By 1983, though, the Camaro/Mustang performance race was on again. Two oil shortages in the previous 10 years and the ratcheting up of emissions standards had diverted engineering resources into building smaller, more efficient cars.
Still, the third-gen Mustang GT marked the start of a long climb out of the Dark Ages for American carmakers. Of course, by today’s standards, the GT is a snail tied to a brick: A Honda Odyssey minivan will blow the stripe off the GT’s hood in acceleration, cornering, and braking. Back when it was new, we clocked its zero-to-60-mph time at 7.0 seconds, only a couple of ticks behind the quickest car we tested in 1982-the 220-hp Porsche 928, which did the 60-mph sprint in 6.8 seconds. And that was a noteworthy improvement over the ’82 GT’s minuscule 157-hp allotment.īut thanks to 245 pound-feet of torque at 2400 rpm and a 3070-pound curb weight, the Mustang feels surprisingly lively and agile in normal driving. The GT’s engine, known for decades as the 5.0 despite actually displaying 4942 cubic centimeters, or 4.9 liters, sniffs through a four-barrel carb, belches exhaust through a restrictive catalytic converter, and develops a meager 175 horsepower at 4000 rpm. As the revs climb toward the tach’s 5200-rpm yellow zone, the V-8’s voice gets scratchy. And where are the cupholders? If you’d grabbed a coffee from the McDonald’s drive-through in ’83, you would have had to keep it between your legs until you’d downed it.ĭipping into the throttle from a stoplight reveals that this Stang is more sound than fury.
Its safety gear includes not a single airbag. “Navigation system” meant a paper map in 1983, but there aren’t any map pockets. The interior contains enough shiny black plastic to supply a Lego factory. It lacks power-operated mirrors, windows, and seats. The GT provides a lesson in how much we take for granted in today’s cars.
0 kommentar(er)
