Please educate me

[Alloy Dave]

Ok, since I've historically been a Chevy guy, I need some help understanding the Mustang heritage. I did have a '67 Mustang with a 289 hi-po, but that was 25 years ago. Can someone answer the following questions?

 

1) What were the common "generations" of Mustangs? In other words, when were the major changes in body style. In Camaro language, we call them "generations"....not sure about Mustang.

 

2) When people talk about the Cobra "R", what does the "R" stand for? And can you describe the specs of this car?

 

3) Is there consensus about the "best" Mustang in modern history (since about 1985)? If so, which is it?

 

4) In Chevy terms, the Camaro had "appearance" options called the RS package, and "performance" options called SS and Z28 packages. Does Mustang act similarly? In other words, is the Mach 1 just performance, or also appearance...what about Bullitt? R? etc.

 

5) What is involved in swapping a ring and pinion in a 2007 Mustang? On Chevy's it's a nightmare. I used to be an auto mechanic, but did brakes/suspensions. Is it a 2-hour job or a 10-hour job?

 

6) What is involved in "reflashing" the ECM? Do I need an expensive tool? What technical info is required? Is there a good website that I can read up on this?

 

Thanks to everyone for the info!

 

Dave (see my other post in new member forum about my name being Dave rather than Terry)

[DVS2XS]

Generations: 1964-1966, 1967/68, 1969/1970, 1971-1973, 1974-1978 (Mustang II), 1979-? (Fox body), ?-2004, 2005-current (2009?)

 

R models were race models with added performance - not legal in some states. Light, no rear seats, no A/C, etc.

 

Best Modern Mustang is argueably the 2002-2004 SVT Cobras - with supercharged 4.6 and 6-speed. Rare 2000 Cobra -R with 5.4L engine is my personal favorite.

 

Packages - Mach I - drag centered, Boss - Road Race centered (other than the big block cars). GT is a V8 car. Pony Package is an interior package. Late model SVT Cobras were/are the performance packages.

Lots of different packages offered on early cars - Drag Pack, Cobra Jet/Super Cobra Jet big block upgrades. You really need a couple of books to cover it all.

 

Bullet, Saleen, Roush, etc are aftermarket tuners, like COPA, Motion, etc.

 

Ring and pinion swap - a bit different between early 9 inch rears and late 8 inch cars - especially the IRS dif. but not that involved - experience helps. Not a lot different than a 10-bolt GM, but shimming is easier IMHO.

 

Reflashing ECU/PCM (or what ever you want to call the computer chip) involves using a laptop with software, or a flash module connected to teh computer's i/o port. The latest Spanish Oak PCM is a bit trickier, but mostly becaust it does so much, and is so much faster.

If you are using a standard aftermarket flash module with map(s), you just plug it in and follow the directions. Custom tuning is NOT for the beginner, but many centers around the country offer tuning and experience.

 

I am SURE others can add more details.

[68fastback]

Ok, since I've historically been a Chevy guy, I need some help understanding the Mustang heritage. I did have a '67 Mustang with a 289 hi-po, but that was 25 years ago. Can someone answer the following questions?

 

1) What were the common "generations" of Mustangs? In other words, when were the major changes in body style. In Camaro language, we call them "generations"....not sure about Mustang.

 

2) When people talk about the Cobra "R", what does the "R" stand for? And can you describe the specs of this car?

 

3) Is there consensus about the "best" Mustang in modern history (since about 1985)? If so, which is it?

 

4) In Chevy terms, the Camaro had "appearance" options called the RS package, and "performance" options called SS and Z28 packages. Does Mustang act similarly? In other words, is the Mach 1 just performance, or also appearance...what about Bullitt? R? etc.

 

5) What is involved in swapping a ring and pinion in a 2007 Mustang? On Chevy's it's a nightmare. I used to be an auto mechanic, but did brakes/suspensions. Is it a 2-hour job or a 10-hour job?

 

6) What is involved in "reflashing" the ECM? Do I need an expensive tool? What technical info is required? Is there a good website that I can read up on this?

 

Thanks to everyone for the info!

 

Dave (see my other post in new member forum about my name being Dave rather than Terry)

 

 

Just to add my 2-cents to DVS2XS great summary:

 

 

The 74-78 Mustang-II sucked -- they were the result of emissions legislation killing anything that performed well -- they were pintos in disguise -- almost literally, except for the asthmatic V8 hamstrung by a crappy intake manifold but at least it's a smallblock V8 you can build on (many mustang fans will not even recognize the existance of the 74-78 as a true mustang).

 

The Rs also came from the factory with a roll cage and fire bottle, I believe but, yeah, not street legal in many states. But they were lighter than their non-R brethren, but still heavier than the early foxes.

 

Re Best Mustang in modern history: certainly this is a matter of taste but the current mustang is clearly the best engineered mustang ever by a very wide margin. In fact, it's solidness is unmatched by any vehicle even vaguely in it's price range (including the 'vettes) except for the FordGT. Even the last of the fox chassis Cobras, while sweet rides, were't even close in structional and torsional rigidity to the present generation mustang. From a performance viewpoint, I'm right with DVS2XS but let me mention to you one very sweet but often overlooked fox-stang. The 2001 Cobra was the only all-aluminum naturally-aspirated 4.6 cobra with Independent Rear Suspension! Has a nice tremec short thro 5-speed and the best weight distribution of any Cobra. It's combination of weight balance and IRS make it the best handling Cobra of all the great fox-based stangs, so if you're into road courses, the 2001 is arguably the best base to work off. It's only shortcoming is it's strength... the all-alum engine that gives it its balance (it also weighs a couple hundred less) likely makes it a bit weaker than the later supercharged iron blocks, but I've never found anyone who's had engine problems with the naturally-aspirated 2001 alum Cobra. And it's lighter weight and better handling probably make it equal to the blown 2003/4s on a short twisty road course for sure. It also can cruise at 25 mpg, something the s/c foxes can only dream of. Most folks have forgotten that the '01 was therefore unique among all the fox-based Cobras for the above reasons -- and it's one of my fav rides of all time.

 

The late 70s thru 90s foxes (very diff body style from the later foxes -- the fox chassis was tweaked several times over about 25 years across styling changes) were very light and have become a favored base for track car build-ups since they came in 4, 6, and 5.0 small-block and some love the later 5.0s (you might want Five Oh B's thoughts on these -- I think he runs one at the track). They also handle suprisingly well due to their very low moment-of-yaw (short wheelbase, light weight at the edges) and offered a great optional suspension package, wheels and special Michelin tires (hard to find now) but, tortionally, they are no match for the current 'stang.

 

So, while the 64/5/6 and 67/8 and 69/70/1 are all great classics and easy killer crate-motor sleepers (I'm partial to the 67/68), the early foxes make great track cars, and all the late-fox SVT Cobras are hot, but if I had to pick just one to drive cross country for the rest of my life (and I couldn't pick the '05/'06 GT) I'd pick the 2001 SVT Cobra for it's IRS, slightly lighter weight, overall balance and 25 mpg when just cruisin'..and it's 320HP in the lighter fox chassis is still considerably faster (0-60 4.8) than the '05/'06GTs, but not as fast as the '03/04 (385-390HP) in the straight-line quarter. Kind of the best of all worlds for me.

 

... again just one person's opinion.

[GT500OnOrder]

Just to add my 2-cents to DVS2XS great summary:

The 74-78 Mustang-II sucked -- they were the result of emissions legislation killing anything that performed well -- they were pintos in disguise -- almost literally, except for the asthmatic V8 hamstrung by a crappy intake manifold but at least it's a smallblock V8 you can build on (many mustang fans will not even recognize the existance of the 74-78 as a true mustang).

 

The Rs also came from the factory with a roll cage and fire bottle, I believe but, yeah, not street legal in many states. But they were lighter than their non-R brethren, but still heavier than the early foxes.

 

Re Best Mustang in modern history: certainly this is a matter of taste but the current mustang is clearly the best engineered mustang ever by a very wide margin. In fact, it's solidness is unmatched by any vehicle even vaguely in it's price range (including the 'vettes) except for the FordGT. Even the last of the fox chassis Cobras, while sweet rides, were't even close in structional and torsional rigidity to the present generation mustang. From a performance viewpoint, I'm right with DVS2XS but let me mention to you one very sweet but often overlooked fox-stang. The 2001 Cobra was the only all-aluminum naturally-aspirated 4.6 cobra with Independent Rear Suspension! Has a nice tremec short thro 5-speed and the best weight distribution of any Cobra. It's combination of weight balance and IRS make it the best handling Cobra of all the great fox-based stangs, so if you're into road courses, the 2001 is arguably the best base to work off. It's only shortcoming is it's strength... the all-alum engine that gives it its balance (it also weighs a couple hundred less) likely makes it a bit weaker than the later supercharged iron blocks, but I've never found anyone who's had engine problems with the naturally-aspirated 2001 alum Cobra. And it's lighter weight and better handling probably make it equal to the blown 2003/4s on a short twisty road course for sure. It also can cruise at 25 mpg, something the s/c foxes can only dream of. Most folks have forgotten that the '01 was therefore unique among all the fox-based Cobras for the above reasons -- and it's one of my fav rides of all time.

 

The late 70s thru 90s foxes (very diff body style from the later foxes -- the fox chassis was tweaked several times over about 25 years across styling changes) were very light and have become a favored base for track car build-ups since they came in 4, 6, and 5.0 small-block and some love the later 5.0s (you might want Five Oh B's thoughts on these -- I think he runs one at the track). They also handle suprisingly well due to their very low moment-of-yaw (short wheelbase, light weight at the edges) and offered a great optional suspension package, wheels and special Michelin tires (hard to find now) but, tortionally, they are no match for the current 'stang.

 

So, while the 64/5/6 and 67/8 and 69/70/1 are all great classics and easy killer crate-motor sleepers (I'm partial to the 67/68), the early foxes make great track cars, and all the late-fox SVT Cobras are hot, but if I had to pick just one to drive cross country for the rest of my life (and I couldn't pick the '05/'06 GT) I'd pick the 2001 SVT Cobra for it's IRS, slightly lighter weight, overall balance and 25 mpg when just cruisin'..and it's 320HP in the lighter fox is still considerably faster (0-60 4.8) than the '05/'06GTs, but not as fast as the '03/04 (385-390HP) in the quarter. Kind of the best of all worlds for me.

 

... again just one person's opinion.

 

[68fastback]

...

Hey. GT500OnOrder, my friend... feel free to express thineself -- just trying to help. No one's making you read these forums. If you have something to contribute to Terry's question I'm sure he'll appreciate your input, else maybe you should be civil or go elsewhere......

[kaylan1521]

 

[robertlane]

May be just your opinion, but grab a breath and just shut the f#$k up. Christ, enough is enough.

 

GT500OnOrder

 

Your post was not cool and totally un-necessary.

[1969HOT]

May be just your opinion, but grab a breath and just shut the f#$k up. Christ, enough is enough.

 

GT500OnOrder

 

 

Man, no one is making you read it. It was answering anothers questions. That was uncalled for.

[68fastback]

.

 

yeah, and that's after Kaylan cleaned it up.

 

.

[Alloy Dave]

DVS2XS and 68fastback, thanks a LOT for the info...this is exactly what I was looking for. It will take me some time to learn the Ford side of things...but I'll get there.

 

Now if I can just get delivery on my GT500 I'll be in great shape.

 

Dave (aka Terry)

[Joe G]

Packages - Mach I - drag centered

 

Hey DVS. Just to clarify the Mach 1's... if you're talking about the 69-73 Mach 1's, your statement isn't quite correct.

 

Mach's could be ordered with almost any V8 engine (not just the big guys), and, actually had the few hundred pounds of extra sound deadening and luxury appointments that came with the "plush" Grande' model. Everyone thinks the Mach's were the "fast" stangs - they could be with the right engine, but if you wanted a quick drag car it was better to order the standard model with the big engine and save a few hundred pounds of extra weight you didn't need.

 

Otherwise, great synopsis of the years.

[BadTony]

DVS2XS

"Bullet, Saleen, Roush, etc are aftermarket tuners, like COPA, Motion, etc."

 

 

I would argue that the Bullitt is not an aftermarket tuner car but a factory produced version of the 2001 Mustang.

[SteelSteeds]

Just to add my 2-cents to DVS2XS great summary:

The 74-78 Mustang-II sucked -- they were the result of emissions legislation killing anything that performed well -- they were pintos in disguise -- almost literally, except for the asthmatic V8 hamstrung by a crappy intake manifold but at least it's a smallblock V8 you can build on (many mustang fans will not even recognize the existance of the 74-78 as a true mustang).

 

... again just one person's opinion.

 

 

Ah, man.... Awright, I have to speak up. Normally I grin and bear it, but I was just starting to think this kind of crap was really on the way out. This isn't a bash on you, 68fastback, I know you're just repeating what a lot of people used to say, but it is less and less called for in the modern day.

 

Here goes: Yes, performance wise the Mustang II sucked. The government restrictions strangled performance across the board from the mid 70's through the early 80's. But performance aside, the Mustang II was the ONLY MUSTANG in town for 74-78, and without it the Mustang would not have a long and continuous lineage of 42 years and counting. And it had far less in common with the Pinto than most nay-sayers would have you believe. It is less like the Pinto than the 64-68 are like the Falcon, or the 79-93 are like the Fairmont. The Mustang II sold 386,000 units in 1974 alone, and over 1.1 million went out the door in the 5 year run. It was a money maker for Ford, and was very popular due to good fuel economy, excellent ride, the new rack and pinion steering, the best suspension design Ford had ever come up with (why so many of them are cut up for street rods), standard radial tires, and a lot of stuff new then that we take for granted now like electronic ignition. On top of all that, a lot of us feel that they are extremely attractive cars in their own right. Yeah, I'm biased, I own two of them, and one of them was my first car. I think they were the first real "retro" car, as they returned to a lot of Mustang styling cues that had vanished by '69, including the coves in the side, and the pony in the grill. But, to not accept that they are a Mustang is just plain ignorant, and disrespectful to those of us who love and admire them. Mine are by no means stock, and no longer lack performance as they did when new. All right, I'm done. Again, no anger directed at anyone in particular, and I suppose anyone who has read this far can feel free to tell me to shut the hell up now. We all have different opinions, and I choose to hang out in places where that is respected and encouraged. Stangsunleashed has been one such place, so I was a mite sensitive to II bashing here. Peace.

[68fastback]

Ah, man.... Awright, I have to speak up. Normally I grin and bear it, but I was just starting to think this kind of crap was really on the way out. This isn't a bash on you, 68fastback, I know you're just repeating what a lot of people used to say, but it is less and less called for in the modern day.

 

Here goes: Yes, performance wise the Mustang II sucked. The government restrictions strangled performance across the board from the mid 70's through the early 80's. But performance aside, the Mustang II was the ONLY MUSTANG in town for 74-78, and without it the Mustang would not have a long and continuous lineage of 42 years and counting. And it had far less in common with the Pinto than most nay-sayers would have you believe. It is less like the Pinto than the 64-68 are like the Falcon, or the 79-93 are like the Fairmont. The Mustang II sold 386,000 units in 1974 alone, and over 1.1 million went out the door in the 5 year run. It was a money maker for Ford, and was very popular due to good fuel economy, excellent ride, the new rack and pinion steering, the best suspension design Ford had ever come up with (why so many of them are cut up for street rods), standard radial tires, and a lot of stuff new then that we take for granted now like electronic ignition. On top of all that, a lot of us feel that they are extremely attractive cars in their own right. Yeah, I'm biased, I own two of them, and one of them was my first car. I think they were the first real "retro" car, as they returned to a lot of Mustang styling cues that had vanished by '69, including the coves in the side, and the pony in the grill. But, to not accept that they are a Mustang is just plain ignorant, and disrespectful to those of us who love and admire them. Mine are by no means stock, and no longer lack performance as they did when new. All right, I'm done. Again, no anger directed at anyone in particular, and I suppose anyone who has read this far can feel free to tell me to shut the hell up now. We all have different opinions, and I choose to hang out in places where that is respected and encouraged. Stangsunleashed has been one such place, so I was a mite sensitive to II bashing here. Peace.

 

 

.

 

Hey, SteelSteeds, thanks for your added perspective on this... sorry if my summary of the II seemed harsh ...you opinion is not only welcome here but encouraged... thanks for your comments, I'm sure they will help Terry get a more complete perspective on past mustangs that he was looking for. I test drove a II at the time they came out but my 6'2" height would not permit my favored driving position.

 

"Touche" to your both points on early mustangs and falcons vs IIs and pintos... I guess I forgot that all our favorite 'stangs have some mongrel ancestry -- and isn't that what made them so affordable, after all.

 

Peace, bro...

 

.

[SteelSteeds]

.

 

Hey, SteelSteeds, thanks for your added perspective on this... sorry if my summary of the II seemed harsh ...you opinion is not only welcome here but encouraged... thanks for your comments, I'm sure they will help Terry get a more complete perspective on past mustangs that he was looking for. I test drove a II at the time they came out but my 6'2" height would not permit my favored driving position.

 

"Touche" to your both points on early mustangs and falcons vs IIs and pintos... I guess I forgot that all our favorite 'stangs have some mongrel ancestry -- and isn't that what made them so affordable, after all.

 

Peace, bro...

 

.

 

 

Thanks, I appreciate that. I'm 6' tall myself, and I've never driven a car that feels more like it was designed specifically for my physical build than my '77 Cobra II. But, I can definitely see that an extra 2" could make a difference.

You know, I think the new '05+ Mustang is the least mongrel of any Mustang that has come before it...

[brands5.0]

I didnt read it all but to add to the secound poster

 

79-83 ( FOX BODY) 94-95 (5.0 SN-95) 96-04 (4.6L SN-95) 99-04 changed body style..... 03-04 Cobra Had the 390 hp supercharged 4.6 l

 

2001 Bullitt Was built by ford more hp then reg. GT better sup. and better exh. also nicer interior

[HSURB]

Ok, since I've historically been a Chevy guy, I need some help understanding the Mustang heritage. I did have a '67 Mustang with a 289 hi-po, but that was 25 years ago. Can someone answer the following questions?

 

1) What were the common "generations" of Mustangs? In other words, when were the major changes in body style. In Camaro language, we call them "generations"....not sure about Mustang.

 

2) When people talk about the Cobra "R", what does the "R" stand for? And can you describe the specs of this car?

 

3) Is there consensus about the "best" Mustang in modern history (since about 1985)? If so, which is it?

 

4) In Chevy terms, the Camaro had "appearance" options called the RS package, and "performance" options called SS and Z28 packages. Does Mustang act similarly? In other words, is the Mach 1 just performance, or also appearance...what about Bullitt? R? etc.

 

5) What is involved in swapping a ring and pinion in a 2007 Mustang? On Chevy's it's a nightmare. I used to be an auto mechanic, but did brakes/suspensions. Is it a 2-hour job or a 10-hour job?

 

6) What is involved in "reflashing" the ECM? Do I need an expensive tool? What technical info is required? Is there a good website that I can read up on this?

 

Thanks to everyone for the info!

 

Dave (see my other post in new member forum about my name being Dave rather than Terry)

 

Dave - did you get all of the Mustang background you were looking for?

 

HSURB

[CobraCrazy]

Just to add my 2-cents to DVS2XS great summary:

 

 

The 74-78 Mustang-II sucked -- they were the result of emissions legislation killing anything that performed well -- they were pintos in disguise -- almost literally, except for the asthmatic V8 hamstrung by a crappy intake manifold but at least it's a smallblock V8 you can build on (many mustang fans will not even recognize the existance of the 74-78 as a true mustang).

 

The Rs also came from the factory with a roll cage and fire bottle, I believe but, yeah, not street legal in many states. But they were lighter than their non-R brethren, but still heavier than the early foxes.

 

Re Best Mustang in modern history: certainly this is a matter of taste but the current mustang is clearly the best engineered mustang ever by a very wide margin. In fact, it's solidness is unmatched by any vehicle even vaguely in it's price range (including the 'vettes) except for the FordGT. Even the last of the fox chassis Cobras, while sweet rides, were't even close in structional and torsional rigidity to the present generation mustang. From a performance viewpoint, I'm right with DVS2XS but let me mention to you one very sweet but often overlooked fox-stang. The 2001 Cobra was the only all-aluminum naturally-aspirated 4.6 cobra with Independent Rear Suspension! Has a nice tremec short thro 5-speed and the best weight distribution of any Cobra. It's combination of weight balance and IRS make it the best handling Cobra of all the great fox-based stangs, so if you're into road courses, the 2001 is arguably the best base to work off. It's only shortcoming is it's strength... the all-alum engine that gives it its balance (it also weighs a couple hundred less) likely makes it a bit weaker than the later supercharged iron blocks, but I've never found anyone who's had engine problems with the naturally-aspirated 2001 alum Cobra. And it's lighter weight and better handling probably make it equal to the blown 2003/4s on a short twisty road course for sure. It also can cruise at 25 mpg, something the s/c foxes can only dream of. Most folks have forgotten that the '01 was therefore unique among all the fox-based Cobras for the above reasons -- and it's one of my fav rides of all time.

 

The late 70s thru 90s foxes (very diff body style from the later foxes -- the fox chassis was tweaked several times over about 25 years across styling changes) were very light and have become a favored base for track car build-ups since they came in 4, 6, and 5.0 small-block and some love the later 5.0s (you might want Five Oh B's thoughts on these -- I think he runs one at the track). They also handle suprisingly well due to their very low moment-of-yaw (short wheelbase, light weight at the edges) and offered a great optional suspension package, wheels and special Michelin tires (hard to find now) but, tortionally, they are no match for the current 'stang.

 

So, while the 64/5/6 and 67/8 and 69/70/1 are all great classics and easy killer crate-motor sleepers (I'm partial to the 67/68), the early foxes make great track cars, and all the late-fox SVT Cobras are hot, but if I had to pick just one to drive cross country for the rest of my life (and I couldn't pick the '05/'06 GT) I'd pick the 2001 SVT Cobra for it's IRS, slightly lighter weight, overall balance and 25 mpg when just cruisin'..and it's 320HP in the lighter fox chassis is still considerably faster (0-60 4.8) than the '05/'06GTs, but not as fast as the '03/04 (385-390HP) in the straight-line quarter. Kind of the best of all worlds for me.

 

... again just one person's opinion.

 

I am one of those who refuses to call the 74 - 78 pinto II a Mustang!

CC

[68fastback]

I am one of those who refuses to call the 74 - 78 pinto II a Mustang!

CC

 

 

...watch out...steel steeds might be lurking :P

[funky10]

Well i think it comes down to personal preference. They are all great except for the lull in the mid 70's. My favorite all time is 67-68 FE powered fastbacks. I grew up on the 5.0 Stangs. 79-93. I have owned 6 mustangs ranging from 89-92 and i loved them all. You cannot beat the performace for the amount of money. The fun factor is off the charts!!! I love my 07 GT 500 Rag. It is not a race car in my mind, can be stupid fast i guess if i want to but it is more a top down have fun type car that my whole family can enjoy!! I dont know alot but the stuff i do know is that Shelby, Boss, Saleen, Rousch, etc etc have added to the already great car we have today!!!

[nilkilla]

Current model has Appearance Packages(even named Sport appearance package on V-6) such as The California Special

Performance Packages, like the Shelby GT and Bullitt, which also add their own flavor of appearance as well.

 

In the Previous model years they have also run appearance packages like 40th anniversary package.

[burnedgt500]

Ok guys hands down the best Mustang ever built is my SHELBY GT500. You all can say what you want about the others but I love then all and the 07 GT 500 is the best.

Best looking is a Red 66 2+2!

[Paleoc]

A good writeup here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang

[Alloy Dave]

Dave - did you get all of the Mustang background you were looking for?

 

HSURB

No, please educate me on the entire history.

[07alloyGT]

No, please educate me on the entire history.

[shel-b001]

 

If you want to know the history of Shelbys purchase a copy of the 97` Registry.