Therefore, the question of why a Ford Mustang King Cobra of the 1970s was a "terrible car" is flawed. The quality of a "King Cobra" depended entirely on the individual modifications and the skill (or lack thereof) of the person performing them. Some custom-built cars with that moniker might have been excellent, others poorly executed. There's no single standard for comparison.
To address a similar question, however, the performance of *some* high-performance Mustangs of the 1970s could be considered underwhelming compared to their muscle car predecessors from the mid-to-late 1960s, due to a number of factors:
* Insurance and Safety Regulations: Increased insurance premiums and stricter safety regulations led to heavier cars with less powerful engines. This was a trend across the entire muscle car industry, not just Mustangs.
* Emissions Standards: The tightening of emission control regulations resulted in less powerful engines and reduced performance.
* Fuel Crises: The oil crises of the 1970s led to a shift towards smaller, more fuel-efficient engines, further impacting performance.
So, any perceived "terribleness" of a modified Mustang called a "King Cobra" wouldn't be due to a factory defect but to the quality of the modifications or to the general decline in raw power of muscle cars during that period due to external factors.
