I’ve got an ‘83 GLX 5.0 5 speed convertible in my garage now. Less than 75k miles and mostly original everything. Is surprisingly reliable and hasn’t given me a minute of trouble. Even the “tight-fitting” tonneau cover they were concerned about it still working just fine after 40 years!
i dont mean to be offtopic but does anyone know a trick to log back into an Instagram account?? I was dumb forgot the password. I would appreciate any tricks you can offer me!
ftffighter This wasn't a good driver, they could run mid 15's all day long, even the convertibles. Good grief, he nailed it out of the hole and was taking time in the shifts to try to get it to bark the tires lol..may have been drinking....?
You would think they could figure out how to make them go left and right without falling off the road. Or spinning out crossing an intersection in snow.
Boy I miss my 5.0 LX convertible. That thing gave me a lot of bang for the buck both in performance and fun as I got laid nonstop in it lol. Ahh those were the days. Only thing I didn't like was the insurance premiums were horrendous here in NJ as I was in my early twenties. If I remember correctly I paid over $100 every two weeks out of my paycheck to State Farm which was a huge amount of dough back then:/
It may not be goodlooking like the current Mustang but it was very cool back in '85 when I ordered a Light Regatta Blue GT convertible. I had that car for 5-years and loved it.
Have a 83 at home im restoring. Its a glx with 96 thousand original miles. Was a barn find a doctor bought it for his daughter brand new to go off to nursing school in. The driver side seat belt has a old label sticker stuck to it that says nursing on it. Guess that was on her name tag in school or something. Really cool old car the interior plastics still look new im having the seats and other panels recovered at a upholstery shop bc none of the restore suppliers have the white vinyl for the 83 vert. Its a 3.8 car but I have found a 84 5.0 engine with low miles im going to go threw and freshen up from it sitting and make it a 5.0 car. Im not gt cloning it the engine wheels and tires is all that is changing im even leaving the luggage rack on the trunk deck. I just want it to be more fun to drive than the 3.8 can give. Im thinking about putting a gt style stripe on the hood but with glx instead of gt. Cant wait to finish it and go on date nights with the wife in it. I also have a 90 hatch. My oldest son has a 81 hatch with t tops.
The Mustang is beautiful. 5-speed manual transmission, open top, 5.0 V8 sound, what else would anyone want? Plus, the performance on par with to of the line BMW. This Mustang is an amazing car.
I was 14 then and even i disliked Mustangs then. I love them now and own one lol. But those Fox bodies were like a big ugly box to me. I kinda appreciate them now and wouldn't mind owning a white one these days.
I miss my 5.0 Stang Conv. Same exact exterior, interior, and top. 4 spd. After owning a ‘87 TransAm with T Tops in bright red, the mustang got the most looks and comments everywhere I went.
Gotta love these old reviews. 6 series BMW 0-60 in 8.5 sec sucks in today's standards buuuuttt it did have a 180hp v6, back in the early 80s that was insane power from only six pistons.
The early fox Mustangs looked allright, especially 80-82 Cobra models, but the convertible version were really ugly, maybe bland is a better word. The more angular 79-82 nose was also much better looking with the wider grille.
And while were on the subject of Ford coupes, did you guys ever get your hands on a tenth generation Thunderbird Super Coupe, or even just a V8 (preferably the 4.6 modular) ?
thanks for uploading. the progress both companies were making with each of these chassis at that time is pretty impressive. they were both kind of "works in progress" at this point. is there any particular backstory behind the bmw? I'm sure it's a fleet/test car, but it looks pretty beat down
Yeah but the '83 model has like, nowhere near as many features as the new one. Technically the new one should cost double what it does considering all you get. This was 30 years ago. I doubt BMW's in 2045 will be that much better than they are today, besides the fact that they will be 100% self-driven.
GT6SuzukaTimeTrials your missing the fact that the features we have now didn't exist back then.. so comparing what you get for the money is useless, also, the longer tech is around the cheaper it gets... satellite navigation was once something only the top end Mercedes and bmw got.. now a civic have it..
A 1983 5 literV8 with 175 h.p. and 40 years later I had a Ford Fusion with a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder with 175 h.p. I'd rather have the Mustang, especially with the 5 speed manual.
the best I could get out of my 1983 mercury RS Capri was 0-60 in 6.5 or 6.2 and ¼ mile was 14.? seems like it was 14.2 or 14.5. that's “speed shifting” which I found out destroyed the B&W T-5 transmission and did likewise to the 7.5 rear-end.
The best part of this is how a lowly Ford Mustang, especially in hatchback or coupe form, completely shames German cars like the BMW costing 2 to 3 times as much on a drag strip. And even today much cheaper American cars continue to shame cars costing far more from Germany even around the famed Nuremberg Ring. Superior German engineering is a myth. The Germans have had their ass handed to them by Ford, Chevrolet, Tesla, and even Kia and Hyundai on their own Ring.
So for almost 3 times the price you get a BMW with nearly identical performance. STD mustang GT non convertible was a few thousand less too! I'd say compared to the bmw the mustang was a performance bargain
You get the same 16.5 second 1/4 mile time with both, but the Mustang has bad brakes, bad handling, bad ride comfort, a cheap interior and a body that's as rigid as jello in an earthquake! That's why a Foxstang is cheap. You want a Foxstang? Get a notchback, they have some body strength. Foxstangs look square because they are based on family car Fairmonts. The only thing worth salvaging is that 302 V8, and I would like to see that put in a Merkur XR4ti, which would make a great combination.
Thomas Leerriem In 84 Ford had a 2.3 in the SVO that put out 175 @ 76hp/liter and 205 @ 89hp/liter in 1985-1/2! , do your homework before you put your nose up in the air!
Thomas Leerriem a 4.7 liter (289) version of the Smogged and suffocated venerable 4.9 (302) powered the Daytona Coupe to first in class at the 1964 24 hr Lemans ahead of som e pretty fancy 3 liter,6-carbed, Sohc screaming V-12s from Italy! They where reliable and as far as I remember in my research their were no BMW's competitive during that era?
That mustang w@s ugly, I mean aesthetically unceasing lol those wheels and ugo rag top tail lights body side moldings but good for go fast and the tail pipes are iconic..... almost like 2nd gen fbody almost.
Reference "Top Gear" for much better driving. I am truly surprised how bad the driving is by this crew. No one here ever ran a race! I see it in every program these guys produce. It's sloppy, it's really bad.
God that is a ugly mustang.. what was the obsession with square shaped everything.. exterior is all square, lights are square interior is square.. did they not have the technology to do different shapes?
I’ve got an ‘83 GLX 5.0 5 speed convertible in my garage now. Less than 75k miles and mostly original everything. Is surprisingly reliable and hasn’t given me a minute of trouble. Even the “tight-fitting” tonneau cover they were concerned about it still working just fine after 40 years!
Its always scary to see 80's vehicles take hard corners no matter the make.
Nah. Us 80' s men know how to drive. Not like the knuckleheads nowadays
@@Kgio-2112 yeah new generation have weak arms they couldn't handle the power steering going out
@@madfun510😂😂😂
1983, good times. I was a teenager oogling over all these cars.
Ahhh, a new batch of Retro Reviews. It's like Christmas in July.
jo hn I'm a few years late but may I come to your Christmas party?
This is one of the oddest coupling of cars ever
i dont mean to be offtopic but does anyone know a trick to log back into an Instagram account??
I was dumb forgot the password. I would appreciate any tricks you can offer me!
@Hugo Ryland Instablaster =)
Kind of
As was typical of car magazines back then, the foreign car's 0 - 60 time is "rocket like"... American car's much quicker 0 - 6o is just OK...
@@BuzzLOLOL I remember..the struggle was real in the 80's. Even Corvettes were at like 170 HP or so. How times have changed!
Thanks for the old Mustang video...thumbs up!
I love watching you guys flog these on the track
Near "Rocket-like" 0-60 of 8.5 seconds
Yeah in 80s it was stupid fast lol my 10 corolla gets 8.4s lol and it only has 132hp
ftffighter That a Nissan Rogue can now match lol.
That is just sad. I was shocked the mustang was a full second faster, even though it was the heavier convertible too.
ftffighter This wasn't a good driver, they could run mid 15's all day long, even the convertibles. Good grief, he nailed it out of the hole and was taking time in the shifts to try to get it to bark the tires lol..may have been drinking....?
+ftffighter yeah, a 1983 European Ford Capri 2.8 V6, 160hp, 0-60 7.8secs, must have been warp speed in those days :)
“Our Mustang managed a very respectable showing around this road course”
*Drives off the track*
"Zero to sixty times were ROCKET like at only 8.3 seconds" lol
You would think they could figure out how to make them go left and right without falling off the road. Or spinning out crossing an intersection in snow.
Sounds like you have been living under a rock.
Standard production mustangs have had IRS for a decade now.@@darrelpetrie8793
Boy I miss my 5.0 LX convertible. That thing gave me a lot of bang for the buck both in performance and fun as I got laid nonstop in it lol. Ahh those were the days. Only thing I didn't like was the insurance premiums were horrendous here in NJ as I was in my early twenties. If I remember correctly I paid over $100 every two weeks out of my paycheck to State Farm which was a huge amount of dough back then:/
That stang may not have had the horses (175 hp) but hell youd feel the over the top torque (245 lb-ft)
I've got an 83, just like that one but with white interior and holy hell does the thing fly through second gear!
It may not be goodlooking like the current Mustang but it was very cool back in '85 when I ordered a Light Regatta Blue GT convertible. I had that car for 5-years and loved it.
1983 convertible is my favorite year for the Fox-based Mustangs.
I agree, I like the early Fox Bodies much better than the big bug-eyed models of the late 80s and early 90s.
Have a 83 at home im restoring. Its a glx with 96 thousand original miles. Was a barn find a doctor bought it for his daughter brand new to go off to nursing school in. The driver side seat belt has a old label sticker stuck to it that says nursing on it. Guess that was on her name tag in school or something. Really cool old car the interior plastics still look new im having the seats and other panels recovered at a upholstery shop bc none of the restore suppliers have the white vinyl for the 83 vert. Its a 3.8 car but I have found a 84 5.0 engine with low miles im going to go threw and freshen up from it sitting and make it a 5.0 car. Im not gt cloning it the engine wheels and tires is all that is changing im even leaving the luggage rack on the trunk deck. I just want it to be more fun to drive than the 3.8 can give. Im thinking about putting a gt style stripe on the hood but with glx instead of gt. Cant wait to finish it and go on date nights with the wife in it. I also have a 90 hatch. My oldest son has a 81 hatch with t tops.
The Mustang is beautiful. 5-speed manual transmission, open top, 5.0 V8 sound, what else would anyone want? Plus, the performance on par with to of the line BMW. This Mustang is an amazing car.
Thank you guys ! These are great !
$39k for that? Good grief! BMW is proud of their cars. Guess it hasn't changed, can still buy two Mustang GT's for the price of a 6 series.
+mega0876 If you buy a car just to look rich in front of other people you're not a car person.
+Drake1416 Every Lambo and Ferrari owner.
The fox mustang convertible is the best looking convertible ever made...top up or down!
The 6 series BMW a car that defined what was cool for the eighties.
I was 14 then and even i disliked Mustangs then. I love them now and own one lol. But those Fox bodies were like a big ugly box to me. I kinda appreciate them now and wouldn't mind owning a white one these days.
I had a white 1991 LX 5.0, 5 speed. I wish I still had that car.
I miss my 5.0 Stang Conv. Same exact exterior, interior, and top. 4 spd. After owning a ‘87 TransAm with T Tops in bright red, the mustang got the most looks and comments everywhere I went.
'83 633 CSi was $95,838 in today's dollars. Another words it's still priced similarly today.
The '83 Mustang, its tolerable and acceptable.
Here's a MotorWeek Retro Review of the Ford Mustang 5.0 Convertible and BMW 633 CSi from 1983.
I used to own that same Mustang but with the dog 2.3l four. The floor rotted out and the seat fell in when it was 5 yrs old. Never bought another
Gotta love these old reviews. 6 series BMW 0-60 in 8.5 sec sucks in today's standards buuuuttt it did have a 180hp v6, back in the early 80s that was insane power from only six pistons.
Boostang S.I.C wasn't it a straight six?
Boostang S.I.C yep straight six not v6. Just like all BMW six cylinders.
So 83 mustang did come with f150 rims/caps
Same style, but the Mustang were 14" - the truck was 15"
The MPG is very optimistic. Owned a 533i, and it was never that good. Great footage here tho.
Convertible mustang has a rubber chassis
I had this very model of convertible Mustang. The amount of body flex was ridiculous.
Notice that the Mustang was faster, cheaper, and far better looking.
The early fox Mustangs looked allright, especially 80-82 Cobra models, but the convertible version were really ugly, maybe bland is a better word. The more angular 79-82 nose was also much better looking with the wider grille.
"..Near rocket like 0 to 60 of 8.5 seconds" for the BMW - my how the times have changed..
And while were on the subject of Ford coupes, did you guys ever get your hands on a tenth generation Thunderbird Super Coupe, or even just a V8 (preferably the 4.6 modular) ?
It's interesting that the Mustang used a track for the top cover. My 1989 Mustang has the snaps. Guess they decided the track was too difficult?
Better looking than today's cars. New cars all look alike. you can't tell them apart.
With the exception of sports cars like the Corvette, Miata RF, and Alfa 4C, new cars do look way too similar.
thanks for uploading.
the progress both companies were making with each of these chassis at that time is pretty impressive. they were both kind of "works in progress" at this point.
is there any particular backstory behind the bmw? I'm sure it's a fleet/test car, but it looks pretty beat down
I saw a 1984 Ford Mustang Convertible last year... in the UK!
i guess a 14k 1989 Mazda Miata 0-60 8.6 seconds was a missile lol!
Nice helmet Ben!!!!!
FOX BODY!!!!!!!!!!
First year Fox body convertibles were done by a subcontractor, Ford being building in-house convertibles for 1984.
That $40,000 BMW would cost over $90,000 today.
GT6SuzukaTimeTrials and the 6 Series today costs 90 grand today. So, it's keeping up with inflation! ha
Yeah but the '83 model has like, nowhere near as many features as the new one. Technically the new one should cost double what it does considering all you get. This was 30 years ago. I doubt BMW's in 2045 will be that much better than they are today, besides the fact that they will be 100% self-driven.
GT6SuzukaTimeTrials your missing the fact that the features we have now didn't exist back then.. so comparing what you get for the money is useless, also, the longer tech is around the cheaper it gets... satellite navigation was once something only the top end Mercedes and bmw got.. now a civic have it..
@@VaunShiz exactly.
Is "Bimmer" a Northeastern thing? We always called them "Beemers".
I've been told that BMW cars are "bimmers" and BMW motorcycles are "beemers." Who knows
But in early 60's as my dad called sunbeam sportscars beemer
“Bimmer” makes no sense and sounds ridiculous
'83 Mustang looks like a freaking LeBaron, ugh
The 633 looks like it has a lot of ground clearance, maybe to meet the bumper regs of the day?
My first car... An 81 inline 6, omg that thing was beyond slow. Got it in 92... Traded in on a 90 Beretta GT in 96 that I totaled after a month. LOL
Didn't the BMW with a smaller 6 cylinder have the same 1/4 time?
blackericdenice Wasn't the GT 1/3 the price of the Bummer?🤔
83 was not a good look for the Mustang, yuck!
***** no they are just as ugly in person.. saw one the other day.. why.. why... would they sell something so ugly
+matthew von That 83 Bimmer doesn't look too good either. That mustang has a hawk like look while that Bimmer resembles a turkey.
Hatchbacks looked way better
Me too. I'd like a 82 GT and a 86 GT with t-tops.
175 hp from a 5.0 V8. We've come a LONG way.
300 hp more
Why is there always some boring hack saying "we've come a long way"... Go f yourself.
we were already there in 69 70 with the boss,
Smog regulations in the late 70s early 80s was the reason
A 1983 5 literV8 with 175 h.p. and 40 years later I had a Ford Fusion with a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder with 175 h.p.
I'd rather have the Mustang, especially with the 5 speed manual.
The 83 mustang 2.3 liter 4 speed manual got 40 mpg.. my dream car! Great on fuel
the best I could get out of my 1983 mercury RS Capri was 0-60 in 6.5 or 6.2 and ¼ mile was 14.? seems like it was 14.2 or 14.5. that's “speed shifting” which I found out destroyed the B&W T-5 transmission and did likewise to the 7.5 rear-end.
Hahahaha! Yup, I tore up quite a few 7.5 rearends. Made the 8.8 swap, never had an issue again.
I wish I could time travel, and show up on the Motor week set with a Tesla Plaid…bruh!!
I'm not sure why, but that BMW reminds me of the game Driver 3
7:10 the eternal feature of mustangs
smokin the tires 1/4 way down the track and still runs a 0-60 in 7.5
Way to sneak in another BMW!
We are living in the Golden Age of Power, folks, and we have become jaded. LOL LMAO LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL
Back then "rocket speed 8.5 for 0 to 60". Oh how times have changed.
That was because the petrol crisis, in the 60s muscle cars did 0-60 around 5.2 seconds.
The best part of this is how a lowly Ford Mustang, especially in hatchback or coupe form, completely shames German cars like the BMW costing 2 to 3 times as much on a drag strip. And even today much cheaper American cars continue to shame cars costing far more from Germany even around the famed Nuremberg Ring. Superior German engineering is a myth. The Germans have had their ass handed to them by Ford, Chevrolet, Tesla, and even Kia and Hyundai on their own Ring.
4:09, I thought the car was heading for the camera! how did they even think that was good handling?!!!
4:43 you can skip to the Stang.
Thanks!
Thanks for letting me know when to stop!
I think some pro-Euro bias was showing through when 19mpg for the BMW is “acceptable” but 24mpg for the Mustang is merely “tolerable”.
That Mustang rings "Trailer Trash"
So for almost 3 times the price you get a BMW with nearly identical performance. STD mustang GT non convertible was a few thousand less too! I'd say compared to the bmw the mustang was a performance bargain
I think Ford stole this body style for the 89 Thunderbird.
The commentator sounds like he is selling something. Like you see in commercials at night when there is no night program.
“Hi performance” lol…😂😂
7:26 3rd gear rubber!
The Mustang wasn't bad for 1983...
But theres a reason people collect the mustangs from 15 years prior...
The program was throwing the fuel to the mustang for sure. Saw about 3 instances of obviously full rich.
That program was a 4 barrel carburetor in 1983
Was the price mentioned for the BMW?
So 12500 buys you $30K today which is equal to the cheapest convertible.
Yes it was $37k if I remember correctly :)
+Chris Dooley Thanks. Now I can see that that price would be 89K today which is 10K more than the current 6 series.
Seems like Ford shared rims with Mitsubishi at that time...
The $8000 K car had more gauges than the BMW.
it isn't a toneau cover it is a boot
that engines pretty slow because Chevy had a 5.0 that made 175hp and the was 4 years before this mustang came out
You get the same 16.5 second 1/4 mile time with both, but the Mustang has bad brakes, bad handling, bad ride comfort, a cheap interior and a body that's as rigid as jello in an earthquake! That's why a Foxstang is cheap. You want a Foxstang? Get a notchback, they have some body strength. Foxstangs look square because they are based on family car Fairmonts. The only thing worth salvaging is that 302 V8, and I would like to see that put in a Merkur XR4ti, which would make a great combination.
God old 4 eyes
$39,000!!!!!
Who could ask for anything more?
That's Toyota, not BMW!
A mustang with no get up and go. Still can`t go left or right when ya need to.
Imagine the shit show of both trying to track now
Hi performance in the 80s lol
The guy is driving the Mustang wearing a helmet like he's really killing it in a 7 second 0-60 run.
The American bumper just ruins that 6 series . and never put your fingers in the door gaps in a convertible hahaha ..who's done that ! ?
+deadkemper big fucking deal
what kind of comment is that !???? jesus at least bother
deadkemper wait I don't get it 🤔
Ohhhhhhh the 80's
It’s funny to think my ten year old 4 banger crossover makes almost as much power and is a bit faster to 60 than a car like this lol
"Pony car collector"
it's painful to realize how slow and how under powered American v8's were back then
sunfury racing every car was slow back then
sunfury racing Says the Renault LeCar driver.
Torquey though and at pretty modest revs. Don't blame the automakers, they were just trying to comply with both the epa as well as cafe standards
The 80s were awfull years for ford. The japanese flew far ahead of American manufacturers in that era.
7:30 he left the track because he messed up.
A racetrack with left AND right hand corners?
You sure this is in the USA?
You had to counter the bodyroll by leaning into the passenger side. Laughable
BMW 3,3 liter: 191 hp, that's 58 hp per liter
Mustang 5 liter: 175 hp, that's a lousy 35 hp per liter, and yet they call it "High Power"
Hahahaha
It took the BMW an extra second to get to 60 compared to the Mustang...
But they had identical 1/4 mile times.
Thomas Leerriem Says the Limey. Your fish and chips cars are mechanical nightmares.
Thomas Leerriem
In 84 Ford had a 2.3 in the SVO that put out 175 @ 76hp/liter and 205 @ 89hp/liter in 1985-1/2! , do your homework before you put your nose up in the air!
Thomas Leerriem a 4.7 liter (289) version of the Smogged and suffocated venerable 4.9 (302) powered the Daytona Coupe to first in class at the 1964 24 hr Lemans ahead of som e pretty fancy 3 liter,6-carbed, Sohc screaming V-12s from Italy! They where reliable and as far as I remember in my research their were no BMW's competitive during that era?
That mustang w@s ugly, I mean aesthetically unceasing lol those wheels and ugo rag top tail lights body side moldings but good for go fast and the tail pipes are iconic..... almost like 2nd gen fbody almost.
175hp…..😂😂😂
Reference "Top Gear" for much better driving. I am truly surprised how bad the driving is by this crew. No one here ever ran a race! I see it in every program these guys produce. It's sloppy, it's really bad.
God that is a ugly mustang.. what was the obsession with square shaped everything.. exterior is all square, lights are square interior is square.. did they not have the technology to do different shapes?
and it didn't even have mustang badge weird
$39,0000 for a BMW in 1983 is friggin stupid, this car and any BMW is an endless money pit plus it's a douche bags car anyway.
I'm pretty sure any 1983 Toyota Camry that's still on the road had less problems.
beyond fugliness
nothing compared to today's motors
Jamie Anthony Really, Captain Obvious?😆