How did you guys live through it?
2/27/05, 06:03 PM
#1
GT Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: December 30, 2004
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being of a younger generation, and this being my first Mustang, I've been doing a lot of historical research into the Mustang. Now, being a kid who grew up in the 90s, the one constant for our generation is that things always get faster,.more high tech, cheaper, and better, pretty rapidly and exponentially over time. I guess you can thank the digital age, but the one thing we know is that things will always be better. My queston for all of you is simple. HOW did you live through a period that went from a multitude of 300+ horsepower engines available in 1969 to the MOST POWERFUL engine being offered in 1972 being a 120 horsepower 4 cylinder engine in a car half the size of the previous generation. I can't imagine the demoralizing effects and the stark realization that your quality of life was substantially less than the generation before, something that I never knew was a part of America, where things are always better.
2/27/05, 06:18 PM
#3
I'm people, and I like.
Join Date: March 13, 2004
Location: PDX
Posts: 9,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by futurestang@February 27, 2005, 5:06 PM
...but the one thing we know is that things will always be better... something that I never knew was a part of America, where things are always better... a time when America must have been demoralized.
...but the one thing we know is that things will always be better... something that I never knew was a part of America, where things are always better... a time when America must have been demoralized.
thats some funny stuff there... i would assume you are talking only about automobiles, and not other issues. if not, I would much rather live in any era than now.
and to answer your question about the 70-80's... some people had their ways of coping
2/27/05, 09:51 PM
#7
Team Mustang Source Legacy Member
1969: 376 hp-V8
1970: 375 hp-V8
1971: 375 hp-V8
1972: 275 hp-V8
1973: 266 hp-V8
1974: 105 hp-V6
Not sure where those numbers in your "historical research" came from, but yes, the hp went down... then it went up, then it went down, well you get the point.
Next time you decide to tell another generation how much better you have it than them, do your homework a little better. At least you'll "seem" intelligent.
1970: 375 hp-V8
1971: 375 hp-V8
1972: 275 hp-V8
1973: 266 hp-V8
1974: 105 hp-V6
Not sure where those numbers in your "historical research" came from, but yes, the hp went down... then it went up, then it went down, well you get the point.
Next time you decide to tell another generation how much better you have it than them, do your homework a little better. At least you'll "seem" intelligent.
2/28/05, 10:30 AM
#11
Bullitt Member
Join Date: December 16, 2004
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy. Buy used cars. When the gas crunch hit in the 70's, you could pick up big blocks all over. As long as you were willing to pay for the gas, you could drive whatever you wanted.
Exactly the same today. My wife's Diesel Jetta TDI gets almost 53 miles per gallon. Still, I'll take my 66 GT that gets 15ish any day. I just have to fill up much more and be willing to spend the money.
Exactly the same today. My wife's Diesel Jetta TDI gets almost 53 miles per gallon. Still, I'll take my 66 GT that gets 15ish any day. I just have to fill up much more and be willing to spend the money.
2/28/05, 05:12 PM
#12
V6 Member
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm "only" 27, so I didn't live through the big number to little number phase. Heck, I don't even remember the gas crunch of the '70s.
What people tend to overlook when comparing those large horsepower numbers of the '60s to the more meager numbers of the late '70s and so on, is the way those ratings were obtained.
It was in the early '70s, 1972 I believe, that all the companies had to change how they got those numbers. Before '72, those numbers were basically acquired by running the engine without any accessories on it. I guess the government stepped in and said something, and after '72, manufacturers had to give the numbers from the engine as it would sit in the vehicle.
So, in theory, a 139 hp 302 from a Mustang II *could* actually put out as much power as an earlier model 289.
It was all in how the ratings were obtained.
What people tend to overlook when comparing those large horsepower numbers of the '60s to the more meager numbers of the late '70s and so on, is the way those ratings were obtained.
It was in the early '70s, 1972 I believe, that all the companies had to change how they got those numbers. Before '72, those numbers were basically acquired by running the engine without any accessories on it. I guess the government stepped in and said something, and after '72, manufacturers had to give the numbers from the engine as it would sit in the vehicle.
So, in theory, a 139 hp 302 from a Mustang II *could* actually put out as much power as an earlier model 289.
It was all in how the ratings were obtained.
2/28/05, 07:00 PM
#14
Post *****
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Location: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Posts: 18,614
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
actually he's right. or would have been if he hadnt realeted the II. in fact, after the '73 model year, new emmisions stuff was added into the engine. one such torture device was the recycler valve wihch put exuast back into the engine via intake, thus killing power. also the intakes were more restrictive, the receycle valve clogged and a number of other things (exuaste, etc) all factored in to the loss of power.
so actually, the II had it worse then the '73. it had the new way of measureing AND all this crap that made it slower anyway.
hope i didnt confuse no one
and James, lets see some pix of that '72
so actually, the II had it worse then the '73. it had the new way of measureing AND all this crap that made it slower anyway.
hope i didnt confuse no one
and James, lets see some pix of that '72
3/1/05, 01:16 AM
#15
GTR Member
Join Date: May 27, 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,749
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Originally posted by Red Star@February 28, 2005, 10:32 AM
James, since when do you have 1972 Mustang? Have you been drinking again?
James, since when do you have 1972 Mustang? Have you been drinking again?
And a picture for you! (this car is now rotting away somewhere in London because the guy who bought it off me blew the engine)
3/1/05, 08:28 AM
#17
GTR Member
Join Date: May 27, 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,749
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
I sold it because I wasn't getting enough use out of it (not being able to use it whenever there was salt on the road). I used the money from the sale to buy my 2000, a car I could use everyday! I do really regret selling it though and someday I will get myself a Bright Red Mach 1 like this one!
3/1/05, 08:40 AM
#18
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 5, 2004
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gotta agree with jg, my '73 had a 351C and it had waaaaay more than 120hp. I remember one time smoking the bald tires and having sparks coming off the tire because the steel belt was wearing through. 
