Fox Being Phased Out Of Media....

[hoopty5.0]

if i could like this 55 more times I would.

no love for the IIs...cant do it

There's one down the street from me. Bone stock. Makes me giggle every time I see it. No love, no respect.

 

[91TwighlightGT]

I agree that Fox's are being phased out. I have a subscription to 5.0 and SF (only because we were doing a favor for a Friend's kid by getting a couple of subs through school) and it is full of S197 stuff. They do a few Fox articles, it is true, but they never seem to interest me. The only Fox cars that make the pages are 900 hp Super/Turbo charged drag cars that have 50K invested and were built by a shop, not the owner.

Impressive, I guess, but not interesting to read about time and again. No, I won't renew my subscription.

Fox Mustang Mag looks okay, maybe I should subscribe. I've been pinching pennies lately, so I haven't been wanting to spend any extra on anything.

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

Hate the II all you want, if it never existed there's a very good chance the Mustang wouldn't exist today. It served its purpose and if not for the II the Fox wouldn't have been what it is.

 

[Bullitt347]

I owned a 1978 Mustang II once, factory 302 C-4 car. If I am not mistaken there is a picture of the car somewhere on the Mustang II threads, the guy that owned it then says it was wreaked.......oh well. It was a good transition car for me because it was cheap to own (buy) and nobody shed a tear when I modified it. Bob Glidden won a NHRA championship in a Mustang II, but then again he also won a championship in a Fairmont. Hell, I think that guy could have won a championship is a Gremlin if forced to back in the day, he had that much talent.

 

[Ozz]

I agree that Fox's are being phased out. I have a subscription to 5.0 and SF (only because we were doing a favor for a Friend's kid by getting a couple of subs through school) and it is full of S197 stuff. They do a few Fox articles, it is true, but they never seem to interest me. The only Fox cars that make the pages are 900 hp Super/Turbo charged drag cars that have 50K invested and were built by a shop, not the owner.

Impressive, I guess, but not interesting to read about time and again. No, I won't renew my subscription.

Fox Mustang Mag looks okay, maybe I should subscribe. I've been pinching pennies lately, so I haven't been wanting to spend any extra on anything.

Sure there are many like that, or high-dollar cars built by the serious racers themselves, but that's certainly not true for all of 'em. I personally don't care for the race-only type of cars either, Fox or not. You should really take a look at Fox Mustang Magazine; their aim is to showcase cars that are built by the "everyman" instead of what you described.

 

[1990Coupe]

Haha....explain to me what makes the Fox Mustang (that was based on a Ford Fairmont...a family sedan) any more worthy of the title than the Mustang II? You guys forget....if it wasn't for the Mustang II, you wouldn't have a Fox Mustangs to **** and moan about not getting coverage on.

...and if the Shelby owes respect to the '93 Cobra, then the '93 Cobra owes respect to the '78 King Cobra Mustang before it.

And FYI.....Shelby's were around looooooong before the '93 Cobra was a though. Now....RESPECT YOUR ELDERS!!!

This whole post is so wrong it makes me LOL.

In all actuallity, the fox chassis mustang was designed first - fairmont was released to the public first - thus the common misconception that the mustang is based off the fairmont. Thats actually wrong.

I think what he meant is the new age shelby gt500 is a product of SVT. Thats why he said what he did about the respect thing of the first SVT based 93 cobra.

Shelby is simply a name for marketing and branding, engineered by SVT is where its at.

 

[Sharad]

Awkward subject here since I work for 5.0 & SF.

I know the magazines don't include very much Fox content anymore, and believe me, I lobby for it all the time. But the S197s (which have been out for 9 model years now) are really where the majority of public interest is.

Fox Mustang Magazine is an interesting option, although their tech doesn't seem to be as thorough as 5.0 and MM&FF were back in the Fox days. Unfortunately, I think the Foxes have just overstayed their welcome, and any significant magazine coverage will come from restoration type mags (like FMM) and not from the big magazines.

To be fair, MM&FF is building their Coyote Fox and at 5.0, we still have at least a couple more articles coming on the Fox that is in my avatar. But yeah, the Foxes definitely seem to be getting phased out, sadly.

 

[Boss 351]

When guys like me, now 34, end up our 50's the Fox will see a serious comeback (unless the world goes to sh!t, no more oil, WW3, etc...). Phased out of mags isn't that big of a deal. A fox is and will always be one of the best Mustangs Ford built (I said "one of" not THE, ok?). I don't need to read about some dude who spent 30k, a 2nd mortgage and a divorce to have a 600hp Twin turbo Fox with a chrome powerplant to enjoy the hobby. I open the garage door, start up the old 86 and bang some gears - going sideways That's where the fun comes from.

Let the guys have their S197s, they're nice cars but lack the rough, smelly, shaking, nasty fun a Fox has. Fox is that awesome cougar that tought you nasty sh!t, while the S197 is the 200lb chick you end up with. lol (sorry)

 

[91TwighlightGT]

Awkward subject here since I work for 5.0 & SF.

I know the magazines don't include very much Fox content anymore, and believe me, I lobby for it all the time. But the S197s (which have been out for 9 model years now) are really where the majority of public interest is.

Fox Mustang Magazine is an interesting option, although their tech doesn't seem to be as thorough as 5.0 and MM&FF were back in the Fox days. Unfortunately, I think the Foxes have just overstayed their welcome, and any significant magazine coverage will come from restoration type mags (like FMM) and not from the big magazines.

To be fair, MM&FF is building their Coyote Fox and at 5.0, we still have at least a couple more articles coming on the Fox that is in my avatar. But yeah, the Foxes definitely seem to be getting phased out, sadly.

Interesting.

I can't say I blame you guys for continuing to stay up on the new cars, of course. You have to sell what people want to buy, and there are a lot of S197 owners out there who have cars out of warranty and are itching for some mods. One of the things that has changed with the new platform (if 9 years old is new ) is that the backdating doesn't really work anymore. It used to be that I could read about a new suspension component for a New Edge GT and know that it would likely bolt up on the Fox body. The new platform might as well be a Corvette - nothing transfers.

Oh well, time marches on. Change is inevitable.

 

[Gearbanger 101]

This whole post is so wrong it makes me LOL.

In all actuallity, the fox chassis mustang was designed first - fairmont was released to the public first - thus the common misconception that the mustang is based off the fairmont. Thats actually wrong.

I'd love to see some sort of conformation on this. Especially since the Fairmont/Zephyr was built, sold and on the road in 1978 a full year before the Mustang wore the chassis.

 

[mob]

flipping through new mustang magazines at walmart and noticed that over past few months, the fox is left with a single feature that seems like an afterthought. i know our cars are old and i accept the fact that the amazing new 420 hp stangs get all the draw and attention, but it almost hurts to see the pioneer of the mustang aftermarket get left outside like an old dying dog.....
add to that that its rare to see a clean, fixed up fox running around town anymore... makes me love my oldskoo fox gt that much more

/ rant

I think they'll always be a classic, just will take a little while to be recognized. Just like you don't see 67' Mustangs in those magazines, they've got their own magazine, maybe one day we will have out own magazine again, maybe not such a big name as 5.0 was but something to showcase some of our cars.

 

[Boss 351]

I think they'll always be a classic, just will take a little while to be recognized. Just like you don't see 67' Mustangs in those magazines, they've got their own magazine, maybe one day we will have out own magazine again, maybe not such a big name as 5.0 was but something to showcase some of our cars.

When I take my 86 out, I get tons of thumbs up, people asking about it and such. The fox Mustang is far from being phased out of people's minds. At local car club shows, all you see are rows of S197s, and New Edge stangs. It's like visiting a Ford dealership. The fox bodies that do show up stand out like a classic!

 

[Gearbanger 101]

When I take my 86 out, I get tons of thumbs up, people asking about it and such. The fox Mustang is far from being phased out of people's minds. At local car club shows, all you see are rows of S197s, and New Edge stangs. It's like visiting a Ford dealership. The fox bodies that do show up stand out like a classic!

You have no idea how many young people (late-teens/early-20's) have no idea what kind of car I'm driving. They just know it's a nice car and they like the sound of it. My favorite is when people try to guess they year. I don't think I've had one person get it right yet.

 

[1990Coupe]

I'd love to see some sort of conformation on this. Especially since the Fairmont/Zephyr was built, sold and on the road in 1978 a full year before the Mustang wore the chassis.

Second issue of Fox mustang magazine. The chassis was designed as a Mustang first. However Fairmont/Zephyr came to the market first. The first Fox chassis mustang prototype was in 1976.

 

[1990Coupe]

You have no idea how many young people (late-teens/early-20's) have no idea what kind of car I'm driving. They just know it's a nice car and they like the sound of it. My favorite is when people try to guess they year. I don't think I've had one person get it right yet.

Maybe that it is in Canadua.. But by me lots of young guys (late teens etc) are rocking foxes because its what they can afford. Not nice ones, but Fox Chassis mustangs none the less...

Oh, Thanks for warning. Why am i not surprised Leave it to you to throw around your e-thugness haha.

 

[NIKwoaC]

Honestly, I don't care if the Fox gets phased out of the big name Mustang magazines, the tech in those mags is terribly WEAK anyway. I'm so tired of reading engine buildups where they fail to mention what the cam specs are, or they mention that they're running "high" compression, but don't actually specify it, or they have a component failure and they conveniently don't mention what brand it is. I've been transitioning into magazines like Car Craft and Engine Masters (which is AWESOME BTW). I'd love to see that high level tech in the Mustang magazines, but unfortunately hand held tuners and CAIs in cars that are still under warranty is what sells those mags.

 

[NIKwoaC]

Maybe that it is in Canadua.. But by me lots of young guys (late teens etc) are rocking foxes because its what they can afford. Not nice ones, but Fox Chassis mustangs none the less...

Oh, Thanks for warning. Why am i not surprised Leave it to you to throw around your e-thugness haha.

More and more, I get two kinds of people that approach me: 1. dudes in their 40s that say "I had one of those back in 87" or 2. Teens that say "what kind of car is that?" I do think the 4 eyes are less recognizable than the aero cars, though.

 

[Gearbanger 101]

Second issue of Fox mustang magazine. The chassis was designed as a Mustang first. However Fairmont/Zephyr came to the market first. The first Fox chassis mustang prototype was in 1976.

No offence, but you'll forgive me if I don't site a newsstand publication as a credible source. MM&FF and 5.0 & SF and every other automotive magazine in history have been full of misprints and misquotes for years. Why should Fox Mustang Magazine be any different?
Every other publication and source I've read states matter of factly that the Fox chassis was designed for a multitude of compact/mid-size cars and even a pick-up and that it was first introduce with the Fairmont/Zephyr. It was never intended to be Mustang specific. The "planning phases" for the next generation Mustang may have originated in 1976, but the decision on the use of the Fox platform wasn't.

Specific planning for the next generation of Mustang may have dated back to 1976, but the concept of developing personal transportation that would meet all foreseen environmental and economic requirements on a global basis dated back to the earliest days of the oil embargo in 1973. The idea of a "world car" factored into the long range planning of most major automotive manufacturers.
For Ford, the search for commonality of parts throughout its vast product line was given the code name "Fox." Possibly the concept reflected early Mustang thinking...the original 1964-65 relied heavily on Falcon components and, later, the Mustang II incorporated some of the Pinto's chassis and parts.
So, the design teams searching for fuel efficiency and interchangeable platforms came together in the late 70s at Ford. Designers found that the Ford Fairmont/Zephyr compact platform could accommodate the Mustang

http://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au/ford_mustang_story_3.htm

In any case...whichever vehicle made it to market first is quite frankly irrelevant. It was still built and intended as a do-it-all, non specific chassis designed to fit a multitude of vehicles. That really doesn't make it any more special status wise than the Pinto chassis it replaced?

The only Ford Mustang in history that designated it's own true chassis is the current S197's D2C platform and even it takes inspiration from the DEW chassis used with the last Gen TBird and Lincoln LS. Heck, even the coveted 60's Mustangs was based on a Ford Falcon/Mercury Comet underpinning...another do-it-all chassis.

So really...why be a snob about it? Who cares if the Mustang II used the Pinto chassis....or if the '79-'04 Mustang used the Fairmont Chassis. It makes perfect financial sense for manufactures to ring as much use out of every part and design they're able. That's how money is made. Money used in development for the next "big thing".

Maybe that it is in Canadua...

Yeah....maybe it's just in Canada.

 

[RacEoHolic330]

I'd love to see that high level tech in the Mustang magazines, but unfortunately hand held tuners and CAIs in cars that are still under warranty is what sells those mags.

Don't forget the articles on "lease-friendly" mods that can be put on and easily taken back off when it's time to trade the car back in

 

[Sharad]

Let the guys have their S197s, they're nice cars but lack the rough, smelly, shaking, nasty fun a Fox has. Fox is that awesome cougar that tought you nasty sh!t, while the S197 is the 200lb chick you end up with. lol (sorry)

Incidentally, you'd be hard-pressed to find a more loyal Fox fanatic than me, but I need to point something out. I thought the same thing as what you posted above, but two things changed my opinion.

#1. Two years ago, my clean, low-mileage '93 coupe got totaled by some blind idiot who t-boned me. Maybe it was my fault for daily driving a car that was relatively irreplaceable. Regardless, that car was destroyed and I needed a reliable daily driver. Ultimately, circumstances practically forced me into buying my '06 GT. It was a MUCH newer car, everything worked, and the price was right- $12k. It was one of the first S197s I had ever driven (mind you, this was in 2010) and to tell the truth, I was impressed with how nice the newer cars are. The S197 platform is quite a bit more advanced than the Fox platform. For example, I've read that the S197 chassis in stock form is as torsionally rigid as a Fox with a rollcage. That's just crazy. But you can tell the difference when you drive the cars.

#2. Yes, my '06 was much nicer than my rare & desirable '93 notch (and almost as quick) but it was still almost, well, too refined. I know what you're saying Boss 351. The S197s lack personality in stock form. But I have to tell you- in the past year I've performed the typical bolt-ons and replaced the entire suspension on my '06. Between the improved throttle response, added power, louder exhaust, smell of the off-road x-pipe, and specifically the feel of the engine from the polyurethane motor mounts, my '06 GT has a lot of the same personality which made the Foxes so popular, but without the drawbacks like little switches that fail, window regulators burned up, multiple heater core replacements, etc. If you haven't driven an S197 with all of these upgrades, then I'd recommend for you to give it a try before you completely write off the S197 platform.

Of course, this may all be a moot point when the 2015 model year comes along...

When I take my 86 out, I get tons of thumbs up, people asking about it and such. The fox Mustang is far from being phased out of people's minds. At local car club shows, all you see are rows of S197s, and New Edge stangs. It's like visiting a Ford dealership. The fox bodies that do show up stand out like a classic!

^^that's exactly why the magazines are covering the newer cars. Foxes are the minority and S197s are the vast majority of what you see actually out there being driven on a daily basis.

Honestly, I don't care if the Fox gets phased out of the big name Mustang magazines, the tech in those mags is terribly WEAK anyway. I'm so tired of reading engine buildups where they fail to mention what the cam specs are, or they mention that they're running "high" compression, but don't actually specify it, or they have a component failure and they conveniently don't mention what brand it is. I've been transitioning into magazines like Car Craft and Engine Masters (which is AWESOME BTW). I'd love to see that high level tech in the Mustang magazines, but unfortunately hand held tuners and CAIs in cars that are still under warranty is what sells those mags.

I agree that a lot of the tech is weak, but it's not all that way. In particular, Richard Holdener is very detailed and thorough. And to speak to your example of cam specs, you have to remember that some cam designers don't want their specs out there. One of my magazine cars has a custom solid roller cam which was cut from a billet core. It was designed by Ed Curtis, and out of respect to him, I was intentionally vague on the cam specs in my engine article. It's not because I don't know what the cam specs mean so I left them out of the story, it's because those specs are proprietary info from Flowtech Induction.