The Mustang II front end is compact.  That's why people use it, not because it rides or handles better than the stock setup.  Its just a way to eliminate the shock towers so engine options free up and header routing is easier. 

The stock setup with fresh components and the Shelby/Arning drop handles on par with newer cars IMO.  Actually it has the inherent advantage of two control arms and less camber gain than a strut style front end.  The MII setup has two control arms as well, but the spindles are shorter so the inherent camber gain is greater. 

Rufus68 wrote:

I've never had one; however, the buzz on the VMF is that a refreshed stock front suspension with the Arning drop is better than a Mustang II type suspension.

Well the car I am looking at buying already has the setup in it … I just figured it would be a good setup for clearance and maybe a Coyote or something in it later. But was just curious on how the ride was.

I have the R&C MII front suspension with coil-over shocks.  My biggest reason was to eliminate the shock towers.  My 351W is much, much easier, and pleasant, to work on now.  I'm very happy with this setup.  The total travel on the coli-overs is 3.5" that makes watching for potholes, shrunken manhole covers, etc. something to watch for in my city.  The recommended normal ride height compresses the coil-over about 1 to 1.5".  On the highway, I do not find it much different then when I had the stock suspension with the Shelby drop.  Handling does seems to be "flatter" when making turns, even quick ones.  Note that I no longer try to challenge the road, or the car to find the "limits". 
One other note, with this setup, one will not be able to remove the oil pan with the engine in the car.

Bearing Bob wrote:

If I were to buy a car with a Mustang II front suspension (ain't going to happen) I would take it to get an alignment before I made the purchase final. This would confirm, or show that the cradle/cross member was installed correctly or not.

This sounds like a great suggestion.