It’s amazing to think how, when some cars were new, enthusiasts at the time likely couldn’t imagine said vehicle becoming a ratty, tired project. Really, any pace car would likely fit this description as they were undoubtedly a hot item when new, especially in the 70s and 80s when pace car tributes were considered must-haves. This 1979 Ford Mustang Indianapolis 500 pace car is one such example of a once-collectible car that now pops up routinely in condition like this one, listed here on craigslist for $4,000.
This particular pace car looks largely complete, as you can see the body kit is still intact and the Recaro seats are still visible through the front window. Of course, it’s all in pretty tired condition, but the important thing is that it’s there. Another bonus is that this is a car from the Pacific Northwest, which always seem to fare better than forgotten classics found elsewhere. The old-school Oregon plates give some indication as to how long it’s been parked.
The familiar graphics and decals that signaled the Mustang’s pace car status, but you had to pull the hood release to find out what resided in the power barn. You didn’t just automatically get a 5.0L simply because it was a pace car; oh no, a 2.3L turbocharged four-cylinder was also in the cards, which is what this car got. The seller doesn’t say much about its condition, other than to say it’s complete and was running four years ago. Thankfully, this Mustang has the four-speed manual gearbox.
The wheels are mismatched and the seller notes he no longer has the original set, but may be able to scare up a few isolated tri-spokes if you want the original look. Of course, there is a company now making the same wheel design but without the goofy metric sizing, which is the way to go if you want to preserve the original appearance. The seller does disclose some metal work will be needed, so it has rust hiding somewhere. Is this a project you’d take on, or is it too big of a lift for a model without much upside financially?
Thanks Jeff. I think your last sentence sums up my thoughts on this car. I like these Pace Cars, but ones in better condition– for not much money– are not hard to find. And, if you are an early Fox Body Mustang fan and are interested in restoring one, why not something less commonly seen (such as a Cobra or even a V8 coupe). It does look complete (as far as we can tell from the few pictures) but very tired.
There were more cobras produced than pace cars, just under 11,000 pace cars were produced in 79. There were more cobras that year. V8 coupes aren’t all that uncommon also atleast out in texas.
Good info Shaun. To clarify my point, when a 79 Mustang appears at a show, most likely it will be a Pace Car, despite the production volumes being higher for other models. Further, despite the high production volumes (369,000), few– of any model– are seen today in good shape.
I bought a repo in 1980, but mine was the 302, with auto. After the original tires wore out, I scrapped the 390mm TRX wheels in favor of a set of Cragars, as original replacement tires were quite expensive at the time. This would be a worthwhile project, but the 4cyl turbo would have to go, much better cars with a 5.0
The 2.3 turbo was right up there in the horsepower with the 302, and adding a few lbs of boost would put you ahead of the 5.0 in power, look up the m81 cars those made some steam for the day
When I bought my Pace Car in 1979 the dealer had a V8 and 2.3 turbo. I opted for the 2.3 turbo, for a few reasons… The rated HP was very similar, the 2.3 got better gas mileage, no one else had a turbo, and the turbo whine. You could hear the turbo winding up and feel the increased power. If you kept the throttle in the right spot (just before TURBO dash light illuminated), you got great mileage and (late 70’s) V8 like performance. If you give her little more throttle, the turbo light in the dash would illuminate. I swear at that point Ford changed the timing and the gas mileage went down. I think that I still have the ~1×3 plate for the dash around here somewhere. I never installed it and the vinyl protection was still in place.
I owned a Mustang with the turbo 4-cyl motor, most of which was in Michigan where it didn’t get super hot in the summer, although compared to the West Coast, humidity was high. It had a couple of hard to debug problems that were fixed under warranty, that I assume were corrected in later models. One was a intermittent issue with ECM that would disable the car, and since diagnostic tools were crude by today’s standards, it was found by replacing sensors and as a last resort, the ECM.
The other problem was sitting at a stop light idling in hot weather, the fuel would boil in the carburetor, bubble up through the vent tube, spill into the barrels, and flood the engine. That ended being avoided by changing the adjustment spec on the float level, increasing the amount of fuel in the bowl, which increased the amount of heat it could absorb. The fix was discovered by a technician at one of Ford’s dealers, and eventually published as a service bulletin.
My 1979 Mercury Capri Turbo RS had that fix and ran well. I miss that car!
My 79 2.3 turbo never had a computer, I never had much issues with it other than making weekly adjustments to the carb. I blew it up when I was 16, it now has a 4.6 ford engine in it now.
My friend had the Mercury Capri version of this car. He spent more time under the hood than he did behind the wheel. Car makers had no idea what they were doing with carburetors and turbos back then. The Trans Am with the turbo 301 is another flop.
Mine ran perfectly fine. I miss that car.
@Neil : true story about that fix. I am in the computer industry, and back then ran marketing for a mainframe company that had an early relational database. Ford Engineering used it and had over 1000 different databases for various things.
They imported every service record warranty claim, which included what the dealer logged when they billed Ford for the labor. If for example, you heard about a problem with gear oil viscosity being too thick when cold in 4-wd transfer cases, you could select 4WD repairs where service date = December, January, February to see if there were a lot of them in northern states. I was complaining about my car stalling to one of the computer guys that had access to that database, and he did a search, found one tech who had experimented with the float level, and forwarded my complaint to the service department, notifying them there were several. I went back to my dealer, and told them how to fix it. Next time I was in, they said a service bulletin was published.
Thanks to you mine ran perfectly. Not the fastest car but I enjoyed it and spent time running SCCA Solo II with it. It did well.
Pace car for a bicycle race maybe…
None of those cars from theb80’s were that fast. The 302 only made 145hp! LOL
Nevertheless, there wasn’t much of anything faster at the time.
I do realize I’m a bit of an idiot. I like oddball cars and engines. I have been collecting hot rodding articles on modified carbed turbo 2.3 engines. I also have been collecting parts. I have 3 engines kicking around and want to use them. All are mechanically sound, bores, cranks etc. I want to see how far I can take one. I think they would be good engines for classic daily drivers. I want to put one in my 71 Capri once I get sick of the 2.0 pinto engine it currently has. Any other ideas for swap candidates?
Nevertheless, there wasn’t much of anything faster at the time.
I had the Capri Turbo RS, boy was I shocked when those big Michelin tires wore out at 19,000 miles. It was a capable car on twisty roads .
I worked at a Ford Dealer on the overnight for many years around this time period. The 4cyl turbo in all of the Ford products had a lot more issues than the 302. Don’t forget, Ford had the turbo 4 as an option in the Fairnont too. The 302 in the Mustang felt stronger than the Turbo 4. Shortly after this, Ford introduced the 255 V-8. It lasted a short poof time until they reintroduced the 302 in 82 as the boss. It had 157 hp. In 83, it had 175hp. In 84, it went to 205hp. In 87, 225 hp. The turbo was upgraded as well over time. Eventually, they came out with the Mustang SVO which was a strong 2.3 turbo. I can tell you that over time, the 302 was much less trouble prone.
The 79 5.0L did only rate at 145 hp, but it put out 255 lb-ft torque. The 2000s 4.6V8 was just under 300lb-ft, so although it did run out of breath, the 79 5.0L could pull hard and with no quad shocks and very nose heavy it is a blast to drive!