TribLIVE

| Business


 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Auto review: Mustang honors the past as Ford looks to the future

2013 Mustang GT

Base price, excluding destination charge: $22,200

Price as tested: $40,255

By Brian Thevenot
Saturday, March 30, 2013, 12:01 a.m.
 

A decade ago, as Ford engineers prepared the next-generation Mustang, they stared down an inescapable truth: The best Mustangs were built in the 1960s.

So they set out to build a brand-new 1968 Mustang fastback, wrapping modern technology in retro sheet metal. That strategy carried its own risks, like asking the Rolling Stones to re-record “Exile on Main Street.”

It's clear now that it worked brilliantly, setting off an unlikely second coming of the muscle car era. In a familiar stampede, Chevrolet and Dodge — which scrambled in the '60s to make their own “pony cars” — followed Ford's lead again with refried versions of the original Camaro and Challenger.

The 2013 Mustang GT we tested recently, a drag-strip beast that could smoke most anything from the '60s, may be among the last of the retro breed. With the Mustang's 50th anniversary approaching next year, the engineers in Dearborn, Mich., are again feverishly designing the next-generation Mustang. They face an even tougher challenge: How do you take a car into the future after you've taken it a half-century into the past?

However wonderful the next Mustang may be, it will be a shame to see this one pass into history, whence it came. The successful remake of the 1967-68 car represents a kind of redemption for dumb decisions Ford made when it abandoned the early Mustangs in the first place, leading to a series of putrid pony cars throughout the 1970s. (Note to Ford: Do not bring back the Mustang II.)

A week in the old-school cockpit of the latest GT confirms that its ride, handling and shifting are an upgrade over both ancient and recent Mustangs, which have always been a bit crude — endearingly so.

Ford has also pulled off a subtle but substantial evolution of its retro design. A mid-cycle refresh in 2010 added a sharpened belt line and a rear end pinched in on both sides. For 2013, Ford added a more prominent front grille and other tweaks. The updates somehow made the car look simultaneously less dated and more like the old car.

But only one option really matters on this car: the 302-cubic-inch, 5.0-liter V-8, a direct descendant of the first 302 small-block introduced in the 1968 Mustang, now with a ludicrous 420 horsepower and 390 pound-feet of torque. The first retro Mustang GT, a 2005 model, was impressive enough with 300 horses. Piling on 120 more is like deep-frying bacon in pork fat.

With the six-speed manual, it's difficult to launch the GT without roasting enough rubber to set off neighborhood smoke alarms. Shifts into second gear provoke another loud bark from the rear tires. Pushing the 7,000-rpm redline in higher gears requires acres of open highway.

The car's least-expected quality is a near-optimal trade-off between aggressive handling and a comfortable ride.

The GT has its issues. All Mustangs do. Their point has never been perfection, but rather the proper ratio of performance to price. The car can be a handful to drive in town, and feels a tad too big and heavy. Its center console is awkwardly angled up toward the back seat, making manual shifting an elbow-bumping affair.

The GT goes from zero to 60 mph in 4.3 seconds on its way to a 12.7-second quarter-mile, according to Motor Trend. If you want something just a hair faster, plunk down $190,000 on an Aston Martin DB9.

Our loaded test car came to $40,255, a bit high for the quintessential affordable fast car. But GTs start at $30,750, and the V-6 base model — with a more-than-respectable 305 horsepower — brings the price down to $22,200.

All this sets a high bar for the next-generation Mustang. If Ford has learned anything from history, it will take care to avoid repeating what happened after the 1960s, a textbook case of messing with success.

Our advice to Ford: The Mustang is finally back in a good place. Don't screw it up. Don't get any big ideas. Do what you should have done in the 1970s: Let the shape of the car change slowly, organically, over many years.

Brian Thevenot is a writer for the Los Angeles Times.

 

 
 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Business Headlines

  1. Range Resources to pay $4.15M fine, close old gas drilling impoundments
  2. Chevron gets first OK from Pa. sustainable drilling group
  3. Bayer to spin off plastics unit as separate company; employment to remain stable
  4. Bayer plastics unit may be gone
  5. U.S. Steel shares jump on turnaround strategy
  6. Consol, Noble expect at least $325 million from partnership’s IPO
  7. Tobacco growers forced to find profits as buyout checks end in October
  8. Fed not budging on rate increase
  9. Investors applaud central bank’s decision
  10. UPMC buying New Castle-based Jameson Health System
  11. FedEx to add 50,000 seasonal jobs
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.