Steve Magnante's 1001 Mustang Facts - Steve Magnante

Скачать книгу

the breed and that performance sold cars, in the early 1960s Ford monitored a group of Ford dealers in the Southwest (NASCAR country). In 1962, sales from January through May totaled 52,000 cars. A year later, and with Ford’s Total Performance marketing campaign in full force, the same group of dealers sold 65,500 cars in the same time frame.

      114 The September 1964 issue of Car Life featured a 1965 Mustang coupe road test. Equipped with the 271-hp 289 Hi-Po and Ford’s new Toploader 4-speed manual transmission, the results were favorable. “Indeed, while the HP packages (the stiffer suspension can be purchased with any engine) add upwards of $450 onto the base price of the car, it is still possible to get a rip-snorting, big-muscled go-pony for right around $3,000, a real bargain in performance.” Of the 680,989 1965 Mustangs built, (sadly) only 7,273 were equipped with the K-code 289 Hi-Po (561 of which were converted into Shelby Mustangs).

      115 Taking the previous fact further, it is often overlooked that all Shelby Mustangs received a normal Ford VIN during initial assembly at Ford’s San Jose, California (1965–1967), or Metuchen, New Jersey, plant (1968–1970). You must remember to subtract the Shelbys from annual Mustang vehicle and option production totals so they are not counted twice.

      116 “Present planning calls for a production run of 200 cars a month. These will be handled by Cobra dealers across the country. The competition models will be available directly from Shelby’s Venice, California, plant on a special-order basis only.” Well, Car Life staffer Jim Wright sure got it wrong! That’s the GT350 build and distribution strategy he spelled out in the April 1965 issue of the magazine. A mixed bag to be sure, the idea of 2,400 ’65 GT350s sounds great today (200 per month) even though the idea of numerous Shelby-authorized modification facilities spanning the nation seems like a recipe for inconsistent build content and quality. History has shown that Shelby stepped up and rented an aircraft hangar from North American Airlines, where he directly oversaw GT350 and GT500 conversion work through the end of the 1967 model run.

      117 No doubt wanting to avoid a repeat of Studebaker’s disastrous Avanti launch in 1962 (a youth oriented sporty car similar in theme to Mustang), Ford made sure that the dealer pipeline was well stocked with fresh Mustangs when the April 17 launch date arrived. But despite building Mustangs at the rate of 530 units per day for a full six weeks before launch date, by midnight of the first selling day, every one of them was sold and deposits had been taken for another 6,000 (unbuilt) units. Studebaker president Sherwood Egbert had publicly predicted the exciting, new Avanti sports car would sell 1,000 units per month. But, when the Avanti’s official April 26, 1962, launch date came, dealers had no cars to sell. Persistent quality control problems with the fiberglass body forced repeated delays and massive frustration among would-be customers. Egbert’s lofty goal of 1,000 cars per month never had a chance to be tested. In total, a mere 4,643 Avantis were sold before Studebaker ceased domestic auto production in December 1963.

      118 Just 571. That’s the number of days that passed between the final selection of the long hood/short trunk Mustang rendering and the first Mustang that rolled off the Dearborn, Michigan, assembly line on March 9, 1964. Readily accessible (but once top secret) photographs today show clearly recognizable Mustang styling models with dates as early as September 10, 1962. We now know that at least seven distinctly unique design proposals were in the running before the final choice was made. The mind boggles at what might have been.

      119 Time magazine was granted an exclusive interview with Lee Iacocca that appeared in its April 17, 1964, issue. Here are some of his words: “By next year, 40 percent of the U.S. population will be under 20 years of age, and the 16 to 24 group is growing faster than any other segment. Not only are there more young people, they are settling down at an earlier age, marrying, and having families. We have designed the Mustang with young America in mind.” The Baby Boomers were growing up and Ford had the right cars to make their dreams reality.

      120 With its artificially long 17-month manufacturing span, the 1965 model year was an impossible act to follow. Study of comparable 12-month time periods reveals that 1966 Mustang sales ran ahead by 50,000 units when viewed in motion. Total sales (again) were 680,989 for 1965 and 607,558 for 1966.

      121 Despite Iacocca’s “foot-long” option sheet, Mustang’s success led to a form of burnout in some circles. The April 1965 issue of Car Life sums it up, “Mustang has everything going for it except exclusivity. It’s impossible to drive more than a few miles without spotting one or more. They’ve grown so commonplace that Mustangs don’t bother to wave at each other. Not that they could expect recognition from those who remember the precise art of waving, but some sort of camaraderie might have been hoped for. Anyway, it didn’t happen and now there’s discouragement in numbers.” In my view, there is no such thing as too many Mustangs!

      122 “The future of the Mustang is not yet certain. Although built as an exercise, it is no secret that Ford is going to show it very widely and it is not inconceivable that, should public acceptance demand it, a limited production version could be developed around this working prototype.” So wrote Car Life’s J. G. Anthony in a December 1962 review of the two-seat, mid-engine Mustang sports car (that shared nothing but its name with the eventual 1965 production offering). Hindsight being 20/20, the 1962 Mustang had more in common with Pontiac’s 1984–1988 Fiero than anything from Dearborn.

      123 “Aptly named, the 2+2 is designed for two people plus an occasional extra two passengers. We tried those rear seats and found them all right for short hops across town, but we wouldn’t want to ride back there for any distance.” That’s how Motor Trend described the rear seat accommodations of a factory fresh 1965 Hi-Po 289 Mustang 2+2 in its January 1965 issue. The interior dimensions chart listed rear seat legroom at 28.8 inches and headroom at 35.6 inches. To see how things have progressed since then, let’s turn to a road test of a 2015 Mustang GT published in the December 2014 issue of Motor Trend. In the half century since, rear seat legroom grew almost 2 inches (to 30.6 inches) while headroom shrank .8 to 34.8 inches.

      124 A 1965 Plymouth Barracuda Formula S fastback was also evaluated in the same January 1965 issue of Motor Trend. Mustang’s only pony car competition until the 1967 arrival of the Camaro and Firebird, the Barracuda’s wider rear seat cushion could accommodate three people, making the Plymouth a five-passenger proposition. By contrast, the Mustang 2+2’s thicker B-pillars reduced rear seat capacity to two (the Mustang hardtop could take three). Motor Trend called Barracuda’s luggage space “tremendous,” thanks to the standard fold-down seat, which gave access to the under-glass cargo area.

       Chapter 2

       1967–1970 Enter the Big-Blocks

      126 Former President Bill Clinton is a fellow Mustang enthusiast, holding title to a light blue 1967 convertible for many years, including his two terms in office. One might expect the world’s most powerful politician’s car to pack lots of engine, perhaps the new-for-1967 390 big-block or 428 dual-quad GT500? But no, Bill’s ’Stang is more of a cruiser with the base 120 hp T-code 6-banger under the hood.

      127

Скачать книгу