When I was 15, I worked for a Ford dealer in 1969 and drove these new off the nu-car carriers !

“A four wheel drift that felt as smooth as homemade ice cream” 🤣🤣🤣

Perfect lines. Such a beautiful design. Of course all American cars this year were beautiful.

I love these old Bud Lindemann Road Test videos. Bud seems like a real car guy. Beautiful Mach 1. But my favorite big block Stang is the 68 Mustang 428 CJ

Bud drives em, like he's stole them. Buds the man

I`d go back in time and buy 5 of them.

My favorite Mustang . A girl I dated had a 69 sports roof with a 302 and automatic. It also had the fixed hood scoop , rear window louvers , and a spoiler /wing on the trunk lid. In the late 80's it got a complete restoration and a Ford performance 302 crate engine.

the 428 cobra-jet was available in 1968 models. at the winternationals in 1968 two 428 68 fastbacks faced off for the superstock eliminator title. Don nicholson won in the ss 4 spd car. the 68 fb was a couple of hundred lbs lighter than the 69. in hotrod mags road test of the 68 428 cobra jet they clocked the fastest 1/4 mile time they had ever recorded for a street stock car. 13 plus seconds. I was there (pomona) in 68 and 69 and saw the whole shooting match.

I’ve been binge watching this Bud guy entertaining stuff

Pinnacle of American power. We walked on the Moon this year. And this Mustang was unadulterated epic. No smog, no lawyers. Just brutal performance sucking down gallons of hydrocarbons

Oh man, the description of the carburetor is poetry.

Ahhh the best era for muscle cars 50-70's. Had a neighbor in 69 Had this and with slicks, tune and headers was into the 12's.

That car i was legitimately my dads car. I’m so glad I found this!! I sent it to him! Thank you!

the best looking MUSTANG ever built!!!

when cubes were king. gotta love the big blocks.

0-60 in 5.9 with that wheelspin? Very impressive.

Guys from around Dearborn always say "DEARBURN" I love it.

Let's go surfing now! Everybody's learning how! Come a safari with me!

My friend bought one of these in 1989 for $4k (expensive for a muscle car at the time, but the 428's were already getting collectible). I remember going up Reseda Blvd. in the San Fernando Valley and some guy made his way next to us in a Taurus SHO. We kept whipping him the next 3 lights, and the fourth, without even looking at us he got into the right lane, turned right, and took off like a dog with its tail between its legs, LOL

I was never a fan of the stamped steel suspension that bent on ever bump but it was a good looking car!

There folks is your first factory "Shaker " hood scoop.

You got the 428SCJ when you ordered a 3:91 or 4:30 gear. Oil cooler,LeMans rods, 1UA crankshaft. Horse power way underated

when Ol Bud said it was a knuckle buster he meant what happened to your hands trying to change the spark plugs in a 428 Mustang!

My great aunt, at 70 years old, was driving a red 1969 Mustang fastback, cotter pins in the hood to keep it closed while racing.

Knuckle buster yes !! ever try to change a set of plugs on one of these !!

69 was the peak year for the musclecar era and the Mach 1 epitomizes the performance cars of that model year. I was a high school senior that year and the new Mach 1s were everywhere, mostly 351s. I saw more than a few totaled Mach 1s sitting at gas stations which is where they hauled wrecks to back then. After a few years their numbers dwindled with the survivors ending up in teenage hands, jacked up and wearing primer with glasspack mufflers. A lot of them rusted into oblivion not long after the warranties expired. Fords rusted fast and hard back then. But I'm happy to see all the restored (and expensive) Mach 1s these days.

I want one in every color available in 1969

Got my license in 66. Ford was nowhere with street muscle cars until 1968 and the 428 CJ. Sure you could get the hot 427 Super Stock engine for around a thousand bucks, in a Galaxie unless you were one of the privileged allow to buy one of the 100 or so Fairlanes. But the GT 390 and 428 7 liter were stones, even with the dual quads and headers Shelby put on the GT500 they just weren't quite up to the performance potential of the cheaper GTOs and SS 396s that were the big sellers. Then the 428 CJ gets new heads with decent sized exhaust ports and a new cam and at least 390 hp. And for a few hundred bucks over the standard 390 GT you could get it in any Mustang or Torino and keep up with just about any muscle car. Rare in 68, by 69 428 CJ Mustangs were out in force.

People from Barrett-Jackson just cringing watching these videos...🤣

Zero to sixty in 5.9 seconds was pretty swift for it's weight. It's swift now.

5.9 to sixty is pretty good even for todays cars...impresive!

This car ran a best of 13.56 on slicks bone stock all motor and no computers, 335hp was underrated. With a little tweaking, a 4:11 you're well in the 12s"

Legendary vehicle. Power, speed, good looks and wonderful handling!! What more could anyone ask for?!! PS. Although I was changing cars as frequently as changing underwear back in those days, (lol) unfortunately I never got around to buying one of these. And I regret it! ... BUT, a good buddy I had DID own one. And I spent a lot of time in it, AND, spent a fair amount of time behind the wheel driving it. So, I knew the car very well. One last thing to consider. I get so tired of seeing in so many comments, people writing that "all these cars were big boats that were all over the road", or that "these cars don't have performance because the designers had little to work with, and didn't know much"..."way back then" 8 ......... These statements are absurd...!! Manufacturers had to meet NEW, completely ridiculous regulations to conform to emissions and gas mileage limits. This meant actually De-tuning motors to put out less HP & performance than they did from the factory. Today, we have $5.00 per gallon gas, and car makers using electric to combat the problem. We see car makers today, struggling to squeak out every extra HP they can, from tiny 4 cylinder engines, all bolted into basically a plastic body that rides and drives like a go kart. That isn't progress IMO. Most people reading & writing here in these comments, probably we're not even born yet when the gas crisis hit us back in 72-73. But if you think todays bad, paying $5.00 a gallon? Imagine back to 1972- 1973, when WE paid nearly the same amount per gallon!!! But, minimum wage at that time, we were only making about $100 a week BEFORE taxes taken out!!! Even if you had a high paying job at the time, say $300 a week before taxes, and that was a LOT then, the gas prices made it impossible. Also, unlike now, back then they would run out of gas!! So, you'd wait 3 hours in line to get gas, then finally you get to the pump and the station attendant tells you all the tanks are empty/dry. "Sorry about that, you can try again tomorrow".... Stations were all closed, "Out of gas".... So it was serious. OPEC tightened the grip, and everything that takes gas stopped running!! So car makers HAD to take drastic steps to show the buyers gas mileage was going to be better in new cars. Lastly: These cars all drove similarly to one another. They all slid in turns. Most had oversteer characteristics, but people knew this, and expected this, since they were all rear wheel drive. (just a couple of exceptions, front wheel drive was an oddball, that most people either hated or knew nothing about) ... A few cars like the front heavy Chevy Impalas with big blocks, had terrible understeer issues. All (or at least most) of the Chrysler vehicles back then (Dodge, Plymouth, Chrysler) used a unique torsion bar suspension up front, and in their big full sized cars like the Fury lll's etc. had fantastic handling due to that system. Especially when the vehicle was light in the front end, due to having a small engine like the 318 V8 for example. Short on power, but great handling. My point is people today would call the fury three a "land yacht" that's all over the road. When in actuality it's a beautiful handling car. The problem is they're comparing it to one of today's Go-cart type vehicles. These old cars were not designed to ride or drive like a "go-cart". All of these old cars would slide through turns, they ALL exhibited either understeer or oversteer, were ALL rear wheel drive, and they ALL drove/drive exactly like they were designed to drive. And THAT'S a good thing. Not a bad thing.

I had a 69 black on black coupe, my first car in 1985.

69. The peak of the american automobile. What a year to buy a car.

@1:10, the Insurance companies were talking notes.

love that colour combo

i was 16 my dad had one just like it xcept it had a 4 speed 2nd gear 3rd gear locked you back in the seat o ne time was leave the little city of pinole calif headed to rodeo calif took off up the hill was gone 130 i slowed down and in the distance behind me i see flashing red and blue lights police man stops me and says son i took off after you just as you were cresting the hill and iam couldnt see you when i came over the hill how fast was you going and dont lie to me i said 65 officer ok he says ill write this ticket for 80 in a 45 becuase i know it was faster than that he says i was going 115 and i still couldnt see you if i had gone a little further he would have turned around and went back to pinole my mom covered for me as i sneaked it out and the ticket busted me trust me that car was the shit every body wanted that car it was silver and black and not a blimish on it my dad sold it in 1984 for 40 gs the badest car i ever drove thanks dad r.i.p 2014

Good shit for sure let’s face it 5.9 0 to 60 is fast on shitty tires what a great show

I miss my first Mustang 1969 black Mach 1

Bud Lindenmann is cool. I want to get me a Bud Lindemann t-shirt

A little lite on the testing in this one. Drag racing must have been the economical focus.

Was underrated for sure @ 335HP!

That was my first car in 1971

Nobody: 🎙: “knuckle buster.” 🤣🤣🤣

So far it Doesn't look like Ford will have enough sense to bring back the Mack 1 for 2019, which would be just in time to celebrate the 50th anniversary of this Ridiculously good Looking Iconic muscle machine ..Too Bad...I would buy one for sure!

A buddy of mine in High School had a 10 year old '69 Mach 1. I wonder if he still has it.

huge chunks of etmosphere...oh gosh..😁.good and intertaining video.

Bud knew how to use that prose! So did Tom McCahill.

Classic lines, great year - 1969

Ford underrated their engines at that time.

That was an awesome ride

Good tires would have made a huge difference

I owned one unrestored and perfect. I was as teenager when I bought it in '79. 510HP to the wheels on dyno and stock. 430 Detroit locker lifted the wheels out of the gate with street tires and beat everything in sight! I've owned over 150 cars, most of them fast! 427 Camaro, 429 Cyclone, 440M Charger etc etc etc and my 428CJ is still talked about at get togethers with what's left of my high school buddies. It was a terror!

Always thought the '69 Fastback Mustang looked like a '67/'68 that went through a weight lifting program - everything a little tighter and sleeker and a more defined muscularity.

All of the cars back then would have run considerably lower ET's if they only had TRACTION. And well yeah, a few more broken parts to boot.

Mine was incomparable. It was a 69 .5 build Mach 1 Super CJ GT. Nobody understands the car more than Carol ,Steve and me and the others are dead .

Nice to look at Mustangs when they were real Mustangs tires back then words that good as tires they make now this would allow that car to handle a little better and get better traction

tested by the same guy this car was a full second quicker than the 1969 Hemi Charger.

The Cobra Jet Mach 1 was the little brother to the 1969 CAMARO SS 375hp 396 not even mentioning the COPO 427 or the ZL-1 CAMAROS !

Best looking Mustang ¹⁹69

Ford sandbagged the horsepower rating on the 428 Cobra Jet recent article had a Ford worker work the dino on 428 Cobra Jets stated that the 428 actually put out 428 horsepower not 335 hp. This was strictly done for insurance purposes.

More more more!!! MORE! that wasnt fast off the line imo by todays standard , but it wasnt slow.

Since the 428 CJ was introduced in mid-68, wasn't Ford already making up for lost time?

Is this the guy that does the Ralph Williams car commercial goes ballistic on Ralph Williams so sure sounds like it

@4:04 0-60 in 5.9 seconds. People today would claim that is “slow”.

Shout out to everybody who identifies as part of the "Performance Youth Market." LOL YYYeeaaa Buddy...FOMOCO Big Block Murica!

Probably a 12sec. car with modern tires and a modern trans.

I had a 69 Mustang 428 CJ minus the accessories, and minus the black hood and stripes. Dark green, black interior and a 4 speed. Mine had the same wheels as this one. I was 18 and in Heaven!

I laugh out loud on every single brake test...on every single car... Jeezoo

Notice the low rpm. And low hp? But you really shift it at 6500 and the hp goes up alot. They advertised muscle cars like that to keep insurance costs down.

HOMEMADE ICE CREAM!!!

Fast cars in the NHRA.

Hp and tq rated at 3400rpms. That's some sandbagging for sure !

I was lucky to have one of these 69 428 cj

I have this car's little brother.

You know what ,not only was that body style the best ,it was also affordable . Too bad American manufacturers followed the Japanese into oblivion car designs . Anew Mustang was less than 4 grand and the high H.P. engines were only a few hundred dollars option . Now the Mustang looks nice but it has a crapper 4 cylinder as the standard engine everything else is thousands of dollars option . The Shelby is nice but you need to rent out your step sister to afford one . The Mach E is a joke ! All we have in cars these days is computers on wheels ,no heart no soul ,just Ralph Nader shit shoved down our throats by overbearing politicians and insurance scum bag companies . Nice video dude ,We need Bud back to test the new shit in today's show rooms. Later I need a coffee.

Has anybody noticed this car the mock one is a super cobra jet drag pack with air conditioning

all Ford had to do was put a higher gear ratio in the rear end and put a different cam in their motors to let it rev up to six grand and they would have whooped ass and all those Chevys & mopars.

Great car if y can take big time co2

Can you drop a couple of those at my house?

was rubber not as sticky back then as it is today? I've watched several of these videos and all the cars seem to have terrible tires that make way to much squealing. this is a performance car, it shouldn't be leaning and sliding like that.

Brand new car and it has the wrong horn pad on it. Matter of fact the whole plastic top piece is not even mounted to the pad.

Let's be honest, though; this car was supplied by Ford--do you really think it was the same as production models? I'm not picking on Ford, all manufacturers did the same thing with press cars. But out on the streets, the 428 CJ was whipped by LS6 Chevelles, big block Mopars and Stage 1 Buicks.

I had one and it didn't handle worth a dime.ran decent .my 383 road runner would leave it guick.

I had a ‘69 Mach I with a 351w 4bbl with aluminum mid-rise intake. ‘69 was the only year Ford made a 351w 4bbl- the 351c was NO MATCH for it. The car weighed only 2950lbs and would run like a scolded dog. I miss that car.

He gushed over this one

i know exactly where one is... its sitting in my back yard...LOL

My wife's 70 with a 351 and 2000$ worth of c-4 smokes the tires real good, probably, I don't know!!!

335bhp doesn't seem very much for a big block V8.

Handling ❓😂 it did drift and spin nice . It spun perfectly around the motor . Best were the disc brakes 😜❗

Why not CADILLACS NOR LINCOLNS TESTED? ?????

.now they cost 50 gs or more

428 is crap it's a tame 427 . same torque with 100 less hp

These Cobra Jet motors put down 420hp or more to the ground in reality....junk-ass chevy hunks of shit were gettin their asses kicked by these rigs all the damn time...

Next time floor it.

Hahaha. O-60 in 5.9. Motor Trend’s 0-60 in an Accord 2.0 turbo 4 banger is 5.7. Amazing that some people pay 100k for a “classic” muscle car and loose to some millennial in an accord with a baby seat in the back. Of course I’m old enough to remember when you could pick up a muscle car like this used in the mid seventies for 500 to 1500 bucks. Yeh, I know: Ok boomer. Just sayin. Ummmm, but I’d still love to have one of these 😛

TorQUE

I wonder why FORD couldn't figure out that Rear Sway Bars and Front Disc Brakes were a good idea.

I thought it was 429 not 428.