Allpar Forums banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The 64-67 Mustang gets all the love. The only good thing you can say about it which is personel taste thats it better looking.
The 65,66 Barracuda with the ho 273 was faster, it handled alot better and it was more cormfatble and it was a more useful car with a much better back seat that folded down and what can 1 say about that great back window.
comments............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
I'm sure the folks at Chrysler have asked themselves this same question a million times.

Extra salt in the wound was the Barracuda was introduced before the Mustang.

As I saw it unfold back in the day, the Barracuda was considered a Dart/Valiant with little marketing.

The Mustang was promoted greatly as something new and wasn't considered a Falcon.

Didn't even have a fastback at first, but many options and packages.

Lee Iaccoca was a marketing man, the Mustang proved it!!

Thanks
Randy
 

·
Got parts?
Joined
·
2,610 Posts
Handling was bad in the Mustang because the chassis was made for the basic Falcon, not the long hood and shorter trunk of the Mustang. I recall a Michigander talking about a trip he took up north during a snowstorm during the winter of 1964-5. He counted 10 cars that spun out into the median; 6 of them were Mustangs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,177 Posts
Mustang was later by only two weeks. Barracuda was basically an appearance package (heavily modified Valiant) while Mustang was a whole new sporty line with better proportions that happened to be built on the Falcon platform. It didn't hurt that it was $300.00 cheaper (11.5%) too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
The Mustang didn't happen to be built on the Falcon platform, it had to be.

Ford management wasn't really sold on the idea, especially so soon after the Edsel failure.

Iaccoca pushed the project through, he was marketing genius, and the Mustangs success proved it.

Chrysler, or GM could have done the same thing easily but no one there had the vision.

With 20-20 hindsight the G.M. introduced the Camaro and Firebird a few years later.

Chrysler followed suit with the 1970 Challenger and Barracuda, a little late.

While I'm not a Ford fan I love the history and Iaccoca made it happen.

Chrysler had a suitable platform but GM didn't even have one at the time.

Thanks
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Gm had the chevyII (nova).
But the point being, the barracuda was the much better sporty car.
The Mustang is the perfect example of style over function.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,177 Posts
First gen Charger had to have been created because of the Barracuda and it's success (It was a marketing success). However, it was not a real seller until the 2nd gen in 68 with it's own dedicated body. Style is always the #1 reason a model sells well. Poor quality will restrict that sell but if it is styled correctly, people will beat a path to the door. Best example I can think of in Chrysler was the PT. Some of the first went to rental car companies because of the lack of confidence in it and they quickly pulled them aside and waited the minimum time and sold them for over list. PT was not a glorious mechanical product, but the package was in extreme demand because of the style/seating. The complete 1957 line drew a lot of buyers too. however, they dropped off real soon over quality.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,969 Posts
The Mustang was among the first cars marketed to women. Availability of either coupe, convertible, or fastback helped broaden its appeal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
The 1962-1967 Nova was a disaster, suspension, and handling wise.

The 1967 Camaro platform was used for the 1968 Nova.

Styling is subjective but marketing is what sold the Mustang, and not the Barracuda.

Folks lined up to see the Mustang, before they even saw one, the hype was sensational.

Better or worse, the Mustang won races all over the world, marketing paid off !!

Barracuda remained stagnet, Mustang was continually evolving, Shelby gave Mustang a great boost.

GT 350 and GT 350 H rental cars, marketing was king in every segment imaginable.

From secretary's, family's, nerds, cool guys, racers, boy racers, to old folks, there was a Mustang for everyone.

For what ever reason Chrysler didn't want to challenge the Mustang sales phenomenon.

Barracuda had tiny wheel bearings, goofy bolt pattern and 273 235 H.P.

Mustang soon went to conventional bolt pattern and 289 with 200-225-271 even 306 HP.

They had all bases covered, Coupe, Convertible then Fastback body styles.

Mustang option lists were probably among the longest in history, plus dealer accessories.

Bench seat, buckets, luxury interior, Pony groups, overhead consoles, etc, etc.

Honestly, I don't think the Barracuda was a better sporty car, Mustang had too many choices.

Thanks
Randy

Gm had the chevyII (nova).
But the point being, the barracuda was the much better sporty car.
The Mustang is the perfect example of style over function.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
PT is a great example of a runaway success until its redesign.

Here in Canada if one wanted to buy a new PT you had to sign a promise not to sell it into the U.S. and still had to pay over list.

US dealers and reps were combing the dealers with shill buyers as you had to prove you were a local to buy one.

There were PT clubs all over, youngsters, old timers, everyone in between and it was building momentum!!

It seemed Daimler didn't like the PT and never supported it. What a shame.

And, you can still but a Mustang!!!

Thanks
Randy


Best example I can think of in Chrysler was the PT.
PT was not a glorious mechanical product, but the package was in extreme demand because of the style/seating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
The 1962-1967 Nova was a disaster, suspension, and handling wise.

The 1967 Camaro platform was used for the 1968 Nova.

Styling is subjective but marketing is what sold the Mustang, and not the Barracuda.

Folks lined up to see the Mustang, before they even saw one, the hype was sensational.

Better or worse, the Mustang won races all over the world, marketing paid off !!

Barracuda remained stagnet, Mustang was continually evolving, Shelby gave Mustang a great boost.

GT 350 and GT 350 H rental cars, marketing was king in every segment imaginable.

From secretary's, family's, nerds, cool guys, racers, boy racers, to old folks, there was a Mustang for everyone.

For what ever reason Chrysler didn't want to challenge the Mustang sales phenomenon.

Barracuda had tiny wheel bearings, goofy bolt pattern and 273 235 H.P.

Mustang soon went to conventional bolt pattern and 289 with 200-225-271 even 306 HP.

They had all bases covered, Coupe, Convertible then Fastback body styles.

Mustang option lists were probably among the longest in history, plus dealer accessories.

Bench seat, buckets, luxury interior, Pony groups, overhead consoles, etc, etc.

Honestly, I don't think the Barracuda was a better sporty car, Mustang had too many choices.

Thanks
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
The majority of both cars were bought with 6 cyl. The /6 was a much better motor especiily with 3 speed torqflite
The vast majority of Mustangs were your basic coupe. The 300hp 289 was very rare.
Both the /6 and the 273 made the Barracuda the better sports car and a better everyday car.
But Ford did rule on marketing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,177 Posts
The majority of both cars were bought with 6 cyl. The /6 was a much better motor especiily with 3 speed torqflite
The vast majority of Mustangs were your basic coupe. The 300hp 289 was very rare.
Both the /6 and the 273 made the Barracuda the better sports car and a better everyday car.
But Ford did rule on marketing.
As much as I thought the Cuda was a good design, Mustang read sexy especially to young ladies. Cuda was never sexy nor had the options. Mustang/Falcon suspension was horrible but was not held accountable.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,817 Posts
The Falcon had a horrible front end design, if I remember the shocks where mounted on the upper control arms and the lower ball joint took a beating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
Mustang, Falcon and Fairlane etc. had both the spring and shock on the upper control arm.

Due to this design, the upper ball joint was the load carrying one, not the lower.

Not a great setup but approx 10 times better then the 62-67 Nova/Acadian.

AMC used the same design and it proved sturdy, although early ones used trunnions instead of ball joints.

Barracuda front suspension was pretty good overall, with torsion bars and a much better power steering system.

Thanks
Randy
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,835 Posts
Both through styling and marketing the Mustang did a better job of hiding its economy car roots than Barracuda did. Plus the public never warmed to the glass fastback styling (look what happened to Charger sales when it gave up the fastback!).

Mechanically the Barracuda was the better car. Betamax was better than VHS. Sometimes the better choice doesn't always win the sales race.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
In 1967 I bought a 65 Barracuda 273 2bbl & 4 speed. There was a guy in town with a hopped up Falcon. He said it was a 260 but ?? I used to blow his doors off on a regular basis. He eventually became frustrated and stopped trying to bait me into a run. Thing I most disliked was the lame 650 X 13 tires and wheels it came with. I had a really hard time finding 14" chrome reverse in the 5 on 4" bolt pattern. I think the biggest I ran was G70 rear and E70 front. No clearance problems. Converted to a J C Whitney dual exhaust. Went thru 2 rear ends and a clutch. The Inland shifter was just OK at best. One of the things I liked best were the front vents with the doors that opened. Good place to stash beverages you wanted to keep cool. The fold down rear seat and big back window made a great place to stargaze. Had the car for 4 years and a lot of fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,172 Posts
Good story from an owner back in the day, I always likes 273's!!

That goofy wheel bolt pattern was a curse on older A bodys.

Falcons and Mustangs started out with 260 V8's before 289's, same as Cobras.

Fairlanes and Meteors even had a 221 V8 at first, not sure if the Falcon ever got it.

I remember the vents below the dash that could hold about 6 beverages behind their doors.

I never needed them but many did!!

Cool story on the duals, I don't think even the 273 Hi Perf had duals available , they had a large single.

Thanks
Randy



In 1967 I bought a 65 Barracuda 273 2bbl & 4 speed. There was a guy in town with a hopped up Falcon. He said it was a 260 but ?? I used to blow his doors off on a regular basis. He eventually became frustrated and stopped trying to bait me into a run. Thing I most disliked was the lame 650 X 13 tires and wheels it came with. I had a really hard time finding 14" chrome reverse in the 5 on 4" bolt pattern. I think the biggest I ran was G70 rear and E70 front. No clearance problems. Converted to a J C Whitney dual exhaust. Went thru 2 rear ends and a clutch. The Inland shifter was just OK at best. One of the things I liked best were the front vents with the doors that opened. Good place to stash beverages you wanted to keep cool. The fold down rear seat and big back window made a great place to stargaze. Had the car for 4 years and a lot of fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pt006

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,672 Posts
Early Barracudas were fugly.
Plain and simple: styling sells cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,815 Posts
. . . Falcons and Mustangs started out with 260 V8's before 289's, same as Cobras. Fairlanes and Meteors even had a 221 V8 at first, not sure if the Falcon ever got it. . . .
The Ford Fairlane and Mercury Meteor debuted in the fall of 1961 as 1962 model intermediate size car. Its size put it between the compact Falcon and Comet and the full size Galaxie and Monterrey. V8 engines were popular then so Ford decided to build a new lightweight, thin wall casting engine. The first rendition was 221 cubic inches which by coincidence (or not) was the size of the first flathead V8 offered in Ford cars in 1932. Ford had big block V8 engines of 352 and 390 and 406 cubic inches but would have made these smaller cars extremely nose heavy. Also the big block V8 engines were too wide for the smaller car engine compartments.

By the spring of 1962 Ford was introducing sportier package options on the cars with bucket seats, consoles and larger V8 engines. Thus the 260 inch was born. It did not get installed into the Falcon until the spring of 1963. It was the base V8 for the Mustang when it arrived on the scene in April 1964. The 289 V8 was introduced in the spring of 1963 as an option on the full size Ford and as a high performance tuned option for the Fairlane. With the start of 1965 model year cars in the fall of 1964, the 260 V8 was no longer made and the 289 V8 became the base option V8 on cars.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top