Anybody else into Mustang II's and Pintos?

[Dadsccat]

Were the German Capris made in the early-mid '70s based on the same Pinto/II platform? The German Capris were so cool/exotic

I don't believe so. They were a unique chassis.

Love the Mustang II's. They get a bad rap but have there place in Mustang history.

[E2ZZGLX]

Mk1 and Mk2 Capris were an European Ford platform. Accautly believe they was mostly an European Ford with engine/trans options tell they got the 2.3 replacing the 2.0. That platform even ran into the 80's (Merkurs and Escorts...not the US versions) before being phased out. Not 100% sure just based on what I have owned and noticed looking for parts etc...

[Mentok]

I was brought home from birth in a 77 pinto squire wagon, so I kinda have a soft spot for em. I would totally rock one.

[floodstang]

I am loving on the spoiler on the back of this coupe, never seen one before other than on a hatch for those years.

Someone stole that rear spoiler off my car while I was at work. I saw it on the trunk of a brown Monte Carlo. They didn't even paint it! I bought the front chin spoiler and the rear spoiler from J. C. Whitney.

[TopGear85]

I love them both. I've even thought about selling my Saleen for a King Cobra. As far as the pinto's are concerned that wagon with the port holes is amazing...totally 70's cool. Neither get any respect but I think that makes me like them even more.

[E2ZZGLX]

"I've even thought about selling my Saleen for a King Cobra"

That's funny and most would not even thank of that. I have been noticing that the values of any Mustang II's (clean examples) especially the "performance" models have doubled and some times tripled in prices over the last couple years. It's taken a long time for the Mustang hobby to truly inbrace these cars.
We or Us...the 4-eyed crowed think finding clean cars and parts is difficult...try a II. There community is much smaller than we have here on FEP if even at all.

So...selling a Saleen for a King Cobra? Maybe not as rare in the numbers game but in the real world...who knows. Could you sell your Saleen and replace it with a nice orgnial of restored KC...that may be a challenge.

BTW I love your car...it's something I would like to own my self and always wanting one. I also being a Mustang lover would like to also and always looking for an affordable KC also. If they both came up at the same time...I would take the KC over the Saleen. Call me nuts or crazy!

[Tigger]

Here are a couple more that I saved from the crusher. The bronze 78 was a little old lady car. The granddaughter inherited it. The timing belt broke and some friend of the family tried fixing it but it would never start for them. I tried to buy it from her but we could not agree on a price and she wouldn't tell me what sidelined it so I passed. The person I bought it from bought it from her and did not do anything with it. It still did not run. I reset the timing belt and it fired right up. It had 72k on the clock and came with all the service records. Nice little car.



Bought this one from a kid that was turning it into a race car. He started stripping it. It had a mint deluxe black interior. I bought all the parts he took off first and then bought the car when he lost interest. It was rusty but it ran so good I didn't have the heart to part it out. 2.0l and a 4spd. I pulled the interior for my blue car and replaced it with a well used stuff and pieced it back together. I drove it for about 9 months and then sold it when I had the cruising wagon road worthy.

The guy I sold it too drove it for another 3 years before he sold it. That next owner put a turbo motor in it. Unfortunately a year or two later it succumbed to the tin worm. The body started sagging.

[Tigger]

Funny I sold my cruising wagon because of the Saleen. Wife said I could buy the Saleen but I had to get rid of something. The cruising wagon was it. It went to a good home in Arizona.

[xctasy]

I don't believe so. They were a unique chassis.

Love the Mustang II's. They get a bad rap but have there place in Mustang history.

Mk1 and Mk2 Capris were an European Ford platform. Accautly believe they was mostly an European Ford with engine/trans options tell they got the 2.3 replacing the 2.0. That platform even ran into the 80's (Merkurs and Escorts...not the US versions) before being phased out. Not 100% sure just based on what I have owned and noticed looking for parts etc...

Totally love the two cars that got the worst rap from its wrong thinking, counter reactionary revisionist press. Each was American, and fitted into the scheme of things perfectly.

From overseas, I've seen basically, the writers accusing Americans of being crass, brainless people for deciding to downsize into these short wheel base, narrow track, large over hangcars which sold like hotcakes. Safety issues and low rent performance were always what you get when the cars weren't 3700 pound with a 429 or 351 4V. The Fastback styling made both cars cool, and so did the hint of swanky jelly mould in the cross section...it was what makes the cars so cool and 911 Porsche-like to this day. In Pangra form, the Pinto was right up there with the greats. In King Cobra form, it created the start of the 5.0 mystique. Farah Fawcett on the hood never hurt the Cobra II either. The Mustangs small trans tunnel begat the 148 teeth bellhousing SR trans and small 143 teeth C4 auto; each were signs that Detriot could throw money at downsizing a package, and not enough positive press was given regarding the breakthrough steering, gearbox and NVH packaging improvements. People decried its weight and 217 feet stopping distance, but failed to see that it was well proportioned in an AMC AMX manner, and the Fox Mustang/Capri copied the hard chassis rail width and lower suspesion coils and steering gear hard dimensions, hubs, 6.7" axles and, for 79, its engines and yet made space for truly huge engines. The press got it wrong

"Throwing some nice parts at the Pinto failed to mask its true identity as a lemon. In retrospect, it’s easy to see why the Pangra was such a failure. Trying to turn the Pinto into some sort of exotic was futile, as nobody was going to pay Porsche money for a tweaked compact. Still, despite its impracticality, the Pangra remains a fascinating footnote in the history of the Ford Pinto"

55 full kits that passed emissions in an unfriendly Californian market, and a 175 hp net, but 285 hp claimed 15.4 second Ak Miller turbo 2000 that added to the orginal form wasn't a bad idea. see http://news.boldride.com/2013/02/top...it-cars/22963/

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/tri...f/tags/pangra/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwiOUL2BS-k

The 94 inch wheelbase Pintos and 96.2" Mustang II's were very unique designs which cashed in on NVH reducing rubber insulation wishbone fornt ends and pretty good rack and pinion steering. The Pinto and Mustang II lead with Chevrolet/Opel/Vauxhall/Jensen Healy style isolated subframe wishbone IFS and rack and pinion steering, but still with the crude semi elliptic live rear axle. The front end started out in response to the TRW rack used in the DeTomaso Mungusta and Pantera. The Mark III "TC" Cortina and "TC" Taunus used this same cushy, high compliance coil front suspension with an equally lousy coil spring four link rear end...it was always lousy in the Euopean cars, probably worse than the leaf spring Pinto and Mustang II. Retuned, the Pinto and Mustang II are great machines, with scope for better Ranger sized brakes, but the variable ratio powered rack which did such good service in the Fox frames.

It took years for Ford to sharpen the wishbone and rack and pinion Fords. But even the recirculating ball MacPherson strut Consul/Corsair/ Cortina Mark II and rack and pinion Capri were superior, even though they too had cart spring rear ends.


The Euro Capri was totally different with another another half foot in the wheelbase, and harsh, hard, over sprung suspension 1962 with high feedback, sharp steering modification made in 1968 from the rear drive Escort. Although the chassis was pretty much perfect from day one, it took seven long years and a lot of US styling input to get the raging sucess that was the 69 Capri into production.

MacPherson struts featured at the front, a live axle supported on leaf springs with short radius rods at the rear. The Escort steering was new, and very sharp, the cars best feature. The wheelbase was within 3/16ths of the Corsair wheelbase, and 2 inches up on the 62-64 Capri, with all of it in the hood to give it a Mustang like feel, with the RWD Escort tail transplanted to "truncate" it within an inch of its life. So good, the basic changes redistibuted the whole front to rear deck balance totally missing in the orginal Thunderbird style personal coupe.




The American designer of the European Capri reworked the orginal United Kingdom Consol Capri with more Mustang que's, and hit the marketig sweet spot. From 1962-1964, the Consol Capri sold only 20,000 units. In one year, the 1969 Capri sold 400, 000 units. In the US, it sold almost 90000 units in the first year of the 2.6 V6, but soon that rate floundered due to the currancy fluctuations making it increasingly expensive. They may not have had as tight, well sorted chassis, but the Pinto and Mustang II were much more competitive.

[roush235]

Good post xctasy.

I always thought the Pinto and Mustang II were the victims of unduly harsh criticism by the media. The Pinto, of course, for the gas tank issue; I believe history has shown that it was generally no more, or no less, safe than contemporary compact cars. It was the media circus around the issue (not unlike the Firestone/Explorer fiasco from a generation later). The Mustang II, for being "just a fancy Pinto" which is exactly what the market called for in its day.

I even see derision directed to our beloved four-eyes, specifically the early year models and their low-horsepower 4, 6, and even 8 cylinder powerplants. Again, one has to consider these vehicles in the context of their day. Low power does not make them boring or undesirable; even "sports cars" of the day have less horsepower than today's midsize family cars. Times have changed.

[black1980fiveoh]

I owned a few Mustang 2s before I got into the early fox bodies. I still love them but they are so hard to find these days. I had no money to keep mine going plus they were so few parts available at that time.

[roadkill]

Never been into Mustang II's but my first car was a '74 Pinto Runabout and later owned a couple of '73 Runabouts. Still love the little cars after all these years and soneday will own another one.

[84GT350_Annv]

Owned a Maverick and II in the 80s. Had a hard time keeping the II running. The car was in bad shape but I had zero resources at the time. Loved the Maverick though.

[xctasy]

Good post xctasy.

I always thought the Pinto and Mustang II were the victims of unduly harsh criticism by the media. The Pinto, of course, for the gas tank issue; I believe history has shown that it was generally no more, or no less, safe than contemporary compact cars. It was the media circus around the issue (not unlike the Firestone/Explorer fiasco from a generation later). The Mustang II, for being "just a fancy Pinto" which is exactly what the market called for in its day.

I even see derision directed to our beloved four-eyes, specifically the early year models and their low-horsepower 4, 6, and even 8 cylinder powerplants. Again, one has to consider these vehicles in the context of their day. Low power does not make them boring or undesirable; even "sports cars" of the day have less horsepower than today's midsize family cars. Times have changed.

Actually shear ignorance perpetuated by the likes of Yahoo and others in ill researched articles by propane brained, rear engined focused reporters who wouldn't have two brain cells to rub together. People who think that a Pinto is rear engined, and that the Corvair fell over everytime it cornered.

Evidence? worst cars ever made

http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...s-ever-made/5/

1971 Ford Pinto

Much like the 1961 Corvair, the 1971 Ford Pinto was another car with its engine mounted in the rear. The difference? The 1971 Ford Pinto was by far more deadly than any car ever created. Even the slightest nudge to the back end of this car could turn it into a volatile disaster. Back in the day, it was almost as if Ford had no interest at all in the safety of the consumer.

Why do we say this? Well mainly because, it would have cost $121 million to reinforce the rear end of the car, as opposed to the $50 million it would cost to buyout the dissatisfied customers. Needless to say, if you're one of the people still driving the 1971 Ford Pinto, you must have a death wish! Read more at: http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...s-ever-made/5/

http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...-ever-made/11/

1961 Corvair

The 1961 Corvair was literally a death trap on wheels. Everything about this atrocity was a disaster waiting to happen. To start, they mounted a flat six engine in the rear of the car. Anyone knows that if you have more weight in the back that you're more likely to spin out. That wasn't the biggest issue with the engine placement though. If you got into a fender Bender, it could turn ugly really quick.

If that wasn't enough for you, the 1961 Corvair also had a single piece steering column. As if worrying about your engine exploding behind you wasn't enough, you had to worry about your steering column impaling you in a front end collision. No wonder this car was deemed "Unsafe at any speed." Read more at: http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...-ever-made/11/

1975 Morgan Plus 8 Propane

If you thought that the Pinto was a poorly designed and dangerous car, you obviously have never heard about the 1975 Morgan Plus 8 Propane! To start off, did they realize that they were in the 70's?! Everything about the exterior of the car gives off the vibe that this car was actually built in the 1930's. It had all the classic traits of the cars created 40 years prior including wing fenders, wooden-frame bodies, and sliding-pillar front suspensions. But guess what? That's not the worst thing about the 1975 Morgan Plus 8 Propane. Someone thought that it would be a bright idea to run the v8 engine off of a propane bottle. The worst part about the concept was that the propane bottle hung freely behind the rear bumper! I don't know about you, but we wouldn't want to be in that car when it got rear ended!! Read more at: http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...-ever-made/17/

2016 Ford Mustang

Since the beginning of time, the Ford Mustang has always been an iconic car. To most, being able to own an old fastback is a dream, but with Mustangs being what they are, their price never depreciated. In fact, it seems that the older the car the more it's worth. Well over the last decade or so, the look of the Mustang has slowly been going from "American muscle" to "import tuner".

It finally became too much when Ford revealed the prototype for the 2016 Ford Mustang. At first, second, and fiftieth glance, all we can think about when we seen this horrendous car is a rounded Toyota Supra... Ford really did it this time. They may have ruined the way our children are going to look at muscle cars!! Read more at: http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...-ever-made/25/

Thanks for Reading! Thanks for Reading! Read more at: http://werankcities.com/gallery/26-w...-ever-made/26/

[xctasy]

See this article. More proof on how the Mustang II always gets the rasberry. Carophile, its a free country let your opinons roam free.


Cobra II and KingCobra? Kiss a$$ in my opinion.

http://www.carophile.com/cars-that-e...eir-makers/10/

10. Ford Mustang II



Loosely based on the Ford Pinto, The Mustang II was available as a coupe or hatchback. Two engines were available for the Mustang II: a 2.3 liter four-cylinder Pinto engine and a 2.8 liter “Cologne” V-6. Neither motor gave the Mustang II much power or speed, resulting if Mustang enthusiasts despising the vehicle. Ford eventually released a V-8 engine, but even that motor didn’t top 140 horsepower. To make matters worse, Ford offered “Cobra II” and “King Cobra” appearance packages for the Mustang II; in case you wanted to look fast even though you weren’t. Luckily for Ford the Arab oil embargo had just occurred and the Mustang II sold well due to it’s decent gas mileage.

Anyone driven a 200 or the late 250 Mustang 71-73 would be happy driving the 2.3 or 2.8 Mustang II...the Colgne V6 was a standout engine and a sales feature for Lee's little jewel.

The 2.3 was superior to any thing GM offered in 2.3 liters. 0- 60 mph 12.9 secs, 1/4 mile drag time of 19.1 secs with a 2.3 four speed. Come on, it ran away an hid from a C4 six cylinder Mustang. Even a 1980 4 speed Fox 3.3 would be hard pressed to keep up with a Mustang II.

[TopGear85]

This is the only one I have so far....but hopefully that will change soon:

[Gemini1999]

See this article. More proof on how the Mustang II always gets the rasberry. Carophile, its a free country let your opinons roam free.


Cobra II and KingCobra? Kiss a$$ in my opinion.

http://www.carophile.com/cars-that-e...eir-makers/10/




Anyone driven a 200 or the late 250 Mustang 71-73 would be happy driving the 2.3 or 2.8 Mustang II...the Colgne V6 was a standout engine and a sales feature for Lee's little jewel.

The 2.3 was superior to any thing GM offered in 2.3 liters. 0- 60 mph 12.9 secs, 1/4 mile drag time of 19.1 secs with a 2.3 four speed. Come on, it ran away an hid from a C4 six cylinder Mustang. Even a 1980 4 speed Fox 3.3 would be hard pressed to keep up with a Mustang II.

I had the Cologne V-6 in my 74 Ghia coupe. That was a terrific engine for that size car. I never had any complaints about it. I'd have another any day. I had the 2.3 liter four coupled with an automatic transmission. I drove it from Colorado to California when I moved back home. It made a terrific commuter car for my 60 mile.round trip.commute.

[82GTforME]

I had the Cologne V-6 in my 74 Ghia coupe. That was a terrific engine for that size car. I never had any complaints about it. I'd have another any day.

Alright, 2.8 V6 love! You don't see that every day (ever)!

[84StangSVT]

This is for you Skip! These are the 3 that took home the trophies in our class (74-86) at the show Sunday that left me going home empty handed.

[Gemini1999]

That Red/White '74 Ghia coupe really melts my butter...!

[84StangSVT]

That Red/White '74 Ghia coupe really melts my butter...!

It's for sale. In all honesty, it was nice. Interior was clean, the car as a whole is solid.

[SuperDuty455]

The main issue with the Mustang II are the looks. The proportions are a bit off, tiny wheels, too much metal between the wheel arches and the upper body line, cheesy design cues. The hatchback looks better but it still has the odd proportions. I think a Maverick based Mustang II may have given better results on that aspect.

With that said, I wouldn't mind having one :P And I like them a lot more than the SN95s.

[Ray Dog]

The first Mustang I drove and maintained was a red 74 like the one in 84StangSVT's post.
My first wife's car when we married.
Traded it in for an 81 Fox.
This time around my wife came with a 94 Saturn SL2.
Another car with a cult following.

[xctasy]

qwertz, this ones for you....

US 2.8 cams as recomended by EthylCat

See the previous two posts. I trust and engine builder with some engine analysing experience.

http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...-options/page2

Not anything near EASY, but this thread got me thinking what I would do if I were to build one of these engines on a realtively tight $$ budget. Sooo, after about 5 hrs of research tonight(hard to find info on these things) this is what I have. Maybe someone will be interested maybe not.

1. Bore to 3.680 and install Ford 255(4.2L) v8 pistons. You have to bore the pin bores out to fit the .945 pin but you gain something valuable.
a. From what I can find the 2.8 piston is .060 in the hole creating a ground pounding 8.7:1 compression ratio. Piston compression height is 1.535. The 4.2 piston has a compression height of 1.585, placing the top a mere .009" from the deck. This raises compression to 9.5:1. Yah!

2. Next I would source some Toyota 3TC intake valves to gain a little cross section to spin about 6500 rpm size= 1.615". most likely would run 22r retainers and locks.
The exhaust looks to be a 4.0 v-6 ford piece 1.358" in diameter and will run stock locks and retainers. Valve springs for both applications are very similar with the 22r spring getting the nod(better pressures at the same installed heights) if the Ford head will accept a slightly smaller spring ID. Otherwise I'm sure there are drop in performance springs for both.

3. After the valve job, port work would be performed to increase airflow.

4. Contrary to popular belief, I would run headers, but of my own design, keeping primary pipes small and relatively long (30+inches) with a 2.125-2.250" collector

5.Flow numbers are really hard to come by for these engines (so far) so a cam is tricky right now.Preliminary thoughts are 270/280 230/230 .472/.450 net lift 110lsa 102 ICL STICK SHIFT ONLY. This cam will not work too well without a stall converter in your C3. Automatics would get a different profile.

This cam has better low rpm cylinder pressure potential than the larger of the 3 comps and more exh seat to seat due to the TERRIBLE exhaust ports
55 degrees overlap should be ok for power brakes (close).

My intake lobe seems bigger than the biggest of the Comps until you see that the advertised duration is at .020" valve lift. This one is at .006"

6. Not sure about induction. I have never seen an intake yet. My first instinct would be a 500 Holley 2bbl though.

Well there it is, my hypothetical 2.8 engine. Doesn't it sound nice? I am sure it will make 250hp here on the internet!

The numbers add up , but I have never built one of these engines. ( I would though!!)

Also OP there are some pretty good grinds for your engine at http://catalog.elginind.com/app/Engi...gh+Performance

They can be had for less than the Comp stuff as well.

Now I can sleep!

Steve

Do not remember if this was an auto or stick, or whether you had taken measures to increase compression, but I would not run a 276 duration cam in that engine if it is pertaining to the intake lobe. The exhaust is a different story.

I did give more of a race type cam example in an earlier post that had 270 on the intake, but I do not think you are in that realm of operation with this project.

I would recommend something like a 254/276 224/230 .480/.390 on a 109 +7

Should pull hard to 5000 or so and have about 200lb/ft just off idle

http://www.therangerstation.com/tech...rformance.html

http://www.burtonpower.com/tuning-gu...ing-guide.html

I bought it 6 months ago... what a bad surprise for my wife...

I'll loose some friends on this forum but I want to sell that fox as soon as possible, probably in March (you won't buy skis in summer, you won't buy a mustang in winter).

Maybe I'll keep that spare nose apart and see what happen, that's good news if it might come back in place...

I can't afford 2 Mustangs. And I love my other one.



I know it's a II, not a real mustang, weak engine bla blah...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIWJ5mywo1I


Ford Performance Article above is wrong in many instances...in an about the mid sixites, the 7 "litre" 500 Galaxie was the first US Ford to use the French "Liter" measure



And the platform sharing of the Mustang and Falcon...yes, the dash, cowl and pressings were internally interchangble, but it was a short wheel base Fairline with less than fairlane and greater than Falcon tracks, the Pinto and Mustang II shared steering and brakes and engines and modified Pinto floor pan pressings...

http://www.fordpinto.com/your-projec...lacement-pans/

[img][/img]






The rest of the car, as was said, was a home run. Here's why...












The Fox took the same turret parameters (its interior and cowl and and narrow width hood and cat walk were pretty much Ford Mustang II), and


the European Cortina Coil spring rear end, Cortina/Taunas Two door hard dimensions of steering rack, lower front coil springs, wheel base, track width,



and mashed it up with the right kind of wheel arch space and great US Fairmont Fox hard dimensions...


Four Eyed Foxers owe their all to the Mustang II.