Last week while vacationing in San Francisco I rented a Ford Mustang convertible from Enterprise for a three-day excursion up the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). On the second day we drove over the coastal range into the Anderson valley so my wife could sample some of the fine wines produced there (she bought three bottles). These roads were generally very challenging--pretty much scared my wife to death, in fact--so I was able to thoroughly evaluate the performance of the car.
I've written a more thorough review of the 2004 Mustang in SVT Cobra form here. In this review of the much less powerful V6 I'll limit myself to impressions from my rental experience.
Styling
I've never been a fan of the "new edge" 1999-2004 Mustang, but in black with alloy wheels, the rental looked good enough. Better than it drove, at least. That said, every time I saw a 2005 on the road--and I saw quite a few on the PCH--I wished I'd gotten that car instead. The 2004 looks pudgy in comparison.
Inside the rental was a disaster. Fit and finish were about the worst of any car I've reviewed, and that's saying a lot. Workmanship on the door panels was especially poor, with large, uneven gaps between trim pieces. To top it off, the heavy door closed with a clunky sound and feel. In both regards the Mustang recalled Detroit coupes of the 1970s. While the Mustang's chassis dates to this period, the car has been heavily revised in the quarter-century since, so I'm puzzled as to why the doors feel so dated.
The convertible I drove had gray leather that looked and felt much like vinyl. Nothing classy about it. Very unsporty-looking seats (this wasn't the GT) don't help.
A final workmanship issue: the top was very difficult to latch. A strong arm was especially necessary on the right side.
Accommodations
I've picked on the Mustang's oddly high driving position (for a sports car) before. I didn't mind it so much this time around, though something continues to feel dated about the relationship between the seat, pedals, and steering wheel. The hood is relatively level, so you see more of it from the driver's seat than in most cars these days. This doesn't impede forward visibility, so let's just say it lends to the cars (overly?) authentic retro character.
The front seats look like bargain basement old school junk, so imagine my surprise when they proved more comfortable over the long haul than those in any other car I've rented in recent memory. Never a hint of complaint from my back, and the seats' generous size provided good thigh support. Lateral support wasn't an issue despite the slippery leather, perhaps because the handling limits of the car weren't very high. One ergonomic oddity: the power seat controls are located on the forward face of the seat cushion just behind your left calf. Not easy to reach and far from intuitive. Every time I used them was an exercise in trial and error.
The rear seats are of course of limited use. I suppose children and small adults might be reasonably comfortable back there. Larger people will find insufficient space for their heads (unless the top is down), outside arms, and legs.
On the other hand, the rear seat held two suitcases very well. Which was a good thing, because only one would fit in the trunk, and even that one barely fit through the tight opening. I ended up with both in the back seat to serve as an improvised wind blocker. It's chilly this time of year on the PCH, especially when the fog rolls in. Helpfully, the heater blows hot enough to fry your feet, if you so desire.
I generally don't comment on sound systems, partly because I don't pay them much attention during the test drives that are the basis for most of my reviews. The rental had a "Mach 460" system, so I sought to try it out. But the areas where I drove the car were not densely populated. The few times I turned the radio on all I could get were some country stations, and those not clearly. So once again I won't be commenting on the stereo.
On the Road
While on vacation I could not recall how much horsepower the V6 generates. My guess, based on how the car performed, was about 140. So I'm now surprised to find that the six received a 40 horse bump to 190 the last time the Mustang was restyled, in 1999. These could be the weakest 190 horses I've ever sampled. The Mustang convertible only weighs about 3300 pounds, so the power-to-weight ratio isn't bad. Heck, back in the mid-1980s when the GT 5.0 was all the rage it kicked out only ten more horses. So I simply cannot explain why the 2004 felt wheezy and sluggish at full throttle. But it did.
Aside from its lazy responses, the engine sounded as if it was going to fly apart every time the tach passed 3500. Very rough and very loud. And not "sports car" loud. Just a lot of noise the character of which screams "BACK OFF." So I tended to keep revs between 2000 and 3000.
I did this through frequent use of the shifter, as the four-speed automatic transmission reacted very slowly to the throttle when left to its own devices. To downshift to third for 50+ MPH turns, I pushed a button on the shifter to lock out fourth. For slower turns (most of them on the windy roads in question) I downshifted from D to 2, with a nudge at the gas to encourage the shift. Gearing is so tall that second is viable up to at least 50 MPH when not cruising. I probably spent more time in second than in fourth.
I downshifted to first a couple of times. It's much shorter than second, shooting the engine into the zone of aural discomfort. Downshifts almost invariably chirped the tires. You get more noise than thrust, so just not worth it.
All in all, the sound and feel of the powertrain was oddly similar to that in my mother's Mercedes-Benz SL. Which might sound pretty darn good, until I tell you that said SL is a 1972 with over 180000 miles on the broken odometer. Best driven with moderate revs and a heavy foot.
One bright spot: despite the amount of time spent in second gear with the top down, the Mustang went 20 miles on each gallon of gas. I expected worse given the near-constant flogging.
Compared to the powertrain, the Mustang's chassis acquitted itself well. The 225/55R16 Eagle LS's provided plenty of grip given what the sickly six was able to dish out. Tire squeal was rare in all but the tightest turns. Balance and composure were considerably better than I expected. Some throttle-induced oversteer would have been nice, but it just was not to be thanks to the engine's limitations. The steering was better than I recall from the SVT Cobra I drove last year, but then the V6 likely deflated my expectations in this area.
Overall, the V6 Mustang handles very safely, but not sportily. Driving the car just short of squealing the tires, a Nissan Armada full-size SUV managed to keep up most of the way down a twisty mountain road. Of course they took one unplanned excursion over the double yellow, while I did not... Idiots.
Some might wonder why I'm not criticizing the behavior of the antiquated solid rear axle. Well, the roads I drove were almost invariably smooth, eliminating the advantages of an independent suspension. On bumpier roads my evaluation of the Mustang's handling would probably not be so kind.
Ride quality isn't bad aside from the shakes easily induced in the convertible's flexible structure. Most newer convertibles are more rigid, and hopefully the 2005 Mustang is among these.
Last Words
The rental's V6 engine was the least sporting I've sampled in some time and its fit and finish were dreadful. Comfortable seats were a plus, but not enough of one to carry the whole car. Only recommended if what you want is a convertible with secure handling and comfortable seats at the lowest possible price. Assuming that the price is in fact low.
To learn more about my reliability research and sign up to participate in it, or to perform thorough, up-to-date new car price comparisons, visit www.truedelta.com. A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.
Recommended:
No
Amount Paid (US$): 26300 (new)
Model Year: 2004 Model and Options: Base Premium convertible
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.