| |
PM Owners Report: Ford Mustang II
A nationwide survey based on 669,000 owner-driven miles.
by Michael Lamm
|
Mustang II owners gave all sorts of reasons for buying. A South Carolina accountant exulted, "For style and economy - it's one car whose styling is different; not carried over or borrowed or added to."
"I wanted a small car with luxury appointments," explained a Michigan high school principal. "Looks, price, economy," - Utah machinist. "Safer than other small cars," said an Ohio manager. "I had a 1967 Mustang that I like very much." - New Hampshire librarian.
An Ohio practical nurse: "Because of its smaller size, appealing looks, price and good gas mileage." An Oregon teacher: "I wanted a car that didn't look like the other small cars - VW, Datsun, Vega, etc. I wanted one that looked like a big car but had small size and luxury." And a California typist confessed, "Because it's sexy - like me!"
What do Mustang II owners think of their dealers? "I made an appointment with the dealership to fix my stall-outs," comments an Ohio steelworker, "and they fixed it the same day at no charge." A Texas claims adjuster admitted: "The dealer had an easy job, because the car sold itself and the saleman only had to take my money." A California meat cutter observed, "When a dealer sells you a little car fo $5100, he's always very nice."
"I ordered the optional digital clock but never got one." - California electronics worker. (Those who did get these clocks say they keep better time than the old type.) "Service is better than average." - Chicago engineer. "Dealer gave me the runaround about fixing my leaky transmission. This was warranty work, of course. Ford has a way to go to find no unhappy owners." - New Jersey salesman. "My fuel pump went out at 4900 miles. Dealer paid for the tow and fixed it in 90 minutes, so I'm more than satisfied." - California chemist.
On the topic of workmanship, ther are these quotes: "Outstanding, almost defect-free, few ghost noises." "Excellent." "Same quality as Thunderbird." "Some chipped paint, but nothing else was wrong." "Great." "Doors don't shut as easily as they should."
"Very satisfied with quality." "Perfect - no problems at all - seems very sturdy." "Above average, both chassis and body; no malfunctions."
How about comfort? "The back seat is a joke." "Sufficient for two people; rear seat for short trips only." "I'm 6-4 and would like a little more headroom." "Extremely comfortable; passengers impressed." "Two plus two what?" "The floor hump in the back seat gets in people's way, and it's a bit cramped, but you expect that when you buy a small car."
One loud, prolonged gripe - the mandatory seat belt-ignition interlock. "The new safety devices can really be a hassle. I realize they are important, but if the belts get the least bit tangled, you're stuck. I once spent 30 minutes in front of a store trying to get my seat belts untangled. It feels kind of dumb explaining to people that your car won't start because your belts are tangled."
Similarly: "I found the shoulder harness uncomfortable so I cut them off!" "I hate to be harassed by a bunch of buzzers." "Seems stupid to me that I have to buckle up to start the car, then unbuckle to get out and deice the windows, then buckle up again before I take off." The interlock is a real paind in parking lots, car washes, etc." "Please tell me how to bypass the seatbelt interlock."
And even more: "Shoulder harness cuts into my neck; very uncomfortable." "Even with the front seats all the way forward, it's really a chore for tall people to get into the back seat. They have to duck under the top half of the shoulder harness."
Pros and cons on performance included these: "Four-cylinder engine is very sluggish from 0-30 mph." "No guts...how about Ford's 351 Cleveland V8 as an option?" "I listed 'lack of power' as one of my complaints, because it takes a little extra effort to merge and pass on expressways. But anyone who feels he's been ripped off because of this lack of power just didn't look closely enough. I was buying an economy car, not something to race." "Mine has awfully good pickup." "Lacks power, especially trying to climb steep hills." "I like the snap of the V6 engine."
Most owners appreciate the Mustang II's handling ease. A Maine bookkeeper: "Holds the road well in crosswinds." An Indiana credit manager: "Handling ability similar to European cars." An Ohio accountant: "Rides like a larger car and handles like it has power steering." An Alabama student: "It handles good in the corners and holds the road real good, and the brakes are fine." "Handles like a heavy car on the road." - New York salesman.
Gas mileage came in for consistant praise from owners, even though a high 18.3 percent isted it as their biggest complaint. Most of those had been told by salemen that they could expect 25-30 mpg. The Mustang II's 17-21 mpg average is the best for any American-made car we've surveyed in the last three years. We haven't posted mileage like that since 1971, when Pintos were getting 22-27 mpg, Vegas 21-25, and Gremlins 18-22.
If Mustang II owners could re-engineer their cars, what would they change? "Put the old 289 four-barrel back in!" - Mississippi computer programmer. "Nothing - I love it just the way it is." - New Jersy secretary. "Redesign the heater so the driver's legs don't roast and the passenger's don't freeze." - New Jersy coast guardsman. "Add more trunk space and subtract buzzers and no-start devices." - Illinois worker. "I'd try to get a smoother ride." - Florida secretary. "I sure would like the side vent windows back." - Florida airman. "The ashtray is in a poor spot for a manual-shift car; I'd move it." - Arizona electrician. "It looks too much like the Pinto." - Georgia corpsman.
We always leave space on the backs of our questionnaires for general comments. These often tellmore than answers to direct questions. We have room this time, so here are a few.
A Minnesota locomotive engineer writes, "I had an engine vibration that couldn't be stopped. Called in Ford Customer Service, and response was excellent. They sent engineers out twice and called Dearborn once, but no solution. I felt the engine was out of balance and asked the dealer to trade for a car of equal value. This was done with no problems."
A Virginia EPA employee: "I would simply comment that I could not be more pleased with my Mustang II. I trade in a VW in good shape. No regrets. VW can't touch the Mustang for responsive steering and comfort. I am especially pleased with the styling, inside and out. A friend who owns a comparable Vega is amazed at the Mustang II's more luxurious interior."
A California forklift operator: "I wanted economy as well as a sporty little car. I got more than I expected. Very nice, very solid, feels and rides smooth like a big car."
A Michigan factory worker: "I haven't found a girl yet who doesn't like the car." Most owners, evidently, are pleased.
|
| Summary of 1974 Ford Mustang II Owners Reports* |
| Total Miles Driven |
669,320 |
| Average miles per gallon: |
|
| 2.3-liter Four: |
|
| Local driving |
18.1 |
| Long trips |
21.7 |
| 2.8-liter V6: |
|
| Local driving |
17.2 |
| Long trips |
20.7 |
| Engines: |
|
| 2.3-liter Four |
53.3% |
| 2.8-liter V6 |
46.7 |
| Transmissions: |
|
| Automatic |
53.3% |
| Four-speed manual |
46.7 |
| Series: |
|
| Basic Mustang II |
35.3% |
| Mustang Ghia |
25.3 |
| Mustang 2+2 |
17.6 |
| Mustang Mach 1 |
21.7 |
| Body style: |
|
| Notchback coupe |
56.4% |
| Hatchback coupe |
43.6 |
| Why the Mustang II? |
|
| Styling |
52.7% |
| Economy |
45.6 |
| Size |
23.0 |
| Past experience |
11.5 |
|
|
| Specific likes: |
|
| Styling |
61.5% |
| Handling |
56.0 |
| Economy |
41.7 |
| Ride |
24.8 |
| Comfort |
23.4 |
| Size |
17.4 |
| Specific dislikes: |
|
| Seat-belt system |
18.8% |
| Poor gas mileage |
18.3 |
| Lack of power |
12.4 |
| Poor workmanship |
6.4 |
| Number of vehicles owned: |
|
| Mustang II only |
39.0% |
| Two cars |
41.7 |
| Three cars |
14.8 |
| Makes of other cars owned: |
|
| Ford |
29.5% |
| Chevrolet |
16.5 |
| Mustang |
12.2 |
| Mercury |
10.1 |
| Pinto |
8.6 |
| Comfort opinion: |
|
| Good to excellent |
39.4% |
| Average to poor |
58.9 |
| Workmanship opinion: |
|
| Good to excellent |
39.4% |
| Average to poor |
28.6 |
|
| Had any mechanical trouble? |
|
| No |
55.2% |
| Yes |
44.8 |
| What type of trouble? |
|
| Transmission |
16.0% |
| Carburetor |
16.0 |
| Engine runs on |
14.0 |
| Heater |
7.0 |
| Did you repair it yourself? |
|
| No |
96.9% |
| Yes |
3.1 |
| Dealer repairs satisfactory? |
|
| Yes |
56.1% |
| No |
43.9 |
| What changes would you like? |
|
| Sealt-belt interlock |
14.9% |
| Better mileage |
7.7 |
| More trunk capacity |
6.7 |
| More rear legroom |
6.2 |
| More horsepower |
6.2 |
| Age distribution of owners: |
|
| 16-29 years |
50.7% |
| 30-49 years |
31.5 |
| 50-plus |
19.7 |
| Would you buy another Mustang II? |
| Yes |
79.1% |
| No |
20.9 |
|
|
| *Percentages might not equal 100% due to rounding or insufficient data. |
|
|
