Child Safety Seats

Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
<http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
r-seat-check.html>
I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
but I didn't check.

You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.

--
For all you know this message was...
Sent via an exclusive network, on a snobby portable computing device.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
wrote:

>Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
>r-seat-check.html>
>I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
>but I didn't check.
>
>You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.

I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
Mustang of any year.

On Feb 24, 1:49*pm, D E Willson > wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
> wrote:
>
> >Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
> ><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
> >r-seat-check.html>
> >I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
> >but I didn't check.
>
> >You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.
>
> I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
> kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
> outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
> Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
> Mustang of any year.

I don't know. My old '87 LX 5-oh was our family, and lone, car until
1995. By 1995, my two kids were 11 and 9. Yep, that old Mustang
worked for us -- and that's including many 700+ mile vacation trips.
Not to mention, a trip to the drags when I removed their two car seats
to lay down a number of low-14 second passes.

Patrick

On 2012-02-24, D E Willson > wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
> wrote:
>
>>Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
>><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
>>r-seat-check.html>
>>I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
>>but I didn't check.
>>
>>You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.
>
> I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
> kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
> outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
> Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
> Mustang of any year.

Mustang has been around long enough that some of us were kids that sat
in the backseats of them and have different perspective

" > wrote in message
...
> On Feb 24, 1:49 pm, D E Willson > wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
>> ><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
>> >r-seat-check.html>
>> >I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
>> >but I didn't check.
>>
>> >You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.
>>
>> I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
>> kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
>> outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
>> Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
>> Mustang of any year.
>
> I don't know. My old '87 LX 5-oh was our family, and lone, car until
> 1995. By 1995, my two kids were 11 and 9. Yep, that old Mustang
> worked for us -- and that's including many 700+ mile vacation trips.
> Not to mention, a trip to the drags when I removed their two car seats
> to lay down a number of low-14 second passes.
>
> Patrick

I always thought the 5.0's were just fine for small children. My two kids
grew up in the back seat of a Mustang II hatchback, then rode in the back of
an '84 5.0, and by the time I bought my '93 they were 11 and 13, getting
just a mite tight back there.

The good thing was that, as they grew, they wanted less and less to sit back
there. When we went anywhere as a family, we would take my wife's station
wagon (or, later, her Escape). I had no problem with that - it meant that
the kids and ALL of their assorted parephernalia and trappings went in the
truck, and not in my Mustang. No melted Crayons® in the side pockets, no
empty french fries bags under the seats.

It had really been about 10 years, I guess, since anyone has sat in the back
of TFrog. I was recently asked to transport a couple of adults to their
hotel, and so I had a somewhat-nervous older man in the passenger seat and
an absorbed-with-her-cellphone older woman sitting sort-of sideways in the
back. It worked out okay, but I was glad that it was only a 20-minute trip.
And, since almost all of my driving is solo, it was WEIRD having people in
the car. Didn't care for it at all.

The trade-off has always been that, when we drove a distance for vacation,
the Mustang stayed home. That always meant that I had no Mustang on
vacation, and spent the entire week driving around in the Escape (which, I
have to say, is NOT something I enjoy). And no, taking both cars was never
an option. Of course, the moment we got home again, I would volunteer to go
out for milk! After driving an Escape for a week, getting back in the
Mustang always seems a bit strange, but always soooooo right.

dwight

On Feb 25, 8:09*am, "dwight" > wrote:
> " > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 24, 1:49 pm, D E Willson > wrote:
> >> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
> >> ><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
> >> >r-seat-check.html>
> >> >I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
> >> >but I didn't check.
>
> >> >You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.
>
> >> I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
> >> kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
> >> outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
> >> Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
> >> Mustang of any year.
>
> > I don't know. *My old '87 LX 5-oh was our family, and lone, car until
> > 1995. *By 1995, my two kids were 11 and 9. *Yep, that old Mustang
> > worked for us -- and that's including many 700+ mile vacation trips.
> > Not to mention, a trip to the drags when I removed their two car seats
> > to lay down a number of low-14 second passes.

> I always thought the 5.0's were just fine for small children. My two kids
> grew up in the back seat of a Mustang II hatchback, then rode in the back of
> an '84 5.0, and by the time I bought my '93 they were 11 and 13, getting
> just a mite tight back there.

You had an '84 5.0? I never knew that, or least remembered that.

> The good thing was that, as they grew, they wanted less and less to sit back
> there. When we went anywhere as a family, we would take my wife's station
> wagon (or, later, her Escape). I had no problem with that - it meant that
> the kids and ALL of their assorted parephernalia and trappings went in the
> truck, and not in my Mustang. No melted Crayons® in the side pockets, no
> empty french fries bags under the seats.

I remember all that. Lots of pillows, blankets, books (remember
those?) during long trips.

> It had really been about 10 years, I guess, since anyone has sat in the back
> of TFrog. I was recently asked to transport a couple of adults to their
> hotel, and so I had a somewhat-nervous older man in the passenger seat and
> an absorbed-with-her-cellphone older woman sitting sort-of sideways in the
> back. It worked out okay, but I was glad that it was only a 20-minute trip.
> And, since almost all of my driving is solo, it was WEIRD having people in
> the car. Didn't care for it at all.

That's why I'd love a rear seat-less Mustang.

> The trade-off has always been that, when we drove a distance for vacation,
> the Mustang stayed home. That always meant that I had no Mustang on
> vacation, and spent the entire week driving around in the Escape (which, I
> have to say, is NOT something I enjoy). And no, taking both cars was never
> an option. Of course, the moment we got home again, I would volunteer to go
> out for milk! After driving an Escape for a week, getting back in the
> Mustang always seems a bit strange, but always soooooo right.

Same thing going from an Element to a Mustang. The Element on windy
days is like piloting a sailboat. Then to switch to a Mustang, with
it's hunkered down stance, is like jumping in an Indy car by
comparison.

Patrick

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 02:07:08 +0000 (UTC), Brent
> wrote:

>On 2012-02-24, D E Willson > wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
>>><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
>>>r-seat-check.html>
>>>I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested it
>>>but I didn't check.
>>>
>>>You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.
>>
>> I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
>> kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
>> outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
>> Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
>> Mustang of any year.
>
>Mustang has been around long enough that some of us were kids that sat
>in the backseats of them and have different perspective
>
>
>
When I was a kid my folks had a VW bug. We made one long trip in it
when we moved from Cape Cod to Florida. Two adults, 3 kids (13, 11, &
5), and a couple of cats. Luggage in a luggage rack on top. Dad
removed the back of the rear seat. VWs were "family" cars but that
does not mean comfortable back there. Like with Mustangs (and I have
had 2 65 FBs, a Mustang II, and a 72) not enough luggage room, not
enough leg room in back for growing kids or adults... especially if
those in front had longer legs. I have ridden in the back of many pony
cars, and never found one to be comfortable for more than a short
trip. Not saying anyone who disagrees is wrong. It's just my personal
experience since the 1960s.

" > wrote in message
...
> On Feb 25, 8:09 am, "dwight" > wrote:
>> " > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 24, 1:49 pm, D E Willson > wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:11:58 -0500, twk >
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >Yeah, I guess the mustang isn't a great family car.
>> >> ><http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...ng-boss-302-ca
>> >> >r-seat-check.html>
>> >> >I can't see the camaro stacking up any better. They may have tested
>> >> >it
>> >> >but I didn't check.
>>
>> >> >You just have to take the escape when you go out with the kids.
>>
>> >> I never has been a family car. Oh, sure, you can squeeze a couple of
>> >> kids in the back but they outgrow the rear seat about as fast as they
>> >> outgrow their clothes. I know from experience. The same applies to
>> >> Camaros, Firebirds, etc. An old Falcon has more back seat room than a
>> >> Mustang of any year.
>>
>> > I don't know. My old '87 LX 5-oh was our family, and lone, car until
>> > 1995. By 1995, my two kids were 11 and 9. Yep, that old Mustang
>> > worked for us -- and that's including many 700+ mile vacation trips.
>> > Not to mention, a trip to the drags when I removed their two car seats
>> > to lay down a number of low-14 second passes.
>
>> I always thought the 5.0's were just fine for small children. My two kids
>> grew up in the back seat of a Mustang II hatchback, then rode in the back
>> of
>> an '84 5.0, and by the time I bought my '93 they were 11 and 13, getting
>> just a mite tight back there.
>
> You had an '84 5.0? I never knew that, or least remembered that.

The 84 was a bad mistake in saw-it-on-the-lot-had-to-have-it. I don't know
why I bought it, other than the timing was right, financially. It was used
(abused, apparently) and an automatic, gun-metal grey on the outside, but I
had been out of Mustangs for a couple of years, so I bought it. As I recall,
the '84 had all of 175 HP (or a whole 30 less than the '93), but it could
move. One thing I'll never forget is the plastic cross-hatch grille, which
was always a BITCH to clean. This is also the car that reinforced the notion
that I should have a mechanic check out a used car before I buy. Of course,
it's also the car that made me swear NEVER to buy another used Mustang.
(Sorry, CFrog - you were an exception.)

I had one relatively good year with it. The 2nd year, the entire cooling
system had to be replaced - radiator and hoses. The 3rd year, the
electronics started going haywire, I got three speeding tickets in the span
of 12 months (which put me in PA's Assigned Risk pool = $$$), and I sold the
car to the first guy with $3,000 in his pocket. I spent a year in Purgatory
(a 1984 Chevy Cavalier station wagon) as punishment, along with a Kawasaki
650 cruiser. When my insurance rates came back down to normal, it was the
magical year 1993, when we bought both an Escort GT for Jean and TFrog for
me. The entire first year with TFrog, the motorcycle never came out of the
garage, and Jean finally convinced me to sell that off, too. I had no qualms
about that - I had TFrog.

Jean's Escort became my son's car (he trashed it), and she moved on to the
Mystique. The Mystique became daughter's car, when Jean bought the first of
her Escapes (2004, 2007, now 2010). All the while, TFrog is still the best
automotive decision I'd ever made.

Think about it... TFrog was already two years old when I first started
posting in newsgroups. And it's sitting outside this morning, waiting to go
for a romp.

dwight

On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 09:02:15 -0500, "dwight" >
wrote:

>
" > wrote in message
...
>> On Feb 25, 8:09 am, "dwight" > wrote:
>>> " > wrote in message
>SNIP
>
>Think about it... TFrog was already two years old when I first started
>posting in newsgroups. And it's sitting outside this morning, waiting to go
>for a romp.
>
>dwight
>
>
Now that's what I call a relationship!

On Feb 26, 8:02*am, "dwight" > wrote:

> > You had an '84 5.0? *I never knew that, or least remembered that.
>
> The 84 was a bad mistake in saw-it-on-the-lot-had-to-have-it. I don't know
> why I bought it, other than the timing was right, financially. It was used
> (abused, apparently) and an automatic, gun-metal grey on the outside, but I
> had been out of Mustangs for a couple of years, so I bought it.

How old was it when you bought it?

> As I recall,
> the '84 had all of 175 HP (or a whole 30 less than the '93), but it could
> move.

GT or LX?

>One thing I'll never forget is the plastic cross-hatch grille, which
> was always a BITCH to clean. This is also the car that reinforced the notion
> that I should have a mechanic check out a used car before I buy. Of course,
> it's also the car that made me swear NEVER to buy another used Mustang.
> (Sorry, CFrog - you were an exception.)

The CFrog was a low mileage car, right? How did you find it -- friend,
classified, spotted a for sale sign while driving by?

> I had one relatively good year with it. The 2nd year, the entire cooling
> system had to be replaced - radiator and hoses. The 3rd year, the
> electronics started going haywire,

Those are odd things to wear out from being abused. (Typically it's
transmission, brakes or engine problems.) Unless the previous owner
was a "modifier", and in this case a bad one.

> I got three speeding tickets in the span
> of 12 months (which put me in PA's Assigned Risk pool = $$$),

My older brother once received three tickets in one evening -- in only
about 4 hours time. He had a "hotted up" '72 Chevelle and had just
installed some new wheels and tires, and the local authorities,
apparently, found it to be irresistible. The first ticket was for 15
over. The second 10 over. He then came home to inform my mom and
dad. After the discussion, he had but one trip do for the evening and
that was to take his girlfriend home. My parents parting words were
'keep it slow, you can't afford to get anymore tickets." 30 minutes
later he had ticket three -- for [slow] rolling through a stop sign.
Three tickets, three different cops, in two different towns. Needless
to say, not a good evening for my brother, or my parent's insurance
rates. Also, needless to say, he quickly found himself on his own
policy.

and I sold the
> car to the first guy with $3,000 in his pocket. I spent a year in Purgatory
> (a 1984 Chevy Cavalier station wagon) as punishment, along with a Kawasaki
> 650 cruiser.

My brother's purgatory was his beloved Chevelle parked in the garage,
and sitting behind the wheel of a rusted/crashed '68 Dodge pickup, a
vehicle that later would became my "winter beater." (Never has there
been such a cobbled-together, rolling wreck. (A cop who pulled me
over for loud exhaust and partially non-functional blinkers was even
astonished at the amount of dis-function and "band-aids" it sported.
And even more astonished when I nearly ran him over during a parking-
brake test. The plea bargain was I'll rewire the blinkers and fix the
exhaust, in exchange for being able to drive it until Spring when I
promised to junk it. Luckily and surprisingly, for me, he
agreed.)

> When my insurance rates came back down to normal, it was the
> magical year 1993, when we bought both an Escort GT for Jean and TFrog for
> me. The entire first year with TFrog, the motorcycle never came out of the
> garage, and Jean finally convinced me to sell that off, too. I had no qualms
> about that - I had TFrog.

Didn't you have a time when you thought about getting another
motorcycle?

> Jean's Escort became my son's car (he trashed it), and she moved on to the
> Mystique. The Mystique became daughter's car, when Jean bought the first of
> her Escapes (2004, 2007, now 2010). All the while, TFrog is still the best
> automotive decision I'd ever made.

It's weird how some vehicles just click with their owner. My '76
Dodge stepside and the LX both had that magic.

> Think about it... TFrog was already two years old when I first started
> posting in newsgroups.

Back when there were scores of trolls and regulars, one of which who
wouldn't stop lambasting the then new Mustang for under performing
compared to competition.

>And it's sitting outside this morning, waiting to go
> for a romp.

I miss the smallish, intimate dimensions and very appealing
"crudeness" of those Foxes -- it's a combination the new ones lack.

Patrick