

© Copyright 1995 thru 2008 - The Mustang Works™. All Rights Reserved.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
![]() |
#27 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Central Valley, Ca
Posts: 58
|
![]() Well i have no idea y you would want a 71-73, cause they are the ugliest of mustangs, besides mustang II. The last year of the good looking classics has got to be 70'. You just cant beet the looks and performance of the 69-70 Mach 1's or boss cars. But i would have to agree with and earlier post about 64.5-66, you can get one at resonable price, and the 289 has got to be one of the most potent engines ever built. Not to mention the fact that its cheap for hp, seeing as how most of the go fast guys are driving 5.0's. And 302 parts are interchangable with 289, with some exceptions such as early 289's(ie 64) Being a classic owner i would go for the classic, they just look sharp and women lov'm. But if your goals are to go fast and handle well, i would have to say the market is a little better for the fox bodied mustangs, (87-93 that is).
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
any way i can get under 9 seconds in the 1/8 | Bigcarguy65 | Modular Madness | 8 | 11-03-2001 09:35 PM |
Original Gone... 60 seconds on Speedvision | Stefan | Blue Oval Lounge | 3 | 09-23-2001 09:16 AM |
gone in 60 seconds | 82 GT | Blue Oval Lounge | 15 | 01-15-2001 02:13 PM |