GTP Cool Wall: 1969 Ford Mustang Boss 429
- Thread starter White & Nerdy
- 249 comments
- 11,284 views
- 4,741
- Bogota,Colombia
- GTP_ARP93
All of my agreement. Specially with the notion of generic American Muscle and Euros Sports car, there definitely is such a thing.
- 22,550
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
They made a name for themselves to a small group, this then was marketed and perpetuated to the point that why they were popular in the first place was lost by the greater majority. And thus it's easy to say "yeah I like that mustang (just so happens to be a Mach/Boss/Shelby)". If you asked them why it's cool or what they know about it, they'd most likely just say "I like it".
- 2,153
- Great White North
I never meant it was the best car (as in most practical) if that's what you meant. It's not a good car for things like family use or daily driving. In fact, it would be terrible for that. But that's not what it's meant for. But it's my dream car (yes I know I've said that many times) for other reasons beyond being a practical everyday car.
- 22,550
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
No because that's quite singular in thought.
True considering an owner of a high power Cougar on par with this car basically said this in the Cougar Eliminator thread
In fact, it would be terrible for that. But that's not what it's meant for. But it's my dream car (yes I know I've said that many times) for other reasons beyond being a practical everyday car.
Well yeah most people don't dream about owning a high power car because their wife loves how you are able to pick up groceries at the market...
My point was and why @Azure Flare asked for more from you is that perhaps you should do a little more of "IMO" rather than just flat out saying "best car EVAAAAR!!!"
NOTE: last part is just to be honest but poke fun so don't take it in vain please.
- 2,153
- Great White North
I completely understand that. And it's fair enough, but it wasn't like I said "it's the best car ever, and everyone else should think that too." But yes, I definitely understand that.
I guess I might have been too excited when I voted it the first place.
- 22,550
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
I completely understand that. And it's fair enough, but it wasn't like I said "it's the best car ever, and everyone else should think that too." But yes, I definitely understand that.
You know how we are, anytime you say something that seems to be leaving the realm of opinion people will pounce. It's better to be over safe than under prepared.
- 2,964
- Buckinghamshire
- GTP_Snorevette
Going to give it a cool. It's just a little too over the top to get a Sub-Zero in my eyes, but it's still lovely.
- 40,425
Far from being the last cool Mustang, this (along with the 1969 restyle in general) was in fact the start of the end of the car as the cool trendsetter on the market as Ford chased harder and harder after something that consumers didn't actually want the Mustang to represent (not helped by Ford cutting themselves off at the knees with the Maverick). Yeah, this is the restyle of the Mustang that goes for big money; but part of that is because those rich old white guys are chasing after the image they want to believe is both true about the car (that every Mustang was a Boss or Mach 1) and the era (that it was all good times and awesome) and that they can attain part of that image by buying one and taking it to car shows or locking it in a garage; and the other part of that is because people just didn't want them at the time so they are rare as hell.
Stepping aside from that, there are cool big block Mustangs, but they are cool because of their association with cool things rather than by their own merits (which were usually pretty questionable). The 429 in particular is one of the main offenders in the false aura that the muscle cars from the 1960s actually produced a bajillion horsepower, but THE MAN was keeping Ford/Chrysler/Chevrolet down, perhaps best (and most depressingly) exemplified here:
Stepping aside from that, there are cool big block Mustangs, but they are cool because of their association with cool things rather than by their own merits (which were usually pretty questionable). The 429 in particular is one of the main offenders in the false aura that the muscle cars from the 1960s actually produced a bajillion horsepower, but THE MAN was keeping Ford/Chrysler/Chevrolet down, perhaps best (and most depressingly) exemplified here:
Last edited:
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
You are right on the horsepower ratings for a lot of the cars but this one is one of the ones I have to put my foot down and say hell no to. And that's only because I know the specs of one of these motors and what they are capable of. Especially the S code engine. It is well documented that a couple minor tweaks will do miracles to this engine.
Wheel horsepower is a different story. Crank horsepower is easily believable. Especially when you consider that the standard non hemi 429s were making the same as this was "rated".
So no.
Wheel horsepower is a different story. Crank horsepower is easily believable. Especially when you consider that the standard non hemi 429s were making the same as this was "rated".
So no.
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
True, but t was done to make it streetable. Unless you want to rev to 4500rpm and go nowhere until 4600rpm. And that's part of the difference between the 3 code engines. It was intentionally under cammed, under carbureted and timing retarded. Early Boss 429s are the ones you want if you want big power. Not all of them are the same except by name.
Last edited:
- 2,037
- Colorado
Everybody knows I like Mustangs, but there is literally no getting around the fact that this car was such a turd when it shipped from the factory that Larry Shinoda himself, the man responsible for this car's existence, went on record apologizing because every other V8 Mustang offered by Ford in 1969 would walk away from the Boss in a drag race. Sorry, but that's about as uncool as it gets. Then Ford, in a panic about their 15.5 second 1/4 mile BIG BLOCK car sent all the dealerships detailed instructions on how to replace the wimpy carbs, port polish the intake manifold, and other tweaks, to get more output from the 429. Only then did the real potential of the car come out. But, the car that directly came from the factory was an embarrassingly slow turd that cost over twice as much as a 302 car and lost to it in drag races. Sorry, but from even a Mustang guy like me, that's just seriously uncool. But I still voted cool because every Boss 429 still on the roads has the dealer modifications (and then some) and therefore goes like stink, like they should have on day 1.
- 40,425
This sounds a bit like how you knew how much heavier Fox body Mustangs were over the cars they replaced, or how you knew what the top speed of Mustang IIs were when stock.
The 429 did not produce over 500 horsepower in street tune. That's simply absurd to assume was possible with 1960s technology and design standards, even ignoring how slow the Boss 429 actually was compared to what such numbers suggest it should be. That's over 125 horsepower higher than the ZL1 427 Chevrolet engine produced in street tune, which was a handbuilt converted CAN-AM engine. That's the entire point of what I said. It most certainly did in racing tune on the Grand National circuit, before they tamed the cam timing, put a highly restrictive exhaust system, chopped the redline, strangled the carbs, installed engine accessories and put on a production exhaust manifold and in general did everything they could to cut the legs of the engine so its main qualities couldn't be attained; and as a result of its hardy nature has a lot more potential to someone drag racing than some crappy 390 just like the Hemi engine did over the 383. When people talk about how mystical the cars at the end of the 1960s are, they talk as if the engine/car combos that did 11 second quarters with 115 MPH trap speeds or could propel cars to 200 MPH around a superspeedway as if they were the exact same vehicles in the exact same state of tune as the ones you could go buy at your local Ford/Chevy/Chrysler dealership. They weren't, and it doesn't matter how easily they could be converted as such, because how they are sold to the customer from the factory is the entire point of horsepower ratings.
Last edited:
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
I'm not going to argue what it produced in street tune, I've even said that it was detuned for streetability 
And again like I said, wheel horsepower in a heavy car such as this is way different than crank.
A little work goes a long way...
___________
This is a good read.
http://www.topspeed.com/cars/ford/1969-ford-mustang-boss-429-ar32774.html
And again like I said, wheel horsepower in a heavy car such as this is way different than crank.
A little work goes a long way...
___________
This is a good read.
http://www.topspeed.com/cars/ford/1969-ford-mustang-boss-429-ar32774.html
- 40,425
If you weren't arguing with my point that this is one of the most notorious examples of a car as it left the factory not remotely measuring up to the "totally true" mystique the surrounds it 40 years later, why did you respond with "You are right on the horsepower ratings for a lot of the cars but this one is one of the ones I have to put my foot down and say hell no to."I'm not going to argue what it produced in street tune, I've even said that it was detuned for streetability
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
Because it depends on the code of the motor. As I said, S, T and A code engines are different. Same block, different parts. Some with smaller valves, bigger thermactor bumps, tighter emissions, smaller carburetors, different cam specs etc.
The S code is the engine that made the behemoth amounts of power. There's maybe 150 of them. That was the harcore engine. Forged internals and full of race duty parts like a cross drilled crank, 1/2" rod bolts and a hydraulic cam etc. The rest are T and A Code engines, the first being the middle of them as far as "good" specs go. Those are the ones everyone thinks of. The A code being the worst with a different valve train etc. Those 2 engines are laughable when you comepare them to the S code NASCAR motor that was stuck in the early cars.
S code was early 1969, T code was mid to late, and A was late 69/early 70.
http://www.russoandsteele.com/index.php/media-page/media-press-releases/2841-s13boss429
http://www.popularmechanics.com/car...ng-facts-about-american-muscle-cars-6#slide-6
And a 670hp street build while we are at it.
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/hrdp_1006_ford_boss_429_engine_buildup/viewall.html
The S code is the engine that made the behemoth amounts of power. There's maybe 150 of them. That was the harcore engine. Forged internals and full of race duty parts like a cross drilled crank, 1/2" rod bolts and a hydraulic cam etc. The rest are T and A Code engines, the first being the middle of them as far as "good" specs go. Those are the ones everyone thinks of. The A code being the worst with a different valve train etc. Those 2 engines are laughable when you comepare them to the S code NASCAR motor that was stuck in the early cars.
S code was early 1969, T code was mid to late, and A was late 69/early 70.
http://www.russoandsteele.com/index.php/media-page/media-press-releases/2841-s13boss429
http://www.popularmechanics.com/car...ng-facts-about-american-muscle-cars-6#slide-6
And a 670hp street build while we are at it.
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/hrdp_1006_ford_boss_429_engine_buildup/viewall.html
Last edited:
- 11,332
- The 51st state of america
- sparkytooth50001
Sleeper is definitely not the vibe it gives me. Far from it.
I still stand by my statement, Muscle Cars, especially those from the late 60's with their strange gearboxes and untapped potential, are meh to me at best. Only the 427 Cobra saves itself because it's less like the rest, and because it's a goddamn Cobra, cooler than any Mustang.
I mostly rate them cool anyway because I sorta like them in a strange way, but this Mustang, just... Meh. Maybe it'll grow on me someday but for now, meh.
Cano
Premium
- 20,758
- Cephiro
That makes it awesome. It's an event car.
Stil... damn, this car. I love the Boss '9, I do. But as others have said, it's the pinnacle of everything that wrong with muscle cars these days:
-Barret Jackson bait
-garage queens
-matching-numbers queens
-trailer queens/never driven, let alone hard
-colelctor car, not muscle car
-never modified because made of unobtanium
-you have to be a Ford nerd to really know what the heck you're looking at
And what was wrong with muscle cars back in the day:
-sssssssssloooooooooow
-big disappointment for the then-new owners (read: ZL-1 Camaro)
-expensive
-no racing pedigree whatsoever, as Mustangs never raced with these... hell not even in the NHRA
-overshadowed by the Boss 302 and the even less cool Shelby cars
I don't know. This might be the hardest vote for me ever, I love the Boss but it's just SO wrong on many levels :/
- 23,800
- Philippines
We voted (before your time) the 427 Cobra to the highest spot on the Cool Wall.
Does not compute.
The problem with the Boss isn't that it has a big V8. That V8 is rather nice. It's that it's a garage queen for most owners nowadays.
-
But then again, I voted cool just because I like the name.
- 3,023
- Peruibe, SP
You have got to be kidding me. I see no reason to vote this as seriously uncool. Disliking this car is the equal to not liking one of the legendary muscle cars. It was practically one of the best to turn the late 60's and early 70's into a blast of great muscle cars. Voting it as seriously uncool, it's like an insult.
And basic? Define basic. If I would go for basic, try the '65 Mustang coupé. The normal mustang are cool still but compared to this, they're much more basic.
YOU CAN'T SAY NO TO A 429.
Cano
Premium
- 20,758
- Cephiro
I would say no to a 429 because you can't use it.
- 4,741
- Bogota,Colombia
- GTP_ARP93
GTP_Ingram
Premium
- 1,916
- London
- GTP_Ingram
- NowtDaft
Oh pipe down.
We're just not so narrow-minded that a car doesn't NEED a big V8 to be cool.
