun!
i had a 75 mustang 2 it was the only automatic i ever owned, hell..i liked it just fine even tho the 302 was weak it would still catch a wheel between 1st and 2nd.
Well done! I like the history behind the car, and the comparison of the performance with the original Mustang releases. My first car was a '78 Mustang II Ghia 4-banger, and it was so awful but I loved everything about it!
Thanks for watching, glad to see people still like these little cars
I had a '74 Mustang II, Mach 1. Since the '74 didn't offer a V8, mine had a 2.9L V6, 4 speed. One day my sister was telling me how slow it was so I stopped and waited for the traffic near me to get out of site and "drove it like I stole it" spinning the tires a good bit on takeoff and barking them in second, eased up, looked at her a said, seems okay to me. 😊 I'm a huge fan of small cars and would like to have another Mustang II. I liked the hatchback like my Mach 1, but I thought the Ghia coupe was the most attractive of the trio.
The 78 cobra has a sick body style
Great job. I love when young people get it right. Great quote on falcon vs pinto influences.
Thank you for watching, glad you enjoyed it
I've always wondered how many mustang 2 we're canabalized for the rack and pinion.
Thousands of them. Not just the rack and pinion, the entire front suspension with frame section.
Excellent video with well-presented information.
Thank you, Glad you enjoyed it
The Mach E blows! The Mustang 2 was the right car for the 70s. It’s just the 70s sucked for car guys. I mean a Corvette only had about 180 hp. And cost three times as much as a Mustang.
So I bought a Mustang II recently and the era, it's a really great handling car. Now it's not a 911 but for an American car wow it's surprisingly good and very fun.
Not surprising, given the front end is still the go to for hot rod builders to this day.
Well said and well made.
Thanks!
The cartoon caricature of a Mustang on tiny tots tires with amusement park bumpers. The Pro Stock guys went back to the Pinto because it was more aerodynamic. It did however have a great front suspension setup that could be put into something less embarrassing, but the aftermarket has that now so there really is no need in these things anymore.
Owned 2…’76 tricked-out notchback and a ‘77 fastback. Wish I STILL had BOTH! Nuff said.
I had a 1977 Mustang ii with a 2.7L V6 great car. I drove the wheels off that car by the time Mustang quit running it had well over 250k on her again, a great car. I wished that I still had her.
That's 2.8
10.20 stock with c4 in 1/8 . 9.9s with a stick if ya didn't break it. With a Trac/loc a bit better on street tires, 13 inch rims was a down side.
By far the best handling mustang up to then. I had a 76 COBRA 2 then a 78 King. Both black. Drove them to death as a teen and they took it well.
Id bet these handle better then some mustang that came after it too. they have great front suspension
I love mine
Those are cool, light weight too which is best for ET! :)
Finally a fair treatment of the Mustang II. As he said, it was not just a tarted up Pinto. Part of the cause of this was that Ford did put the Pinto 4-cyl. engine in it and the Mustang II was just too heavy for that. That little engine just had to work too hard. My '75 Mustang II (automatic) actually got worse mileage than my '68 Mercury Cougar with a 302 c.i. V-8. the Mustang II with the 6-cyl. or V-8 was a good (and good looking, in my opinion) car. We were a Mustang family, including a '66 convertible, '74 Mustang II Mach 1, '75 Mustang II, and '85 GT convertible. I'd love to get the new one, but they are priced more in the Corvette range now. Oh, and I agree with your assessment of the Mach-E. Might be a decent SUV (I don't know - I hate SUVs), but it's not a Mustang!
If you bought any car from any Brand 1974 to 1982 it was a Turd 455 engines with less than 200 hp.
it was not until the 1983 GT that someone made a car with reasonable performance. It was sad times and thanks to the Mustang II, Mustang Survived it.
we wouldn't have the Fox Body without the Mustang 2. In fact the Mustang 2 was the first Mustang to use the beloved Windsor engine
I've never had one, but I just think they look so damn cool.
I love the Mustang ii, sure its not the sexiest Mustang but I still want one. A 78 King Cobra With T-tops
Bro I am from Adelaide South Australia 🇦🇺 l ABSOLUTELY loved your review on the Mustang ll , when I was a kid in Brazil 🇧🇷 there was one of them I always loved that car , I think to me is one of the best thing ever as it’s gorgeous and it’s small and it’s economical plus it’s a legendary iconic Mustang anyway, as a 67 Shelby Cobra 🐍 to me this Mustang ll ain’t no less than any mustang as it’s still classic still unique and this is the car model that carried the Mustang torch 🔦 away through the petrol crises this a VERY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT mustang that carried the Mustang Badge from muscle through the petrol crises and without it maybe Mustang would’ve not survived it deserves HEAPS OF RESPECT from others mustang owners i really insist that every Mustang enthusiasts RESPECT this little Pinto/Mustang as pinto in Brazilian language means “ Penis “ this is the Mustang Penis answer to petrol crises
thanks for watching man! glad you enjoyed it. good to know I'm not the only one who likes these little mustangs
Excellent car for a LS swap. the engine and a tremec 5 speed fit well in the car and the aluminum engine doesn't throw the weight balance off either.
Just buy a chevy at that point, mustang 2 would be better off with a 7.3 or coyote
@@riogrande163 neither of which would fit well
The LS would because of its compact pushrod design. The all aluminum engine wouldn't throw the weight balance off either which is why its the engine of choice for engine swappers in every small car from Porsche 944s Miatas and even older Mustangs
My first car was a 78 California Special. It had a 2.8 v6 4speed. It wasn't the fastest car I had driven at the time. I had plenty of time behind the wheel of a 68 318 Barracuda and a 71 318 Dodge demon. Now getting to the point of my story, I raced 3 different automatic, 82 to 84 z28 cameros and beat all of them by at least a fender length. The point of this story is, I would choose a mint condition 1978 king cobra over any other Mustang except a 1969 cobra jet. After all, the 78 king cobra looked BAD ASS!!!
I have Mustang 2 1974 mint condition 19500 miles driven bought in 1974 first owner
The Mustang was envisioned from the beginning as an inexpensive and sporty car for everybody. The Mustang II applied that same formula and adapted it to the changing 70's. And honestly, I think it looks pretty good, especially in its fastback form.
If Ford had not changed from the 1973 style model when they did Mustang would have been Dead by 1976 Just like Javelin, Challenger and Cuda. Chevy still made Camaro because Ford built the Mustang.
@@mylanmiller9656 The Camaro and Firebird were almost discontinued after a somewhat disastrous 1972 model year. And the Z28 Camaro was briefly discontinued for 1975 and 1976. The Mustang wouldn't have been able to survive the 70's if it didn't adapt to the changing times. Cars like the Toyota Celica and Datsun Z were popular, and Ford wanted the Mustang to compete against those. And Ford's instincts proved to be correct.
Very well done young man no one considered the Mustang II a serious Mustang... BUT in quotation marks the electric Mustang it's just laughable😅
It was made bigger for the boss 429 that it never got, but if they had just gotten rid of the struts and towers they would have not needed a bigger car, the 427 sohc is wider than the boss 429 ,and will fit in the Mustang 2, seen it done,
If I had one I'd swap the motor with a better 302 or a 4.6 from a cvp71.
Good luck getting a 4.6 to fit. Very small engine bay
@@charleslinlow4859 The engine bay isn't small. People have swapped a 429/460 into them, they've swapped 4.6/5.4, they've swapped a Coyote into them. The engine bay is HUGE. There are no shock towers in the way, unlike the older Mustangs. The only small area is the transmission tunnel, which they simply cut out and replace with a larger tunnel. The same needs to be done when they go to a C6 auto or Powerglide with larger SFI bellhousing.
Do you actually defend this car?
I bought a 77 Cobra new. It was a great car. Fast? No. Fun? Yes.
Could a been better with a 351 4 barrel . Damn the EPA.
I installed one in it they don't fit really well, was ok on the drag strip but not a practical driver.
The Mach-e is not a mustang it’s just some board member at ford slapping the logo on their effect people movers
Even the 460 got down under 200 hp in the 70s,
In 1979-81 , the new fox body mustangs had a 255ci v8 that gave you 110 hp, which is the worst Mustang v8 ever. Not the Mustang it's v8
I would love to see Ford come out with the Mustang III and give me the cheap every mans sports car back. If they can come out with the Maverick and give the brokies a truck in the modern car market they can give me a Mustang II again.
I couldn't agree more
So the mustang 2 is a smaller lighter mustang still capable of a v8. And by today's standards I don't have to put in the 70s 302. I can put in whatever I want
Such a good point!
71 mustang is way worse than the Mustang II. It made no sense as a car, like why not buy a Torino? And people who talk shit on the Mustang II make me lmao because the fox body is literally the same negatives except it's also ugly. In reality i'd rather have a Nissan Z or a Toyota Celica than one of these but still i'd rather have either of those than a Fox Body as well.
the late '70s ford mustang ii king cobra edition still could not compete at all with early detroit,kenosha muscle cars ...2 B honest!!😂😂
There was no car built Between 1972 and 1996 that could compete with late 1960's Performance cars in straight line performance.
It was the worst Mustang, there is no argument there. Just because it sold decent, doesn't put it above other Mustang generations and comparing it's sales to a Corvette is laughable as the buying pool for a Corvette is tiny. Sales, did you know the 1978 Oldsmobile Cutlass sold 520,279 units? The F body (Camaro/Firebird) sold over 1.5 million in the same time period 74-78, also in 77 and 78 the Camaro itself outsold the Mustang. The Mustang II isn't the sales champ you try to make it out to be.
if it was not for the Mustang II Your Trailer Park Camaro wouldn't have even been around. Gm was considering canceling them all together. They kept it going because the mustang was selling strong.
@@mylanmiller9656 The Mustang II and the F bodies are not even in the same class of cars and you think the Mustang II forced GM to keep the F body around? Talk about being delusional.
The Mustang Mach E is not a Mustang! Car enthusiasts call a 4 door a parts car As far as I am concerned the Mach E is not even good for that because nothing interchanges.
i have owned every style of mustang since they were built and I liked them all but the only one that I owned and didn't like what it looked like was My 1983 GT. For a mustang it was sad. I bought an 88 the outside looked better, and the Dash layout was horrible. My favorite was My 1969 Mach I Just wish it would have had better power steering. The slave cylinder was a leaker. The new cars look nice and have power, but their electronics are atrocious.
In stock form, it's hot garbage. But the V8 models are a great platform for building a nice hot rod
Kids, you really shouldn’t be riding your toy Mustangs on the street. You might get hit by a car.
The Mach E has replaced the Mustang 2 as the worst
I agree, mustang II is good compared to the mach E
The mustang II was nothing but a reskinned pinto and it was blasphemy to call it a mustang.
It's pronounced Pintang.
The Fox body was the worst the 1980 with 255 was the saddest excuse for a V 8 ever built. The car was ugly, and the engine was hopeless.
If you think a foxbody is ugly then you need glasses.
@@riogrande163 Some people like a car with some style the fox looks like a K car. By far the ugliest Mustang of all!
@@mylanmiller9656
Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. The foxbody looks nothing like a chrysler K-car.
In fact, the fox hatchback has quite contemporary styling in line with the AMC Spirit, nissan s12, mk3 supra, and Ae86 Corollas.
@@riogrande163 Oh ya Real contemporary All Squair lines and no style at all typical of a 1980's car.
@@riogrande163 If you think a Fox Body Mustang has style, you have no taste. in cars. The 1980's was a sad time for Automobiles.
coyote swap that bih
fixes the only problem right there
Technically, there was a stop in the Mustang production and that was from 74-78. That is of course when a different name came along, Mustang II.
Then in 1979 they built the K car and called it a Mustang.
@@mylanmiller9656 Tell me more about what you are saying.
@@Olds_Pwr The 15 years of K car Mustang that Has no resemblance to any Mustang, they should have called it the box 'body it was mor appropriate.
@@mylanmiller9656 Do you have a link to this K car Mustang?
IMO, the styling is better than the foxbody. I always thought the foxbody looked like your basic generic sporty hatchback. It really had no mustang DNA in the styling. At least the Mustang II kinda looks like a mustang.
Yeah, no.
fair enough
First car was a '74 "mach 1".
V6, 4 speed, utter POS.
It was a Pinto with a weight problem.
Mustang 11 got a bad rap.
Low power and the coupe was fugly.
All that could be fixed
Mine was a coupe, and I didn't think it was ugly.
Expensive? No
Cool? No
Quick? No
Reliable? No
Will you buy it? *No.*
It was a acceptable car, but it wasn't a Mustang, but still better than the MACH-E
It's a mustang ii. Thr king cobras are cool, it has a good roofline. You can easily make it quick.
@@riogrande163 Yes, but I don't want to drive a rebadged Pinto. For the same price of those Mustangs 2, you can buy a Mustang from the early 2000s or 90s, and it will be better at anything, starting from the design to comfort and performance
@Nic-uk9cf
But it's not just a rebadged pinto, you're thinking of the mercury bobcat.
The mustang ii is a larger and heavier car, and the pinto never had a v8.
however it's going to cost you money no matter what you build. Also a 302 windsor in the mustang 2 has way better dollar per horsepower than a 4.6 mustang.