StevenCaylor

I find it strange that Reserve and Black Label require 4WD. That would be a deal breaker for me.

Correct. I have a similar unit on my 2000 Mustang. Love being able to go to the beach and through my wallet and keys in the car and not have to worry about them. First factory unit was on my 87 Turbo Coupe.

Will the new Ranger have the new 10-speed auto?

When I went to college, I wanted to be a Software Engineer. Back in the olden days, that degree didn't exist. The closest that Loyola University of Los Angeles had was Electrical Engineering with a Computer Science option. I had to take calc classes that were totally useless. Still have a great career in software, especially due to my TS/SCI clearance from when I was in the military.

I love how they named some of the drive modes. Instead of the typical "economy" and "sport", they used "conserve" and "excite".

Back when I bought my current car, a 2000 Mustang, in September of 99, I went through the AAA Fleet Order Program. I had test driven a 99 for a few months as a rental, so I knew I wanted the car (manual vs auto though). The AAA made a reservation for me with the closest fleet dealer to where I lived. I went to KBB to get all the codes for every option, drivetrain and color that I wanted and printed it out. I arrived at the dealership and said "Order this car for me" and handed him the printout. He said "Oh. You've done your homework". I paid a $200 deposit and was out the door in 10 minutes. It's a no hassle deal for only slightly above dealer invoice. Ordering the car gets you exactly​ what you want, no more, no less. I don't like car salesmen because, being a car enthusiast, I know more about their product than they do. All three of my previous vehicles have been factory ordered (65 Mustang, 83 Escort GT and 87 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe). The car arrived eight weeks later.

I recently rented an F-150 XLT that had start-stop. I came to a stop and go "Dang, this is quiet", look down at the tach and see it at zero. Lifted my foot off the brake, and the engine smoothly restarted. I was impressed.

IIRC, the last three-on-a-tree car my family owned was a used 1950 Ford sedan. Most others have been floor shifted autos.

I remember my 87 T-Bird Turbo Coupe had a separate turning light on the side of the car that worked well.

The 64.5 came with a 101 hp 170-1V, a 164 hp 260-2V, a low-compression 210 hp 289-4V and the hi-po 271 hp 289-4V. The 65 came with upgrades. 120 hp 200-1V, a 200 hp 289-2V, a high compression 225 hp 289-4V and the hi-po 271 hp 289-4

Especially when 93 octane gas is not available in much of the country.

What about that huge backlog of orders for the export version?

I'm old school. I wish Ford would bring back the Mustang coupe, last built back in 93. Our first Mustang was our 65. It was my mother's car, thus, the family car. It was fairly loaded with the 289, factory air (rare), power steering and power brakes. At 6'0", I could comfortably sit in the back seat. Admittedly, my parents were a bit shorter than I was. Also, the coupe was also about 60 pounds lighter than the fastback. If you check this classic Mustang commercial ( ), the housewife at 2:17 could have easily been my Mom. We were the first family on the block with a Mustang. You wouldn't believe the number of people who wanted to see it.

Most of the CHP Explorers I've seen have been the non-EcoBoost 3.7.

IIRC, the official standard of "premium" gas is 91 octane, as 87 is for regular. If Ford bases their ratings on 93 octane, then it would be false advertising where that fuel Is unavailable.

Back when I was replacing my 87 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe, I was commuting 36 miles one-way to work, so I wanted a car that was both quicker and got better fuel economy. The 2000 V6 Mustang fit the bill perfectly. Using the current standards, 16/24 vs. 17/26 (the original ratings were 18/26 vs. 20/29) and 0-60 of 8.5 vs. 7.2. Both engines made 190 HP.

Well, in that case, here's my all time favorite.

If those horsepower and torque ratings are based on 93 octane, I wonder what the ratings will be for cars sold in California (max 91 octane).

That was an interesting read.

Good grief. My first car, a 65 Mustang was given to me in 72 because I graduated with honors from high school. I've purchased three other Fords since then, an 83 Escort GT, an 87 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe and a 2000 Mustang.

That's why I wish Ford would bring back the Mustang coupe. For decades, it was the only Pony car that had a decent back seat (IIRC, last year was 1993). My first Mustang, a 65 coupe, was originally my Mom's car, thus, the family car. My 83 Escort GT and 87 Turbo Coupe also had decent back seat room. My current 2000 Mustang does not. http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL430/521213/24140446/403363696.jpg

LOL, that reminded me of my mother. Back in 1969, we bought a fully loaded 2-door LTD Brougham (officially, an LTD with the Brougham option. Didn't become a separate model until 1970) with a 429. It was so quiet when started, compared to her previous car, a 65 Mustang, that she would try to restart it. Dark metallic green with a white top, deluxe wheel covers, power disk brakes, four speaker AM/FM stereo radio, power windows and door locks, split bench seats, even rear window defogger and intermittent wipers. Wish it would have had T-Lock. Prone to one-wheel burn outs. As I recall, no tach was available, even with models with the 4-speed manual.

Great video. A lot of interesting info.

The 57 Thunderbird was as well.

This thread reminds me of this Mustang commercial. Fond memories. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjBlsp9g6Hc