| |
Update:
Mustang II Part Two
Wherein we furthur investigate the effects of V-8 power added to the Pony Package
|
Our preview test of the V-8-engined Mustang II in the November issue was necessarily, short of a full road test. We didn't have the time or equipment to conduct a complete test, so we arranged with Ford to get another car at a later date to complete the picture.
From the moment we drove that "update" car out of Bill Stroppe's garage in Long Beach, we knew the Mustang II we were given would be an unusual performer, partly due to the ride. It had a heavy-duty competition suspension package incorporating a rear antisway bar, adjustable shocks, and stiffer springs. And it felt like it; the first bump we hit didn't produce any variation in the steering of the car at all, and neither did the last.
Besides the special suspension bits, our car had a few other goodies as well: power steering (rack and pinion), power front disc brakes, a digital clock, a limited-slip differential, various special trim items, an AM/FM stereo radio, the security lock group, and an electric defogger for the rear window. Five fat 195/70x13 Uniroyal steel radials completed the package, totaling out to $5048, which means that the options brought the price up by $955 over bog-standard.
In everyday use, the 302 cid V-8 was as tractable and easy to live with as you would expect from a medium-gauge American V-8. The three-speed automatic transmission (no charge with the V-8) also performed flawlessly, although not without its peculiarities. The stall-speed (the rpm possible while holding the brakes and revving the engine in first gear) seemed high for a car with as torquey an engine as the Mustang II, at around 2200 rpm. Smaller-engined cars need automatic transmissions with this higher stall-speed to get off the line at something better than a turtle's pace, but driveline engineers working with larger cars usually lower the stall-speed to make shifting smoother out of the hole.
With the higher stall-speed meant for the Mustang II we had was a tendency to spinning-tire starts, reminiscent of the old Pony-cars. If you moderated your low-speed throttle pressure, there was no problem, but a quick jab at the accelerator at a stoplight invariably gave us squealing tires.
Low-speed hotrodding aside, the V-8 propelled the Mustang II down the strip considerably faster than its V-6 powered predecessor. Our acceleration curves showed a car that gave really good times to 50 mph, but then started to flatten out, with 60 mph coming in about 11 seconds. Our best quarter-mile time was at the short end of 17 seconds with a speed of nearly 79 mph. The 3.0:1 axle ratio is behind this, of course.
The domestic behavior of the car we had was not up to its dragstrip form, however. Even though it carried the luxury interior group, there was no rake adjustment for either the driver's or passenger's seat, something that provided for considerable discomfort in taller drivers. Shorter members of the RT staff found the seating position just fine, but in combination withe the skinny plastic heel and the supersensitive power steering, driving the car for long intervals on the freeway was a tiring ptoposition for those of us 5'6" and over.
The fold-down rear seat was in almost constant use, underlining the utility of the hatchback concept. Our previous complaints about the tendency of luggage or cargo to slide around in the hatchbacks also apply to the Mustang II, though, and tie-downs would be appropriate.
At the skid pad, the Mustang showed a marked tendency to understeer, finally plowing out at maximum speed. This is undoubtedly due to the extra weight of the V-8, which gives the car a 58/42 per cent weight distribution, a ratio not calculated to give neutral steering through corners. The suspension certainly wasn't at fault in that area, though, since - if you could overcome the zero-feedback power steering and the understeer - the car would corner without fuss or strain, not lifting a wheel anywhere. Body lean was minimal, and the car's transient response - how it went from left to right - was limited only by the steering.
We predicted that fuel economy for teh V-8 Mustang would be somewhere between 14 and 16 mpg. In that we were wrong....the overall average for the test period was 13 mpg, which - as usual - includes a hard day at the strip and skid pad. With judicious driving, we saw a tankful go by at 14.6 mpg, so if you buy a Mustang II with a V-8 and can keep your foot out of the carb, you may be able to realize a 15 mpg average.
Our time with the update car confirmed a few of our previous impressions of the package and gave us some new ones. The outside mirrors - both internally adjustable - vibrated at speed just enough to obscure that patrol car a few lengths back. The wind noise of the earlier models seemed to be dampened quite a bit, and the engine noise seemed - perhaps because of the lessened outside sounds - more intrusive. The engine burbled very nicely at idle, but a bit of throttle brought on the full-throated roar so beloved of glass-pack buyers. Braking was an easy maneuver, but one likely to make the car pull to the left, at any speed, and the pressure necessary to bring the car to a locked-up-and-screeching halt was very light. Quality control seemed good throughout, and attention to details - as in the overhead-mounted adjustable map light - gave us no reason to thing that the V-8 powered Mustang II will not be as successful as its predecessors.
|
|
