1989 Ford Mustang Reviews - Page 3 of 7

1989 Ford Mustang LX 2.3L 88 horsepower from North America

Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 2.3L 88 horsepower Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired122100 miles
Most recent distance122514 miles

Summary:

A great first car

Faults:

There is a power steering leak, but nothing that can be easily fixed. There is a rip in the vinyl seats I have, but I can get that fixed. There also might be a radiator leak, but other than that really no complaints.

General Comments:

This car when it shifts from reverse to drive takes a while, but it's an old car so its expected. It handles A lot better than my wifes Toyota Camry, I feel. It also handles really well in corners and it is very easy to commute in. The gas pedal is firm, and it accelerates powerfully with it being a 4 cylinder. They seats are very comfortable, and the air conditioning works really well. This car also gets really good gas mileage.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 23rd July, 2004

8th May 2005, 21:53

I have same one, what ever you say that's right, I got with per tank (55liters) gas 485km, I just change fuel filter will see how much will be different than before I got, but I feel car getting faster, I recommended everyone every year change fuel filter... by the way they put it fuel filter so bad location under the car front side of the gas tank, if anybody want change so easy it will take 30 minutes. little bit gas run out, but not strong. just make new filter ready to put into the hose. first take out exit hose (going to engine side) after from gas tank hose. good luck...

EDMONTON-CANADA.

6th Mar 2006, 19:12

A mustang is not a mustang if it doesn't have a v8!

28th Jan 2008, 16:49

A dummy isn't a dummy unless he needs to make his balls bigger by saying go V8.

The mustang 2.3 N/A is the best engine for both gas mileage and reliability. I had one with 300000 miles and it was never rebuilt... still had cross hatching on the cylinder walls when I took it out XD.

26th Mar 2008, 13:45

Parents loved these cars, not enough power to hurt their kids or anybody else. And the kids liked it because it looked sporty.

They sold like gold on the used car market to parents. I sold mine used the day after I posted the ad for list price.

1989 Ford Mustang LX from North America

Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 2 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
2.5 / 10
Distance when acquired69000 miles
Most recent distance135000 miles
Previous carOldsmobile 98

Summary:

Horrible looking, Horribly Designed Nightmare

Faults:

In Order:

1. After I bought the car, the exhaust system needed to be replaced.

2. The transmission went out.

3. Gas tank started to leak.

4. Rust consumed the car's body.

5. The brakes system needed to be replaced.

6. Many other repairs. Including the car overheats during summer, which is why I was glad I sold the car this spring.

General Comments:

I got this car my senior year in High School. The car lasted through my final year in college. When I bought it, it had very little rust. However, now rust has almost consumed the whole entire car.

I bought the car for $2,600. However, I spent much more money fixing the car up. It was a mechanical nightmare. On top of that the performance was horrible. The car couldn't even accelerate. I sold the car for $850. It just wasn't a good car. Plus, it just doesn't look very good. The newer mustangs look much better.

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

Review Date: 17th July, 2004

29th Mar 2005, 10:47

I often wonder why people would buy a car...

1.) With out test driving it

2.) if they thought it was ugly.

Sounds like you got a lemon. These are decent cars if shown just a lil bit 'o' love.

7th Nov 2005, 00:15

I have owned my 89 for 3 years now... i live in Maine we have bad winters so I put it away... no rust consumption if you take care of the car... i have had very minor problems with the car like the o'2 sensors going bad... heck the car is after all 15 years old... you can't buy a car this year and expect it not to have some problems... specially a car with a big motor... god knows I'm not easy on mine.

31st Jul 2006, 23:26

I sold my '89 Mustang 5.0 in 2003. It looked as good as the day it was purchased new. A lot depends on how a car is taken care of. I thought it looked better than the newer ones, as it was sleeker and had cleaner lines. It was also very tough. I hit an 8-inch high curb with it at 50mph and figured I'd wiped out the whole front end. All it did was warp a wheel. I didn't even knock the front end out of alignment.

3rd Dec 2008, 21:42

I have owned a 89 Mustang 5.0 for 3 years now and am loving it. You probably have a 2.3 liter, that's why the acceleration sucks. Plus all you need to do is take care of these cars and they will take care of you. Plus owning a car that's 10 years+ old, you should know what you're getting into.

4th Dec 2008, 20:38

My last Fox 5.0 was a very rugged and tough car, and by no means slow (though slower than my 2007 4.0 V-6). My biggest gripes were the horrible gas mileage (11-18) and very rough ride.

Average review marks: 7.6 / 10, based on 26 reviews