MustangII.Org
74Ghia.com
FordPinto.com
|
|
 and about equal to our 1974 long-term V-6 Capri, a car the Mustang outweighs by a hefty 750 lb. Those excess pounds are the primary reason why the V-6 feels so weak in the Mustang compared to its snappy response in the Capri. California residents once again bear the brunt of more restrictive emission standards. All California Mustang II 302s will be fitted with dual catalysts; the rest of the country escapes these devices entirely. With the converter, more spark advance can be dialed into the engine-an aid to drivability, fuel economy and cooling-but all 302s, whether equipped with catalysts or not, will have exhaust-gas recirculation though in differing amounts. In addition, all 1975 Ford engines, not just 302s, will have air pumps and pointless ignitions. Ford expects fuel economy of the V-8 package to average around 15 mpg, relatively poor compared to the 20-22 mpg we average with our Capri but only 1.5 mpg lower than the sluggish 1974 Mach 1 we tested. To improve the 302's range , a 3.5-gal. auxiliary fuel tank is fitted in the left-rear quarter panel. This brings the total capacity to 16.5 gal. for a cruising range of around 250 miles with 1.0 gal. in reserve. Real enthusiasts will be disappointed to learn that a 4-speed transmission-standard in all other Mustangs including Mexican 302s-isn't available with the U.S. V-8. According to Ford, the current 4-speed won't fit because of interference in the tunnel area and for economic reasons Ford elected not to modify the car to make one fit. This isn't a problem with Mexican Mustangs, Ford says, because those cars have a slightly different floor pan. Whatever the reason, look for a V-8 with 4-speed in 1976. On paper the specifications of the 302 would hardly seem conducive to balanced handling: weight distribution without the driver is a noseheavy 60% front/40% rear. Surprise, it really handles. Besides the stiffer springs and bigger anti-roll bars, all shock absorbers have been revalved to reduce porpoising of the front end over dips or during braking. In addition the 3-way adjustable Gabriel shocks (standard with the competition and rally suspensions) have been rebalanced to make the car more neutral during transient maneuvers. The car the EE drove in Dearborn had the competition suspension with the adjustable shocks cranked full hard and was most impressive. Through high-speed sweeping turns there's mild understeer but in low-speed corners the driver can apply throttle to bring the tail out-a virtual impossibility with the underpowered V-6. There's a little more steering feel (a mid-year change to all 1974 Mustangs) plus faster response to initial steering inputs. For real fast motoring, however, some additional road feedback would be appreciated. The California package with dual catalysts upshifted at about 4000 rpm. Acceleration times were improved slightly by holding the lever in gear and upshifting manually at 4800-5000 rpm but anything higher is a waste because the camshaft is tuned for emissions. The 302 Mustang isn't aimed at the performance buyer anyway. Rather, Ford says, it's a good highway car-quiet, nice ride, comfortable-but one that is also fun to drive. All this is true but somehow we can't help feeling that lurking in the back of a few minds at Ford are fond remembrances of the previous all-conquering Boss 302.  As appeared in Road & Track, 1974
©1998-2014 The Mustang II Organization, ©1997-2010 D'TechnoArt Designs, & ©1999-2014 Lee Lafountain |