makes you wonder how many people will be restoring old hondas in 40 years,doesnt it? remember,in those days 14 second quarter mile times were respectable,and most cars were equipped with drum brakes.mustangs have been produced for 50 years,i dont see any honda model names that have been around that long.

 

you mean like the 283 or 302? ive driven a 67 mustang with the 427 and it was a mean car.not many honda owners would like it or be able to drive it though.and yes you could get disc brakes on a mustang.i had two 67s,andthey were decent cars even though i preferred my GTO.

 

IDK Chevy had all kinds of bad ass cars in the 60's and 70's with high power motors. Ford has slacked until the Ford GT40, then Ford GT road car, then the newest 5.0 Mustang GT. IMO that is the only thing great they have ever done.

 

actually, the civic has been around for 40 years. Thats a pretty respectable run.

 

Honda S600... I've seen a few off chassis full restorations on them. Super rare to find! RWD Honda from 1964-1966.

 

A Honda S600 Had a 4 cyl engine with 4 carbs producing 57 hp back in the early 60's and I highly doubt those cars were 4 wheel disc brakes back then.

A 64 Mustang wasn't a real Mustang back then anyways. It used parts from a Ford Falcon and the Fairlanes including the Falcon engine. It was a new car so it had it's quirks. Back then the 6cyl 289 only produced like 101HP. I have no clue what the 8cyl had. Maybe 120hp?? Not bad numbers for 40+ years ago. Civics today don't come with much more then that. For 40 years the Honda Civic's HP ranged from 57hp to like 120hp. Give or take a few more. The Mustang is an iconic car. If it wasn't for the Mustang you would not see some cars on the road today. The Camaro being one of them. Shit in the late 60's early 70's they were already producing the Boss, and other famous Mustang cars. The 64 was the beginning. So of course it wasn't going to be a stand out at first. Those two cars are not comparable.

 

I thought it was the 2.8l that made 101hp? a 289 v6 only making 101hp seems a little off to me.

 

I think I'm wrong. IIRC a 289 is a v8. A 4.7l V8 Windsor motor right??


Edit. I just looked it up. 289 is a V8 4.7l making around 195hp. the 2.8 v6 had around 101hp. Too early in the morning.

 

weren't the original 6 cylinders, inline 6's also?

 

I don't know. I don't know much about the mustangs. I figured they would be a V series not a Inline. I have no clue.