Is the Mustang a "muscle car "?
10/2/16, 10:42 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Is the Mustang a "muscle car "?
I heard a guy today at work refer to Mustang's as "pony cars" not muscle cars, what exactly is the Mustang considered? my insurance company says my 2010 GT 4.6 is a sports car, although I consider Corvettes, Porsche , Ferraris, Lamborghini etc sports and I consider Camaros,Chargers,GTOs,Mustangs, Challengers etc muscle cars, is the Ford Mustang (all years and engines) a muscle car?
10/2/16, 11:59 PM
#2
I heard a guy today at work refer to Mustang's as "pony cars" not muscle cars, what exactly is the Mustang considered? my insurance company says my 2010 GT 4.6 is a sports car, although I consider Corvettes, Porsche , Ferraris, Lamborghini etc sports and I consider Camaros,Chargers,GTOs,Mustangs, Challengers etc muscle cars, is the Ford Mustang (all years and engines) a muscle car?
The term "Pony Car" was first coined by an automotive magazine in 1964 when it did an article about the soon to be released brand new Ford Mustang. It was used specifically because of the running horse motif of the car. In the ensuing years the term has been applied to the Camaro as well. In point of fact there was never a class of car designated "Pony" although some people will argue with until they are blue in the face about it. They are completely wrong, no matter what they tell you. There is no such class as a Pony car. It's just a term used by layman. For that matter there is no such thing as a 1964 1/2 Mustang. In point of fact, they were all 1965 models. 64 and 1/2 was again a designation applied by the population and enthusiasts years later. As far as Ford was officially concerned they were all 1965 models.
The definition of a muscle car as it applies to the era of muscle cars was to take a small car and put a large motor in it to make it faster. That's it, it's that simple. The original muscle car was the Pontiac GTO. I know, people look at a GTO from the 60's now and wonder how that is considered a small car. You have to remember that cars in the 60s were huge so the GTO was a small car. The Mustang was also a small car, the smallest car in Ford's lineup. It did not, however, have a large displacement V8 stuffed under the hood. In 65 the largest motor available was the 289. Subsequent years of the Mustang surely could be considered muscle cars when you started seeing versions that had the 429 motor under the hood. The Mustang is technically considered a sports coupe.
So that brings us to the question of what qualifies as a sports car. Some people say a sports car is a two seat roadster and nothing else can be a sports car. Try as you might you will not find a definitive authority that decides what qualifies as a sports car and what does not because there isn't one. If the manufacturer of a given car designs and designates the car to be a "sports car" then it's a sports car. In other words, if the intended or implied purpose or ability of the car is to be a performance oriented car than it is a sports car. This is why Nissan marketed the Maxima as a 4 Door Sports Car once upon a time; even marking the car with decals that read 4DSC. Some people scoffed because it wasn't a two door coupe. There is no rule that says a sports car must be two doors. That is just a common interpretation but not a correct one, like mistakenly believing that Pony car is an actual class of car.
10/3/16, 12:05 AM
#3
Member
Thread Starter
The term "Pony Car" was first coined by an automotive magazine in 1964 when it did an article about the soon to be released brand new Ford Mustang. It was used specifically because of the running horse motif of the car. In the ensuing years the term has been applied to the Camaro as well. In point of fact there was never a class of car designated "Pony" although some people will argue with until they are blue in the face about it. They are completely wrong, no matter what they tell you. There is no such class as a Pony car. It's just a term used by layman. For that matter there is no such thing as a 1964 1/2 Mustang. In point of fact, they were all 1965 models. 64 and 1/2 was again a designation applied by the population and enthusiasts years later. As far as Ford was officially concerned they were all 1965 models.
The definition of a muscle car as it applies to the era of muscle cars was to take a small car and put a large motor in it to make it faster. That's it, it's that simple. The original muscle car was the Pontiac GTO. I know, people look at a GTO from the 60's now and wonder how that is considered a small car. You have to remember that cars in the 60s were huge so the GTO was a small car. The Mustang was also a small car, the smallest car in Ford's lineup. It did not, however, have a large displacement V8 stuffed under the hood. In 65 the largest motor available was the 289. Subsequent years of the Mustang surely could be considered muscle cars when you started seeing versions that had the 429 motor under the hood. The Mustang is technically considered a sports coupe.
So that brings us to the question of what qualifies as a sports car. Some people say a sports car is a two seat roadster and nothing else can be a sports car. Try as you might you will not find a definitive authority that decides what qualifies as a sports car and what does not because there isn't one. If the manufacturer of a given car designs and designates the car to be a "sports car" then it's a sports car. In other words, if the intended or implied purpose or ability of the car is to be a performance oriented car than it is a sports car. This is why Nissan marketed the Maxima as a 4 Door Sports Car once upon a time; even marking the car with decals that read 4DSC. Some people scoffed because it wasn't a two door coupe. There is no rule that says a sports car must be two doors. That is just a common interpretation but not a correct one, like mistakenly believing that Pony car is an actual class of car.
The definition of a muscle car as it applies to the era of muscle cars was to take a small car and put a large motor in it to make it faster. That's it, it's that simple. The original muscle car was the Pontiac GTO. I know, people look at a GTO from the 60's now and wonder how that is considered a small car. You have to remember that cars in the 60s were huge so the GTO was a small car. The Mustang was also a small car, the smallest car in Ford's lineup. It did not, however, have a large displacement V8 stuffed under the hood. In 65 the largest motor available was the 289. Subsequent years of the Mustang surely could be considered muscle cars when you started seeing versions that had the 429 motor under the hood. The Mustang is technically considered a sports coupe.
So that brings us to the question of what qualifies as a sports car. Some people say a sports car is a two seat roadster and nothing else can be a sports car. Try as you might you will not find a definitive authority that decides what qualifies as a sports car and what does not because there isn't one. If the manufacturer of a given car designs and designates the car to be a "sports car" then it's a sports car. In other words, if the intended or implied purpose or ability of the car is to be a performance oriented car than it is a sports car. This is why Nissan marketed the Maxima as a 4 Door Sports Car once upon a time; even marking the car with decals that read 4DSC. Some people scoffed because it wasn't a two door coupe. There is no rule that says a sports car must be two doors. That is just a common interpretation but not a correct one, like mistakenly believing that Pony car is an actual class of car.
10/3/16, 03:57 AM
#4
A Man Just Needs Some....
The pony cars were mustangs Camaros and challengers. I don't even believe the little AMC jobs were considered pony cars. The muscle cars were bigger platform cars usually available with big blocks. Everything else from the 60's and 70's that had big horsepower except the corvette. This is all just word of mouth and nothing official but still used today. Even still, the mustangs Camaros and challengers are referred to as pony cars and not muscle cars by car circles. Even the nova and falcon which were smaller cars are not referred to as pony cars. Just the Big 3 competing against the mustang. Pretty sure that's where the "pony" came from. Lol
10/3/16, 07:56 PM
#6
Mach 1 Member
At this point anything with a V8 is a muscle car in my book, the selection of muscle cars is so small now days, its pointless trying to put each one in specific categories and argue about stupid crap.
10/5/16, 01:50 AM
#7
The following 2 users liked this post by 3point7:
CaliStangGT500 (10/5/16),
TymeSlayer (4/22/17)
10/5/16, 06:42 PM
#8
Bullitt Member
I agreed, there isn't much choices of pony/muscle cars left to choose from these days. I consider the late model Mustang GTs and higher models, up to the 2014's muscle cars. You get a V8, RWD, 400+ hp, made for the drag strips, and relatively cheap compared to other high performance cars. Plus side is, the newer Mustangs are more than track capable too now.
10/5/16, 10:07 PM
#9
I agreed, there isn't much choices of pony/muscle cars left to choose from these days. I consider the late model Mustang GTs and higher models, up to the 2014's muscle cars. You get a V8, RWD, 400+ hp, made for the drag strips, and relatively cheap compared to other high performance cars. Plus side is, the newer Mustangs are more than track capable too now.
Last edited by 3point7; 10/5/16 at 10:10 PM.
10/5/16, 10:58 PM
#10
Mach 1 Member
Free advice, don't track your Mustang unless you have plenty of "fix it" money in the bank. When you're talking about a car that is hitting 60 in less than 5 seconds and around 12 or 13 in the quarter mile but you're only paying about 35 to 38 for it new it means the car is built to minimum specs. Mustangs are boulevard cruisers, not serious race cars. They're designed for street light to street light, look at me fun stuff but it is not a serious sports car. If you race the thing it is going to break because it was never built to handle that kind of driving. The tire size on the back of the car is not wide enough for the amount of torque the car is putting down and that is part of the reason you see so many clowns swapping ends as they leave these cars and coffee type events. If you want to make your Mustang actually capable of real race driving it's going to take money. In the stock configuration it's good for impressing girls at a street light and that's about it. Just being straight up with you.
And any car you track has a possibility of a failure somewhere, its just the question of when not if. Its not like if you pay 60 grand + for a sport car, it will make it magically more sustainable to any kind of failure, I can go to any car forums right now and find tons of threads about failures of this and that with its salty owners crying and complaining
. and I can bet you fixing anything on the mustang will be 1/3rd of the price then trying to fix that M3 or M4.
10/5/16, 11:46 PM
#11
When 2011 mustang GT came out it was matching and sometimes outracing the BMW M3 at race track,drag, and 0-60 times in a stock config with track package. Now we got a Camaro that out does everything M4 does and even some other sport cars in a way higher price bracket. So by your idea, it makes the M3 and M4 not a track ready car as they all pull the same or close numbers?
And any car you track has a possibility of a failure somewhere, its just the question of when not if. Its not like if you pay 60 grand + for a sport car, it will make it magically more sustainable to any kind of failure, I can go to any car forums right now and find tons of threads about failures of this and that with its salty owners crying and complaining. and I can bet you fixing anything on the mustang will be 1/3rd of the price then trying to fix that M3 or M4.
And any car you track has a possibility of a failure somewhere, its just the question of when not if. Its not like if you pay 60 grand + for a sport car, it will make it magically more sustainable to any kind of failure, I can go to any car forums right now and find tons of threads about failures of this and that with its salty owners crying and complaining
. and I can bet you fixing anything on the mustang will be 1/3rd of the price then trying to fix that M3 or M4.Last edited by 3point7; 10/5/16 at 11:51 PM.
10/6/16, 01:56 AM
#13
10/6/16, 02:11 AM
#14
And because I know someone is going to say "But the new car" and "IRS".
That car was trying to swap ends just twenty or so yards down the track because the back tires cannot handle that much torque and it tries to push to one side or the other. If anything the live axle car is the better drag car than the IRS car. Regardless, the same thing will happen if you're on a road course and you give it to much gas either going into or coming out of a curve.
That car was trying to swap ends just twenty or so yards down the track because the back tires cannot handle that much torque and it tries to push to one side or the other. If anything the live axle car is the better drag car than the IRS car. Regardless, the same thing will happen if you're on a road course and you give it to much gas either going into or coming out of a curve.
Last edited by 3point7; 10/6/16 at 02:15 AM.
10/9/16, 03:18 PM
#15
Cobra Member
[QUOTE=AlsCobra;6997739]The pony cars were mustangs Camaros and challengers. I don't even believe the little AMC jobs were considered pony cars.]
I purchased a new 1969 Javelin SST, Performance Package 2 with the 390 V8, Borg Warner four speed with the Hurst Competition Shifter and linkage from the factory, for delivery overseas, while in the Air Force. It was referred to as a Pony car in most write ups when compared to the Mustang, and Camaro. The Javelin, driven by Mark Donahue (Penske Racing) was a Trans Am Champion, racing against Mustangs and Camaros.
I purchased a new 1969 Javelin SST, Performance Package 2 with the 390 V8, Borg Warner four speed with the Hurst Competition Shifter and linkage from the factory, for delivery overseas, while in the Air Force. It was referred to as a Pony car in most write ups when compared to the Mustang, and Camaro. The Javelin, driven by Mark Donahue (Penske Racing) was a Trans Am Champion, racing against Mustangs and Camaros.
10/10/16, 06:17 PM
#17
Roush Forum Stalker
If muscle cars from back in the day were called "muscle cars" because of their power and torque,................what do we call the Mustangs/Challengers/Camaros of today with almost double said horsepower and torque?! When I hear the word "muscle", I automically think power/strength/torque.
Anyone can call it what they want, but I still call these modern made cars, muscle cars.
Anyone can call it what they want, but I still call these modern made cars, muscle cars.
10/10/16, 07:16 PM
#18
2013 RR Boss 302 #2342
Join Date: March 6, 2012
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 11,658
Likes: 0
Received 2,171 Likes
on
1,619 Posts
Originally Posted by Stage_3
If muscle cars from back in the day were called "muscle cars" because of their power and torque,................what do we call the Mustangs/Challengers/Camaros of today with almost double said horsepower and torque?! When I hear the word "muscle", I automically think power/strength/torque.
Anyone can call it what they want, but I still call these modern made cars, muscle cars.
Anyone can call it what they want, but I still call these modern made cars, muscle cars.
I wholeheartedly agree with you Tony! 
10/11/16, 12:30 AM
#20
Member
Thread Starter
The Shelby has some changes to the suspension that would help it out if I recall correctly but it still suffers from the same problem that the GT does and that is the tires on the back are not big enough for the amount of torque the car is putting down and that causes the car to want to swap ends. In fact in the case of the Shelby it might be worse because it's putting down some really serious torque. I've seen Shelbys whip the tail end of the car around on flat, straight and smooth pavement. Probably the most well known example of this is the one on youtube in which the car ended up slamming into a Dodge truck. I'll post it below. People need to come to the realization that a factory Mustang is a fun car and it's a cool looking car but it is not a serious sports car. It is a boulevard cruiser. So enjoy it for what it is but if you are serious about making it a track car just know in advance that you are either going to spend a lot of money replacing broken stock parts over and over or you are going to have to invest a pile of cash into upgrading the car to a point where it can be effective on a track.
Show off Mustang Shelby GT500 driver crashes into a parked truck - YouTube
Show off Mustang Shelby GT500 driver crashes into a parked truck - YouTube