kt97679 wrote on 03/03/14 at 20:41:29:I thought that Mustangs were decent cars, what specifically is wrong with electronics and suspension? From original "gone in 60 seconds" I've got impression that mustang suspension is pretty strong
.
I am not googling this so I may be off. late 70's saw the intro of the new Ford "Fox body" as a much needed replacement of the Mustang II. With the new body came a lot of kinks to be worked out.
My own mother bought a 1980 2.8 RS Capri. The engine was that great german little 2.8L v6. But the car over all was very unreliable due to bad brain boxes, faulty wiring and those "new fangled struts" that would not hold their position.
The 2.8 v6 still lives ( or did) in the Ford Ranger as the 3.0 v6, which I had in my 1986 Ranger. My 1996 Ranger had the 4.0 V6, another stuff engine that I would put up against any little truck motor of its day.
Other fun info that NOBODY cares about:
My 1976 Pinto had the 2.3 I4 and a C4 auto tranny. I raced the car, and could not blow it up or trash the tranny... the motor.. ehhh.
The 2.3 I4 was used in the Turbo Tbird and the 1979 Indy pace Mustang. That same lower end was then used in the Rangers but with a dual overhead cam. Ford got a lot of milage out of that little engine.
To me... I would love to find a well preserved Gen II Pinto. Fun to drive, easy to work on ( carbs were crap).. justa fun little jalopy of a car; Fords version of a VW beetle.