GTP Cool Wall: 1969 Ford Mustang Boss 429

  • Thread starter Thread starter White & Nerdy
  • 249 comments
  • 15,548 views

1969 Ford Mustang Boss 429

  • Total voters
    123
  • Poll closed .
@niky The Mirage has its own problems. For starters, short, tall hatchbacks are kind of ugly, at least to me. Second, they forgot the other part of the equation, which is engine. So it's just a slow, ugly heap at the end of it all. Something more the old US Mirage's size & weight would be about perfect with a larger 4 or a small V6.
 
White & Nerdy
@niky The Mirage has its own problems. For starters, short, tall hatchbacks are kind of ugly, at least to me. Second, they forgot the other part of the equation, which is engine. So it's just a slow, ugly heap at the end of it all. Something more the old US Mirage's size & weight would be about perfect with a larger 4 or a small V6.
Click to expand...

The old Mirage was technically a superior car. It had independent rear suspension, a good choice of engines, including a small V6 and the manic 1.6 liter motor the Japanese got, and it was a proper sized car.

But... The handling was stodgy, the steering was crap and the rear seat was incomprehensibly tiny, even by late 90's standards. This is coming from someone who used to drive that tin suitcase on wheels, the B13 Sentra.

The new Mirage is near as quick as the old 1.6 SOHC variant, and if the V6 came with the INVECS II tranny, it would still lose to the new car. (the last time I drove a Mirage, it had a 200 hp FTO V6 swapped in... absolutely gutless down low). It weighs less. It's safer. The suspension and steering are garbage, but with the optional 15" wheels. you can pitch it willy nilly into a bend like an old 2CV.

It's actually not all that short or tall. It competes against the Spark, the UP! and the Kia Picanto elsewhere, all of which are shorter and taller. The Mirage is rather long for a micro car, because they needed to make it longer for better aero.

The Mirage has a small motor, and even for a 1.2, 75 hp is unimpressive. But it's a rocket compared to 1.2 and 1.3 liter competitors. All because it's light and aerodynamic. Just wait till they start selling some proper suspension components and turbo kits for it... it's rather fun going four-wheels sideways in something so light on track. (done. And it was a lot of fun jumping off the kerbs and landing askew like a wannabe Ken Block... :lol: )

I'll give you ugly, however. :lol:

You think manufacturers purposely make the cars that carry big engines heavy? Absolutely not. Put a bigger engine in the Mirage and it'll weigh a ton. You want more motor, you need more than the two motor mounts the Mirage has. And you'll need a longer nose to house the radiator and ancilliaries. And you'll need a heavier suspension to hold all that up. And you'll need bigger brakes, and a bigger tank, and a heavier rear suspension for that. Eventually, you'll end up with the Fiesta, whcih is an absolute porker of a small car. (lots of fun to drive, though) Put a bigger motor in the Fiesta and you end up with a Focus... and so on and so forth.

Or you could say: "Damn it all" and do this:
http://www.spagweb.com/magicspanner/v8_micra/
05_test_drive2.jpg


Yes. It drove as horribly as it looked. Understeered like a pig. Wasn't all that quick. No traction.

It was damn cool, though. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Somehow I get the feeling we aren't even talking about the same two cars. The OldMirage we got here came with gutless I4s and appeared to be roughly the same car as the JDM Lancer of the 90's. The NewMirage we have here is also gutless and there's no way it would be anywhere near as fast as OldMirage with a V6.
 
Went with 'cool'. Seriously fast car, but just doesn't hold the same appeal as some of the other 'go faster special' Mustangs.
 
White & Nerdy
Somehow I get the feeling we aren't even talking about the same two cars. The OldMirage we got here came with gutless I4s and appeared to be roughly the same car as the JDM Lancer of the 90's. The NewMirage we have here is also gutless and there's no way it would be anywhere near as fast as OldMirage with a V6.
Click to expand...

I know Mirages. I've driven stock ones, ones with 2.0V6s and ones with MIVEC 1.6 (Cyborg R) transplants. I've helped take care of one and helped in sourcing parts for an engine transplant for that same car after the stock DOHC motor blew. We are talking about the same car.

Manual to manual, there's no way the new one would keep up with a MIVEC Mirage (those things are wicked quick). But the old Mirage's INVECS II manu-matic transmission was a real dog. Slow response and intergalactic gearing. A far cry from the CVT in the new car. Not that competitors of the time were any better, but we've come a long way since the 20th Century, baby.

Not everything old is better, faster, lighter, more fun. I've been doing the motoring gig for a decade now, and I've been in enthusiast circles for nearly twice that. I love old cars, but I ain't going to pretend that they were anywhere near perfect.
 
Last edited:
I find it to be an interesting social experiment that you guys argue about the Boss or 250 GTO being a "garage-queen", yet exactly no one said anything about the Alfa I nominated.
 
Not quite, but I get what you're getting at.

He seems to be saying that high-performance specials are equivalent to lower-line models, which isn't always the case.
 
mustang fanatic
Yeah, so. It's like saying a Ferrari 250 GTO, in which less than 100 were made, is just another Ferrari because it's called a Ferrari, and looks like a Ferrari.
Click to expand...
No it isn't.
Ferrari and Ford are the brands in this instance.
Mustang and 250 are the names of the cars.
They are effectively separate entities.

Personally, as someone so utterly indifferent about muscle cars I'd call it just another muscle car. Literally all of them, with the notable exception of the Corvette (the thread I mentioned it in) just look the same. Maybe even fill the same purpose.
 
OriginalCheezIt
I find it to be an interesting social experiment that you guys argue about the Boss or 250 GTO being a "garage-queen", yet exactly no one said anything about the Alfa I nominated.
Click to expand...

It's more than that, it's an art piece really...which probably makes it worse off than the two mentioned.
 
There may have been less than 1000 Boss 429s made, but it is a big-ass engine in a car that looks like the one next to it with a 302 in it, and don't say anything about how "different" the 2 look, a passer-by wouldn't know the difference. Hell, I probably wouldn't know if I just glanced at it.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
It's more than that, it's an art piece really...which probably makes it worse off than the two mentioned.
Click to expand...

I know I have an extremely biased opinion towards the Alfa, but I find the transcendence of the Alfa from "just a car" into being viewed as art to be the coolest thing a car can possibly do. Just my 2.
 
Azure Flare
There may have been less than 1000 Boss 429s made, but it is a big-ass engine in a car that looks like the one next to it with a 302 in it, and don't say anything about how "different" the 2 look, a passer-by wouldn't know the difference. Hell, I probably wouldn't know if I just glanced at it.
Click to expand...

No there haven't there were 1358 made in respect to the 429 between 69-70
 
The engine is unnecessarily large.

I vote this cool instead of SZ for the same reason I'd vote the 289 Cobra over the 427.

Speaking of which, we should get the 289 on poll sometime. The bickering there would be great.
 
The 427 Cobra is the 2nd coolest car ever according to GTP, I doubt the 289 would beat it.
 
C-ZETA
No it isn't.
Ferrari and Ford are the brands in this instance.
Mustang and 250 are the names of the cars.
They are effectively separate entities.
Click to expand...

I see no difference.

C-ZETA
Personally, as someone so utterly indifferent about muscle cars I'd call it just another muscle car. Literally all of them, with the notable exception of the Corvette (the thread I mentioned it in) just look the same. Maybe even fill the same purpose.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Find a similarity here
image.jpg

image.jpg


Azure Flare
There may have been less than 1000 Boss 429s made, but it is a big-ass engine in a car that looks like the one next to it with a 302 in it, and don't say anything about how "different" the 2 look, a passer-by wouldn't know the difference. Hell, I probably wouldn't know if I just glanced at it.
Click to expand...

Yes, but they're different in every other way. Besides, most passer-by's wouldn't care anyways.
 
mustang fanatic
I disagree. Find a similarity here
Click to expand...
The black paint.
In addition to the boring straight line for the bonnet, boring straight line for the A-pillar, boring arch back for the C-pillar and the boring slight curve on the bonnet.
That being from the side obviously. The most important part of a car's look to me.
Also, they both sort of fail at their jobs nowadays.
 

Latest Posts

Back