This was our anniversary week, and the car we proclaimed to be the mascot of our second anniversary is, appropriately, a second itself: the Mustang II. This is by far the least-desirable, most maligned Mustang, but like so many of the reputations of undesirable cars, The II’s bad rep is somewhat unfair.
The Mustang II was a product of a very specific time in history, and the peculiar circumstances and demands of that era defined the boundaries of what the Mustang II could be. In that context, I think the Mustang II did a pretty good job, keeping the Mustang concept of a fun, accessible sporty car alive while the world around it roiled and frothed in ways perhaps not so welcoming to fun, sporty cars.
But what if things had been a bit different? What if geopolitics and global economies and overall human culture had taken different turns, made different decisions? In these cases, maybe some of these unrealized Mustang II concepts would have been what made it into the world. And maybe, in some alternate realities, they did? Who knows. But we can certainly look at the Mustang IIs that never were, and wonder.
It’s important to remember just how huge and bloated the Mustang had become by 1973; the Mustang Mach 1 of that era was a colossal beast, all runway-long hood and high, meaty rear end. It was a beast, and customers were starting to complain that it was unwieldy and perhaps lost focus on what the Mustang’s original intent was.
I mean, look at that thing up there in the brochure art! It’s a beast! A beast whose proportions you can still see in early Mustang II concepts, like this one from 1970:
I’ll admit, while I don’t really think this is successful, I love this one because it’s so gleefully unhinged. Look at that skirted rear wheel! The subtle flush door handle! And that truly bonkers front end, with the monobrow hood shrouding inset headlamps and a very raked grille The turn indicators are those long strips on either side of that grille-and-headlights central pod, and I do like those. This feels more like Ford’s take on a Citroën SM than anything based on what we understood Mustangs to be.
This peculiar front end treatment shows up, in modified form, in a later styling model:
This one is from a bit under a year later, but that sloping front end with a higher-height midsection is still there. This time we have a more traditional Mustang grille in that area, with hidden headlamps. It’s a strange look, turning a hood scoop into an entire front end, and while I don’t really think it’s attractive, I’m definitely intrigued. Maybe a little aroused?
Let’s go back to 1970 and see what other approaches were being tried:
This one is interesting because the designers pretty much hit on what the final Mustang II front end treatment would be, way back there in October of 1970, before trying out a lot of other approaches. That character line that whisks from the front and kicks up after the B-pillar is kind of fun. Note also that certain Mustang design traits, like the faux side scoops, weren’t deemed important enough to include here.
This is quite a departure, and almost feels ’70s Italian, like a Fiat 124 Sports Coupe, in its crisp rectilinearity. The hidden lights and full-width grille are interesting, but the rest of the body has a lot of what would become a late ’70s, early 1980s Ford look, what you’d see on later Fox body Mustangs and Ford Fairmont Futuras.
The front end of this one feels a lot like what would end up on the Ford Torino. Also, look at that AMC-style pull-flap door handle! This feels almost nothing like a Mustang, though.
Here’s a really radical departure, a full-on wedge-shaped mustang with hidden lights and a strange grille on the hood. I kind of like this, in a first-gen Mazda RX-7 sort of way, though that C-pillar, with its horizontal vents, is giving some very Alfa Romeo Montreal vibes. Interestingly, the traditional Mustang side scoop is back here on this very un-Mustang concept. I like it, though!
Around the same time as that radical re-think of Mustang-ness was happening, there were other design ideas that were much more traditional, reaching all the way back to the first Mustangs, like the concept above. The traditional three-bar Mustang lights are there, now with what seems to be inset reverse lamps in the middle bar, and a very prominent faux-scoop, with some kind of D-shaped detailing in there. Proportions feel like traditional Mustang notchback proportions.
Just about a month after the one above, we see studies that feel very close to what the Mustang II would be. This one is a bit swoopier and that side scoop almost looks functional for something, but it’s quite close, right down to the “reverse color” bumpers that were mostly body-colored plastic with an inset aluminum strip.
By early ’72 the fastback had been tried, and the Mustang II side window graphic seems to have been defined. The taillights are also similar to the production Mustang II, which was the first American car to feature amber rear indicators, something I think is shown in that black-and-white picture above. I think. This rear end feels like a Mustang II, though. We’re almost there.
The final product is significantly toned down from the styling concepts and experiments, but you can definitely see how they got there. Would a wedge-shaped Mustang II have been more of a success? Or one with that weird hood-scoop front end? Who knows. Maybe these new quantum computers can peek into other realities to see how the Mustang II developed there. That seems like a good use of resources!
Anybody else think that the concept in the back left behind S-17317-33 resembles a Studebaker Avanti?
Meanwhile, S-17317-18 reminds me of the Granada/Monarch. Very Mercedes-ish, IMO.
It’s a small image to judge from but, IMHO, that is the nicest of the lot. Not sure about the resemblance to an Avanti (at first glance, the front end looks BMW-ish) but the proportions and stance look better than any of the main images and the side scoop matching the line of the C-pillar is a nice touch.
A friend the next street over bought a brand new 1974 Mustang Mach 1 with the solid lifter 2.8 V6 (years later, my 84 Bronco II would have that same Cologne V6). Light metallic green, light green interior. 4 speed. Being a sophomore in high school, knowing what those gas lines were doing, I loved that car then, as I still do, today. Today, I give Ford; Iacocca, Deuce, all of them, credit for the guts to react to the arab oil embargoes in taking the Mustang down to it’s original roots with the II. But these styling studies? No thanks. I’d like to see the design studies that gave way to the 1974 II.
I’d certainly love to read something on the ideas and thoughts of Ford Styling, when faced with building a replacement for the Mustang II. As radical as the II was for traditional Mustang buyers, the Jack Telnack designed 1979 made a clean break from everything the styling of the II represented. That’s certainly worthy of an in-depth look!
The Mustang II has the stance of an economy car, not a sporty car. In the three-quarter shots at the end of the article, look how far the wheels are tucked into the fenders. If they had moved the wheels out, oh, six inches or so and lowered the ride height a little it might’ve at least looked the part of a sporty car, even if the most muscle you could get was a castrated 302.
The one photographed in Oct 1970 is a winner! Apes the F bodies a little, but looks great.
Are we sure the car in the Heading is a Mustang and not a Pinto? I swear it looks just like the Pinto my brother’s girlfriend had down to the color which I can’t find listed under the Mustang search.
Personally I love S-17317, and it is kind of fascinating how they’d already dialed-in the Fox-body roofline a decade ahead of time.
But if that was too radical for them, then S-16184 was basically a more interesting version of the production Mustang II. Those few changes just made it so much prettier. WHY did Detroit have to be so damn boring in the 1970s?!? Styling has nothing to do with any oil embargo. Just make your slow cars beautiful!
The one with the skirted rear wheel reminds me of something 80s. Maybe a Lincoln? Probably without the skirted wheels, but similar vibe.
Okay, take S-17303-28 and narrow the center grille by about 2/3. Keep the fender line, though, and put in Porsche 928 style lay-back headlights on them!
Now you’ve got some Autopian level weirdness!!!
The 4th concept looks more like a Mercedes 450SLC to me than a Fiat. It also looks more like early 80s Ford than 70s so maybe it took time to percolate.
The first one looks like some of the “safety cars” of the era, I’m glad it got nixed.
It would have been a lovely Cougar.
I personally know the designer of the Mustang II (Who has been retired for quite a long time now) and when I asked him about the Mustang II and he replied that the final version of the Mustang II design was not what he would of chose.There were several other versions that he would of chose if it were entirely up to him.
He also designed the Ford Probe, which he was rather proud of and when I asked him about those strange protrusions in the hood of the Probe, (near the windshield) he explained to me that they were necessary to accommodate the top of the MacPherson struts while maintaining a low hood profile.
He is a very interesting dude to say the least.
Wow! He absolutely deserves an autopian interview. Preferably by Adrian.
And you mean the bumps on the first gen’s hood, right? I always wondered about those, so thank you!
Yes, the first generation. I always referred to those protrusions as “pimples” 🙂
I second this motion. Shooting Brake, see if you can hook up your friend with Adrian or another member of the gang. We would all benefit greatly.
I have the horrific feeling that Iacocca stuck his fingers in the final choice here.
I honestly don’t know, because I didn’t ask him, But it was either Iaccoca or Hank the Deuce.I do know for a fact that Hank LOATHED small cars ( according to my friend) and he(Hank) preferred the long hood on the Mustang II.
It never ceases to amaze me how short-sighted CEOs can be about their business.
HF2 also utterly refused to consider front wheel drive, which was something Iacocca and Hal Sperlich were interested in pursuing, to bring something similar to the Ford Fiesta to the American market. Both men eventually landed at Chrysler, and their ideas became the K car and the minivan, we’ll before Ford brought anything to the US market
That is insane! I understand the tradition of the time to rear wheel drive cars, but the sales numbers by the imports should’ve convinced him to offer it in that class of car.
Here’s a story for you. I grew up in Highland Park and didn’t know that Chrysler’s World Headquarters was there until they announced their move to Auburn Hills. I was literally seven blocks away! If I had known, I would’ve harassed them every day until I got a job.
They were in such dire straits at the time that our driver ed cars were Cavaliers instead of Omnis! We did get Chrysler cars that were unfortunately crashed into underpasses by car carriers for the auto shop.
If Ford woulda dropped that wedge shape in 1974 or whatever, they’d be a completely different company today. I think that would have sold very well and propelled them on a different path than they are on now.
The maroon front three-quarter view (with jock and babes) looks very Pinto-y.
That’s because it is. The II is built around pinto underpinnings rather than the prior nimitz class chassis.
I briefly drove a 4cyl hatchback one and it honestly wasn’t a terrible drive, it was slow for certain but it handled fairly well for a car of the era.
People often call the Mustang II ugly which I’ve never agreed with. It was the Pinto underpinnings, not the looks, that gave it its reputation, even though it was hugely successful sales-wise. Now the first two options shown here are truly ugly cars. I like them, but wow. That second one with the ’67-’70 T-bird grille is really something.
S-17615-10. The Bishop needs to take that through to the current day in an altered universe. It sorta looks like a Ford take on the Saab Sonnet.
Take away the grille and tell me that was an early mockup of the original 300ZX, and I’d believe you without question.
That giant hoodscoop one, the fender lines on that one are giving me 80s Firebird vibes.
I can see the influence of the 1967-69 Thunderbird in that grille.
Okay I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought that!
The one photo with the guy looks like Loki traversing the multiverse of madness. I think he is going around to other Earth’s and bringing back their designs.
The RX-7 looking one with the Fiat 124 looking one’s front end would have been cool. Either one of those concepts could have been a hit as there were though.
The Capri is the real Mustang II
It should’ve gone like this:
64-68 original Mustang
69-86 Euro Capri
87-97 Probe
98-04 New Edge Cougar
05+ “modern” S197/S550 Mustang and up
Okay, I’ll bite/fight! Mine:
The 69-70 Mustang is awesome, so I’d have kept that around; I’d have started the Mustang II in 71 for a few years of good V8s so there was time to prepare the platform for the energy crisis years/have banked some goodwill beforehand.
I’d have kept the Fox for the ’80s, as at heart, its Fairmont roots aren’t dissimilar to the original’s Falcon.
I wouldn’t have gone with a FWD model at any point for the same reason Ford didn’t – too much of a different feel, something that people cued in on even back then.
The trick would be what to do as the ’90s rolled around. With the benefit of hindsight, I’d probably say start the S197 then, but…
So you took it from RWD to FWD back to RWD? That’s a choice I guess.
The Ford Maverick of the same era is the real Mustang II…or should have been, IMHO.
Considering it was built on the Falcon platform and the fastback styling- Yes.
The 3rd one (1970) would have stylistically been a hit. That has the right proportions end to end….
It looks like what a Mustang would have been if GM had designed it.
Ha, I was going to say it predicted the rear quarter of the modern Camaro (and current gen, Camaro-cosplay Mustang)….
The ’70’s amazingly crazy front end did seem to actually more or less make its way into production – looks like the front end from the first year (’79) Fox Body ‘stang?
I really like the 4th one from the top, the Mustang II would have acquired a completely different reputation if that had been built
These are cool concepts. I still prefer the Mustang II concepts from the early to mid sixties. Lot of commonality between the designs in two different decades, including a wedge-shaped design.
One of my dreams to eventually see the ’63 Mustang II concept, currently in the possession of the Detroit Historical Society. I understand it still runs just fine, and they even occasionally take it out to events.
Closest I ever came to seeing it was an AMT model kit.
I have a Hot Wheels version of it, which I esp. love for being surprisingly accurate (it is HW after all) – white with blue interior, with that unique centered over-the-body blue stripe.
The last one is also a split model with what is known as an A side and a B side; in other words two different themes on the same model.
All I keep seeing are those fantastic slotted 5-lug mag wheels. Wow…
But there keeps appearing weird bodies attached to them for some reason.
The last one has a lot of Capri in the window lines.