They had a lot of bad press on the 1980's turbocharged 4 and they are starting to have issues with the current ones. The new ones are pushing higher mileage now and failures inside the motor are increasing.
In 1986 I bought a Mustang S.V.O. off the showroom floor. The 1986 had flush headlights and the engine had been bumped from the 175HP of the 1984 to 225 for the 1986 with a 0-60 of 7.2 seconds. I loved that car but spent more time in the shop than on the road. The S.V.O. also ate alternators, had to have a spare with me at all times; it definitely needed a larger alternator than the 65A it came with. Eventually Autozone with lifetime warranty refused to give me another one and refunded the money for it. Routing the spark plug wires over the engine, under the intercooler was a bad choice as well. Still, have many fond memories of an underappreciated car. If I had a dime for every time I had to pop the hood to prove it was a 2.3L 4 cylinder, I could have bought another new S.V.O.
@@jamesjohnson4163 I was just a kid in the 1970's but one thing for sure there were many more pretty girls in the 70's than 80's and thousands of times more than today. Girls started getting a little more chubby in the 80's then this trend went through the roof.
I bought an '84 SVO back in 1999 with 17,000 miles, which I still have & will probably never part with! Along with Buick GN, was one of my favorite 2 U.S. cars of the 80's.
... 😆 lol...no ...no it wasn't...I had a 5liter mustang GT and it barely got into the 14's and was considered slow at the track. If you weren't doing mid to low 13s you were considered slow.
It's a TURBO. Also it's slower than an '85 Fiero GT, which is shocking to me, having owned one of those in the 90s -- right after I owned an '82 Mustang, that might have been the slowest, biggest piece of junk car I've ever owned.
@@netrioterWould like to see a new ecoboost 2.3 with a tune and a 6 speed transplanted into an ‘86 SVO. Thinking 400 hp would be pretty easy…and a blast on a road course!
@@kevinnorwood7355 Yes! A Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang though... A 4 cylinder Mustang is just not appealing! Emission regulations and oil crisis back in the late 70s-early 80s were part of the reason why the SVO was created to begin with...
@@kevinnorwood7355 Whatever the reason was, I'm glad that the crisis situation calmed down by the mid-80s and the most powerful Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, ... models continued having *V8 engines* in the following years and decades!
16" rims, ( I think the only other was corvette that had them in '84 American cars )speed rubber, quad shocks, rebuildable konis, intercooled turbo, supportive seats it was way ahead of its time.
I had an '86 SVO. Great little car. Got great mileage had more power than just about anything short of a V8. My idiot cousin stole it one day and totalled it. I should have totalled him.
I feel ur pain i too had a cousin wreck one of my cars a 96 svt cobra that had custom roush racing stroker motor in it haven t seen that cousin since that was 1999 i probably still would beat his ass if i seen him
Man I love these old reviews. Brings back a lot of memories. This car was high tech back in the day. This was the year I purchased a 1984 Z28 for $10,500.00 My friend had a black turbo thunderbird which had great lines. Look at that baby lean in the turns. Not many people will be doing 80 MPH (LOL) 32MPG for 1984 George Orwell would be proud.
I like the quote that, "the two level spoiler is suppose to provide more road holding down draft at slower speeds say 80 or 90 mph of course, few owner will ever drive that fast" I made it a point to hit triple digits every morning on the way to work in my '89 5.0 ! You have to love rural south Georgia...
Agreed, although often misunderstood, even today (12/2014), the Mustang SVO truly was an amazing car! I still would love to pick another one up, I miss my 85.
@@BuzzLOLOL I believe the 2.3 inline 4 was an original Ford engine. At the time Mazda only had a 2.0 turbo for FWD applications. The new one however, I believe does use some version of the old Mazda MZR 2.3 engine's block, though heavily modified.
I like your daily FLASHBACK series. I loved the cars of the '80s, & '90s. They remind me of a much more simpler time in my life, keep up these old re-runs please.
saacman I had a 79, 85, and 92. All 5.0s. But the one I miss was the last Fox I owned. A 1986 SVO. Modded with a better intercooler, ported exhaust manifold, 3" exhaust pipe, and a little bigger turbo. At 18 PSI It was a handful for anything on the street in the early to mid 90s.
Yep! The 80s ruled! The music, the cars, the bighair/hvy makeup'd horny girls, the LONG weekends, awesome movies&tv, very few nutjob liberals trying to ruin the country... some great days!
I own 85 SVO and I have to say its always a hoot to drive, for all you people out there putting this car down has not driven one , it mite change your opinion !! Its a keeper.
I was a teen when this car came out. It's funny to think that the Mustang was only 20 years old at the time. 1964 seemed like so long ago, it may as well have been the Stone Age.
@@roddydykes7053 It just got me thinking about how our perspective on time can change as we age. 1964 was before I was born, and I hadn't even lived 20 years. Now, 20 years doesn't seem like such a long time 😁
The 1985.5 & '86 versions had 205 & 200 hp respectively. They performed much better than the '84 due to engine improvement , suspension tweeks and 3.73:1 axle ratio. The SVO main reason for failure in sales was due to price and Fords lack of marketing the product properly. If SVO had a John Coletti type of leader , they probably would never have retired the name plate.
John Doe During the time of the '84 Mustang SVO introduction, The "euro" style composite headlamps were illegal here in the U.S. hence the closed glass halogen type that was installed. I do believe in 1985 that law changed with the intro of the Thunderbird Turbo coupe which sported Ford Motor Company's new coporate face. Sadly the last of the 85 and 86 SVO's sported the Euro styled composites which lived on to the 1987 Mustang 5.0s redesign - gracien69
30 years later Ford has brought back the SVO, that happens to be named as Ford Mustang EcoBoost. It has a 2.3 Liter turbocharged 4 cylinder engine, but the turbo spindle is oil-cooled, instead of the water-cooled turbo from the 1980s. Synthetic Oil is necessary for turbo engines, because they create way too much heat, when the turbo spins at 200,000 rpm. Surprisingly, the EPA fuel economy numbers for the 1984 SVO and the 2015 EcoBoost Mustangs are the same, depending on transmission choice, despite having direct injection with more horsepower and torque.
To me the EcoBoost is more of a Turbo GT replacement because it has no unique features and upgraded tech above the GT. The SVO even matched the output of the GT each year it was produced basically (Less Torque Of Course ) (ie) 84' models both produced 175 hp forthe GT&SVO .. 85'.5 210 hp GT vs 205hp SVO and finally '86 Both produced 200hp , The 2015 EcoBoost @310 hp is far behind the 435 hp GT.
The fastest time i have seen by magazines for a 2010 GT with the track pack was 0-60 mph in 4.9 sec and 1/4 mile times of 13.6@104 mph. 2015 Mustang EcoBoost i've seen 0-60 mph in 5.6 sec. and 1/4 mile times of 14.1 sec @97.8 mph. Still not quite what the SVO was vs GT.
AmericanMuscleCar :We check out our stock 2015 Mustang EcoBoost track results and challenge a 2014 Mustang V6 to see who can get down the track the fastest... The crew at AmericanMuscle.com just landed another 2015 Ford Mustang, this time a 2.3L EcoBoost 4 cylinder engine equipped with an automatic transmission, premium package, EcoBoost performance package and 50 years appearance package. We wanted to see what this thing could do in stock form going right to the track from the showroom floor. Equipped with 87 octane, stock tires and tire pressure and less than 50 miles on the odometer, our 2015 Mustang Ecoboost went 14.3 in its best time in crappy track conditions. Even with the terrible prep, we're confident these cars could see high-13 second timeslips consistently on a good day. Make sure to keep an eye out for all of the things that we have planned for the EcoBoost crowd. There's a ton of potential for big gains and we're excited to start ripping her apart. And for all things 2015 Mustang, keep it right here at AmericanMuscle.com.................. Waiting on more vids of owners/tuners running them stock with a manual trans and 93 Octane.
I ABSOLUTELY LOVED THIS CAR!!!! I saw one commercial as a kid in high school and LOST MY MIND!!! I was always a Stang freak and this was SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!
THE 88 OR 89 SVO MUSTANG STICK SHIFT IS THE MORE POWERFUL,CAME WITH 195 HP,FOR THAT YEARS WAS A LOT,THAT ENGINE WITH ROLLER ROCKERS CAM FROM RANGER 95,AND RAISE THE BOOST CAN HIT 250 HP,NOT BAD FOR A 30/40 YEARS OLD DESING,PLUS HAVE FORGED PISTONS,AND SOME PPL SAY CRANK AND RODS,BUT 100% SURE HAVE FORGED PISTONS!
The SVO was basically a off the shelf parts cars. Ford pulled parts from over platforms to build the SVO. The end result was one cool car. I had an older 85 SVO and really enjoyed driving it.
I was/still in love w/my 1985 1/2 SVO. 32 Yrs. later, the kids have moved out/on their own & I'm looking to relive my youth & find/buy Another Grey on Grey 1985 & a half. My wife calls it "Dumb" Not to me & So many other guy's who Loved these cars. Ya only get One life to have fun. hyway
If I didn’t know any better I’d think the SVO was a JDM lol Ya got Styling inline 4 Forced induction Offset hood scoop Headlight and taillight pattern remind me of a hatchback Corolla
Totally understand what you mean! 😂 It's a cool car, no doubt! The SVO might have had good performance but it having a 4 CYLINDER TURBO was a turn-off to be honest. It's just not appealing... Big V8 power is part of the American car culture! It's part of the appeal of an American sports car! If I want a 4 or 6 cylinder car, I'll get a German or Japanese car! 👍 The same goes for the BUICK GNX from the 80s. It had a V6 TURBO engine and good performance, it was really fast but... a V6 in an American sports car? No thanks! It also didn't last long in the market just like the SVO... *Emission regulations and oil crisis at that time were all part of the reason why those models got created to begin with...* American car manufacturers like Chevrolet, Dodge and Ford also didn't use 4 and 6 cylinder engines for their *most powerful* models, even in the following years and even decades! They always used *V8 engines* as they should! 4 and 6 cylinder versions exist, especially nowadays for a reason... but no one really cares about them! 👉 Go overseas and ask people what comes to their mind when they hear "American muscle car" or even "American sports car": *Big V8 Power* is one of the thoughts!
I am a Mopar guy, but I love these cars. I knew a guy who had about 3 or 4 of them. He even restored a green 1984 ex-rental. They were unlike any other fox body I've driven/ridden in. It's a shame there aren't more of these cars out there. I guess everybody still wanted V8s and couldn't justify the extra dough. They were worth the extra cash for sure.
Shelby Performance managed over 500hp out of the 2.5 Chrysler engine. They said emissions is what held them back from production. Ford, GM, and Shelby did all they could for the time.
I had that exact same car. Cool looking and unique...but sooooo many issues. After quickly becoming a money pit I had to give her up. We certainly had some good times together and to this day I think about her often...
One of Ford's best futureproof sleepers. The blocks were essentially bulletproof. People nowadays have these same SVO's in the 9s with large turbos running higher boost. In the end they're easier to take into low low quarter mile times than almost anything produced before or since.
I had a Merkur XR4TI I loved it. It was the same chasis and drivetrain. It smoked everything on the strip that it faced. I had it up to 130mph on a favorite back road.
@@Kev27RS Mustang SVOs are more rare and were better Road Racers then he GTs. The Merkur/Sierra/Scorpio was on the same platform as the Mustang. It had a considerable racing pedigree in Europe.
@@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869 The SVO had good performance but wasn't appealing by having a 4 cylinder... A Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang! If I want a 4 or 6 cylinder car I'll get a German or Japanese car! Yes, the Sierra was quite popular in Europe!
I was thinking the same thing, what killed the brand exactly? they looked so futuristic at the time, you would think it would of been successful. Everyone I've driven felt like the build quality was kinda shotty.
+Josh d When Saturn was created, it aimed to take on the Japanese imports' most successful categories: subcompacts (Honda Civic at the time) and compacts (Toyota Corolla, since 1991). That's what the S-Series was aiming at, after all! But, as you may have noticed over the years, Saturn began to lose their tracks, as they were getting into Chevrolet's and even Pontiac's territory! Big cars, like the Outlook and even a sports car, the Sky! But, the Wiki says that the project was overly ambitious and that it drained 5 billion dollars from other car projects. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_Corporation I say that the Saturn project was a clear effort, something built with GM's own powers to take on the Japanese. It was certainly much better than the GEO project, which was all about rebadged Japanese cars (Storm, Tracker, Prizm, Metro etc.). I don't understand: you build something with your own powers to take on a rival (Saturn) and at the same time you build the rival's cars under your own badge (GEO)! That's the stupidest thing a CEO has ever thought! How stupid did they think you were??? No offense! I think the GEO project drained money because, they didn't import the cars, they produced them in America, under NUMMI! And I've thought about something else too; what if the Chevy Cobalt had the Saturn badge? ''Saturn Cobalt''? I mean, it was a compact car, it had just the right sized body and motors to do the job! Also, the Chevy Cavalier: the 1996 gen-car could be called the Saturn Cavalier! Real investment to take on the Japanese!
+MafiosoItaliano458 apparently very stupid, and they didnt even seem to use good cars to start with! maybe the tracker was ok. And yeah i see what you mean with the sky even though i think its a great looking car, but who wants a a Saturn sports car? same with the redline models. and huh Saturn cobalt, doesn't really have a ring to it! but if they made it a little more stylish and gave it a cool name I bet it would have sold like hot cakes! I think the business model was a great idea at the time but mismanagement just seemed to drive them off their original plans! That's a shame.
Saturn was discontinued during GM's bankruptcy because it really didn't have anything in the development pipeline that was saleable. The only real Saturn was the original S-series which although it sold well didn't generate the profits needed to invest in R&D for a replacement or additional models. Saturn had replacement models ready to go at the time of GM's bankruptcy but they were mostly rebadged OPEL's. GM was trying to sell OPEL at the time and if it had it would have to pay whomever to build Saturn's for them thus eliminating any potential profit. GM decided to keep OPEL after they had discontinued Saturn and the models that were meant to new Saturn's became Buick's.
I loved these cars. In an age when power meant having a v8, these cars delivered it on a 4 popper. It was a great cross over for motorheads of the time because of the familiar Foxbody’s but with added euro engineering to make it a true performance car. It’s because of the appeal and performance of this car that the US has been able to push the market toward fuel efficient performance cars as Europe and Japan had been doing.
It's a cool car, no doubt! The SVO might have had good performance but it having a 4 CYLINDER TURBO was a turn-off to be honest. It's just not appealing... Big V8 power is part of the American car culture! It's part of the appeal of an American sports car! If I want a 4 or 6 cylinder car, I'll get a German or Japanese car! 👍 The same goes for the BUICK GNX from the 80s. It had a V6 TURBO engine and good performance, it was really fast but... a V6 in an American sports car? No thanks! It also didn't last long in the market just like the SVO... *Emission regulations and oil crisis at that time were all part of the reason why those models got created to begin with...* American car manufacturers like Chevrolet, Dodge and Ford also didn't use 4 and 6 cylinder engines for their *most powerful* models, even in the following years and even decades! They always used *V8 engines* as they should! 4 and 6 cylinder versions exist, especially nowadays for a reason... but no one really cares about them! 👉 Go overseas and ask people what comes to their mind when they hear "American muscle car" or even "American sports car": *Big V8 Power* is one of the thoughts!
@@Kev27RS at the time I was really more about the body style but thought that they should have put a 5.0 in it. I was still impressed with the car anyway, but felt like it could have been so much more with a v8.
@@matthewbittenbender9191 I agree! There's a reason for the SVO's existence but I'm glad that the crisis situation calmed down by the mid-80s and the most powerful Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, ... models continued having *V8 engines* in the following years and decades!
80's was the "BEST" 5.0's...Iroc-Z's...Grand National's street racing was something to look forward to on the weekends...Rosa Parks...6 mile Mt. Elliot...the Blvd...French Rd...City Air Port...The Cemetery man I can go on and on bring back the 80's
I am old enough to remember when the SVO was the shiznit. Never got to drive the "tang" version but did get to wring out a very clean turbo T-Bird that was just awesome.
Right on! But I have to mention that if you're old enough to remember the SVO was the shiznit...you might be too old to use that word to describe it. JK
I don't get all the comments regarding the front end. I think the sunken headlights look awesome. The flush versions have a thick rubber seal around them that looks sloppy. At the time I thought the 87 design was the best. Now though I really like the 82 "tang" styling the best. I also like the grills in the quarter Windows. The flat glass panel on 87 and newer mustangs looks really awful compared to the svo/gts of previous yrs. if I could build a fox body I'd choose a 93 cobra body kit, svo quarter Windows, and a 82 front end. Engine and interior from a 93 cobra. The interiors from mid 80s mustangs were hideous. Esp the fake wood. The svo interior was far superior for that time. The thick leather wheel and shifter made the svo seem far more quality than other mustangs.
Schnell Bill I love it too. I want my car to scream 80's and this does, lol. I'm here because I'm currently thinking about buying a really clean 84 SVO I just came across, so unique
It was so ugly only a Momma could love it but I do miss Ford's SVO cars. That was a lot of ingenuity for way back in 84. Thank you again MW for these so great vintage videos!
Emission Regulations and especially the oil crisis back in the late 70s - early 80s were all part of the reason why the SVO got created to begin with... Thankfully it didn't last long and American car manufacturers kept putting V8s in their most powerful models in the following years and even decades! A Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang...
An engine from the pinto and mustang II, in 1971 the pinto started life with this engine it could have used the svo turbo to move it faster so it wouldn't get rear ended, and explode into a fireball!
@@jimgarrity2414 I will rely on the leaked memo from a Ford Exec. Let them burn alive it will cost 7$ a car to fix and we have lawyers on retainer anyway.
The 1984-1986 SVO is my favorite Mustang of all time. It wasn’t until 2005 (fifth generation) that I would take notice again of the Mustang. When the sixth generation Mustang was revealed for 2015, I knew I had to finally buy one.
Yes, cars had less weight back then considering extra safety equiptment , computers, and heft. Back then I thought the five-speed manual super coupe was huge compared to a Mustang 5.0... but park it next to a new Toyota Corolla and see how tiny cars were back then - gracien69
Yes, but cars now have a lot of safety equiptment, computers, and other heft installed on them . Im just recalling how I thought the T-Bird super coupe was heavy and large compared to a Mustang GT, but park one against a new Toyota Corolla and see how tiny cars were back then - gracien69
Hang on to it.they were a great car and almost impossible to find now with the original engine in it.if you find one now the original rims are gone along with the engine etc.
@@thunderroad7289 So far still have. Unfortunately mine did not come with the original wheels, though the engine is original. Kids & no time means its still sitting where it was 5 years ago when I made this comment. Need to get the old girl running again!
Chris Curtis you can find the original rims today. You got the original motor and that’s huge. you have a car most of us dream of having . I wish I had never traded mine in. Enjoy it when you can
When this car came out, I saw a good number of them shaded as Black and white Police interceptors... Saw one of them smoke and catch up to a '83 Chevy Camaro on the freeway... Crazy how a turbocharger can twerk up a four/six cylinder engine to nearly match a big V-8 back then...
16.7 second 1/4 mile? I think the guy spun the tires for 16.7 seconds during the launch @ 5:18. Jeeze. Lighten up on the throttle until it grabs. I hope they weren't timing the 1/4 mile runs with launches like that.
@@metaljew4456 For a car with a four-banger from 30 years ago? No it's actually not that bad. Plus there's the fact that Motorweek always understates numbers and often show slower results than other shows or magazines
I test drove a couple ‘85 svo settled on the cheaper ‘83 beautifully maintained black hatchback 5.0 with the moonroof. The car was $4600 and in immaculate condition , no accident 1 owner. To this day, this is how I purchase vehicles.
I absolutely loved the look of these. These were probably my favorite Fox Bodies, right after the '85-'86 GT or the Capri bubble back. I always liked the idea of a "different" Mustang, the turbo 4 and wildly unique styling set this one apart from the sea of bland lookalike Mustangs.
I bought a black one in 1988 when I was 21. Cost me a lot and 16” tires were really expensive then. Car ran great and was fun. Unfortunately a tree fell on it in a storm and just wasn’t fixed properly so I sold it. Haven’t seen one on the road in a long time. Wish I still had it and my 1986 RZ350 Yamaha I bought new.
I had a 1986 brand new. When I came in to look at it at the Ford Dealership they wasn’t going to let me test drive it because I was 19 , after showing the dealership the $5000 I had saved up to buy my first car they let me drive it and then I purchased it. It was over $17,000 back then. I could have sworn my SVO had 17 inch rims but a friend told me his had 16 inch rims ?
Started with out of all things the turbo fairmont unheard of but if you know Ford’s fairmont was one of the first Lima I4 super rare hard to find & not really known about.
Why can't the other auto programs put their vintage reviews up? These are fascinating.
top gear vintage videos are out there. not sure if bbc put them out
@@dsruddell You mean the ones from ten-fifteen years ago in 240p?
Farts McGee because TH-cam doesn't pay anything worthwhile for them to do so.
I found @5:15 the most fascinating.
Mid 16's lol...that car would run 14's with me in it.
Scary when it was 1984 and he says 20 years ago the Mustang was released.. time flys
The irony that 30 years later Ford does a full circle and bring back a 2.3 I4 turbo back into its pony car...
+Trades46 Pinto Power Forever!
***** Yeah it is a throughly modern engine, but the idea behind it is still very much the same.
Thats what I was thinkin. if they kept going this way, maybe the us would have had good engines by now.
It’s a Mazda engine.
They had a lot of bad press on the 1980's turbocharged 4 and they are starting to have issues with the current ones. The new ones are pushing higher mileage now and failures inside the motor are increasing.
In 1986 I bought a Mustang S.V.O. off the showroom floor. The 1986 had flush headlights and the engine had been bumped from the 175HP of the 1984 to 225 for the 1986 with a 0-60 of 7.2 seconds. I loved that car but spent more time in the shop than on the road. The S.V.O. also ate alternators, had to have a spare with me at all times; it definitely needed a larger alternator than the 65A it came with. Eventually Autozone with lifetime warranty refused to give me another one and refunded the money for it. Routing the spark plug wires over the engine, under the intercooler was a bad choice as well. Still, have many fond memories of an underappreciated car. If I had a dime for every time I had to pop the hood to prove it was a 2.3L 4 cylinder, I could have bought another new S.V.O.
I’m hooked on these old reviews. Damn I miss the 80s
I miss the 70's
@@jamesjohnson4163 old man
@@J.Gainez getting old is a privilege that is denied to many.
@@one7decimal2eight some luckier than others
@@jamesjohnson4163 I was just a kid in the 1970's but one thing for sure there were many more pretty girls in the 70's than 80's and thousands of times more than today. Girls started getting a little more chubby in the 80's then this trend went through the roof.
I bought an '84 SVO back in 1999 with 17,000 miles, which I still have & will probably never part with! Along with Buick GN, was one of my favorite 2 U.S. cars of the 80's.
Recommend to buy used one
I still have my 85 1/2 that I bought in 1990. I uncorked my exhaust back in 90 and she ran 14.4 on a cold intercooler.
The older turbo cars are neat. Now everything is so digital. Kinda dig old analog.
Get an ecoboost!
Mine too. I have an 86 GN mint. No SVO yet!
7.9 from a 4 cylinder in the mid 80s was flat out impressive. 7.9 was really impressive period
So true .
Remember when a cavalier z24 was hot? 😉
It actually did it in under 7 seconds..the 85.5 SVO with 25 more HP could outrun an automatic 85 GT with ease. The 5 speed GT..no
... 😆 lol...no ...no it wasn't...I had a 5liter mustang GT and it barely got into the 14's and was considered slow at the track. If you weren't doing mid to low 13s you were considered slow.
It's a TURBO. Also it's slower than an '85 Fiero GT, which is shocking to me, having owned one of those in the 90s -- right after I owned an '82 Mustang, that might have been the slowest, biggest piece of junk car I've ever owned.
@@netrioterWould like to see a new ecoboost 2.3 with a tune and a 6 speed transplanted into an ‘86 SVO. Thinking 400 hp would be pretty easy…and a blast on a road course!
The 5.0 version was the bomb. Torque for days and they lasted forever.
These turned up only 3 psi in boost will eat a 5.0 with a 5 speed and the 3.73 rear
@@netrioter yes but these engine were problematic so even if it did you’d Maybe get a handful of rips before you’re burning oil or coolant lol
@@netrioter Doesn't matter!
A 4 cylinder in Mustang is not appealing...
Wasn't back then and even less nowadays...
MUST HAVE FLOWMASTER EXHAUST!
@@jackdough8164 problematic? How so? I ran 22psi, hot summer days in AZ, on 87 octane, no issues.
This was my dream car as a 15 year old. Loved this car. Sadly the 5.0 was cheaper and faster at least in a straight line.
5.0 or nothing!
@@Kev27RS to each their own.
@@kevinnorwood7355 Yes!
A Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang though...
A 4 cylinder Mustang is just not appealing!
Emission regulations and oil crisis back in the late 70s-early 80s were part of the reason why the SVO was created to begin with...
@@Kev27RS yes and no. It was created by people who liked to go around turns and not just in a straight line. Again to each their own.
@@kevinnorwood7355 Whatever the reason was, I'm glad that the crisis situation calmed down by the mid-80s and the most powerful Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, ... models continued having *V8 engines* in the following years and decades!
16" rims, ( I think the only other was corvette that had them in '84 American cars )speed rubber, quad shocks, rebuildable konis, intercooled turbo, supportive seats it was way ahead of its time.
The 15th Anniversary Trans Am from 1984 had 16” wheels as well.
@@FirebirdDude so did the 84 300zx anniversary edition
I had an '86 SVO. Great little car. Got great mileage had more power than just about anything short of a V8. My idiot cousin stole it one day and totalled it. I should have totalled him.
I feel ur pain i too had a cousin wreck one of my cars a 96 svt cobra that had custom roush racing stroker motor in it haven t seen that cousin since that was 1999 i probably still would beat his ass if i seen him
Dag gone idiot cousins.
Sure
Lmao great line
I grew up on MotorWeek and Sesame Street. Thank you MPT for making me the man I am today
Man I love these old reviews. Brings back a lot of memories. This car was high tech back in the day. This was the year I purchased a 1984 Z28 for $10,500.00 My friend had a black turbo thunderbird which had great lines. Look at that baby lean in the turns. Not many people will be doing 80 MPH (LOL) 32MPG for 1984 George Orwell would be proud.
An 84 Z28 is such a better looking car than this disaster.
Mustang SVO 1984 is engine 2.3, 4 cilinders
I like the quote that, "the two level spoiler is suppose to provide more road holding down draft at slower speeds say 80 or 90 mph of course, few owner will ever drive that fast" I made it a point to hit triple digits every morning on the way to work in my '89 5.0 ! You have to love rural south Georgia...
At least you got the engine that could hold up with that
Loved this Car. My dad gave me his Thunderbird Turbo and bought this machine. Loved it
Every time they call it a "Tang" I wanna vomit
right dude. he could have at least added the 'S'. Stang perhaps.
He has the weirdest way of speaking. I've never heard it called a "tang" before. What the hell?!
Never heard that in my life.
Well then that's on you. That's your tang not mine
It's a tang slaying stang
Best Fox Body ever built! Years ahead of its time..
True, True and True!!!
Few people will ever realize the ability and violent performance of this car. Even in modern standards. With a 4cyl. In 1984
It was violent due to the fit and finish and suspension components
Agreed, although often misunderstood, even today (12/2014), the Mustang SVO truly was an amazing car! I still would love to pick another one up, I miss my 85.
Thank you guys so much for uploading all of these classic episodes!
Had an '86, 215 horsepower and could kick the V8's stop light to stoplight .
Mazda with Mustang badge...
@@BuzzLOLOL no
@@BuzzLOLOL I believe the 2.3 inline 4 was an original Ford engine. At the time Mazda only had a 2.0 turbo for FWD applications. The new one however, I believe does use some version of the old Mazda MZR 2.3 engine's block, though heavily modified.
@@AndresSalazarAutos - I meant from 1979 - 2005, Mustangs looked like Mazdas...
Cool, a Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang though...
There's nothing appealing about a 4 cylinder Mustang...
I have one and I love it. Very fun to drive and gets compliments everywhere I go.
I like your daily FLASHBACK series. I loved the cars of the '80s, & '90s. They remind me of a much more simpler time in my life, keep up these old re-runs please.
Get your youth back grab a Goldie !
The LX was my favorite alltime Mustang in the 80's to early 90's with it's smooth body style unlike the boss GT
SVO's were such great cars. Gawd I miss the 80's !!!!
Vampirebear13 Still have my '85-1/2.
saacman I had a 79, 85, and 92. All 5.0s. But the one I miss was the last Fox I owned. A 1986 SVO. Modded with a better intercooler, ported exhaust manifold, 3" exhaust pipe, and a little bigger turbo. At 18 PSI It was a handful for anything on the street in the early to mid 90s.
same not just for the cars either
Yep! The 80s ruled!
The music, the cars, the bighair/hvy makeup'd horny girls, the LONG weekends, awesome movies&tv, very few nutjob liberals trying to ruin the country...
some great days!
Vampirebear13 The 80’s sucked.
I own 85 SVO and I have to say its always a hoot to drive, for all you people out there putting this car down has not driven one , it mite change your opinion !! Its a keeper.
I was a teen when this car came out. It's funny to think that the Mustang was only 20 years old at the time. 1964 seemed like so long ago, it may as well have been the Stone Age.
My dad was born in ‘57 and he seems to have similar thinking. History started in the 80s or so
@@roddydykes7053 It just got me thinking about how our perspective on time can change as we age. 1964 was before I was born, and I hadn't even lived 20 years. Now, 20 years doesn't seem like such a long time 😁
The 1985.5 & '86 versions had 205 & 200 hp respectively. They performed much better than the '84 due to engine improvement , suspension tweeks and 3.73:1 axle ratio. The SVO main reason for failure in sales was due to price and Fords lack of marketing the product properly. If SVO had a John Coletti type of leader , they probably would never have retired the name plate.
It's Thursday somewhere
lol everyday should be throw back Thursday love the old review plus everybody and there father is doing new car reviews on youtube this is original
Hahaha it's ok guys. We won't judge you ;)
Those headlights were hideous, and borrowed from the Ford Tempo.
John Doe During the time of the '84 Mustang SVO introduction, The "euro" style composite headlamps were illegal here in the U.S. hence the closed glass halogen type that was installed. I do believe in 1985 that law changed with the intro of the Thunderbird Turbo coupe which sported Ford Motor Company's new coporate face. Sadly the last of the 85 and 86 SVO's sported the Euro styled composites which lived on to the 1987 Mustang 5.0s redesign - gracien69
gracien2008 Much thanks for the feedback.
Those T-birds were cool at their time.
Thank you Motorweek. God Bless You John Davis
"An impressive 7.9 second 0-60 time" Thank god we came a long way!
Mark Henry Not much faster than My 2016 Nissan Sentra... in Economy Mode, in Sport, it's a dead heat!!
Michael Schultz our 2008 Toyota Sienna is faster than this “tang”
Quite a lot of lag with that turbo. That's why it passes no probs, but disappointing off the line.
Emissions. Cars were faster in late 60s
It doesn’t help they spin the tires when launching!
30 years later Ford has brought back the SVO, that happens to be named as Ford Mustang EcoBoost. It has a 2.3 Liter turbocharged 4 cylinder engine, but the turbo spindle is oil-cooled, instead of the water-cooled turbo from the 1980s. Synthetic Oil is necessary for turbo engines, because they create way too much heat, when the turbo spins at 200,000 rpm. Surprisingly, the EPA fuel economy numbers for the 1984 SVO and the 2015 EcoBoost Mustangs are the same, depending on transmission choice, despite having direct injection with more horsepower and torque.
To me the EcoBoost is more of a Turbo GT replacement because it has no unique features and upgraded tech above the GT. The SVO even matched the output of the GT each year it was produced basically (Less Torque Of Course ) (ie) 84' models both produced 175 hp forthe GT&SVO .. 85'.5 210 hp GT vs 205hp SVO and finally '86 Both produced 200hp , The 2015 EcoBoost @310 hp is far behind the 435 hp GT.
The fastest time i have seen by magazines for a 2010 GT with the track pack was 0-60 mph in 4.9 sec and 1/4 mile times of 13.6@104 mph. 2015 Mustang EcoBoost i've seen 0-60 mph in 5.6 sec. and 1/4 mile times of 14.1 sec @97.8 mph. Still not quite what the SVO was vs GT.
AmericanMuscleCar :We check out our stock 2015 Mustang EcoBoost track results and challenge a 2014 Mustang V6 to see who can get down the track the fastest...
The crew at AmericanMuscle.com just landed another 2015 Ford Mustang, this time a 2.3L EcoBoost 4 cylinder engine equipped with an automatic transmission, premium package, EcoBoost performance package and 50 years appearance package. We wanted to see what this thing could do in stock form going right to the track from the showroom floor. Equipped with 87 octane, stock tires and tire pressure and less than 50 miles on the odometer, our 2015 Mustang Ecoboost went 14.3 in its best time in crappy track conditions. Even with the terrible prep, we're confident these cars could see high-13 second timeslips consistently on a good day.
Make sure to keep an eye out for all of the things that we have planned for the EcoBoost crowd. There's a ton of potential for big gains and we're excited to start ripping her apart.
And for all things 2015 Mustang, keep it right here at AmericanMuscle.com.................. Waiting on more vids of owners/tuners running them stock with a manual trans and 93 Octane.
HJ Farooqi ....No problem and I accept new knowledge as well. I like both SVO & EcoBoost.
This time the SVO is actually fast and in an age the v-6 versions of the muscle cars of today are worth a shit for once unlike in the 80s and 90s!
I just can't get enough of these old school videos.
I ABSOLUTELY LOVED THIS CAR!!!! I saw one commercial as a kid in high school and LOST MY MIND!!! I was always a Stang freak and this was SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!
175 hp for the year 84 was a lot!!!!! great test!!!
Twenty 20. Not for that year I had a 85 GT in high school which had around 200 no American muscle cars in those years had 300 hp
We drove the 60s and 70s muscle in the 80s. They could be bought for nothing.
Right not even in the early ninties Mustang "boss" GT were close to 300
Emissions.
THE 88 OR 89 SVO MUSTANG STICK SHIFT IS THE MORE POWERFUL,CAME WITH 195 HP,FOR THAT YEARS WAS A LOT,THAT ENGINE WITH ROLLER ROCKERS CAM FROM RANGER 95,AND RAISE THE BOOST CAN HIT 250 HP,NOT BAD FOR A 30/40 YEARS OLD DESING,PLUS HAVE FORGED PISTONS,AND SOME PPL SAY CRANK AND RODS,BUT 100% SURE HAVE FORGED PISTONS!
The SVO was basically a off the shelf parts cars. Ford pulled parts from over platforms to build the SVO. The end result was one cool car. I had an older 85 SVO and really enjoyed driving it.
I had an 86. Really easy to add about 50 HP
Friend tuned his SVO in 1988, and that thing was crazy fast, and was great in the turns.
One of my top 10 MW episodes. This epitomizes everything that ever was, is, and will be great about Motorweek and John.
I was/still in love w/my 1985 1/2 SVO. 32 Yrs. later, the kids have moved out/on their own & I'm looking to relive my youth & find/buy Another Grey on Grey 1985 & a half. My wife calls it "Dumb" Not to me & So many other guy's who Loved these cars.
Ya only get One life to have fun.
hyway
Your last sentence sums things up...Enjoy. Hope you find your Mustang.
Surely you've worked hard you deserve it man!
If I didn’t know any better I’d think the SVO was a JDM lol
Ya got
Styling
inline 4
Forced induction
Offset hood scoop
Headlight and taillight pattern remind me of a hatchback Corolla
L00PdeL00P's Channel oddly the intercooler on it is german.
i scavenged one too use on a 931
Hachi Roku for the w
Totally understand what you mean! 😂
It's a cool car, no doubt!
The SVO might have had good performance but it having a 4 CYLINDER TURBO was a turn-off to be honest.
It's just not appealing...
Big V8 power is part of the American car culture!
It's part of the appeal of an American sports car!
If I want a 4 or 6 cylinder car, I'll get a German or Japanese car! 👍
The same goes for the BUICK GNX from the 80s.
It had a V6 TURBO engine and good performance, it was really fast but...
a V6 in an American sports car?
No thanks!
It also didn't last long in the market just like the SVO...
*Emission regulations and oil crisis at that time were all part of the reason why those models got created to begin with...*
American car manufacturers like Chevrolet, Dodge and Ford also didn't use 4 and 6 cylinder engines for their *most powerful* models, even in the following years and even decades!
They always used *V8 engines* as they should!
4 and 6 cylinder versions exist, especially nowadays for a reason...
but no one really cares about them!
👉 Go overseas and ask people what comes to their mind when they hear "American muscle car" or even "American sports car":
*Big V8 Power* is one of the thoughts!
Excellent ...I was just saying hopefully you uploaded this video being that the 2015 Ecoboost Mustang is arriving to dealers soon.
My 88 Turbo Coupe ran 16 flat at 88 mph at Kilkare with 90,000 miles on it. Loved that car
..and just in time for the new EcoBoost model!
I am a Mopar guy, but I love these cars. I knew a guy who had about 3 or 4 of them. He even restored a green 1984 ex-rental. They were unlike any other fox body I've driven/ridden in. It's a shame there aren't more of these cars out there. I guess everybody still wanted V8s and couldn't justify the extra dough. They were worth the extra cash for sure.
The Hertz is a rare breed. I have a friend in Orlando that has a very nice one he got about a year ago from Ontario Canada.
Thankfully people still wanted V8s, even after the oil crisis...
An American sports car without a V8 is lame!
The front end dive on heavy braking with older cars is absolutely amazing.
I remember sitting in a brand new one late at night. They had left the keys in it. So tempting to take it for a drive.
Ford had a DOHC 2.3 under development. It was for the 87 SVO had it happened it was 250-270 HP :(
This makes me sad
@@colinmoorhead3299
Look up the pictures of the SVO test mule with the DOHC 2.3 if you want to be more sad.
Shelby Performance managed over 500hp out of the 2.5 Chrysler engine. They said emissions is what held them back from production. Ford, GM, and Shelby did all they could for the time.
Amazing what better weight distribution does for handling/overall performance
Those 80's mustangs were good-looking cars..
remingtonh not this one lol
I loooooove this show , thank you so much for uploading
3:56, "You have to work much harder than u did with previous tangs", am I the only one that noticed this?
"...to set the rearend flying" aka it stays under you easier
I'd love to have a badass SVO!
I had that exact same car. Cool looking and unique...but sooooo many issues. After quickly becoming a money pit I had to give her up. We certainly had some good times together and to this day I think about her often...
One of Ford's best futureproof sleepers. The blocks were essentially bulletproof. People nowadays have these same SVO's in the 9s with large turbos running higher boost. In the end they're easier to take into low low quarter mile times than almost anything produced before or since.
Proof that history repeats itself (re: turbo-4 Mustang).
A guy down the street from me is selling one of these. I'm tempted. :)
I had a Merkur XR4TI I loved it. It was the same chasis and drivetrain.
It smoked everything on the strip that it faced. I had it up to 130mph on a favorite back road.
That was cooler than a SVO!
At least the 4 cylinder fits that car!
A Mustang with a 4 cylinder on the other hand, isn't appealing...
@@Kev27RS
Mustang SVOs are more rare and were better Road Racers then he GTs.
The Merkur/Sierra/Scorpio was on the same platform as the Mustang. It had a considerable racing pedigree in Europe.
@@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869 The SVO had good performance but wasn't appealing by having a 4 cylinder...
A Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang!
If I want a 4 or 6 cylinder car I'll get a German or Japanese car!
Yes, the Sierra was quite popular in Europe!
The blood pressure cuff bulb for lumbar is a true classic 😆
0:30 "Project Saturn " in 1984. Such a promising brand that only lived about 20 - 25 years.
+smithraymond09029 Saturn was killed in 2009. So that's exactly 25 years!
I was thinking the same thing, what killed the brand exactly? they looked so futuristic at the time, you would think it would of been successful. Everyone I've driven felt like the build quality was kinda shotty.
+Josh d When Saturn was created, it aimed to take on the Japanese imports' most successful categories: subcompacts (Honda Civic at the time) and compacts (Toyota Corolla, since 1991). That's what the S-Series was aiming at, after all!
But, as you may have noticed over the years, Saturn began to lose their tracks, as they were getting into Chevrolet's and even Pontiac's territory! Big cars, like the Outlook and even a sports car, the Sky!
But, the Wiki says that the project was overly ambitious and that it drained 5 billion dollars from other car projects.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_Corporation
I say that the Saturn project was a clear effort, something built with GM's own powers to take on the Japanese.
It was certainly much better than the GEO project, which was all about rebadged Japanese cars (Storm, Tracker, Prizm, Metro etc.). I don't understand: you build something with your own powers to take on a rival (Saturn) and at the same time you build the rival's cars under your own badge (GEO)! That's the stupidest thing a CEO has ever thought! How stupid did they think you were??? No offense!
I think the GEO project drained money because, they didn't import the cars, they produced them in America, under NUMMI!
And I've thought about something else too; what if the Chevy Cobalt had the Saturn badge? ''Saturn Cobalt''? I mean, it was a compact car, it had just the right sized body and motors to do the job! Also, the Chevy Cavalier: the 1996 gen-car could be called the Saturn Cavalier! Real investment to take on the Japanese!
+MafiosoItaliano458 apparently very stupid, and they didnt even seem to use good cars to start with! maybe the tracker was ok. And yeah i see what you mean with the sky even though i think its a great looking car, but who wants a a Saturn sports car? same with the redline models. and huh Saturn cobalt, doesn't really have a ring to it! but if they made it a little more stylish and gave it a cool name I bet it would have sold like hot cakes! I think the business model was a great idea at the time but mismanagement just seemed to drive them off their original plans! That's a shame.
Saturn was discontinued during GM's bankruptcy because it really didn't have anything in the development pipeline that was saleable.
The only real Saturn was the original S-series which although it sold well didn't generate the profits needed to invest in R&D for a replacement or additional models.
Saturn had replacement models ready to go at the time of GM's bankruptcy but they were mostly rebadged OPEL's.
GM was trying to sell OPEL at the time and if it had it would have to pay whomever to build Saturn's for them thus eliminating any potential profit.
GM decided to keep OPEL after they had discontinued Saturn and the models that were meant to new Saturn's became Buick's.
I loved these cars. In an age when power meant having a v8, these cars delivered it on a 4 popper. It was a great cross over for motorheads of the time because of the familiar Foxbody’s but with added euro engineering to make it a true performance car. It’s because of the appeal and performance of this car that the US has been able to push the market toward fuel efficient performance cars as Europe and Japan had been doing.
It's a cool car, no doubt!
The SVO might have had good performance but it having a 4 CYLINDER TURBO was a turn-off to be honest.
It's just not appealing...
Big V8 power is part of the American car culture!
It's part of the appeal of an American sports car!
If I want a 4 or 6 cylinder car, I'll get a German or Japanese car! 👍
The same goes for the BUICK GNX from the 80s.
It had a V6 TURBO engine and good performance, it was really fast but...
a V6 in an American sports car?
No thanks!
It also didn't last long in the market just like the SVO...
*Emission regulations and oil crisis at that time were all part of the reason why those models got created to begin with...*
American car manufacturers like Chevrolet, Dodge and Ford also didn't use 4 and 6 cylinder engines for their *most powerful* models, even in the following years and even decades!
They always used *V8 engines* as they should!
4 and 6 cylinder versions exist, especially nowadays for a reason...
but no one really cares about them!
👉 Go overseas and ask people what comes to their mind when they hear "American muscle car" or even "American sports car":
*Big V8 Power* is one of the thoughts!
@@Kev27RS that's true. Most back then didn't like that in the Stangs, but it's at least better than the Pinto engines they put in the Mustang IIs.
@@matthewbittenbender9191 Understandable.
@@Kev27RS at the time I was really more about the body style but thought that they should have put a 5.0 in it. I was still impressed with the car anyway, but felt like it could have been so much more with a v8.
@@matthewbittenbender9191 I agree!
There's a reason for the SVO's existence but I'm glad that the crisis situation calmed down by the mid-80s and the most powerful Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, ... models continued having *V8 engines* in the following years and decades!
Motorweek hands down is the best auto program review despite some of there 0-60 times are off
wow! It’s 2022 and this is the first time i have heard of this mustang
Now days that car is REALLY slow. Back then it was cool and fast. Then came the IROC-Z and 5.0 Mustang. Yeah, the 80's were a great time to grow up.
No they weren't, garish fads and shitty hairstyles, weezy cars...
slowstang88 slow cars are the most fun to drive
@@slowstang88
Wheezy modern 1980s cars. But old 60s muscle cars were a dime a dozen in the 80s.
80's was the "BEST" 5.0's...Iroc-Z's...Grand National's street racing was something to look forward to on the weekends...Rosa Parks...6 mile Mt. Elliot...the Blvd...French Rd...City Air Port...The Cemetery man I can go on and on bring back the 80's
Meh. The 90s were a lot better. Especially in the JDM scene. Foxbody Mustangs are cool. But stock they are a little slow.
love this car
One of the best Mustangs ever made.
I am old enough to remember when the SVO was the shiznit. Never got to drive the "tang" version but did get to wring out a very clean turbo T-Bird that was just awesome.
Right on! But I have to mention that if you're old enough to remember the SVO was the shiznit...you might be too old to use that word to describe it. JK
These things were such good cars. In a lot of ways, they're still rather compelling today. The 2.3L engine can take a lot of abuse and make big power.
@Civility went out the window 😂
A 4 cylinder in a Mustang...
I don't get all the comments regarding the front end. I think the sunken headlights look awesome. The flush versions have a thick rubber seal around them that looks sloppy. At the time I thought the 87 design was the best. Now though I really like the 82 "tang" styling the best. I also like the grills in the quarter Windows. The flat glass panel on 87 and newer mustangs looks really awful compared to the svo/gts of previous yrs. if I could build a fox body I'd choose a 93 cobra body kit, svo quarter Windows, and a 82 front end. Engine and interior from a 93 cobra. The interiors from mid 80s mustangs were hideous. Esp the fake wood. The svo interior was far superior for that time. The thick leather wheel and shifter made the svo seem far more quality than other mustangs.
Schnell Bill I love it too. I want my car to scream 80's and this does, lol. I'm here because I'm currently thinking about buying a really clean 84 SVO I just came across, so unique
Agreed, but why did they have to copy the front of a Citroën BX GT?
Schnell Bill Agreed, I love my 84 front end!
You know what’s going on. Nodded the whole time.
@@ronaldderooij1774 Googled a Citroën BX GT.... not even damn close.... you must be blind...
My favorite mustang ever....so glad a new 4cyl turbo has been made
A Mustang with a 4 cylinder... 😂
John’s eyebrows could do the 1/4 mile in 14 seconds flat.
Isn't "TANG" a drink mix???
Robert Ruis only the best
😂👍
Among other things...😁😁😁🐟🌮
Yeah, remember the commercials with the monkey lol?
3:18 is me and my girlfriend making out in a McDonald's parking lot
Cool 3rd grade joke.
She must be a big girl🤣
I was wondering what could possibly be the purpose of bouncing the car up and down like that? We know how shocks work.
I appreciate this comment.
@@markbrinton6790 you're welcome
It was so ugly only a Momma could love it but I do miss Ford's SVO cars. That was a lot of ingenuity for way back in 84. Thank you again MW for these so great vintage videos!
Emission Regulations and especially the oil crisis back in the late 70s - early 80s were all part of the reason why the SVO got created to begin with...
Thankfully it didn't last long and American car manufacturers kept putting V8s in their most powerful models in the following years and even decades!
A Mustang without a V8 isn't really a Mustang...
I had a charcoal Grey 84. Was an impressive car. Wish I still had it.
Yes! Foxbodys!
An engine from the pinto and mustang II, in 1971 the pinto started life with this engine it could have used the svo turbo to move it faster so it wouldn't get rear ended, and explode into a fireball!
might wanna Google "Pinto Myth"
rekt
@@jimgarrity2414 I will rely on the leaked memo from a Ford Exec. Let them burn alive it will cost 7$ a car to fix and we have lawyers on retainer anyway.
I can't wait to get mine on the road.
The 1984-1986 SVO is my favorite Mustang of all time. It wasn’t until 2005 (fifth generation) that I would take notice again of the Mustang. When the sixth generation Mustang was revealed for 2015, I knew I had to finally buy one.
I love Mustang SVO, my favorite. 1985 and 1986 is my dream
@@fernandorocha8459 same here Fernando… i even made a video about it, it’s on my channel somewhere.
@@fernandorocha8459 If a 4 cylinder Mustang is your favorite Mustang of all time, you don't really like Mustangs... 😅
He kept calling it a "tang"
everytime he said it I kept thinking "poo" lol
+Joseph Rogers Im the 80s that had a different meaning, which is why I am so confused why he calls it that repeatedly
+Joseph Rogers I know like he thought he was cool saying that. I never heard it before of since, what a dick.
This guy is still doing reviews for this show. I don't think he's any brighter.
The correct nickname is "'Stang." He forgot to pronounce the leading "s."
79 - 93 is the best mustang ever.
😍 imagine having this car and a glhs and a talon and a merkur xr4ti
LOL @ that brake test , the car dipped like a Concorde ha ha
Pretty good performance for it's time.
*****
I hear ya.
***** 210hp>145hp any day! When Ford brought back the SVO with a 330 hp 4 banger for 2015 they at least did it right.
Yes, cars had less weight back then considering extra safety equiptment , computers, and heft. Back then I thought the five-speed manual super coupe was huge compared to a Mustang 5.0... but park it next to a new Toyota Corolla and see how tiny cars were back then - gracien69
***** The 85 still had 175. The 85.5 had 205 and then the reduced it to 200 for the 86 per Fords marketing team.
Yes, but cars now have a lot of safety equiptment, computers, and other heft installed on them . Im just recalling how I thought the T-Bird super coupe was heavy and large compared to a Mustang GT, but park one against a new Toyota Corolla and see how tiny cars were back then - gracien69
I still own one of these. Don't see too many around anymore
If it ain't broke...
Hang on to it.they were a great car and almost impossible to find now with the original engine in it.if you find one now the original rims are gone along with the engine etc.
@@thunderroad7289 So far still have. Unfortunately mine did not come with the original wheels, though the engine is original. Kids & no time means its still sitting where it was 5 years ago when I made this comment. Need to get the old girl running again!
Chris Curtis you can find the original rims today. You got the original motor and that’s huge. you have a car most of us dream of having . I wish I had never traded mine in. Enjoy it when you can
When this car came out, I saw a good number of them shaded as Black and white Police interceptors... Saw one of them smoke and catch up to a '83 Chevy Camaro on the freeway... Crazy how a turbocharger can twerk up a four/six cylinder engine to nearly match a big V-8 back then...
Only with a turbo though...
That's what made the BUICK GNX so fast back then...
It's interesting to look back at these. I wonder if the folks back then. Had any idea how much power would be in cars today
16.7 second 1/4 mile?
I think the guy spun the tires for 16.7 seconds during the launch @ 5:18. Jeeze. Lighten up on the throttle until it grabs. I hope they weren't timing the 1/4 mile runs with launches like that.
Ugh.. why do people always think that the clips they use to show are the ones the use to test stats? Also, 16.7 is not bad for a little 4 banger.
+Tom Jones Yea your right jelly bean. My Sears mower is faster. 16.7 seconds not bad LMFAO!
@@metaljew4456 For a car with a four-banger from 30 years ago? No it's actually not that bad. Plus there's the fact that Motorweek always understates numbers and often show slower results than other shows or magazines
Philip Rosenthale Great stupid comment.
They seem to always do that
im sure its been asked, but do you happen to have any vids on Buick Grand Nationals or turbo regals? im still new to the channel
We Have A Few, And A Cool Compro Between Grand National, Olds 442, And Monte Carlo Aero Coupe
***** Thanks ill check them out.
I test drove a couple ‘85 svo settled on the cheaper ‘83 beautifully maintained black hatchback 5.0 with the moonroof. The car was $4600 and in immaculate condition , no accident 1 owner. To this day, this is how I purchase vehicles.
I absolutely loved the look of these. These were probably my favorite Fox Bodies, right after the '85-'86 GT or the Capri bubble back. I always liked the idea of a "different" Mustang, the turbo 4 and wildly unique styling set this one apart from the sea of bland lookalike Mustangs.
I wanna see the Vanagon review :)
This almost a second slower in the quarter mile than the 82 5.0 GT you tested two videos ago.
With half the cylinders and 2 years of higher restrictions added. It was after 1986 that power really started to make a comeback
My 84 Supra had a hand pump lumbar support too.
I bought a black one in 1988 when I was 21. Cost me a lot and 16” tires were really expensive then. Car ran great and was fun. Unfortunately a tree fell on it in a storm and just wasn’t fixed properly so I sold it. Haven’t seen one on the road in a long time. Wish I still had it and my 1986 RZ350 Yamaha I bought new.
Funny. I sold mine in late 88 or early 89 for about 8k. It had 40k miles. A nice low mileage could be had for 10 to 12k if I remember.
Nobody called the mustang a "tang"
That was powered orange bug juice
NASA says its good for you.
i remember the counter part mercury capri
ericou812 i believe that had one with German styling called a Merkur XR4Ti.
I had a 1986 brand new. When I came in to look at it at the Ford Dealership they wasn’t going to let me test drive it because I was 19 , after showing the dealership the $5000 I had saved up to buy my first car they let me drive it and then I purchased it. It was over $17,000 back then. I could have sworn my SVO had 17 inch rims but a friend told me his had 16 inch rims ?
Started with out of all things the turbo fairmont unheard of but if you know Ford’s fairmont was one of the first Lima I4 super rare hard to find & not really known about.
the design barley changed from 1979 to 1993
I wish they continued the SVO series
they really should of
They did, SVO vecame SVT.
Only time in recorded history where a Mustang was repeatedly called a "Tang" by a professional reviewer.
Like the inside color and the body school style