1964-1970 Mustang Member Tech & Restoration Discussion

Which Group for the II?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 4, 2004 | 05:07 PM
  #1  
78CobraII's Avatar
Thread Starter
Member
 
Joined: February 4, 2004
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Here's one sure to generate an argument...if you were to try to classify the Mustang II as a "Classic" Mustang or a "Fox" Mustang based on the design of its parts alone, which group would you place it in?

The styling is closer to the "Classic" family.
The front suspension design is closer to the "Classic" family.
The rear suspension design is closer to the "Classic" family.
The 8" rear axle is closer to the "Classic" family.
The core design dates to the late '60's (Pinto).

The C4 auto trans was shared with both groups.
The 302 was shared with (and almost identical to) both groups.

The 2.3L and 2.8L engine was shared with the "Fox" family.
The interior has more in common with the "Fox" family.
The lug pattern is identical with the "Fox" family.
The 6.75" rear is very similar to the 7.5" and 8.8" rears in the "Fox" family.
The RAD 4-speed was the basis of the T-5 5-speed in the "Fox" family.

Most Mustang companies with MII parts in a catalog place the MII in with the "Fox" family catalog. Personally I don't care as long as they HAVE parts for the II and they don't have a 1965-1973 catalog and a 1979-2004 catalog with a gap in-between.

Truthfully there are some MII parts available, and they do have some listings in common with both groups, so there's not much excuse for not placing the MII in one catalog or the other. If for no other reason than to eliminate the gap in their Mustang offerings!
Reply
Old Feb 6, 2004 | 08:01 AM
  #2  
StangII's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: February 2, 2004
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Due to all the II specific parts i.e. bell housing flywheel etc i always pretty much left it to its own group. But if you have to group it i would say its grouped to the foxes. IIs started the 4 cyl availability which led to the 4 cyl turbo end eventually the svo (which are neat cars). Of course its the first V6 stang. Internal linkage manual transmissions, 5.0 moniker (thats right the 78 stang was the first one badged 5.0).
Reply
Old Jun 18, 2004 | 09:33 AM
  #3  
My89Ford's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
There were sixbangers before the II, take for example the '64 Ucode. Not sure if they were I6 or V6 though.
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 08:14 AM
  #4  
StangII's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: February 2, 2004
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Im pretty sure it was a straight 6. I could be wrong but im pretty sure the II was the first stang to use the V 6
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 08:29 AM
  #5  
GT350Clone's Avatar
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: June 9, 2004
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
From: Leavenworth KS
This would be like trying to decide if a Chevy was a Ford or a Dodge. The answer (IMHO), is neither.

The MII is it's own deal. It belongs to both groups, while at the same time, belonging to neither. :scratch:
Reply
Old Jun 21, 2004 | 10:06 AM
  #6  
Mberglo's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: June 9, 2004
Posts: 1,300
Likes: 0
The early 6 cyl Mustangs were inline 6's.

I like the dueces. I wish I had one with all the latest go-fast-goodies. I think they're good looking cars. They earned a reputation for being fat-slow pigs, and rightfully so. Those were the dark ages for the US car industry. But we can overcome all of that now with aftermarket goodies, and 5.0 transplants.

The duece is a classic. It's not a first generation classic. But it's a classic. I'll take a black/gold Cobra II, with T-tops, a SC 5.0, Tremec, an interior upgrade, and a kickin stereo. Yea, that'd be cool.
Reply
Old Jun 27, 2004 | 03:46 PM
  #7  
Luvs_the_II's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: June 27, 2004
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
I consider the II a classic.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2004 | 05:57 AM
  #8  
1976cobraii's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: December 13, 2004
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
I will go with classic also.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2004 | 01:18 PM
  #9  
78Mach1's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Yea, the II is a classic. Looks nothing like the Fox bodies.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2004 | 01:20 PM
  #10  
78Mach1's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
I would put the 05 with the classics before I stick the fox bodies in there. at least 79-86.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2004 | 04:05 PM
  #11  
future9er24's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 18,616
Likes: 3
From: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
classis cut in its won way sorta. like GT350Clone i thinki ti is very much its own car, but it still is a classic.


oh how i wish for a 78 red King Cobra w/ T-tops and a transplanted 427
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2004 | 03:09 PM
  #12  
63galaxie's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
...All classic in every proportion but the smaller 4's and sixes. Buy one with a 302 for cheap, easy to tune up, once she's pushin over 280hp she'll be running with the big dogs(so light of a car.)
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2004 | 05:05 PM
  #13  
future9er24's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 18,616
Likes: 3
From: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
alas, i wish i could ^^
Reply
Old Dec 16, 2004 | 08:03 PM
  #14  
63galaxie's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
me too, me too /\

Too bad I'm pretty much broke
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GTPETE
Car Care
8
Oct 12, 2015 02:20 PM
Coyote5-0
5.0L GT Modifications
23
Oct 12, 2015 10:44 AM
tj@steeda
Auto Shows and Events
0
Sep 30, 2015 07:02 PM
5.M0NSTER
2010-2014 Mustang
17
Sep 12, 2015 08:11 PM
GTPETE
Introductions
8
Sep 10, 2015 03:28 PM




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:26 AM.