Most Under-Performing Musclecar Ever Produced?

[Bill Howell]

The Boss 429 engines were in the Torino Talledega and Cyclone Spoiler II bodies in Nascar in 1969. Ford built the Talledega and Spoiler II long nosed bodies to make them legal and the Boss 429 Mustangs to make the engines legal in Nascar. The engines and bodies each had to have a minimum of 500 units.

[rawhide]

Originally Posted by Geerhead55

I don't recall the Boss 429s doing well in NASCAR,,they had the Torino Cobras on the Ford side(remember Richard Petty was stolen away for one year from Plymouth and drove a Cobra) and on the Mercury side there were the Cyclones( David Pearson and Buddy Baker? I could be wrong) that were the dominant body styles from Dearborn on the NASCAR tracks. If there were any Boss 429s out there I've forgotten about them.
I think Sam Auxier ran one in a class called Ultra/Stock (a forerunner to Pro Stock),in another association. I'm sure someone more NASCAR savvy than me will come on here and set us straight. Danny Durham

Danny,
In 1969 Ford and Mercury won 30 out of 54 races held. Most of those were with the Boss429 although the first few were still with the tunnel port 427.
thanks, Roland

[Superfan1]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lee

Hmmm...how about the '67 Mustang 390? What a pig. Now, with NHRA allowed superseded parts (block, heads, ,oil pan, intake, carb), it's super fast!
And when I see a '69 Mach 1 cross the auction blocks with (big bold advertising!) a 390 under the hood for big bucks, I want to yell...sucker!

And I would gladly race a stock '68-'69 340 Dart with a 4-speed and 3.91's against a stock '66 Chevy II 327/350 with 3.73's. I think it would all depend on who was driving.

Jeff, as a general statement, I agree with you. However, I was fortunate enough to have a very fast '67 390, 4-speed. Bone stock, just as it was delivered, it ran 13.8s@103 mph. The other 390 Mustangs were running very high 14s@95 mph! The only cars that I couldn't beat were 396/375 Camaros and Chevelles. To this day I have no idea why it was so much faster than the average 390, but I sure surprised a lot of people with it and I had a lot of fun.
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT

[Paul Ceasrine]

Those 1966 Dodge Chargers with the 383/325HP were no fun,
Over 3700lbs. of steel.
Just what could you use that car for?
PC

[Frank Castros]

Like some of you I'm old enough to remember the true muscle years.
I drove a friends '69 Boss 429 Mustang: Very over rated performance but impressive with the hood open.
I owned a '69 383, 4-speed, 3.23, Road Runner: 13.80s with street tires, headers, tweaked AVS and recurved distributor. Not bad.
When the '71 Dusters & Demons came out with the Thermo Quad and 3.91 gears they kicked some butt right out of the box.

[X-TECH MAN]

Originally Posted by Superfan1

Jeff, as a general statement, I agree with you. However, I was fortunate enough to have a very fast '67 390, 4-speed. Bone stock, just as it was delivered, it ran 13.8s@103 mph. The other 390 Mustangs were running very high 14s@95 mph! The only cars that I couldn't beat were 396/375 Camaros and Chevelles. To this day I have no idea why it was so much faster than the average 390, but I sure surprised a lot of people with it and I had a lot of fun.
Bill Seabrooks - superfan1
Bridgeport, CT

Someone stuck a pre production 428 CJ in it when you were not looking.....lol. My buddy had one and it was a dog.