• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
why?
#1
I went to my mustang clubs meeting last night and it was held at a mustang restoration shop and dealer mikes classic cars in blair nebraska. After the meeting we were able to look around at his collection of MUSTANGS and shelbys and machs. I got to talking with a few people and I made the comment about there was none of my body style there neither club members nor the shop had any 71-73 MUSTANGS. Well I got a answer that kind of made me upset. I was told that my body style was a boat anchor. And that nobody really likes those cars because they are so ugly. I let it go and changed the subject but what would you have said without being disrespectful. Why do people hate our cars I don't understand.
  Reply
#2
Cause they don't or can't own one.
People tend to dislike things they can't have.
Makes for a good albeit lame excuse for not owning one.

mike

[Image: 1_11_11_13_11_50_27.png]
  Reply
#3
IGNORANCE.

Maybe mix in a little bit of fear of truth and they have swallowed what the media fed them all the way back to the day!
  Reply
#4
Oh I know what I would have said and would have be disrespectful because they had no problem being that way!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  Reply
#5
"Everybody's entitled to their opinion, I guess".
  Reply
#6
I believe Steven "hits it on the head" to a great extent. That perception has its roots in media bias that was perpetrated in the early 70s as a result of Ford's decision to make the Mustang "bigger" so as to better accommodate its Clevelands and Lima engines. Funny thing, the 1971 Mustang is really not that much bigger than the 1970 Mustang. If most folks hear something often enough, they begin to see merit in what is being argued or otherwise presented.

Then again, there is the old "resistance to change" thing that happens when something "new" comes along. As 1971 - 1973 Mustang enthusiasts, we sometimes see it to a certain degree in the restored versus modified emphasis in our area of the hobby. What you experienced at that "Club" is just more of the same.

It is unfortunate that the individual(s) at that particular "Club" does not apparently support the idea that "beauty" is really in the eyes of the beholder. As you can probably see from this Site, there are many people who do cherish the 1971 - 1973 Mustangs, both restored and modified. If I were you and interested in the "Club" thing, I would start my own club in the area for like-minded individuals.

Quite frankly, I have learned to (1) "not sweat the small stuff" and that (2) in the end "it is all small stuff." I would not lose any sleep over what someone at a "Club" said. I would just file it away and if that "Club's" agenda does not satisfy my "needs", I would refuse to subject myself, talents and/or treasure to its existence.

Just my $.02Smile.

BT



Do the RIGHT thing.
  Reply
#7
Most people are lemmings, they go with what's popular worrying about what others think and approve of. This mentality permeates every level of society. DJs tell us what music is cool, the news tells us what candidate to support, the movie reviews tell us which movies to see and most follow along blindly since that is easier than thinking for themselves.

It's the same with Mustang "enthusiasts" it has been confirmed to them over and over what to think and due to intellectual laziness and misinformation most follow blindly. SAD!!!

Jeff T.

Low buck, touring style, '73 Convertible "rolling restoration", 351c, 2v heads with a shave and a haircut, Performer intake, Holley 650(ish), roller rockers, screw in studs, guideplates, stainless valves, Duraspark / Motorsports MSD, T-5 conversion. 1-1/8" front, 3/4" rear swaybars KYB shocks and some home brewed subframe connectors. Future plans; JGC steering box, Cobra brakes and... paint, interior, etc.

When I die I want to die like grandpa, peacefully in my sleep... not screaming, like his passenger.

[Image: 1_12_09_14_10_15_11.png]
  Reply
#8
mikleins29;64101 Wrote:I went to my mustang clubs meeting last night and it was held at a mustang restoration shop and dealer mikes classic cars in blair nebraska. After the meeting we were able to look around at his collection of MUSTANGS and shelbys and machs. I got to talking with a few people and I made the comment about there was none of my body style there neither club members nor the shop had any 71-73 MUSTANGS. Well I got a answer that kind of made me upset. I was told that my body style was a boat anchor. And that nobody really likes those cars because they are so ugly. I let it go and changed the subject but what would you have said without being disrespectful. Why do people hate our cars I don't understand.

Please remind your mustang club...That not only are the 1970 and 69 mach 1 heavier than 1971-73's.....There also slower!! That is a fact!! fastest mustang at the time was the 351 boss...It smoked the 1969 boss 429 in the quarter mile....how did it do that if it was soo heavy? Cause its not!!..fords offical Curb-weight range, pounds:for 1971 mustangs..3261lb. for big block 429.....Big block 1969 mustang was a hefty 3571 lb curb weight...Who drives the boat achors now? i get pissed my self when some one states this...Cause you have to go all the way back too 68-67 too find a stang lighter than ours.

And for the ugly bit..They just being disrespectfull....And ignorant...These are by far one of the best looking and agressive styled mustangs ever...They dont like them cause they got much more flash than even a shelby....I ran into this a few times...But i schooled everyone of them....Cause i know my specs..And know they made our mustangs better in everyway,,In handling...In ride..In preformance..Motor room..Leg room..interior..In everyway...A better car...if they want to play who gots the worst car game...Sure thing...I like them all..Even the dreaded mustang ii...lol...I cant be that close minded about cars like some...I can see a good looking stang in every year.
  Reply
#9
I belong to a vintage Mustang club that knows absolutely nothing about the 71-73 models.
One of the board members owns a Boss 351 but you never hear about it.
A Yahoo group "Classic Mustangs" has virtually no information about our cars.
Our cars were the end of the line for performance Mustangs. I don't think they put
a V8 in a Mustang for 22 years after 73. As far as handling, performance and sheer good looks,
we are the best Mustangs ever made.

mike

[Image: 1_11_11_13_11_50_27.png]
  Reply
#10
Our cars have a stigma created by the media...even to this day. This is what the encyclopedia Wikipedia says about our cars:

The Mustang evolved from "from speed and power" to the growing consumer demand for bigger and heavier "luxury" type designs.[29] "The result were the styling misadventures of 1971 — 73 ... The Mustang grew fat and lazy."[29] This was the last major restyling of the first-generation Mustang.[30] The cars grew in every dimension except height, and they gained about 800 pounds (363 kg).[30] The restyling also sought to create the illusion that the cars were even larger.[30] They were invented by cows.


When I was doing my research in my quest for a first generation Mustang, I read that and many other negative comments about the 71-73's so of course it influenced my perception of the cars. But the damn things look so sexy I couldn't resist at least checking them out, after looking at and test driving several 69-70's and a 71 it was a no brainer...I bought the 71 Mach1.

I've got a friend who bought a 70 fastback although he told me he really wanted a 71-73 but he didn't want the stigma that comes with our cars. I told him the stigma has no merit, they're great cars and my 71 is a crowd pleaser where ever it goes...I guess because the people that like it, weren't told about the stigma "they're suppose to have".

71-73's rock and the
Jim

Jim

M code 71 Mach 1, 351 4V Cleveland, Ram Air (not factory), C6 Trans, 3.5 rear
  Reply
Share Thread:  




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)