I used to have a '73 Mustang Grande. Not a fast car, but it was well taken care of and with shocks and springs and wheel changes, good tires too, it was a good driving car and the 302-2bbl with C-4 and 3.00 rear made for decent fuel mileage, and girls liked it. That was back in the '70s. I always thought that car was large for a Mustang, especially when compared to a '74. My big Coleman cooler fit well in the back seat or trunk, I traveled some with it, always had room for luggage.

Then I seen this picture. Mine wasn't a fastback, it was a hardtop rather, and not blue.

How did I get in that thing?

How did I do a lot of what I did in it wonder?



I had been in other Mustangs, a family friend had a '68 GT fastback he ended up restoring twice over before selling it as he had too many sons wanted it. A best friend of mine had a '68 Shelby GT500KR, loaded, bought for $2400 in '71 from a retiree, but he also had a '74 Mustang II driving to NC when he got hit in the rear by a 100+ mph drunk, he died at the ER that night, his BIL & Sister have that Shelby now. I knew a fellow well had a 65 HT with 289 4 spd that was fun, but all these cars were smaller than that '73 Grande, at least they felt smaller?

 

I always say Awesome is a great work truck. Lots of bodies can be flung in the trunk, the fold down makes more cargo, but even up, there's plenty storage... I put a buncha 8' 2x4s and one 4x4 in there and closed the trunk! Put a hitch on her and she'd tow a nice sized trailer, y'know. Not that I've done such, how dare I. But still, could be done.

Yep. Work truck. That's my Mustang sometimes... or was. I got a lil' Caliber now so Awesome doesn't get out as much as she used to...

Point is.. yep, they're bigger than we think sometimes!

/I really want to find another '05-09 and make a Ranchero outta it... Stick a Ranger bed on it and style it up. I can weld, turns out...
//I need to get Awesome back out soon.
///Thems some purty cars there, lemme tell ya...

 

My wife would have a kaniption fit iffin I brung a batch of lumber home in "HER GT" .... ... I'd probably get smootered then.

I think if I was towing, I'd have to add an Air Lift bag kit in the rear springs, but I think it would even tow a small camper swell.

I recall a fellow used to pull a bike trailer with his Kawasaki 900 (that he had set up to drag race, long swing arm, open header, etc) in the '70s when I worked there at New London DS, with his mildly modded '70.5 Z-28 4 speed, I was surprised to see him and a buddy open the trunk to lift out a tool box that until this day, I still don't know how it fit. His wife was a big girl but she sure put on her own show. That Camaro was pulling a load.

 

Nice picture. I have always thought the 71-73 were 'a lot larger' than the 05-14 Mustangs, I guess I am wrong

 

Dimensions & Weight

The 1973 Mustang resembled the 1971 and 1972 Mustangs very closely. The 1973 Mustang had grown up, out and heavy since its birth in 1964. Wheelbase increased by 1 inch, it was 12.2 inches longer and 5.9 inches wider. In height it grew .4 inches and total weight increased by 575 pounds. Although 575 pounds does not seem to be much, since the original car only weighed 2562 pounds, this was about 22% increase.
Description Measure Body Length 189.5 inches Body Width 74.1 inches Body Height Hardtop 50.8 inches Body Height Fastback 50.1 inches Track Front 61.5 inches Track Rear 61.5 inches Wheelbase 109.0 inches Weight Fastback 3560 lb Weight Hardtop 3590 lb Trunk Capacity - Fastback w/ rear seat up 8.3 cu-ft Trunk Capacity - Hardtop 9.5 cu-ft %Frt/% Rear 56/44

Dimensions & Weight

Compared to the previous Mustang, the 2005 model was a much larger car. The wheelbase grew to 107.1-inches from 101.3, this was done to increase passenger space and improve ride quality. Most of the increase in the wheelbase was gained by cutting the font overhang and moving the front wheels forward. This not only made the car look better but also aided the vehicle dynamics by moving the front weight balance rearward resulting in a better handling car. Overall, the car was 4.4-inches longer, 0.8-inches wider and 1.4-inches taller. This increase in size directly benefitted interior space, an area that was a weakness of the previous Mustang.
Description Measure Curb Weight (lbs.) GT (Auto) 3,518 lbs Curb Weight (lbs.) V6 (Auto) 3,387 lbs Curb Weight (lbs.) GT (5-speed) 3,483 lbs Curb Weight (lbs.) V6 (5-speed) 3,351 lbs Weight distribution GT (%Front / Rear) 57/36 Weight Distribution V6 (%Front / Rear) 55/45 Trunk space 12.3 cu. ft. Overall length 187.6 inches Overall width 74 inches Overall height 54.5 inches Wheelbase 107.1 inches Seating capacity 4 Front head room 38.6 inches Rear Head Room 35.0 inches Leg Room: Front 42.7 inches Leg Room: Rear 31.0 inches

 

cool photo for sure!

I always thought those early 70s mustangs were way too big; very surprised to see the direct comparison with the S197 . . . I think the perspective in the picture is a little off, but for sure the S197 is a lot bigger than I thought in comparison

 

Two pics I took at Charlotte Motor Speedway in April of 2014, not '71-73, but of '65 and a S197 Shelby.



A '68 Shelby and a S197:


My best buddy's '68 as it looks in 2020. Dennis died in '79 as result of a crash in his '74 Mustang II, his DD ... but this car was at home in a garage. The car had just been painted, but the painter saved the OEM stripes and cleared over them. This is exactly as it looked when he bought it. 428 CJ, C-6, 3.00 rear axle , PS, PDB, AC ... car has tilt wheel and when you open the driver door, the steering wheel jump out of your way for easy access. It has Ford AM/FM stereo straight out of my '73 Grande as it came to him with a base AM radio.

 

​​​​​​​Compared to the 2008-current Challenger, the S197 cars are considered as dwarfs in overall size and weight lol.

 

I got distracted by wife, somehow double posted.

 

My dad refers to today's retro-styled Camros and Mustangs as simply taking the old design and making it 9/8 in size.

 

I too drove a first gen, 1967 fastback. My 2014 seemed bigger, but not that much. But being nearly 40 years between cars the memory plays tricks. I know the 71-73 models seemed pretty big compared to my old '67. But they were pretty small compared to today's...

It really is pretty amazing how small the early years Mustangs are, then the even smaller Mustang II.

When I figured this out a few years ago I was surprised how big our S197s are compared to past yeas. Here are a couple of additional pictures to add. These are the ones that opened my eyes. My dealer had sent out a promo email that started my education.

There is a chart out there somewhere I have seen before that shows the comparison in size year by year, but I could not find it.

 

Oh yeah, that really shows it. I think that this might be the first moon roof I've seen in a early Shelby?

 

Man, you are not kidding. I made a thread about this in November. It actually makes me appreciate my '07 Mustang even more as 'bigger is not better' in my personal opinion. I really enjoy my new ride but the larger size is obvious. My Trans Am seems like a minnow compared to both. Same with the wheel sizes as the Dodge has 20", the GT/CS 18" and the Firebird 16".

 

The main reason IMO, is due to stricter crash safety standards in addition to requiring more space to fit safety cells, airbags, crumple zones and so on. Prior to purchasing my first S197 Mustang in "05" I owned 3 Fox body Mustangs which the last one was a black "93" SVT Cobra. Shortly after purchasing the "05" GT, it took quite awhile in getting used to the much larger size of the S197 compared to the smaller Fox body cars. As much as I really enjoyed the Fox bodies, the S197 cars are light years ahead in engineering, much improved chassis platform, powertrain and overall advanced technology in general. At any rate, I'll always have very fond memories of the Fox body cars, but despite the larger size of the S197 Mustang platform, I've also enjoyed them just as much during these last 16 years and also feel much more secure in knowing that if in the event of being involved in a collision? the odds of surviving will be far greater than compared to 20-25 years ago. That being said, when taking into consideration all the pros and cons between the Fox body vs the S197 platform is concerned, the S197 Mustang is by far the clear winner, hands down IMHO.

 

^^^ I certainly agree. I also owned a 1982 Mustang GT (my first ever 'new' car) and a 2004 Mustang convertible. Normally you would never believe the huge advances in just 3 years from the '04 - '07.
Getting back to the 'big' picture, yes, the crash advances have to be put somewhere. Size and weight have to be involved. This Dodge has knee airbags and side airbags besides the regular airbags that I am way too familiar with on the GT/CS (re-calls). I'm OK with it as I really have no choice if I want a new car. I thought for years that my '07 was as modern as I ever really wanted to get but now it's almost a dinosaur too. NAV screens I never imagined owning. At least I can turn the darn thing off although the climate control options can spoil you in a hurry.

 

^^^^ Totally agree as well. Although the S197 may be considered as outdated compared to the technology of the current S550 platform, it has just enough bells and whistles to suit my particular needs as a non-daily driver.. With just barely under 30k miles, my "06" GT is only used for recreational purposes such as car cruise/show events and occasional road trips during the spring, summer and early fall seasons from mid April thru the end of September. Other than that, it stays kept inside the garage. So despite almost now becoming a dinosaur compared to the advancements we now have in current 2020-21 technology, the S197 has just enough modern conveniences for what I ever really wanted and practically need anyhow as a weekend warrior/fun car. We also have a 2019 Escape for our daily driver and I still can't navigate around those goofy NAV/menu screens lol..