1990-1993 Ford Mustang: Road Test

Best to skip the weak, noisy 4-cylinder engine, with its poor repair record. For reliable and strong performance choose the V8, but watch out for its notorious poor wet-weather traction and dismal fuel economy, especially in town. Four-cylinder models average in the low twenties. Ride quality is well-controlled on base models. In the GT, you can definitely expect to jiggle and jounce over harsh pavement, courtesy of an admittedly stiff suspension. However, it is that suspension that makes the GT model handle so well, while the base model leans over heavily even in modest turns. Brakes are one of the bigger bugaboos. Front-disc/rear-drum brakes are simply not up to par for a car of this caliber. Passenger space is fine up front but tight in back. Hatchbacks offer plenty of cargo space with the rear seatback folded down. Convertibles are fun, of course, but bodies are likely to be loose and rattly. Controls are small and some awkwardly placed, but overall better than a Chevy Camaro.

Value for the Money
To be frank, few other cars offer as much bang for the buck as a Mustang. Only the Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Firebird rank as true rivals. Despite high insurance rates and poor gas mileage, Mustangs still deliver good overall value, new or used.