What is it like driving '65 - '73 Mustang and how does it compare to a S550??

[Hack]

My '70 convertible was a factory drum brake, non-power steering, non-power brake, straight 6 automatic car. On a warm day ~80 degrees a stop from 70 mph was difficult because the brakes would be fading before you even stopped the car a single time. On the interstate I always needed to keep in mind that every other car on the road could out stop me.

The manual steering box is terrible. Sloppy and no feel at 50+ mph and difficult to use at slow speeds.

The worst thing about the car as it was originally built is that nothing lasts. Points ignition, carburetor, even suspension and steering. Everything wants to be adjusted, replaced or lubricated or cleaned and rebuilt CONSTANTLY. I replaced the steering and suspension and a couple years later (just a few thousand miles) the suspension was squeaking all the time, the box needed adjustment, etc.

To me a classic car is for a special person that either has a lot of money or a lot of time. And they have to have a lot of sentimentality. Basically it's a constant effort to keep them working properly. I really don't have the patience for it. I started replacing components with more modern parts right away. Electronic ignition was the first one. That made a huge improvement in the car. Front disc brakes made it a lot more livable as well. I swapped in a V8 and fabbed rollerized UCAs to eliminate the constantly squeaking bushings. I'd rather have all modern suspension and steering on the car +EFI, an OD transmission, etc. and someday I hope I will. It's just time and money. I understand my car is no longer an original classic, but for me the only other choice would be to sell it. I just can't tolerate driving a classic Mustang in its original build specs.

I like the styling of my old Mustang, but by no means is it a performance vehicle compared to anything late 80s or newer. Modern cars are so much better at everything other than looking good.

Sponsored

 

[Jimmy Dean]

My '70 convertible was a factory drum brake, non-power steering, non-power brake, straight 6 automatic car. On a warm day ~80 degrees a stop from 70 mph was difficult because the brakes would be fading before you even stopped the car a single time. On the interstate I always needed to keep in mind that every other car on the road could out stop me.

The manual steering box is terrible. Sloppy and no feel at 50+ mph and difficult to use at slow speeds.

The worst thing about the car as it was originally built is that nothing lasts. Points ignition, carburetor, even suspension and steering. Everything wants to be adjusted, replaced or lubricated or cleaned and rebuilt CONSTANTLY. I replaced the steering and suspension and a couple years later (just a few thousand miles) the suspension was squeaking all the time, the box needed adjustment, etc.

To me a classic car is for a special person that either has a lot of money or a lot of time. And they have to have a lot of sentimentality. Basically it's a constant effort to keep them working properly. I really don't have the patience for it. I started replacing components with more modern parts right away. Electronic ignition was the first one. That made a huge improvement in the car. Front disc brakes made it a lot more livable as well. I swapped in a V8 and fabbed rollerized UCAs to eliminate the constantly squeaking bushings. I'd rather have all modern suspension and steering on the car +EFI, an OD transmission, etc. and someday I hope I will. It's just time and money. I understand my car is no longer an original classic, but for me the only other choice would be to sell it. I just can't tolerate driving a classic Mustang in its original build specs.

I like the styling of my old Mustang, but by no means is it a performance vehicle compared to anything late 80s or newer. Modern cars are so much better at everything other than looking good.

nothing wrong with restomodding in some modern tech like that. plan for my 71 is updated front suspension, maybe a 3-link rear and rear disc. anti-locks if I can cobble that up, EFI, coil overs, stiffen the chassis, of course radial tires, steering upgrades,

 

[OldPhart]

My '70 convertible was a factory drum brake, non-power steering, non-power brake, straight 6 automatic car. On a warm day ~80 degrees a stop from 70 mph was difficult because the brakes would be fading before you even stopped the car a single time. On the interstate I always needed to keep in mind that every other car on the road could out stop me.

The manual steering box is terrible. Sloppy and no feel at 50+ mph and difficult to use at slow speeds.

The worst thing about the car as it was originally built is that nothing lasts. Points ignition, carburetor, even suspension and steering. Everything wants to be adjusted, replaced or lubricated or cleaned and rebuilt CONSTANTLY. I replaced the steering and suspension and a couple years later (just a few thousand miles) the suspension was squeaking all the time, the box needed adjustment, etc.

To me a classic car is for a special person that either has a lot of money or a lot of time. And they have to have a lot of sentimentality. Basically it's a constant effort to keep them working properly. I really don't have the patience for it. I started replacing components with more modern parts right away. Electronic ignition was the first one. That made a huge improvement in the car. Front disc brakes made it a lot more livable as well. I swapped in a V8 and fabbed rollerized UCAs to eliminate the constantly squeaking bushings. I'd rather have all modern suspension and steering on the car +EFI, an OD transmission, etc. and someday I hope I will. It's just time and money. I understand my car is no longer an original classic, but for me the only other choice would be to sell it. I just can't tolerate driving a classic Mustang in its original build specs.

I like the styling of my old Mustang, but by no means is it a performance vehicle compared to anything late 80s or newer. Modern cars are so much better at everything other than looking good.

Hi - I believe restomoding is a growing phenomenon and for a lot of reasons, some of which you mention. Why not have that classic look yet have the modern reliable characteristics of a newer car? At the same time, many folks prefer having a car as close to original as possible. I say do what you want with your car. For me personally, it's not worth having a car that I don't enjoy driving, but I'm not a car collector who perhaps enjoys the museum aspect of owning classic cars nor do I wish to dump a lot of money into updating and/or turning it into a show car. If you decide to "modernize" your classic car or simply restore it to originality, be prepared to spend some big bucks, even if you do most of the work yourself. I bought mine already restored several years previously (ie. no longer a trailer queen). I drive it regularly and locally only, so if it has a mechanical issue it's no big deal. I call it a "five footer". If you look at my car from at least 5 feet away it looks great and you can't see all the little flaws in the paint, door alignment, etc. I compare it to an aging beauty queen who is starting to show her age but still damn good looking. Don't necessarily totally ignore other folks advice about your classic car, but in the end you have to be happy with it. Hopefully you can have the best of both worlds and also own a new modern sporty, safe and comfortable car to enjoy and take on trips... Bruce

 

[Bill Hamilton]

Excellent response, Bruce.

My 1970 Mach 1 is that beautiful Homecoming Queen in high school. Only now she's 50 years old and her daughter is the new hotness that all the young men are chasing (LOL). She still looks good and can turn an eye with her ageless beauty. Maybe she's not as quick as the youngsters in a run but she sounds good and looks great trying. She's a fun driver and my local show cruiser car. When I take her to MCA events, she's usually a Bronze winner as the Gold and Silver winners are offloaded from a trailer while I drove a few hundred miles to get there and wiped off the bugs before judging. Of course like many 50 year old's that want to hang with the younger crowd, she's had a few updates. A 5-speed was added over 20 years ago but the stock appearing Hurst T-handle shifter looks like a 4-speed from that era and bumped up my highway mileage from 16 to 23+ mpg. I added a Borgeson Steering system, which is light years ahead of the stock system and changes the steering ration from 16:1 to 14:1. Bigger front and rear sway bars, gas shocks, along with subframe connectors, Export Brace and Monte Bar actually make interstate cloverleafs fun again.

With the older classics you have none of the "Nanny Controls" to keep you out of trouble like the newer ones so every drive is an adventure. In my newer Mustangs, you put them in gear and jump into any traffic. With the classic, my situational awareness is always tuned to it's highest setting. It's fun, but you're just more careful.

 

[Hack]

Hi - I believe restomoding is a growing phenomenon and for a lot of reasons, some of which you mention. Why not have that classic look yet have the modern reliable characteristics of a newer car? At the same time, many folks prefer having a car as close to original as possible. I say do what you want with your car. For me personally, it's not worth having a car that I don't enjoy driving, but I'm not a car collector who perhaps enjoys the museum aspect of owning classic cars nor do I wish to dump a lot of money into updating and/or turning it into a show car. If you decide to "modernize" your classic car or simply restore it to originality, be prepared to spend some big bucks, even if you do most of the work yourself. I bought mine already restored several years previously (ie. no longer a trailer queen). I drive it regularly and locally only, so if it has a mechanical issue it's no big deal. I call it a "five footer". If you look at my car from at least 5 feet away it looks great and you can't see all the little flaws in the paint, door alignment, etc. I compare it to an aging beauty queen who is starting to show her age but still damn good looking. Don't necessarily totally ignore other folks advice about your classic car, but in the end you have to be happy with it. Hopefully you can have the best of both worlds and also own a new modern sporty, safe and comfortable car to enjoy and take on trips... Bruce

I think it's awesome that some people can tolerate an original classic and that people are willing to do the work to keep them driving. I have a lot of respect for those people.

I'm also glad that the particular old Mustang I own isn't very collectible or desirable. Of course as a convertible it's more rare than the other configurations of the car, but I think it would probably sell for a higher price with modifications rather than in original condition. Very few people prefer a straight 6 car over something with a V8. And it was never a nice enough vehicle that people would be offended that I cut it up.

 

[ddeluce]

My Dad had a '72 Fastback with the 351 CI/ 2BBL carb. engine. I drove it quite a bit when it was new. It was a large car that burned lots of gas and wasn't very fast. Handling was nothing special, steering was vague (as most American cars were), and the brakes easily overheated when driven hard. It did look cool. The current generation car is far better.

I've also driven a vintage 1965 Shelby GT-350. This is an old car with all the attendant rattles and wear, but it is a much better driver than the '72 fastback. Once you get used to to manual steering, unboosted brakes, and long throw 4 speed the car is really pretty fun to drive. Good power from the hi-po 289 CI engine, decent handling, and the noise from the side exhaust is great fun. The S550 is a better driver, but you can't beat driving a piece of history.

 

[Norm Peterson]

I think it's awesome that some people can tolerate an original classic and that people are willing to do the work to keep them driving. I have a lot of respect for those people.

If you're old enough, it isn't even a matter of simply tolerating their generally unsophisticated nature - it's part of their appeal that they're not about non-driving stuff like we have available today. Simplicity is their virtue, and a thoughtful restomod can bring the driving up pretty close to current standards without destroying the less-refined side of their character.


Norm

 

[NoVaGT]

A well-done stick-axle suspension is better than a poorly or indifferently done IRS, and can be made to run uncomfortably close to newer and better IRS systems. Not just for the straight line stuff, either, I'm talking about cornering and handling. No argument as far as relaxed ride quality is concerned, though.


Norm

The 2015+ Mustang's suspension is light-years ahead of the IRS cars. We both know the transcribed arcs that SLA imparts during suspension travel, and there's no way around that. It's just geometry.

Yes, a pre 2011 Mustang and it's IRS can be made to handle well, but making the same $$ changes in a 2015+ car will result in an even better handling car.

You just can't get past the old side-to-side, front-to-back movements. You can minimize it, but you can't eliminate it. Then there's the epic amount of un-sprung weight that gets dealt with, with an IRS. That in and of itself is a big thing.

ETA; I do remember an panhard bar replacement that attached to the pumpkin, and removed that arc in the travel. It was some straight up & down centering device. Can't remember the name of it. It attached to the axel/diff and straight up to the body. I think it required some welding.

 

[NoVaGT]

If you're old enough, it isn't even a matter of simply tolerating their generally unsophisticated nature - it's part of their appeal that they're not about non-driving stuff like we have available today. Simplicity is their virtue, and a thoughtful restomod can bring the driving up pretty close to current standards without destroying the less-refined side of their character.


Norm

I'll add;

My 2012 Brembo GT was waaaay more entertaining to drive than my 2016 & 2019. That IRS occasionally scaring the living shit out of you made for some seriously entertaining driving. Yes, the new cars' suspension is much better, but the old cars' antics were more entertaining. The 2015+ cars are so stable and planted, it's actually a bit boring.

 

[Strokerswild]

ETA; I do remember an panhard bar replacement that attached to the pumpkin, and removed that arc in the travel. It was some straight up & down centering device. Can't remember the name of it. It attached to the axel/diff and straight up to the body. I think it required some welding.

Watts link?

 

[NoVaGT]

Watts link?

That's sounds familiar. I think that's it.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The 2015+ Mustang's suspension is light-years ahead of the IRS cars. We both know the transcribed arcs that SLA imparts during suspension travel, and there's no way around that. It's just geometry.

Yes, a pre 2011 Mustang and it's IRS can be made to handle well, but making the same $$ changes in a 2015+ car will result in an even better handling car.

You just can't get past the old side-to-side, front-to-back movements. You can minimize it, but you can't eliminate it. Then there's the epic amount of un-sprung weight that gets dealt with, with an IRS. That in and of itself is a big thing.

ETA; I do remember an panhard bar replacement that attached to the pumpkin, and removed that arc in the travel. It was some straight up & down centering device. Can't remember the name of it. It attached to the axel/diff and straight up to the body. I think it required some welding.

You're talking about a Watts link, specifically the version that puts the main (center) pivot on the axle.


An IRS car also moves its rear wheels around, forward, backward, laterally, and also in camber, for exactly the same reason - IRS links move in arcs just like trailing links and PHBs do on the S197. Just that IRS wheel movements can happen independently (side vs side) where they can't with a 3-link or other stick-axle suspension.

But that's why I specified a well-done stick axle suspension vs poor/indifferent IRS - and there certainly have been some not-so-good IRS setups over the years. In a less well-developed IRS, a single wheel moving (like it's supposed to be able to) can introduce a rather unsettling-feeling little wiggle. Been there.


Norm

 

[NoVaGT]

You're talking about a Watts link, specifically the version that puts the main (center) pivot on the axle.


An IRS car also moves its rear wheels around, forward, backward, laterally, and also in camber, for exactly the same reason - IRS links move in arcs just like trailing links and PHBs do on the S197. Just that IRS wheel movements can happen independently (side vs side) where they can't with a 3-link or other stick-axle suspension.

But that's why I specified a well-done stick axle suspension vs poor/indifferent IRS - and there certainly have been some not-so-good IRS setups over the years.


Norm

Well....you could call a trailing arm/McPherson strut suspension an independent suspension.......but those are really shit. What are your examples of other poor/indifferent independent suspensions?

I had a Merkur XR4Ti at one point. THAT suspension was........horrible. Not even worthy of being called independent. Looked like it was barely holding the wheels on.

 

[Genxer]

The musty smell of a 50 year old interior, a painted dash with all that chrome, the creaks, pumping the gas before starting it. the huge sloppy steering wheel, hearing a carb suck air. some of the charms of old cars.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Well....you could call a trailing arm/McPherson strut suspension an independent suspension.......but those are really shit. What are your examples of other poor/indifferent independent suspensions?

Just about anything with semi-trailing arms or pure trailing arms. Systems that make a transverse leaf spring also serve as one of the lateral links.


Norm

Sponsored