1986 Ford Mustang Reviews

1986 Ford Mustang GT Convertible 5.0 from North America

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2014
Most recent year of ownership2014
Engine and transmission 5.0 Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.0 / 10
Distance when acquired118000 miles

Faults:

I had to rebuild the rear quarter power window motor and add some trans fluid to the convertible top.

General Comments:

Gets great gas mileage for a sports car and is pretty fast.

Gets lots of compliments. I can't drive it without someone trying to buy it from me, or trying to race me.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 29th June, 2014

1986 Ford Mustang LX 3.8 essex from North America

Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2009
Engine and transmission 3.8 essex Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired95000 kilometres
Most recent distance101000 kilometres
Previous carPontiac Bonneville

Summary:

Nice looking car with a bit of kick

Faults:

Rusted out oil pan.

Some rusting to the frame.

General Comments:

Handling is okay and the speed is decent.

I've only needed to put about 800 dollars into the car after buying it for 1600. It only had 95000 km on it, and for the amount I've put into her for a car that will easily last for another 5-6 years, it's rather excellent.

There's no cup holders.

The gas mileage on it isn't great, but what could I expect from a car with a larger engine from the 80's.

All in all, I'm very happy with my purchase.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th November, 2009

1986 Ford Mustang GT Convertible 5.0 302 from North America

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership1986
Most recent year of ownership2008
Engine and transmission 5.0 302 Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired150 miles
Most recent distance262872 miles
Previous carFord Mustang

Summary:

Fabulous

Faults:

Finally replaced my clutch last year... after 21 years.

Basic maintenance repairs throughout the years.

New rag top about 12 years ago. Needs one now.

Front leather seats now need to be replaced.

Had some kind of electrical issue with gauges about 12 years ago. It did not affect the performance of the car.

Premium gas -- ouch!

General Comments:

After driving this car on a daily basis for 22 years, it doesn't owe me a thing. It is reliable, has great performance, and continues to be my primary source of commute.

Although expensive, I will happily continue to feed my mustang her premium gas. It is much cheaper than a new car payment.

It is time to have the valves etc checked because she is a little cold upon first starting. Once going for about 5 minutes, she runs like a dream.

I will continue to drive "Wednesday" and keep making repairs as needed... even though my husband has tried to talk me into a new car and putting her up for the Sunday drive. I'll think about it... tomorrow.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th September, 2008

12th Sep 2008, 11:22

Your experience seems typical of our experience with Fords. One of ours was finally traded (it was hard letting it go) at 325,000+ miles. Naturally it was replaced with another Ford.

22nd Jun 2009, 12:28

Why are you wasting money on premium gas? Mustangs of this era were tuned to run perfectly on 87 gas and there is absolutely no reason to put super unleaded in them. I had two 5.0's and ran 87 in both of them and never had any issues with them. They are rated for 87 so you use 87. Why go up two grades just because, when the car is rated for use with 87 octane?? 30 cents a gallon is a heck of a waste isn't it? They also don't gain any performance with the higher octane, and the only thing you might need it for is to stop any knocking, which usually means you need some other work done like a tune up or something. Let's just say, I never had anyone outperform my cars because they were running super unleaded in theirs. Just think, in the 21 years you have been spending too much on gas you could have put a super charger on your classic Mustang and been up to today's hp standards. Talk about money going up in smoke...

1986 Ford Mustang LX 3.8L V6 from North America

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2008
Engine and transmission 3.8L V6 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.3 / 10
Distance when acquired280000 kilometres
Most recent distance280000 kilometres

Summary:

Fun when it's on the road

Faults:

Transmission went 3 months after purchase.

CAT toasted after 8 months.

Engine went after one year.

General Comments:

The dash is very simple and pleasing. I enjoyed the 'racing' feel that the traditional round guages gave. The little car 'computer' was a nice touch and I can see that being pretty neat when this car was new.

The car held it's own for speed up until about 70KmH, but after that the transmission just wasn't geared for it. Only having 3 gears (no overdrive) makes the drive a little bit upsetting because you know there is more under the hood then what you actually get.

Engine was a blast to work on. Lots of room, simple part installation. Finding parts was very easy and they were relativly cheap.

For being such an old car it did fine for A-B, but as far as a sports car goes there is no substitute for the 5.0L If it wasn't always in the shop then it would be a great car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 12th February, 2008

Average review marks: 8.0 / 10, based on 25 reviews