Dishonorable Mention: The 10 Most Embarrassing Award Winners in Automotive History

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Feb 2, 2009 | 12:11 AM

#16

ProudPony

Registered User

Joined: Mar 2002

Posts: 3,180

From: Yadkinville, NC USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by guionM

I disagree with quite a few of C&D's choices.

1974 Ford Mustang II:
What is always forgotten when the Mustang II comes up in conversation is that it was actually a very good car for it's day, and it sold in numbers that today would make your brain melt. Coming after arguabley the most aggressive looking (and unarguably, the biggest) Mustang in history, the "II" looks completely inadequte. Using the fact it's V8 had only 129 horsepower is deceptive. In the mid 70s, Ford V8s were weak on horsepower, but strong on torque. The result? Mustangs would accelerate strongly on par with the competition, but it had no real top speed. While 5.0 Monza's and Mustangs got to 60 in nearly identical times, Spyders reached 120mph while Cobra IIs could barely get over 100. Mustangs were solid, well built, and very nice inside for their day. But in retrospect, it's easy to forget everything good about them.

Unfortunately, I agree that there are far more American cars worthy of "What were we thinking" placement on 10 best lists. The 80s and a good chunk of the 90s simply wasn't all that great of a time for US makers putting out good... let alone 10 best... quality vehicles.

Great post.

Good points all - no discrepancies from me.

I personally don't understand why everyone in the world hates the Mustang II.
I admit, their styling is adrift in today's world - but WHAT from the 1970's was NOT adrift?!?! Anyone wearing buttondowns with collars that resemble 747-300 wings? Polyester pants with side-buttons on the outside? 1" long **** carpet that was either puke-green, puke yellow, or puke orange? Flowers on everything... toasters, cookie jars, clothes, shower curtains, school books and anything else you can think of? DISCO for Pete's sake?

I mean, seriously - the car was on the money for the market, and it sold like a .25 hot dog at the fair. 385,993 units went into garages in 1974... and folks just don't drop several grand on something they don't like/want/need - especially right after the depression we were in coming out of the 'nam and Nixon crises... money was tight.

There's just something about the M-II s that screams for folks to mock them and disrespect them that I don't get.

I would actually LOVE to know if ANY of the folks that wrote the article that is the topic of this thread, ever RODE in one, much less DROVE one? Funny how all the hot rodders want the M-II front ends, huh? Rack-and-pinion steering... Yeah, they must really suck. The only Mustang ever to have upper and lower control arms with a coil between, and no MacPherson strut... yup - it must really be a loser. A complete vibration isolation unit at the base of the firewall to keep engine and tranny noise totally out of the uni-body. Arguably one of the smoothest Mustangs built to date - regardless of V8, V6, or I4. One of the lightest ever (base coupe coming in at 2,620lbs). First time that disc brakes were standard on all models (front). First Mustang to offer adjustable suspension, using Gabriel adjustable shocks in combination with a Competition and/or Rallye suspension package. First Mustang to offer functional brake cooling ducts for the front rotors. First Mustang to offer a 4-way driver's seat (front/back and up/down). Put the battery behind the front wheels to help weight distribution (published at 58/42 wet in C&D). Brought T-tops to the Mustang world. First Mustang ever to wear a "5.0" on it.
Yeah - it was a total flop... did nothing for the car or the hobby.

Jack Roush would not agree either... 10 Minutes With Jack Roush
EJS = Evan Smith, and JR = Jack Roush
"EJS: You have a lot of the excitement towards the new Mustang platform. What do you think the advantage is over the '99-'04 SN-95 Mustangs?

JR: I think it's the styling thing. The first thing I'll say is that I never saw a Mustang I didn't like.

EJS: Even a Mustang II?

JR: A Mustang II. I drove a Pro Stock Mustang II that's a favorite car in our museum. We don't have it totally restored, but I've got the car that I drove in 1974. I know that was not a popular car for a lot of people. Some people thought when they made the wheelbase longer in 1971 that was a mistake, but those are Mustangs that at a point in time were exactly what I think the public needed and what Ford thought they wanted to be morphed into. Going back to the '67-'68 Mustangs for the styling cues, and this new car that we sold in 2005 first-and it's carried into 2006 and beyond-it certainly tugs at my heart strings. For the folks that were there and saw, and enjoy seeing, the cars from that era, it provides the continuity and momentum to the Mustang brand."

OK, now SOMEBODY go tell Jack Roush that he doesn't know cars.

Most of the rest of the cars on the list all hit that same era too. Why can't we just say that it was a bizzarre time and the cars of that day were wierd by today's standard, and let it go? If they want to go back and look at some of the imports from the mid-70's... I'm all game! Bring it!
Wanna throw up a comparison between some B210s, Mustang IIs, Firebirds, and Camaros?
There's a REASON why you didn't see many imports being chosen for COTY back then...

I don't know - I guess I just don't care for the article - it was not well-conceived or executed IMO. I'm one of those who would rather let sleeping dogs lie - RIP. Fact is - if you go right back in time to those picks they made, they justified the picks right there in text... there were reasons.