why Mustang and not Maverick?

I was there back in the day when these cars were new with my new '74 302 Grabber. The standard engine in the '73 Mach 1 was a 302 2V whitch was no match for any Maverick with a 302 in fact from a 30mph roll the 351 Mach 1 had trouble! A lot of guys were nervious when I got next to them. They would ask me what engine I had! On the other hand I stayed away from "ram air" and dual exhaust Mustangs. A Maverick with a V8 was respected as a muscle car. I sent a lot of people home crying when they were beat by my Maverick. The 1974 Mustang II was concered to be a "Singer sowing maching"

 

yep My Dad's 72 Grabber with the 302 whooped my uncles 351 base model Mustang in a heads up race. Dad still swears his 72 Grabber with the 302 topped out around 85 MPH... I don't know how that coule be possible. But Dad also swears to this day that his Grabber had 3:55 gears in it when he bought it new.. I told him that it would have to have been done at the dealer and NOT at the factory and he said "well that's possible"
But I do know for sure that the 302 Grabber beat the 351 Stang in a fair heads up race

 

Ok...I can think that mean the Mustang is more esasy to restore because ther are a lot of sites with all parts to that cars........then because the Maverick doesnt have the same lucky is more difficult to restore ....then to me for that reason The Mavericks have much more value that the Mustang!

 

Someone may have already pointed this out, but the Mustang was not considered a "muscle" car back when it mattered. It was what they called a "pony" car. Meaning it was small and sporty.

The "muscle" cars were big, beefy cars with the biggest engines available at the time. Small cars, sporty cars, and economy cars were not in this catagory.
The smallest "muscle" cars were considered mid-sized by the standards of the day.

The Maverick just came too late. By 1970 everyone knew the days of the true muscle car were over. The Maverick was meant to be an economy car, and the 2v 302 was laughable at the time as a muscle powerplant. A 390 4v was looked down upon at that time as a 'muscular' engine. The 2v 302 didn't have a chance.

 

The 302 didnt really gain any respect as a performance engine untill the fox mustangs hit the scene in the 80's...Now mavs/Comets with 302's in em are considered a pretty hot car.Lets hope it doesnt catch on too much.

 

Mustang was promoted by Ford as a performance car.. There were racing programs, advertising and engine & trans options the Maverick never had.

It was the starter of the Pony Car craze... It never was a Muscle car, but it beat them.

The Maverick was introduced as an economy car. Reliable cheap and simple. The Grabber, Sprint, Stallian, etc. were graphics appearance packages to compete with other like marketing ploys by GM, AMC and MOPAR. More Mavericks were sold then Mustanges in the early years, but the Mustang has a much promoted history that the Maverick in the USA will never have.

 

I just wish the Maverick gains enough popularity to inspire someone to make replacement floor pans!

 

so here is my question, is YOUR maverick a muscle car.... is it an ugly stock green or a nice looking ride, do you have a 302 or do you have a 6, and finally do people give you complements on your car or do you have to show them what its made of, THEN YOU CAN ASK ME is the maverick a muscle car..... my answer is....... yo lol...chirp chirp

yes and no

 

\
i refraze this....it can be made into one

 

Whats wrong with stock green? I don't think it's ugly.

 

No,it's green(so I guess that means it's ugly),a six(far from a muscle motor,good thing no one has asked me to "show them what it's made of"),funny thing is people comment on it everywhere I go and try to buy it.I'm guessing people get a kick out of seeing a Mav on the road being used as it was meant to be(stock,old,road grime & all),not a show car trailer queen or a gutted racecar(nothing wrong with either,wish I could have one).
A maverick will never be looked at as a musclecar in the old car hobby because it never was meant to be one.It was a subcompact and never had any hipo options(a 2bbl 302 was not hipo back then-or now).Doesn't mean that a Mav can't be a bada$$ car,after all Vegas weren't muscle cars either but scoot pretty good w/a sbc in 'em.Fast is fast no matter what the car is,or how you want to categorize it.Just get out & DRIVE it!

 

Answer,, cause anyone can own a Stang,,, takes a Maverick to own a Maverick.
Dan

 

Reckon John McCain and James Garner ever had one?

 

I read somewhere that Obama learned to drive in a Granada.

I think it is because the Maverick was not originally supposed to be muscle car, it was an economy car. Then the Grabber was added to attract the youth market, and then the 2V 302 was added for the sportier ones. It evolved into a Mini-Muscle car.

 

yup, anyone can own a mustang, open a book and build one..... but it takes a bigger person to have an ambitien (sp.) for something different, take them time to find what they need to build it, and stick by those closest when someone else needs help along the way.

not to mention they're fairly cheap to buy and build