2015 Mustang to Likely Premiere in Times Square Next Thursday on Good Morning America. Part of Simultaneous Reveal of All New Global 'Stang In Six Cities On Four Continents

I know it's a popular trope to knock the Mustang II, but contrary to "nearly killing" the Mustang, the Mustang II kept the brand alive. Some of the best selling years in Mustang history were with the so-called Pintostang, averaging something like a quarter million units a year over five years. I did a piece for TTAC not long ago about the Mustang II and the fact that the people involved with the project are rather proud of it. They sold a lot of cars, they made money for Ford and they helped keep a storied nameplate alive to make it to what will be it's 50th anniversary next year. I'm getting a little tired of automotive cliches, "worst of lists" that include the Pinto, Vega and Gremlin, people saying that men compensate for sexual inadequacies with the vehicles they drive, jokes about Corvettes, middle aged men, combovers and gold chains and the like. I'm sure you can think of a few yourself. Sure, it's an easy joke to make fun of the "Mustang based on the Pinto" but how come nobody but our EiC Pro Tem is willing to point out that a Bentley Continental is really a Volkswagen?

The 2.3 carried over into the fox platform and became a decent engine in 91. The turbo GT's of the early 80's had ironically reliability issues. The SVO however is legendary among late model enthusiasts. BTW Ronnie I had a similar discussion with a coworker. I argued that if he was going to go for a Cayenne or Qwhatever V6 he might as well get the VW as they're exactly the same thing. He counter by saying then a Veyron and TT are the same as they're both VAG coupes. I won by pointing out that the TT doesn't come in W16 flavor.

@Ion Yikes! Don't say that....I had the 2.3 four banger in my silver '79 so I wouldn't consider it particularly positive that 12 years later they finally had it sorted out! Lol

@Ronnie Schreiber the problem I have (conceptually) with the Mustang II is that it was wrong-headed and didn't need to exist. It was such a step back from the Mustangs it replaced, utterly bereft of anything resembling performanceThe Maverick should have been turned into the '74 Mustang. Yes, it was still a descendent of the Falcon but the 2-door Maverick had similar overall proportions to the preceding Mustangs and was almost 600 lbs lighter than the outgoing '73. plus, the Mustang II was just plain fugly, sadly like many cars in the mid- to late-'70s.

@Ronnie Schreiber The "Cobra" versions of the Mustang II are nothing short of embarrassing. Defense of the II also ignores that GM sold loads of F-bodies in this period too, and that although weak by modern standards the Camaro/Firebird had much greater performance than the Ford.

@ajla Even the 175 hp 350 (I think that was as low as the 350 got, unless there was a 150 hp version) had a bit more spunk than the 302 did, and the Firebird had the 400 which belted out a very respectable 220 horsepower in proper late 70s tune.

Lots of Foxstangs had the 2.3 in both NA and turbo form.