The “original” Mustang II has led a sad life. My point: I have been a rabid car fan for all of my 37 years on this planet, live in Michigan, attend a dozen or more car shows and museums per annum, and own an early Mustang (and therefore am fascinated by its history). Never had I, however, laid eyes on this concept car until this June, and then I saw it two weeks in a row. Why the sneaking subterfuge? What gives?
Unfortunately, it has much to do with the city of Detroit, and that may be all I have to say about that. Detroit is, to be charitable, a work in progress. The Detroit Historical Museum owns the Mustang II show car and stores it in a large decrepit warehouse among the rest of their 100-odd vehicle collection. Their cars are stored in large inflatable car bags, but due to a lack of display space, they are almost exclusively locked away from an adoring public.
Fortunately for car buffs, the Mustang II has managed to emerge from its cocoon relatively intact. Indeed, the paint is cracking and a large dent mars its tail panel, but it is in one piece and apparently runs, no thanks to Detroit. Legend has it that the museum loaned the car to Owl’s Head Transportation Museum in Maine from 1996-2011. No wonder I’ve never seen it out. One of Owl’s Head’s employees/volunteers actually worked on the Mustang II during his career at Ford, and restored it to running and driving condition. Remember Maine!
Although the Mustang II has spent much of its life hidden from daylight, it has been shown twice (at least) this year in Michigan: at the Henry Ford Motor Muster and at Sloan Museum’s Autofair. Both times, a “handler” accompanied the car, and I got the distinct feeling that he was a bit overprotective, like a jealous suitor. He seemed to give me the stink eye as I photographed it, and refused to open the hood, as it was “against policy.” Whose policy? To be fair to him, Detroit’s bureaucracy may actually forbid handlers from opening car hoods.
Nevertheless, the Mustang II show car was intended to be a bridge between the Mustang I show car and the eventual production Mustang. Obviously, it had more in common with the ’65 Mustang than the original concept, but it was evidently built from a Falcon Sprint convertible, as the Mustang had not yet been introduced when this car was assembled. Upon seeing it for the first time, GM’s Bill Mitchell reputedly remarked that it looked like a Hamtramck Falcon. For those who aren’t Michiganians, Hamtramck is a city in Michigan with a historically large Polish community. Old Bill was apparently never known for his tact.
Normally, I bow to Bill Mitchell’s taste and wisdom, but he was 180 degrees out regarding the Mustang II. It looks great. In fact, these wheels would look terrific on my ’65 hardtop. I wonder if I could find a set.
Oh goodness, those mirrors! They look infinitely more seductive than the garden variety rear view on the door of my ’65. From this standpoint, it’s easy to see that the Mustang II used similar body panels to the production Mustang. In fact, from here, aside from the mirrors, most people would think they were looking at someone’s base notchback.
According to what I’ve read (and there is little real information out there on this car), the nose of the concept was steel, but bolstered with a heaping helping of body filler, so it certainly wasn’t meant for production. That may be for the best, as the headlight/grille combination may be the car’s weakest feature.
The interior and lowered roofline were, contrarily, grand slam home runs. The sculptured door panels and console said money where the production Mustang’s said frugality. The blue and white vinyl hark to echo the car’s exterior, which wears a similar paint scheme to the Mustang I show car.
The fiberglass hardtop was removable, and this topless photo shows the two-toning that would inspire later “Pony” interiors in production Mustangs. The divided rear seat is a sporty touch that didn’t make it to production models.
Although I have no engine shots, everything I’ve read states that the Mustang II has a 289 High-Performance engine with dual four-barrel carburetors. These were allegedly added later, as the car was used as a carburetor mule by the fuel-system engineering department after its days on the show circuit. By one account, the car was on a trailer headed to the crusher when a few engineers figured they’d use it as a test car. Close call!
The most intriguing engine modification includes wax-filled lifters. Apparently, Ford designed the lifters with a special expanding wax so the engine would sound like it had a huge cam once the engine warmed up. Neat trick, but I’d have to wonder if it would hang the valves open on a hot start.
Who knows how I managed to miss out on the Mustang II for this long? Happily, we found each other, even if only for a short time, and I hope I don’t have to wait another 37 years to see it again. And this raises an interesting dream I have.
I certainly don’t understand the vagaries of museum ownership, but it would be appropriate if the Detroit Historical Museum would loan the Mustang II to the Henry Ford Museum indefinitely. There, it could sit between the Mustang I concept and Mustang serial number 100001, completing the story of the Mustang’s infancy. Until that happens, I guess I’ll just have to be satisfied with an occasional sighting at an occasional car show.
Mustang II–Detroit Historical Museum Collection
The above link shows several pictures of this car, including under the hood shots (the handler told me that these pictures would be online). The engine has dual vacuum secondary Holleys on what appears to be a pretty tall manifold. It’s interesting that it all fits under the hood with that homemade air cleaner. Notice the cuts made around the curved ends of the lid.
It amazes me that they’d let the car sit with that dent in it. You’d think Ford would rush it into the body shop without hours of the damage happening. Little matter of historical importance to the company, and all that.
But Ford doesn’t own the car. The Detroit Historical Museum does.
I always thought this Mustang II concept looked like a 1967 Mustang before they even knew that there would be a 1967 Mustang.
“In fact, these wheels would look terrific on my ’65 hardtop. I wonder if I could find a set.”
Looks like HandS wheels, such as those that evolved into the LAT-70 wheels on Sunbeam Tigers. I know that, for instance, not only are repro’s available but there’s working on 15″ versions (tried buying performance 13″ tires recently?), you might ask at Sunbeam Specialties, maybe they can help you out — concerning the bolt circle issues, I presume you’d need 5-bolt?
Those wheels look a lot like the ones used on 99-00 Mercedes CLKs. I wonder if the bolt pattern is the same.
Yeah, it’s a standard 5-bolt. It looks like even repros are tough to come by, and expensive.
I’m thinking this will be one of those “someday” things. 🙂
Not to be even more pendantic than usual, but those mirrors aren’t one-specials for the show car; they’re Talbot Berlins. They were quite popular on sports cars of that era. You can still get them today.
https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/productdetails.asp?RecID=9111
I do love the car though, and I think that Ford should consider buying it back from Detroit, to save it. Perhaps they could trade it for Lincoln Navigator for the Mayor’s wife or something.
http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2010/06/kwames_cars_throughout_scandal.html
The Story of the Mustang-II sounds very much like the story of the Chrysler Turbine owned by the Detroit Historical Museum. It sat for years in their storage warehouse as well. Thankfully, that one is now on long term loan to the Gilmore Museum. As you say, it would be fitting if they would do the same with the Mustang-II by loaning it to the Henry Ford Museum.
That’s actually where I got the idea; the Turbine Car has been over at Gilmore for a while now, and now people get to actually enjoy it!
are all the remaining Turbine cars static displays or are they drivable cars still?
There are a total of 9 Turbines left in existence.
Jay Leno owns one that he drives. Chrysler installed a brand new crate motor in it when he bought it from them, so hopefully his will be drivable for quite awhile. Chrysler still owns two Turbines, and at least one of those is drivable.
There is another in private hands which was drivable, but the owner died and I haven’t heard anything about the car since. The Turbine at the St.Louis Transportation Museum is running.
Other non-running Turbines are at the Henry Ford, the Smithsonian, Peterson and Gilmore museums.
More information about the operable example in St. Louis can be found here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/railroad-and-automobile-museum-classics-a-tour-of-the-st-louis-museum-of-transportation/
Very minor point but I’d prefer the interior if the blue and white on the seats was reversed. As it is now it puts me in mind of those blue and white models that Ford produced in 1972.
There is a Cougar show car, though I doubt it still exists, that incorporates many styling cues of this car. At one time I owned scale models of both cars. Oddly, the Cougar was a fastback…a body style that Cougar would not use until 30-35 years later.
Detroit Historical also owns the Cougar II show car…
http://www.autominded.com/1021_rarely-seen-cobra-concept-cars-coming-to-amelia-island/classic-cars
It looks like some Euro American exotic car a 60s playboy would drive
Aren’t they called Michiganders?
Some people like that term, and many use it, but it was originally a pejorative that Lincoln used to lambaste Lewis Cass, by comparing him to a goose.
I’m a Michiganian.
On a trip to Detroit in 2000, I noticed how people living in Michigan would hold up their left hand and point to a spot on the back of it to illustrate where they lived. I had never got the connection before then but it makes complete sense.
Michigan, the Mitten State.
Thanks for the interesting clarification, did not know that!
With all of the discussion in the press about the fate of Detroit’s art collection in its bankruptcy, there has been nary a word (at least that I have seen) about the car collection.
It would seem to me that with all of the first-class car museums that are in or are within a reasonable drive of Detroit, I have a hard time seeing the purpose of a Detroit car museum, particularly when the cars are neither maintained well or are available for public viewing.
Sold to other museums or to well-heeled private owners, cars like the Mustang II, the Chrysler Turbine, and such would fetch a nice bit of coin for Detroit’s creditors (like pensioners and lenders) and would have the added benefit of the cars being better preserved and more available. A win-win, I would think.
If not actually part of the City, I guess there is nothing else to be done with a half-assed little historical society that has no money for a proper exhibit, but won’t let the cars go to better homes.
Agreed. They could definitely make some money selling off that collection–while it does seem appropriate for the Motor City’s historical society to have a car collection, if they have no space to exhibit it and the cars are just sitting around gathering dust in a warehouse, what’s the point?
I quite like the two-tone interior on this concept also, too bad it didn’t see production.
it may not be as cut and dry as that. They might not be able to sell it due to some legal stipulation from the donor of the cars that they cannot be sold or disposed of. or they might just be long term loans from the car makers which mean they are still owned by the auto makers and not the city’s to sell.
I am sure Detriot’s creditors would love to get their hands on that collection BUT they are not going to risk Ford or GM seizing the cars as their own property.
How about they restore the Michigan Central Station and display the cars there..
They could sell of the cars, but the amount that Detroit needs is astronmical. They spend much more than they should take in and the people that actually do pay taxes are leaving. I friend of mine lives up there (works all over the country) and a friend of his bought a nice house for $5000. He put it on his credit card, got the points and paid it off. They need more money than what they could get selling off some cars to rich people so the rest of us could never get to see them.
They society actually has a very nice museum that covers all facets of local history, not just automotive. It simply (like most museums) has far more artifacts than can be displayed at any one time.
Unlike the art museum, the historical museum is a separate entity, not owned by the city, so it’s collections have not been involved with the bankruptcy discussions.
They do seem to loan vehicles to other museums, but I suspect that time and budget constraints prevent any sort of mass dispersal of the collection.
It’s a nice looker for sure .
-Nate
I’d prefer that nose over the one we have on the new Mustang. Ford finally caught up with GM by making an ugly ponycar.
Interesting ponderings. I wonder if, like the art world, when stuff like this falls into private hands it further restricts the public’s ability to enjoy it.
I did see a Chrysler turbine at a car show swap meet at the Marion co. fairgrounds in indianapolis several years back in running condition. Quite impressive.
It was owned by a older gentleman. wonder if he is still out there.He was local.
Such a cool concept car.
That would be Frank Kleptz of Terre Haute, Indiana. Unfortunately he passed away in Nov, 2010. He had an impressive car collection and I believe the family is keeping the collection together.
Sorry to hear about the lose of Frank, although it’s nice to hear the family is keeping up his collector nobility within the family. Would of loved to gotten to see his collection of precious metals. Thanks for the update info. RIP Frank
I read that Jay Leno procured the last running Turbine Car engine from Chrysler for his car. Apparently, if any of them go bad, everyone’s out of luck!
I’m just glad the production Mustang didn’t look like that. The mid ’60s Mustangs are about as perfect as possible, the ’67 model smoothed out all the wrinkles. Most people claim the ’74-’78 Mustang II was by far the worst of the Mustangs, but I don’t think so. The Fox body Mustangs from ’79 -’93 were much worse. Finally, in ’05, they got the look right again, only to totally ruin it again in 2015. The Mustang has been all over the board, but it is hard to beat the first generation through ’67. Best looking American car of the time, with the exception of the ’63-’67 Corvette Sting Ray.
I have to include the ’63-’65 Riviera in that company, but you’re right…Ford hit one out of the park with the original.
Wonder how the tail got dented like that and wonder how thick the sheet metal is.
It would be interesting to find out, but I’m guessing the car was not babied if Ford used it as a carburetor mule. From what I’ve been able to gather, the Historical Society picked it up in 1975 or so. 12 years is a lot of time for a car to gather dents if nobody’s really taking care of it.
Thanks for the confirmation that I did indeed see this car in Owls Head many years ago.
Truly a wonderful car in so many regards. It is odd how (and why) it is so infrequently displayed.
Aaron, you are correct; the front appearance is its weak link.
True on the Owl’s Head Museum custodians…they displayed it at Carlisle back then. Saw it up close and talked with the guy from the Museum in 2004.