10th Jul 2010, 18:23
It doesn't take much to outhandle the old Foxbody 5.0. The bar was already pretty low, so I'm not sure the 4 actually handled very well itself.
11th Jul 2010, 09:42
Oh here we go again, slamming the 5.0. They pulled .84g on the skidpad stock, which in its day was very respectable. I used to take freeway loops at 60 without pulling out of the seat. They stayed nice and flat and were really tight in corners. Just because most people couldn't handle the power to weight ratio, and broke the rear end loose by giving it too much gas, doesn't mean the car is a poor handling car. I loved driving mine and they both handled better than most cars I have driven since. Even my WRX was no better due to the pitiful tires they put on them.
11th Jul 2010, 16:27
"You must live in an area that people drive old beater cars around a lot if you are still seeing 4 cylinder Fox Mustangs running around regularly"
No not at all. The Fox 4's that drive around are all in pretty good shape from what I can tell. I've never been up close to any of the ones I see driving around everyday, but when they've driven past my house or in the other lane past me, they looked pretty good. The ones I saw at the shows were in excellent shape, as they had obviously been restored.
12th Jul 2010, 08:42
Well it's good to see some people taking care of their cars for so long... Not sure it would be a wise investment to actually restore a 4 cylinder Fox for more than pure enjoyment.
12th Jul 2010, 23:57
Restoring ANY Mustang is a sound investment. A friend of mine had a beautifully restored 1976 Mustang 4. That's not a Fox, but the previous model, regarded as even less collectible. He just sold the car for $1000 more than it cost new. As the Foxes age, any Fox will bring a good price. I see large numbers of Fox 4's at car shows already.
23rd Jul 2010, 10:11
Sorry, but restoring a 4 cylinder Fox will never get you your money back. I just booked one on KBB. With 10K miles on it, in excellent condition (which doesn't exist as far as any dealer is concerned on a used car) it comes in at $4,600. You couldn't get a good paint job done on the car for that, in restoration, so it would hardly be worth the investment over that. You are better off finding an Escort GT to restore at that point. At least it was more fun to drive than the base Fox.
As far as selling the old Mustang II for more than you paid for it. Yeah, it's possible. Remember the cost new was only in the $3K range or maybe $4K. My Dad bought a brand new Trans Am in '75 for around $5K so the base Mustang couldn't have gone for too much. So they made $1,000 over 34 years? Not much for the time and effort is it? The restoration had to cost way more than that. There are people that look for nice old cars, but getting a lot for a base model will never be the norm. Like I said, go on Ebay or any other trading site and count the 5.0 Mustangs to the 4 cylinder ones of the same year. Most of the time you won't even find any base Mustangs, but they do pop up now and again. Never have I seen one going for much money though, even in mint condition.
23rd Jul 2010, 17:40
I have never seen a 4 cylinder Mustang in a show. I am in at least 3 shows a month, and once I was in a toy run and 2 shows in a single day. I have been in shows since 1988. I did see an old white Capri with sunroof not in a show at my health club parked next to me. The only 4 cyl I see are British Club guys, and once I saw a Gazelle kit with a 4 cylinder.
24th Jul 2010, 15:53
At least 40% of the Mustangs at the last large Mustang show I attended were either 4's or V-6's. Exactly half of the pre-1967 Mustangs (4 out of 8) had the 200 I-6.
25th Jul 2010, 16:21
I believe you, but I have never seen that at any show around here. Older Mustangs were very common with the 6 in them, so I can see that... especially the convertibles. All the shows I have attended have V8 powered Bosses, Mach's, GT's and Shelbys. I've never seen a later model V6 and definitely not a 4 cylinder, other than an occasional SVO, at any show. Like I said, to me a 4 cylinder Mustang is no better than a base Escort of the same year, so to go to shows and see them would be a waste of time for me. There is just no attraction to every day common base cars at shows for me.
26th Jul 2010, 17:51
I think a lot of people must be confusing MUSTANG shows with MUSCLE CAR shows. Yes, at muscle car shows the horsepower is what it's all about. No one cares about the car's looks or interiors, just the engines. At Mustang shows, it is about MUSTANGS, and includes ALL of them. I prefer car shows that concentrate on a car's appearance, interiors and beautiful custom paintwork. I really care little about looking at engines. The shows my family attends are family-oriented, and encourage all Mustang owners to participate.
27th Jul 2010, 18:18
No confusion here... The last MUSTANG show I attended had NO V6 cars and DEFINITELY no 4 cylinder cars. It was comprised entirely of Bosses, Mach's, GT's and Shelbys.
27th Jul 2010, 19:17
Just so everyone is clear. Wikipedia defines a Musclecar as a 60s, early 70s V8 powered 2 door sold for street use. If you showed up at a show, you could call it a classic with a 6, and people like seeing stock class, which means 5 mods or less if judged. I only like the bare bones, anemic power cars, totally stock, as if they just left the showroom. Build sheet literature etc in the show, but I do that with my rare convertible 4 speed big block. People love the correct detail and documentation. And yet some people walking at shows ask the most ridiculous questions. My best observation was seeing a person open the gas cap and looking in the tank in a car next to mine. And people getting in your car without asking. Some have no clue if it's a 6 or 8 at shows. After a while you see and hear it all
29th Jul 2010, 18:18
This would technically be classed as a "performance car" show in that case. MCA (Mustang Club of America) and most organized Mustang clubs forbid discrimination against members owning 4 or 6 cylinder cars. "Mustang Shows" are open to ANY Mustang owner and not restricted to any engine or series. To do so would rule out thousands of prospective, dues paying members and would be highly counter-productive, since 66% of all Mustangs sold in recent years have been 4's (in the 80's) or 6's (now).
30th Jul 2010, 16:14
What is your point here? I am simply stating facts, and the fact is I have never seen a base 4 cylinder or V6 Mustang at any show, period! And who gets so technical about what type of show you are attending. I never really care what the label is on the show, and I am only interested in what is in the show. Who cares about the clubs policies and all. I am glad they don't discriminate. I don't either as far as people driving whatever they like, but I am glad to have never wasted time looking at boring mundane everyday cars at a show.
I also don't care about the 66% number for the base Mustang. This is true about most cars, with base and performance models, because people can't afford to own them or whine about insurance etc, etc. How many of those 66% do you think are envious every time they see a V8 car? Probably more than half. And the other half is probably comprised of rental fleet cars as they don't use GT's for that task. That still doesn't make the average everyday car a show car... sorry. If anything, the more of them there are, the less appealing they become. I am glad there are fewer GT Mustangs around. It makes them more interesting.