Whats your favorite era?

Discussion in '1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-' started by Cobain03, Feb 5, 2006.


favorite era?

  1. 64- 66

    23 vote(s)
  2. 67-68

    32 vote(s)
  3. 69-70

    24 vote(s)
  4. 71 -73

    8 vote(s)
  1. I didn't even ready your post ahead of me Ed....

    You're kinda scaring me :nice:

    For the heavy lipped one with the torino, there is no reason to insult people that don't have the same opinion as you.
  2. Ummm...Jay....

    Nothing "boxy" about your ride at all bro!

  3. Hey Jay, you ever bring your stang to shows? I'd love to check it out sometime.
  4. The 64-66 Fell in love with them as soon as I seen them.
    Never wanted any other car.
  5. Its a really tough decision between the 67-68 and 69-70, but the 69 Mach1 does it for me
  6. I traveled a bunch in 04. Slowed down a little for 05. I should be here and the for 06. I just made plans for the Restomods in Reno show for the end of May. I like to go to the Knotts Show but it ran into my vacation this year. A sure shot would be the MCA show this year here in Vegas. That's at the end of Sept. Otherwise stop by the shop. If you're in OC, you must make runs to Vegas here and there. Thanks for the interest :)
  7. ok I take back the camero remark, but personally even with the new retro mustang, I still believe the only real mustangs are the 65 to 70, the 71-73 model was the mustangs death, like the beatles or SNL, the 71-73 tankstangs are the duran duran of mustangs, IMHO. as for you 72grande, I built that torino, it wasn't given to me.
  8. Can't...vote...too...difficult...must...aaaaarrrrrgggghhhhh!

    Well the body style of the 64.5-66 is my favorite, but they couldn't stuff anything bigger than a 289 into it so next best is 67-68 fastback like the 390 GT in Bullitt but the 428 CJ makes everything else look like it's standing still. So...can I please have one of each? Thank you!
  9. You cant make fun of my car AND duran duran! Its just too much damnt! :nono:

    I'm lost and I'm found
    something something, and
    I'm hungry like the wolf!

    Thats just great stuff!:hail2:
  10. Have you heard "What Happens Tomorrow" by Duran Duran? It is a good one. I think your car is sweet 72grande and that's all that matters. :D
  11. The '64-'66, mostly because it's my first car. I'm sure if I had started out with another model year Mustang, I would like that year more.

    Wasn't the '71 Boss 351 one of the fastest Mustangs from the factory? [email protected]
  12. 1970 Boss 302 ownz all
  13. I think the 69-70 mach 1 is the best looking mustang.
  14. My fav is the '67-'68 bodystyle. One reason, I was born in '67. The '65-'66 reminds me of a teenager, good looking yet retains some cuteness of a child. The '67-'68 is more like a young 20's, cut and buff and won't back down. The '69-'70 is sort of a late 20's/early 30's, knows whats going down, but isn't as cut anymore, more refined, starting to get a bulge around the middle. The '71-'73 is sorta late 30's, not as svelte anymore, likes it cushy, kinda lazy. That's just my opinion, I like 'em all, but the '67-'68 holds the special place in my heart.
  15. Just 'cause I can :SNSign:


    Attached Files:

  16. So many more fine fords are so much more worthy than the tankstang 71-73s, the rancheros and fairlanes and torinos and galaxies, but I shouldn't be too harsh on you 72grande cause your stuck with that 72 of yours, you should be happy with your little blip of purple indicating a whopping 3.85% popularity, perhaps if I found a nice cherry 74 stang you might be interested in buying it ?

    View attachment 487836
  17. I find it humorous that someone is advocating fairlanes and galaxies as a way of saying that Mustangs are too big and heavy...LMAO.

    I was suprised to find out that the 71-73s were not really much larger then the 69-70 which were barely larger then the 67-68 which were barely larger than the 65-66. I do not recall the total difference between the 65 and 73 but it was only a couple of inches in any one direction. Anyone have a source for the dimensions?

    No doubt they were heavier but the newer (fox/sn95/sn197) Stangs are about as big and even heavier, my 2005 is a pig weight-wise. Part of that is due to the mod-motor...heavier and larger than a 460 with less displacement than a 289...how's that for progress?
  18. Great link Jay, thanks. Sometimes Google gives too much :D

    So I just checked out the difference btween them and here they are...

    The 73 has one inch longer wheelbase, is less than 6 inches wider, about a foot longer (mostly in overhang) and is actually shorter than a 65.

    The 73 has a one inch longer wheelbase, is 3 inches wider, six inches longer, and also shorter than a 70.

    So there's as much difference (or more) between the 65 and 70 than there is between the 73 and 70, but folks don't call the 69-70 "tankstangs".

    I'm not saying they aren't bigger, duh, but much of what makes them bigger has more to to with aesthetics and design/lines than measuring tapes. Before I knew these details I'd have said they were two feet longer, a thousand pounds heavier and a foot wider.

    EDIT: Not calling all of his facts into question but there's a number of erroneous statements on the 1967 page. Not just factiods but the weight measurements too. There's no way a 67 Mustang ever weighed 3,910 pounds, not with every option imaginable, a FE with AC and a convertible...no way. Unless perhaps William 'Fridge' Perry was driving it...nope still not.
  19. At fist I just thought this "pursang" guy was just giving some friendly ribbing, but now I don't think thats so. He's really got some sort of axe to grind, doesnt he? Maybe his father was ran over by a 72? Whatever, a ****ing contest doesnt really interest me.

    SO here goes. Pursang, you're absolutly correct, 71-73's suck. They are the worst ford's ever, I'm a fool to make one my project, and you penis is obiously huge. Now can we be friends, or are you just looking for a good troll?