This is the car I had wished I had when I was a teenager in the late 1980’s / early-90’s. It is as far from my same-generation, 2.3L four-cylinder Mustang in concept and execution as could be humanly (automotively?) possible. Not even Vanilla Ice could ruin these for me. It was boxier and stubbier than a Camaro or Firebird. And yes, it was also a hatchback. But the GT was the ponycar of choice for those who wanted some extra visual spice with their speed over the stealthy LX 5.0. And it still rocks.
Fall is in full swing here in Chicago, and the crunching sound and bitter scent of dried leaves is everywhere. Those sensations remind me of this time of the school year, and the memory of the realization I was smack-dab in the middle of the first semester and had to get my grades together ASAP. By this point in the year, there would be only so much time to fix things before the holidays. My late father was a professor, so there wasn’t a lot of foolishness allowed where grades were concerned.
It seems this particular generation of Mustang was everywhere about twenty years ago. I considered the ’87 restyle to be something of a miracle in modernizing chief stylist Jack Telnack’s basic design(s) which rolled out for ’79. These cars were truly ubiquitous at one point – so much so that I learned to ignore them by probably around the turn of the millennium. Later redesigns made the Fox-platform Mustangs look more like big Escorts by comparison, adding classic styling cues, substance, and performance to even the base models.
I hadn’t paid much attention to the Mustangs of the 80’s for a really long time…until recently, thanks to a neighbor who uses this one as his daily driver. Looking at this car was like finding my favorite CD from college that I played incessantly back then, had shelved ten years ago after reaching my saturation point, then recently rediscovered – and put back on repeat. There’s a crisp lightness about these cars that’s lacking from some overwrought, recent models. The missing center-caps on the five-spoke “Pony Wheels” (introduced for ’91) make this example look a little unkempt, but let’s hope the owner continues to keep it rollin’.
Edgewater, Chicago, Illinois.
Thursday, October 22, 2015.
The LX 5.0 was the car of choice for my buddies as we graduated from engineering school in 89-91. Most of them opted for the hatch largely because it looked better, to us, than the trunk version. Most of those same buddies sold them a couple years later because they were awful to drive during Indiana winters.
I see these on the road from time to time. When they were everywhere, they became invisible, but now that they’re unusual, they stand out. And the styling has endured well. They still look good, apart from their contexts when they were new.
Yes, us engineering students did not prefer the extra cladding and “look at me, ticket me please” visuals on the GT.
I drove my friend’s 5.0 LX 5-Speed in the winter once. Completely terrifying!
Thanks Joseph for this great picture of the GT. When the fox Mustang debuted in 1979 there was a lot of emphasis on the Euro influences on the Mustang III. The sister Capri was directly replacing the German Capri and the performance model Ford was promoting was the new 2.3 Turbo, many with metric sized French TRX wheels.
When the HO 302 arrived, America reclaimed the Mustang has it’s own. Eagle GTs replaced the TRX and suddenly a completely unexpected small block horsepower war developed, for once with Ford holding it’s own.
One of the best things about this generation is that it was the last style that was not retro. It is understandable why the automakers shifted pony cars aim to the old. But a Mustang should always promise the young a better future, and the GT 5.0 sure did.
Were these the last Mustangs built for young people? You’re right that these were the last Mustangs whose design brief wasn’t to look like they came from the ’60s, probably because Mustangs since are for aging men and for middle aged men to buy for their daughters. Is it because fewer young people buy their own new cars, or is it because Detroit forgot how to inspire youth to want their image cars?
I think the F-cars did a better job of avoiding retro. The third generation cars were boldly modern when they went into production, but stuck around until they were dinosaurs. The forth generation cars weren’t retro, but they were so inefficiently packaged that they didn’t have broad appeal in spite of their impressive speed. Too bad we’re now on our second generation of retro Camaros for the Barret Jackson set.
Good point, retro was not a consideration with these cars. The current Mustang may have a few retro styling cues but has made a break from retro overall IMO, and especially with the Ecoboost appeals to younger people more now.
Yet another fantastic atmospheric shot Joseph!
You are right about the current Mustang. Paul once described part of it’s inspiration the more purpose built sports car the 240Z. I agree with that and am a fan.
Since Ford on the Fox Mustang went without V6s after 86, I wonder if they could have put in the 3.0 158hp OHC V6 from their Mazda 929. The Essex and the Vulcan being so actively unsporty. It would surely have cost more than a Wndsor 302 though and once it went DOHC and 190hp also left too big a gap with the not improving fast enough 2.3 Lima. The Cologne was small and old and weak by the late eighties and the Mazda V6 might also have been a better base engine in the fox Thunderbird.
I’ve yet to see a young person driving a new generation Mustang, but they seem more popular than ever with empty nesters. The styling is as retro as the last one, and the ecoboost engine has as much to do with CAFE as it does with pulling someone out of a Hyundai. Independent rear suspension is standard now, fifty-four years after BMW made it standard. It didn’t stop the last Camaro from being one of the most retro cars sold. If there’s another Mustang, I’m interested to see what they’ll do. The 2005 car was an attempt at recreating the ’65 Mustang. The updates, starting in 2010, paralleled the cosmetic changes made to the 1st generation car between ’67 and ’70. The new Mustang is less progressive than the ’71 was, but it is bigger and heavier than the unloved Gran Coupes. Maybe next time they’ll revive the Mustang II, but I figure the end of the road for cars designed to be bought because they’re desired is going to end due to ignorant voting behavior instead.
I love these and have been trying to work up the mojo to write a curbside classic on one I shot about a month ago, but I each attempt I’ve made hasn’t done the car justice!
I rented an ’89 convertible in southern california for a long weekend and loved it! The power and tight suspension and precise steering and small dimensions of the car were all a seeming perfect combination of the strengths of american cars and european cars combined!
I’m not sure why but these seem to be cropping up quite frequently on north Florida Craigslists of late. Ads seem to run 50% convertible and 50% hatch, with the very rare notch…..usually a (claimed) ex-FHP car. Almost never see a 4 cylinder, or at least the sellers won’t admit to 4 cylinder power, and rarely a manual transmission in any instance.
I’ve always liked these and agree that Ford did a great job on the styling without incorporating any “retro” cues. (Sort of makes you wonder what the Mustang II might have looked like if they had had the same freedom….and not been heavily constrained by a platform shared with the Pinto.)
I’m always on the lookout for the “oddities” among this generation of Mustang and kick myself often for not scooping up a creampuff 82 triple white cabriolet roof model that a lady at my church was selling in the late 80s-early 90s.
I want to find a cab roof, (preferable V8 powered) car, or another real oddity a turbo 4 cylinder GT hatch (or convertible?) with a manual transmission.
These old Fox Mustangs show up on Central Indiana Craigslist ads with some frequency as well. However, these are becoming like 1962-64 Plymouths and Dodges, in that stock ones are quite rare. Most of the ads go through a list of performance mods that make you wonder whether the car comes from a respectable enthusiast or just some dunderhead who beat the snot out of the thing after each new part was bolted on.
Love the picture.
They are starting to shop up at the various Carlisle events, too. As you note, the problem is finding a stock one.
The “base” models tend to be driven hard and put away wet, while the V-8s tend to sport several engine modifications.
Still prefer an LX 5.0 notchback. Definite sleeper status in my youth.
The father of a high school classmate had an LX 5.0 convertible, white on white. Impossible to keep clean but one of the only times I really felt like an LX “stood out.”
I’m a big fox body fan having my owned a few over the years. My neighbour down the road still has his 93 GT with 5-speed manual, sunroof and over 300,000 km on the odometer. It’s in very good condition and usually once every summer he heads out for a long road trip in it. Of course I’ve strongly suggested he sell the GT to me and get a new Mustang but that’s not going to happen while he’s alive.
I check out various web sites regularly for rare and preferably unmolested fox body Mustangs. Still a few out there at reasonable prices. Great looking cars from 91 to 93 whether hatchback or notchback. Glad there is good aftermarket support to help preserve them.
A strong case could be made that the Fox-chassis Mustang was the last ‘real’ musclecar in that, like the iconic cars from the sixties (or even the old shoebox ’55-’57 Chevy), the Fox Mustang 5.0 V8 was cheap and easy to soup-up. Yeah, V8 ponycars continued to be built and sold after, but they became increasingly more difficult and expensive to modify to the point where some kid working at McWeasels simply could no longer afford to buy one, let alone slap aftermarket go-fast stuff onto it. That wasn’t the case with the 5.0.
In fact, is it conceivable that 10-20 years from now, those old Fox Mustangs will be sought after as much as the great sixties’ musclecars are now?
I don’t think they will ever be highly desirable. There just wasn’t enough variety or performance options to make them all that special IMO.
Finding one of these LX’s is awesome today. Much like finding a $20 bill you forgot about in your coat pocket. Or driving a first gen Ranger 4X4 like I do.
Sing the praises, Mr. Dennis – you are hitting all the right notes and I’m compelled to sing in the chorus.
This was THE CAR where I grew up downstate from Chicago. Good looks, great performance, a price that didn’t compel a person to sell a kidney, with a sound upon startup that is nearly indescribable.
Many of the cars I have been smitten with where the equivalent of a one-night stand – good for a short time and gone. This Mustang GT is like the girl you take home to mom as it stands the test of time.
Sadly, the closest I got was a 2.3 liter 1989 model quite much like you described as having – the name on the side was the only commonality. How Ford could offer such divergent cars with the same name is bewildering.
The upside to my four-cylinder Mustang certainly wasn’t fuel mileage, but it was terrific in the snow. Then again, for years I drove rear-wheel drive cars in inclement weather.
Thank you for a good trip down memory lane.
“How Ford could offer such divergent cars with the same name is bewildering.”
It’s been that way since the beginning, wideband marketing from “Secretary Special” to GT. Same thing with the Euro Capri. One car + many options = profits.
“Looking at this car was like finding my favorite CD from college…”
So true. Just a few weeks ago, a 1990 Mustang GT showed up at my workplace parking lot for several days, and it brought with it a flood of memories similar to yours. You’re write-up is absolutely on target.
While to me, Camaros and Firebirds from the same period seem like relics of some long-gone era, these Mustangs carry an appeal that hasn’t diminished much over time.
Like others have already posted, these 5.0L invoke many fantastic memories. Not that it needs to be said again, but the 5.0L was “the car” to have during it’s day. I always preferred the GT to the LX cars. To me the LX cars just were too plain. My favourite version was the 1993 Mustang Cobra though, much cleaner body kit than the GTs.
My cousin was in the position to buy a new car in 1989 and he went out and special ordered a red 1990 Mustang GT hatchback with a 5-speed. I have so many fantastic memories of that car. My cousin was involved in amateur racing and he has excellent driving skills. I can remember many hair raising rides in that car. Being a performance purist he was all about suspension tuning and over the years he had this car he modified the front and rear suspension for better handling. He got rid of the terrible stock quadrashock 4 link setup and went to a three link suspension with a torque arm. He also upgraded to large four wheel discs (he always said the stock brakes were weak) and five lug wheels. The only body modifications was going to a Cobra body kit and tail lights, which IMO was much cleaner than the GT styling. He had the car for about 10 years, it was extremely well cared for, never saw winter, and he planned to eventually build a 347 stroker for it. Unfortunately when a friend was driving it got totalled on an expressway (the other driver was at fault). I still miss that car, and I am sure he does too, but he was never able to find was as clean as his.
A friend had a 95 5.0L Mustang and I remember doing some work on the car for him. I remember driving it and it just wasn’t the same as the Fox cars. I also didn’t care for it’s styling (remember the “Grand Am” tail lights), and it certainly hasn’t aged as well in my eyes.
These cars have become pretty much non-existent around here. I remember even 10 years ago they’d show up at cruise nights. It seems they became beater hot rods pretty quickly around hear, taking that role the late 70’s F-bodies as they all fall apart. Now, I probably see more vintage Mustangs than Fox Mustangs. I know of one person locally that has a 1991 GT 5-speed that is almost like new. He bought it when it was almost new and lightly used. Since then it has been babied only being driven on nice days. I would love to buy that car some day, but I think he’ll never sell.
I had an ’80 2.3 and an ’84 5.0. I always lusted after one of these but life moved on and practicality became a necessity.
These can still be had for not a lot of money but as others have mentioned, it’s difficult to find an unmolested one. The 5.0 was horrible in the winter too, so much so I ended up buying a winter beater. Still, I hope to own one of these someday. They are not the lookers the f-bodies were, but were better all-around drivers.
I’m not a big sports car fan — or pony car person for that matter, but a navy blue LX 5.0 and smoked windows would definitely be on my top 10 cars of all time to have.
Oh, and the big Escort analogy is perfect. The generation that replaced the 1993s never quite seemed right and I could never find a way to describe this oddity, so the passionless Mazda derived “World Car” comparison helps this inner confusion greatly.
When I was in grade school one of the kids fathers would pick him up after school in a black 1985 Mustang GT. That car was awesome to this then 12 year old. Fast-forward 12 years, to when I bought my first fox car, a red ’85 GT. Man, that car was fast! Much faster than anything I had driven up to that point, for sure. I’ve owned several foxes since…
Anyone has owned or driven one of these Mustangs for any length of time will tell you what a blast these cars are to drive. Kinda scary at times. A heavy foot can get you in a lot of trouble real quick. Never drove anything that could go sideways so easily. Learn how to control that, and you’ve harnessed the power of the 5.0 fox Mustang.
Also, they are very easy to work on. The aftermarket for these is huge, and most shadetree mechanics can work on them without any problems, or fear of screwing things up too badly.
Here is a pic of a 1985 model that I recently sold to a happy buyer.
Thanks Joseph for making me think about the 1987 GT Convertible that is residing in the garage at my mother´s house.
It is Oxford White with the red cloth interior and a black top.
Manual transmission, original paint, original engine and trans, about 70.000 miles.
My mother bought the car in 1992, only driven in nice weather, never seen snow and rarely rain.
It even has the pretty rare factory stereo with equalizer.
It is pretty rare here in Germany.
I have many fond memories of driving that Mustang.
To be honest, it keeps on calling me.
The calls are getting louder and louder and my mother would probably sell it to me.
The problem is that I neither have the time to take care of another car, nor a garage to store it in, as my wife and I already have two classic cars.
But I have to admit that, just for laughs, I have started to look for places to get spare parts lately, the biggest concern is not being able to find a set of the missing wheel center caps for the Enkei wheels that it has (I saw that they offer those again called Enkei92 now) here in Germany, I guess I would (not will, as I am still telling myself I will be able to resist buying that car) get in contact with Enkei in the USA.
The only other thing to make up my mind on would be whether I should get the trim pieces around the windshield, doors and top as well as the cowl and side mirrors repainted in the original black color or leave that pieces as is painted in white body color, the paint was applied by the first owner of the car.
But this is (as The Rolling Stones said) “just my imagination running away with me”, as I surely will remain able to stay away from buying that Mustang (will I?).
Crisp and clean looking on the outside, cheap on the inside. Test drove a near zero miles new red GT hatch in 91 at my local Ford dealer. Drove like a tank and the hatch rattled like an old screen door caught in the wind. Man, was it sweet. Wish I would have bought it as the next gen Stang’s look like a river rock. Interior was much better though.
It occurs to me that these were really analogous to the gen1/2 Barracuda, inasmuch as they were basically a shortened Fairmont with new exterior sheet metal, but undoubtedly kept the basic cowl height and some other key hard points of the Fairmont. Which of course made them quite different from GM’s F-Bodies, but it didn’t hurt it like the Barracuda. In fact, it became an asset, as it was more compact, lighter and more practical than the F-Bodies.
That’s a good point, I sort of was thinking about that with the TC3 article from a few days ago, about how they said all ponycars were more like the Barracuda, but the Gen 3 F bodies were definitely in the vein of the 60s cars. The Mustang was definitely more in the Barracuda vein, even more so than the TC3, I’d even say the designs between the Fairmont and Valiant were pretty analogous for that matter.
Onething I do have to point out though, the cowl height was changed, but not in the direction you’d think. In order to get a more sloping hoodline from the fairmont it was actually RAISED an inch
https://books.google.com/books?id=gURwClIjeFkC&pg=PA1979&lpg=PA1979&dq=cowl+height+telnack+mustang&source=bl&ots=kL7trOSyQA&sig=2KE-rXZNFVFjVSSFp1SplpkfBZc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAmoVChMI3eDAvf3gyAIVSW0-Ch3yugF1#v=onepage&q=cowl%20height%20telnack%20mustang&f=false
I liked the Mustangs until the 1999 uglification. Again I could be biased. It is the time of year when I get my jelly bean Mustang out. Still fun after all these years.
Bah, to me the 99-04 fixed the things I didn’t like about the 94-98s, namely the wide square jawed front and narrow rounded butt.
Perhaps, but I have never cared for the angular lights and grill of the 99-04. Oh well… to each their own I guess. This car was actually given to me by a neighbor after the teenage son trashed it (so I didn’t get to choose the year). He had gotten it from his Grand father. I brought it back from the brink. Only has 70k on it. All original with no modifications.
Totally agree, Jon. I was in college when the ’94s came out and also liked those (immediately). I felt the ’99s, with their ’80 Cougar XR7-esque taillights were less to my liking.
I agree! I think the ’99-04 version is a much tighter design, especially the side sculpturing. Of course, I may have a slanted view on these , as the ’03 coupe I had was the best car I have ever owned. For 228K miles it brought back fun driving to me after driving a series of pickup trucks for several years. I now have an ’09 that is a good car, but I prefer the ’03.
Also, I once owned a 4 banger ’86 hatch that I bought new. Not a bad car that gave me a little emotional lift during a very difficult time in my life, but after 2 years I was ready to move on to a V6 Ranger.
Nice writeup. I’m a bit of a Fox addict 🙂 , having owned 9 various and sundry Foxes. Three were Mustangs, an ’84 V6 coupe, an ’89 LX 5.0 coupe (GAWD do I miss that car!!!), and a rusty but great running ’90 LX 5.0 ragtop that I nicknamed “Slinky” for her rust-induced body flex. I had planned to take the driveline out of the ’90 and transplant it into the ’84 but never got a round tuit and sold them as a pair to someone that eventually did the swap. Maybe after I get my Marquis LTS restored I’ll get another Fox Mustang, probably a Four-Eyes.
I saw this car on the street last week! I live a block from here.
sorry guys, as I mentioned in the trans am article a couple days ago the screaming chicken was the only way to fly!
my personal conspiracy theory is that since the fox mustangs came out about the same time as the pinto went away, they are just fat pintos with bad attitudes.
(and he jumps in his ARO 4×4 and runs for cover before the shelling starts! )
I don’t think that rust caused the convertible to be flexible. I remember jacking one up to put a tire on it and the customer was freaking out as to why the door wouldn’t open for him with it on the jack.
He was telling me that I had screwed up his car until I took the jack out. Door worked fine then.
Always wanted one but I’d rather have the notchback. They didn’t seem to rattle as much.
Amazingly, despite being the “right” age (high school ’94 to ’98, college ’98 to ’02) I never knew anyone with a fox Mustang GT. Among other things, insane insurance premiums for the GT might have been a reason why. On the other hand, I had a ton of experiences with the 4-cylinder versions. Several friends had them and I even took driver’s ed in one. All of those were notchbacks as well, which I always though were a little boring. Something about the roofline just didn’t look right to me. The hatchback, on the other hand, just looked exactly right. Night and day.
Best summed up by some college friends who were apartment-mates. One was my roommate’s girlfriend, who had an ’88 LX notchback 4-cyl. Slightly faded red paint, the most basic alloys available. Looked like an economy car with a slight veneer of sportiness around the nose, but that’s it. Her roommate had a ’93 LX hatchback 5.0. Navy blue metallic, Pony 5-spoke alloys, polished exhaust tips, and meticulously kept. That one seemed like the true Mustang to me–it looked the part, tip to tail. And she drove it like it deserved to be driven.
Completely agree, Chris, with several point you make. This generation of Mustang could look either hot or busted, like that “Gwen” character in that episode of Seinfeld whose appearance varied depending on the lighting. I did like the notchback style, but preferred the hatch (which, by the way, looks terrible without the ’86+ standard rear spoiler). I did really like my 4-cyl. ’88 LX hatch and found it really useful with its split fold-down rear seat. It easily and dutifully schlepped all my stuff to and from college during those years, was cheap to insure, got reasonable gas mileage, and looked great. Its only real downfall was how painfully slow it was, even with a 5-speed manual.
That’s very true about the spoiler, without it the hatch bodystyle looks like a dog about to go number two. The thing that gets me too, that makes me prefer the notch bodystyle, is the spoiler adds to the already large amount of cut lines the hatch body inherently has due to the hatch itself serving as the top edges of the quarters. In profile the spoiler and body completely sandwich it into to this weird little one inch line.
Ironically my only true dislike of the 94-04s that succeeded these was their bad cut lines as well, but in their case it was the separate outer sail panel skin, making it appear as though they had a retractable roof.
I ordered my 1986 Mustang GT from the factory 30 years ago this coming March and I still have it. It was my first brand new car. Still a kick to drive, but braking is not it’s best attribute. Hemmings Classic Car did a feature article on it two years ago in the June 2013 issue when it had about 8,700 original miles on it. I’ve only added about 150 miles to it since then. You can Google or Bing “Matchless Mustang” to view the article and pictures.