Mom? Mom! Why are you having your son sell your car? I hope it’s because you have a new one! This 1977 Mustang II was purchased new by the seller’s mother and is said to only have 40,706 miles. I think the paint is original, or at least most of it is, and it brings some memories home to me as I took my first driving test in a 1978 Mustang II hatchback (yes, I did pass). It’s listed for sale here on craigslist in Tacoma, Washington for $4,500. Thanks go to Barn Finds reader Pat L. for sending us this great find!
Every time we list a Mustang II it polarizes our readers. Some feel that the car saved the Mustang nameplate while others feel it’s an overgrown Pinto. Feel free to debate the point in the comments, but even those that don’t like the car can’t argue with the condition of this one. It looks to be relatively un-rusty and I think the discoloration of the bumpers isn’t a repaint, it’s irregular fading of the different types of paint used for the sheetmetal versus the plastic.
What I really don’t understand is the folks that don’t like the looks of the Mustang II; I find it very evocative of the earliest Mustangs and a genuinely pretty design–especially the hatchback (fastback) models. The factory slotted aluminum wheels are pretty too, although I can’t say I like the whitewalls or the aftermarket body side molding.
The interior looks genuinely nice apart from carpet fading. I remember really liking the steering wheel of Dad’s car and this one has the same interior. I’m also impressed with what looks like an un-cracked dash pad.
Unlike Dad’s car, which had the 2.3 liter four cylinder, this car has the 2.8 liter V6. I can believe the 41k miles given the underhood appearance. Based on the license plate, the car hasn’t been licensed in a few years, so it’s general driving capability is probably worth checking out, as well as brakes and other things that can deteriorate over time. But at an asking price of $4,500, I wouldn’t wait too long if you are interested! Does a Mustang II bring back any memories for you, and are they good or bad?
I really have no memories of this particular Mustang good or bad, but I am always a sucker for a well kept original car. I think this car is great and would be a super buy at the asking price. You could certainly drive $4,500 out of it!
omg, take a look at this one for sale neer me right now. I think it’s this one twin brother but a coupe.
http://www.kijiji.ca/v-classic-cars/st-catharines/1977-mustang-ii-ghia/1261253814?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true
if the trannys were swapped i’d be on the hatch.
In this case I like the coupe much more. The hatch looks kinda ugly. I think it’s kind funny how the two are for sale at the same time when you don’t see these to often nowadays..
I have said this before, and I will say this again, these Mustangs will be the next holy grail of the collector world, and if I had the money and a huge warehouse, I would buy every one of these I could find and reap the rewards in about 5 years or so…and I love this example…very nice car…
I agree.
Not much money for a nice car. Buy and enjoy….
Seeing Charlie’s Angels as a young boy left a lasting impression that this is a girls Mustang.
I’ll take Farrah’s Cobra II as well as….well you get it.
I think the Farrah Fawcett association will only help the value of these cars.
They were the right car at the right time.
Yep, my mom had a King Cobra and the disco hair to go with the era…..
Nice well kept Mustang and at a decent price.
Time has Not healed this wound for me….
never got it, never will I suppose.
How they arrived at this in 10 short years after
designing a masterpiece in ’64 still leaves me
scratching my head.
The oil crisis was no excuse for bad design.
Oil crisis didn’t really bring about this design. That the original had become so bloated and away from the original premise was a big part of it. By 73, the “mustang” was built on the large Torino platform. A far cry from the lowly Falcon underpinnings. The Mustang II went back to it’s origins. A small car that could be built in many configurations and afforded by the masses. Mustang did not start out as a “muscle car”. It was a pony that grew into a big old draft horse. The MII was a new pony. Even though built on a pinto platform. Sales would indicate that the MII was a masterpiece of it’s times as well.
Exactly. The first oil crisis hit the USA just about the same time as the Mustang II. The previous Torino-based car was huge and kind of ridiculous, going after the GTO market as the Pony car market faded a bit.
Performance was hit by early emission control technology, for sure, but that was across the US fleet, not just the Mustang II, which had rack and pinion steering and disk brakes, unlike the Falcon-based models.
And it’s gone… Someone got a nice car at an even nicer price point.
Posting deleted….
https://miami.craigslist.org/mdc/cto/6134719616.html
Well my brother bought brand new Mach 1 in 1974 it was kinda fast with v6 but the 4 speed trans didn’t like his agressive shifting and he took out 2nd gear schcronizer while still under it’s 12000 mile warranty he traded next year for new for 1975 f150 to get around catalytic converter
I see a lot of maverick in this car…
I can explain the appearance complaints. The details are neat but the proportions are wrong–in particular, the short wheelbase makes it look like the top half was meant to go on a bigger car and just got stuck on a roller skate at the last minute.
I agree . The front overhang was excessive and the wheel-well openings and wheels were a bit too small , I think .I could see a shop like Troy Trepanier do a take on this …..
The front overhang is the feature that I always disliked the most. That and 13″ wheels. I think all the OE’s struggled from a design stand point with new NHTSA requirements and CAFE right behind that. There was a custom MII making the internet and show rounds a year or so ago. Wheel base was stretched and bumpers deleted. It is a mean looking little thing.
I agree with DrinkinGasoline, he knows everything!
I don’t know what they were thinking when they put that aftermarket body side trim down the entire side of the car! It looks horrible! Besides that it looks like a very nice car.
They were thinking ” if we put this trim on the sides of our car it’ll save the body from all the idiots who slam their doors against others in the parking lot.” And it’ll be easily removed and with an light buff you’ll never know it was there. Saved the car from a lot of damage. Wish I’d seen it soon and lived closer. Would have been a good one to flip with a little detailing….
I checked that option box when ordering an ’81 Camaro.
It did break up the smooth sides of the car, but I’m glad I did, judging from all the dinged up Camaro doors I would see.
Mine stayed pristine.
They look fine on a ’81 Camaro because the body line come to a peak. The one’s on this Mustang look terrible. Look at the trim and compare it to the pin stripe. You will see what I’m talking about.
I like the overall shape and agree w out of proportion comments, but do something w both bumpers and wheels and … They are like Mavericks and can be done up very nice. These do have a small interior though. Mom got one of these new in 1974 V6 & 4sp at age 60, her last hurrah w manual trans, she went around some corners in 3rd gear, but I loved her spirt.
My wife owned this ’76 Cobra II that she misses to this day!
Read more at http://barnfinds.com/moms-pony-1977-mustang-ii-40706-miles/#0ErlvTQzQCXmWqBY.99
We purchased a new 1974 Mustang II Mach 1 with the V6. I liked the styling of this car. Ford did a excellent job downsizing oversized 1973 model. Ours had the V6 automatic, but it was under powered.
Definitely brings back good memories. I bought a Mustang II back in August, and after making it drivable it’s pretty nice! The most castrated Mustang ever (88 ponies! Woohoo!) but I love the old girl.
I leaned something, I was always a fan of mustangs up to 73, I knew early ones were Falcon based and mustang ll was pinto based, however I did not know the 71,72,73 was Torino based. I always thought that Torino’s had a full frame.
Mustang formula…
Take entry level platform, with existing simple parts, mechanicals, etc.., and dress it up in a more attractive body and trim to appeal to a younger audience, disguising its simple roots. Turning the entry level, boring, Falcon, into a youthful appealing package.
As the Falcon grew, and grew, in both size and weight, so did the Mustang.
So, Ford eventually came up with the Maverick, which actually took the spot of the original Mustang as a place holder in the line-up.
And then, went back to their roots, taking their entry level platform (Pinto) and massaging it into a sexier, more youthful package. Mustang II. If you look close, most of the shapes and design cues are re-introduced from the 65-66 original into the II.
And, this formula continued right through the Fox body stangs (Based on the Fairmont / Futura’s of the 80’s). So, even the Foxstangs are not an original platform, and are based on boring underpinnings.
So, I don’t get all of this Mustang II negativity. It was the same formula, applied at the time when muscle and HP was no longer relevant. And, I am pretty sure the first year or years of the Mustang II were among the top selling model years ever for the Mustang line-up, nearly doubling the sales of the previous gen cars. They must have known what they were doing back then.
All that being said, cars from the malaise era were all kind of crappy from a build and performance standpoint. But, they are gaining huge followings in the collectors world and are getting tougher and tougher to find.