[Tigers] Tiger versus Mustang

[Ron Fraser]

Rande
	The "Falcon Special Project" became the Mustang.  It went from
drawing to production in just under 20 months.  The early Mustangs depended
heavy on the Falcon platform for parts.  It was the only way Henry Ford
would allow the project funding. There were many engineering changes made to
Mustang parts in the first few months. The Fastback version was a Skunk
Works variation done in secret.  When it was reviled; there was nothing but
smiles from Ford Management.

	The Tiger is a similar engineering feat with a history of changed
parts.  No reason not to love them all.

Ron Fraser

-----Original Message-----
From: tigers-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:tigers-bounces at autox.team.net]
On Behalf Of snakebit289
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:03 AM
To: tigers at autox.team.net
Subject: [Tigers] Tiger versus Mustang


It will probably be apparent that I'm not crazy about notion that the Tiger
is a 'tarted up' Alpine any more that I like the dismissive idea, often
repeated endlessly now during the 50th Mustang anniversary, that the first
Mustang  is just a fancy Falcon.

First, calling something tarted up implies it's a little dressed up, and not
very tastefully. Is anyone prepared to say the Tiger body is less tasteful
than the Alpine's? Save the chrome moulding on Tiger I's and IA's, they're
pretty identical. Even interiors are close, the Alpine GT even closer still.
What separates them is the powertrain, and that changes the driving
experience, going from Alpine to a Tiger.

Sure, some of the Mustang
version 1 (1965-1966, I'm not adopting the '64.5 mantra of the Mustang gold
card inspectors) share some Falcon components, and that's probably what
helped the powers that be at Ford to give the Mustang project a green light.
What really separates the two models is the point that the Mustang was meant
as a niche car for Ford. You can argue the point that Barracuda and Corvair
Monza technically was there first. But, neither Monza, or Barracuda, or
Falcon was so popular that they sold 1.2 million examples during the same
time, and they also didn't need to set up three separate assembly plants and
institute 10 hour work shifts to meet demand. Today, with more drivers and
more buyers, when we rave about selling in such large numbers(cars like
Camry and Accord, light trucks like F-150 and Silverado) manufacturers are
happy to push out 400,000 each a year. To me, the surprising sales numbers
for Mustang is what is remarkable, given  that it was not a family sedan
with attendant larger potential market.

Rande
Bellman
_______________________________________________

tigers at autox.team.net

Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/rfraser@bluefrog.com