Some of the scariest things in horror films aren’t usually supposed to be scary. Dolls, for instance, or clowns. But put the right twist on those things, and they turn into nightmares. Likewise, Ford Mustangs aren’t usually thought of as frightening, but there are Mustangs, and then there are Mustangs. Today we’re looking at the latter.
Yesterday’s black sedans weren’t all that scary, but as several of you pointed out, they were definitely bad-guy cars. The Cadillac could easily be the ride of choice of a ruthless mob boss, while the Mercedes has more of an international drug smuggler vibe. However, our villains make their money, I hope it pays well, because the Caddy needs some love to bring it back up to a decent standard, and the Benz will require a lot of maintenance to keep it in its current condition.
IÂ want to like the Cadillac, but I’d like it a lot more if it were a few years older, or half the price. As it stands, I agree that the Mercedes is the better deal, so I’ll side with the overwhelming majority on this one. But it’s still not going to be a cheap car to keep on the road.
When someone says to you, “I drive a Mustang,” you probably have an image of a car that pops into your head. You might picture the iconic ’65 model, or the current generation, or maybe the yellow ’95 GT convertible that your friend’s cute sister used to drive. But what you probably don’t envision, unless you have very strange and disturbing tastes, is either a Mustang II Ghia or a four-cylinder Fox-body. And even if you do, you probably don’t picture them in ghostly white with blood-red interiors, because that would make them extra-scary. But get ready, because that’s exactly what we’re going to look at today.
1977 Ford Mustang II Ghia – $5,000
Engine/drivetrain: 2.8-liter OHV V6, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Brentwood, CA
Odometer reading: 90,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives
By now, we all know the Mustang II saga: it was a hit with critics at the time, and a sales success, but it has never been accepted as a “real Mustang” by fans, and has often been used as a lazy shorthand way to encapsulate everything that was wrong with cars during the malaise era. The Mustang II has seen a little bit of a redemption arc recently, though it’s often spoken of with a wink and a nod even by those who claim to appreciate it. Is it a great car? Not even close. Is it the worst car of its era? Not by a country mile.
Part of the problem was that, in its first model year, the Mustang II didn’t even offer a V8 engine, something which had come to be seen as part of the Mustang formula. In its place was Ford’s Cologne 60-degree V6, which had served the Mustang’s European cousin, the Capri, quite well. It wasn’t exactly a heavy hitter, but then neither was the V8 when it finally did come along. The V6 isn’t frightfully slow like the four-cylinder, or thirsty like the V8; it splits the difference and lands firmly in “meh” territory. This one runs and drives, but that’s all the seller will tell us, except that it’s “a bit higher maintenance” than they can handle. Expect to do some tinkering under the hood once you get it home.
The Mustang II was available in a few different flavors; the Ghia emphasized comfort over performance – which was wise, since it had no performance to emphasize – and was equipped like a miniature personal luxury coupe. This one looks surprisingly good inside. Nobody’s interiors held up worth a damn in the ’70s (except Mercedes-Benz), and the fact that badly faded carpet is this car’s worst flaw inside means that someone really treated it nicely. I have no idea why that gigantic zip-tie is on the steering column, though.
A vinyl landau top was part of the Ghia package, and far too many Mustang IIs were so afflicted. At least this one is in decent condition; hopefully, the roof isn’t rusted out underneath. The rest of it looks clean, though, so I wouldn’t expect to find any rust. It even has all four original hubcaps. The ad does say it has a rebuilt title, however, so obviously it has seen some action of some sort.
1991 Ford Mustang LX Coupe – $7,500
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHC inline 4, four-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Union City, CA
Odometer reading: 96,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives
I still remember seeing the Fox-body Mustang for the first time at the Chicago Auto Show in 1979, and it is impossible to overstate how sleek and futuristic it looked compared to the outgoing Mustang II. It was a design that owed nothing to the past except its basic proportions and layout. And amazingly, Ford managed to make it better-looking with each refresh throughout its fourteen-year run. It’s still my favorite generation of Mustang, and judging by the asking prices of them these days, I’m not alone.
The base engine throughout the Fox-body’s run was a 2.3-liter four-cylinder, a carryover from the Mustang II. It gained a turbocharger on two separate occasions over the years, with varying degrees of success. By 1991, there was no turbo option, nor was there any intermediate six-cylinder option between this engine and the V8, but it had gained fuel injection and a twin-spark cylinder head. It’s actually fun to drive with a five-speed manual, but this one has an automatic, which turns the driving experience into the automotive equivalent of light beer. It’ll get you there, but it’ll be a forgettable trip. This one runs fine, but has a transmission leak that should be addressed if it’s bad enough.
I don’t know how many Fox-body Mustang LXs were sold with red interiors, but I bet it’s a lot. It seems like half of the white or silver Mustangs of this era I’ve seen have red interiors, with the other half split between blue and gray. It looks good in red, and this one is in good condition. Even the headliner looks nice. Our old nemesis, the tree-shaped air freshener, makes an appearance, but we’ll give it the benefit of the doubt unless a sniff-test proves otherwise.
This “notchback” coupe bodystyle is prized by those looking to build a hot-rod Fox-body Mustang, because it offers a little more structural rigidity than the hatchback version. It also, I think, looks better, but you do lose the hatchback versatility. This one is in nice shape, though the seller says it has “minor surface rust.” If so, it’s certainly not obvious from the photos. It’s got aftermarket wheels on it, like so many Mustangs of a certain age seem to end up with, and someone added V8-style dual exhaust pipes to it. No word on whether they’re functional.
Really, there’s nothing wrong with either of these cars, except maybe the prices. They’re just not what you think of when someone says “Mustang.” But the great thing about both of them is that they don’t have to stay frumpy and slow; either one is an engine swap away from being a lot more fun, if you want them to be. Which one calls to you?
No.
And I don’t want to be seen driving either.
This is the correct answer.
Sorry, not at either of those prices. But Ill take the II since I have fond memories racing those around Waterford back in the early 90’s. It’s one of those either/neither kinda days.
…okay, here’s the thing. If I’m continuing with the theme of “intimidating big tire spooky-theme drag car”, then it kind of has to be the Fox. It isn’t that the Deuce can’t be made to look mean, it’s just going to take a lot more body work. The Fox becomes more menacing if you just turn the parking lights on. Both look good tucking big slicks, but the Fox could pull off a nasty look as it is with a black wrap. The Deuce needs the Cobra body kit and some custom paint to really set it off. Even not Sticking to the theme I set for myself, the Fox is named after my favorite animal, so how can I not?
I’ve always liked Mustangs, though I’ve never had any real desire to own one. If I did, it certainly wouldn’t be either of these. Since it’s fake Internet money, I guess I’ll go with the Mustang II. I’ve got a 1972 Super Beetle so another car from the 70s would compliment it nicely. It’s also cheaper than the Fox body, and I have never really warmed up to those anyway.
They both sound like Slow Horses so I think I’ll at least go with the vintage one
I grew up with the fox bodies so if I ever were to own a Mustang it’d be one of that era… but at the price and options of today’s contestants I voted for the II.
I’ll go Mustang II, just not this Mustang II.
That zip tie is likely to hold the key so this was likely an auction car that the buyer realized wasn’t worth it. Add in the landau top and what that hides….
This really should be a neither day for me. I voted for the Mustang II because the Fox body is an overpriced econobox. Sure it has potential with a powertrain swap, but why would I pay that much for it knowing that I’ll need to either pay far more to make it a proper sports car or settle with having the worst version of the Fox body?
The Mustang II is cheaper and, uh, it’s cheaper. I don’t have much else to recommend it beyond that.
I wouldn’t buy either. The Mustang II because, well, it’s a Mustang II. One that is clearly being flipped after buying it at auction nonetheless.
My only problem with the Fox body, is the price. Way too high for a 4-cylinder automatic that isn’t absolutely time-capsule flawless.
But, choosing between these two, Fox body all the way.
The zip tie is inevitably holding the key. At an auction. Hmm.
This is Hobson’s slow choice. Gun to my head, the Fox – at least you look good in the slow lane. And then turbo and 5spd swap it (no I wouldn’t, way too much bother for too little result). I don’t want either of these turds.
BTW – that V6 was pretty universally described as having the power of a four with the thirst of a V8 in-period. And all that extra cast iron in the nose did the handling no favors, and one thing that must be said is that the Pinto-based ‘Stang was a tidy handler, at least with the four. And donated it’s front suspension to a million hotrods.
This, all of it. Of the two, the Fox is the better choice, but neither is desirable.
The 2.8L in the Mustang II is a complete turd, especially when stuck with the C3 auto, but the handling was much better with the lighter 4-cylinder with little (if any) performance penalty.
Mustang II: That gigantic zip tie on the column and the sticker on the corner of the windshield clearly identify it as a Copart auction car. Flipper selling it couldnt even be bothered to remove that and take their own pictures.
https://www.copart.com/lot/66414035/clean-title-1977-ford-mustang-ca-antelope
Asshat.
Exactly. I wouldn’t buy a coupe Mustang II anyways, especially with a vinyl top. But this clearly being a flipped auction purchase screams run away from this seller.
Any car that looks like trash in the classified photos is immediately disqualified.
If the current ‘owner’ (read:car junk flipper) can’t be bothered to tidy up the car for what is inevitably an asking price 3-4x what he paid for it at auction, YOU DON’T WANT IT. There is absolutely no possibility that a 50 year old car that NOBODY WANTS at auction sold for anything more than a few hundred bucks.
Who knows how long that Mustang II sat there before this lame-o dude found it and is actively trying to flip it. Zero effort to tidy and also re-using auction photos is code for ‘run away’.
Googling the auction ID number can often find the sales price. Most places want you to pay for access, but some Russian sites list it. Looks like they paid $1850. https://auctionauto.kg/auction/lot/ford-all-models-1977/7r04z118402 In the neighborhood of $2400 by the time they got it home.
…which was about $1500 too much.
I can always make room for a Foxbody, and I’d probably make it a SVOalike with an homebrew turbo kit and such.
Methinks this Fox, with a 2015+ Ecoboost 320hp 4 cylinder would be a riot.
That would be a hoot, I’d go with a tamer daily driver type of build myself. I like slow car fast stuff these days.
I have been in both styles of mustangs when they were new and the difference is like a wooden ship and the space shuttle. Hard NO on the 77 stang.
My dad has enough leftover Fox-body parts that I could hot rod this one for free, which takes some of the sting out of the overpriced ask.
Both are overpriced, in my opinion, but there’s one too many zeros in the Mustang II price. I always hated them. Still do.
It’s hard to believe that anyone at Ford could look at a ’70 Mustang, and then look at a ’77 Mustang and think, this is better.
There is 1 too many zeros in the Fox body one as well.
The esteemed delegate from Shitboxistan is going to abstain from voting today. Both cars rate a ‘meh’, more so at flipper wanna-be pricing.
The Mustang II looks like the seller picked it up at auction (Copart? Public auction?) and used the original sale pics, hence the giant ziptie around the steering column… .for key(s). Fake duals on a 4 cylinder Fox body made me chuckle. The V6 car would be more interesting at a cruise-in, but would not be able to keep up with the Fox 4 in a straight or curvy line. Again, meh.
I’m going to go counter to the “right” choice today and take the Mustang II. The first car I owned was a ’74 Mustang II with the 2.3 and 4 on the floor MT. It was a right turd when I got it for $65 (what it took to get it to pass PA inspection), and was a hand-me-down from my uncle who’s 3 kids had driven it before me. Kind of a love-hate relationship with that car, but nostalgia is a funny thing. I’d take off the landau top, drop in a modern 2.3 Ecoboost and a tremec T-6 to make it fun. And the red interior would have to go. Paint the whole thing Cyber Orange to match my Bronco, and put in a black interior with Recaro seats. After I win the lottery, of course, so the money won’t matter.
$65 would be Nice Price for this one for sure.
Gotta go with the Foxy Fox body mustang though I prefer the hatchback in those years much better. To me the only decent looking mustang II were the Cobra’s with t-tops.
I know it was mostly a tape-and-sticker package, but the Cobra-fied Mustang II looked pretty cool at a time when Orange Julius was a happening place. It’s telling that in a comparo between the Mustang II and other “sporty” compacts of its time, the Mustang didn’t fare well and the Gremlin was recommended above in quality, power and ride.
Even though I’m a charter member of the Never-Landau Club, I’ll have to temporarily turn in my card as I went for the Mustang II today. Pretty much solely on price. I don’t like the price of either of these cars (or the cars themselves), but a choice must be made.
Oof.
I’m going to have to go with neither. The ’77 is trying to be a miniature Thunderbird and the ’91 is trying to be an Escort GT, and each is failing tremendously.
Blah power, three speeds and a badge-and-chrome package on the Ghia do not a luxury car make. It never stops being the disappointment that it is trying to be something else, instead of more of what it already is.
The LX has huge potential, but at $7500 I could buy something – probably another Mustang – that is already at a higher level. Knock a couple thousand off, put the regular wheels back on it and drive it as the commuter it was built to be.
When I turned 16 and first got my license, my racist, 3-pack of Pall Mall straight smoking uncle had a Fox-body Mustang with the same spec. I bet him I could do a longer burnout in my parents’ 5-year-old Iron Duke 4-spd Chevy Citation. He made three attempts with no hint of wheel spin. The Citation had no issues spinning one wheel for about 4 feet. That was the malaise era in a nutshell.
I really wouldn’t care about which one of these turds to take since the first act with either would be to sell it as quickly as possible.
I voted for the Fox, but that’s only with my fake internet money. For my actual, real world dollars, not a chance on either of these.
I love the optimism of having the club on the Fox body. Buddy, no one is trying to steal your auto four banger
I can see it – the thief isn’t likely to know the level of sad disappointment under the hood until they have already broken in and ruined the steering column hot-wiring it – but imagine the sad trombone when it sputters to life with a Pinto groan, not a V8 roar. It LOOKS just like a 5.0 with those wheels and the dual exhaust.
I guess the club is cheaper than a V8
Today is a “meh” day. A $7500 4cyl auto or a Mustang II? Well, at least the II has some history/nostalgia.
A friend in high school had a Foxbody SVO and constantly worked on it over our senior year. Showed us pictures of progress often but he never got to drive it onto campus because of COVID. Sucks. I would have loved to have seen it in person.
Hopefully he’s enjoying it now at least.
I’ll be honest, I read through your whole comment thinking this happened in the 90’s or early 2000’s and almost got whiplash from my doubletake when I read COVID.
Same. I was picturing mid 90’s and status updates via Polaroids, not early 20’s and tiktok reels.
I still don’t understand how anyone can look at that car and think “Mustang”. It looks like a Cavalier to me, instead of one of Ford’s best model lines. Just as bad as tagging the Mach 1 EV as a Mustang.