93 different from 87-92

roadrunner93 · 02-15-2001, 12:42 PM

OK guys. I've heard so many different opinions on this its unbelievable. I have a 93 LX. What is the difference from the 87 to 92's? Last night I heard that, in 1993, they used smaller MAF, smaller Throttle bodies, and a less agressive cam. IS this true. I would really like some info on this. Are there any sites that you can look up stuff like that?
I figured the only difference was that Ford used the hyperutetic pistons?

------------------
93 LX
1"5/8 shorties, 2 1/2 mandrel bent off road H Pipe, Dynamax cat back, K&N Air silencer removed, Taylor wires, 3.55 gears, Hurst Shifter, March Performance Pulleys, 14 degree timing

Green92LX · 02-15-2001, 12:44 PM

You are right on the pistons, but I can't help you on the rest. All I CAN tell you is you are better off with your 93 motor than an 86

------------------
1992 5.0 LX, Edelbrock 6037 Heads, Cobra Intake,E-303, 1.6 Roller Rockers,65MM Holley TB, 75 MM Pro M Mass Air, 190 LPH FP w/ 24 lb injectors,BBK equal length shorties,offroad h-pipe,Mac Flowpath Mufflers, Pro 5.0, 3.73's,Motorsport "C" springs,welded subframe connectors, Ponies w/ 225/50 Nittos, 93 Cobra Spoiler

Daily driver: 89 Coupe with 205K plus, BBK shorties,offroad h-pipe,2-chamber flowmasters with dumps, cut and welded stock shifter...and it runs like a champ.

Unit 5302 · 02-15-2001, 01:53 PM

Oooohhh!

The '93 5.0 myths! They are kinda like the speed density myths!

Hehe.

The '93 5.0 got hypereutic pistons instead of forged pistons that were on the 87-92 cars. I'm not sure about the 85-86's. Anyway, in addition to the hyper pistons, '93's seemed to come with the least aggressive computers (to stay off warranty claims, especially on the T-5) but I don't know how much weaker.

The 87-88(non CA) cars were SD.
88(CA)-93 Fox 5.0's got MAF.

The MAF cars got a slightly revised cam, MAF sensor, different computer calibrations, and some other very minor tweeks. Your '93 has the same motor as the rest of the MAF 5.0's, except for the hyper pistons.

Ford also changed the rating on the 1993 5.0HO motors. 205hp@4200rpm, 285lb/ft@3600rpm. That's down from the previous ratings of 225hp@4200rpm and 300lb/ft@3600rpm.

That change is not to be taken at face value though. Ford said the change had to do with a different rating system using average hp output versus best output. Which is BS. The 5.0's do not vary in peak production by that much. Something worth noting is the fact that none of the 1988-1992 5.0's were ever rated at all. Ford carried over the numbers from year to year, dispite making the changes to the systems like MAF. In reality the SD cars will usually run 2-3 tenths quicker than the MAF cars, which is more than likely related to more hp without MAF and other revisions.

As far as the performance difference of hyper vs forged, on a straight up comparison, the hypers should make more power than the forged simply because they are lighter. Maybe a full 2hp more!! Heh.

Anyway, the 205hp rating is damn conservative if you ask me. That's saying 170hp at the wheels with the T-5. That's really low for a 5.0. I'd bet maybe 210-215 is accurate for the MAF cars, probably 225-230 for the SD cars.

Just my opinon on the actual hp levels.

DemonGT · 02-15-2001, 02:04 PM

im not sure if its turn i just heard that the 87-92 engine blocks had more iron in them or something like that, that made them a little stronger....

------------------
1991 GT,T-5,air silencer removed,racing clutch(previous owner put in so dont know what kind),K&N air filter,Aiwa deck,power acoustic amp,2 12" pianeers,UPDATE: Just got my Mac long tube headers and Cat-back

By the time summer comes ill have full Mac exhaust,new shifter knob and what ever else i can afford

NoSlow5.0 · 02-15-2001, 02:12 PM

Pistons. 79-84 were cast-aluminum alloy with 8.3:1 compression. 85- forged aluminum alloy with thicker ring lands, compression up to 8.4:1. 86-forged flat tops with 9.2:1. 87-92 Forged aluminum alloy with .030 inch deep, dish and valve-clearence reliefs. Switched to domed pistons with 9.0:1 comp. 93- Hypereutectic alluminum alloy pistons with 9.0:1 comp.

88-93 also has a less agressive cam lobe contour. This contributes about a 3 HP loss from 87. Light Em Up!!

[This message has been edited by NoSlow5.0 (edited 02-15-2001).]

AJSTANG · 02-15-2001, 03:30 PM

Although there were no mechanical changes from 1992 to 1993 (aside from hypereutectic pistons replacing the previous forged aluminum pistons), both the horsepower and torque ratings dropped for ‘93 - horsepower by 20 and torque by 25. The reduced ratings were influenced by a stack-up of minor mechanical changes and by changes to Ford’s engine evaluation processes. Dictated mainly by emissions, fuel economy and customer satisfaction requirements, a series of mechanical revisions had been made since Ford initially assigned the engine’s 225-horsepower rating for 1987. These include a restrictive resonator added to the inlet tract (1987-1993) that produced a 5-7 horsepower loss. The small camshaft profile change in 1989 reduced HO output by 3 horsepower. The restrictive mass airflow meter in the inlet tract introduced in 1989 yields 2-3 horsepower less than the speed density system. Some minor exhaust system revisions made between 1987-1993 also add up to another small reduction in engine output. The second contributing factor in the re-rating of the ‘93 V8 involved changes in the processes that Ford used to select engines for testing and the engine’s state of dress (with all engine-driven accessories) during testing. Combined with the ‘87-93 mechanical revisions, the revised-for-1993 testing procedures add up to the ‘93 model year’s reduced output ratings.
www.mustanggt.org

02-15-2001, 12:42 PM	#1
roadrunner93 Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Canada Posts: 65	93 different from 87-92 OK guys. I've heard so many different opinions on this its unbelievable. I have a 93 LX. What is the difference from the 87 to 92's? Last night I heard that, in 1993, they used smaller MAF, smaller Throttle bodies, and a less agressive cam. IS this true. I would really like some info on this. Are there any sites that you can look up stuff like that? I figured the only difference was that Ford used the hyperutetic pistons? ------------------ 93 LX 1"5/8 shorties, 2 1/2 mandrel bent off road H Pipe, Dynamax cat back, K&N Air silencer removed, Taylor wires, 3.55 gears, Hurst Shifter, March Performance Pulleys, 14 degree timing

02-15-2001, 12:44 PM	#2
Green92LX Registered Member Join Date: Jun 1999 Location: North Haven,CT Posts: 336	You are right on the pistons, but I can't help you on the rest. All I CAN tell you is you are better off with your 93 motor than an 86 ------------------ 1992 5.0 LX, Edelbrock 6037 Heads, Cobra Intake,E-303, 1.6 Roller Rockers,65MM Holley TB, 75 MM Pro M Mass Air, 190 LPH FP w/ 24 lb injectors,BBK equal length shorties,offroad h-pipe,Mac Flowpath Mufflers, Pro 5.0, 3.73's,Motorsport "C" springs,welded subframe connectors, Ponies w/ 225/50 Nittos, 93 Cobra Spoiler Daily driver: 89 Coupe with 205K plus, BBK shorties,offroad h-pipe,2-chamber flowmasters with dumps, cut and welded stock shifter...and it runs like a champ.

02-15-2001, 01:53 PM	#3
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Oooohhh! The '93 5.0 myths! They are kinda like the speed density myths! Hehe. The '93 5.0 got hypereutic pistons instead of forged pistons that were on the 87-92 cars. I'm not sure about the 85-86's. Anyway, in addition to the hyper pistons, '93's seemed to come with the least aggressive computers (to stay off warranty claims, especially on the T-5) but I don't know how much weaker. The 87-88(non CA) cars were SD. 88(CA)-93 Fox 5.0's got MAF. The MAF cars got a slightly revised cam, MAF sensor, different computer calibrations, and some other very minor tweeks. Your '93 has the same motor as the rest of the MAF 5.0's, except for the hyper pistons. Ford also changed the rating on the 1993 5.0HO motors. 205hp@4200rpm, 285lb/ft@3600rpm. That's down from the previous ratings of 225hp@4200rpm and 300lb/ft@3600rpm. That change is not to be taken at face value though. Ford said the change had to do with a different rating system using average hp output versus best output. Which is BS. The 5.0's do not vary in peak production by that much. Something worth noting is the fact that none of the 1988-1992 5.0's were ever rated at all. Ford carried over the numbers from year to year, dispite making the changes to the systems like MAF. In reality the SD cars will usually run 2-3 tenths quicker than the MAF cars, which is more than likely related to more hp without MAF and other revisions. As far as the performance difference of hyper vs forged, on a straight up comparison, the hypers should make more power than the forged simply because they are lighter. Maybe a full 2hp more!! Heh. Anyway, the 205hp rating is damn conservative if you ask me. That's saying 170hp at the wheels with the T-5. That's really low for a 5.0. I'd bet maybe 210-215 is accurate for the MAF cars, probably 225-230 for the SD cars. Just my opinon on the actual hp levels.

02-15-2001, 02:04 PM	#4
DemonGT Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 879	im not sure if its turn i just heard that the 87-92 engine blocks had more iron in them or something like that, that made them a little stronger.... ------------------ 1991 GT,T-5,air silencer removed,racing clutch(previous owner put in so dont know what kind),K&N air filter,Aiwa deck,power acoustic amp,2 12" pianeers,UPDATE: Just got my Mac long tube headers and Cat-back By the time summer comes ill have full Mac exhaust,new shifter knob and what ever else i can afford

02-15-2001, 02:12 PM	#5
NoSlow5.0 YOU HAVE NO MARBLES!!!!!! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Jonesboro,Georgia,USA (Providence, Ri) Posts: 868	Pistons. 79-84 were cast-aluminum alloy with 8.3:1 compression. 85- forged aluminum alloy with thicker ring lands, compression up to 8.4:1. 86-forged flat tops with 9.2:1. 87-92 Forged aluminum alloy with .030 inch deep, dish and valve-clearence reliefs. Switched to domed pistons with 9.0:1 comp. 93- Hypereutectic alluminum alloy pistons with 9.0:1 comp. 88-93 also has a less agressive cam lobe contour. This contributes about a 3 HP loss from 87. Light Em Up!! [This message has been edited by NoSlow5.0 (edited 02-15-2001).]

02-15-2001, 03:30 PM	#6
AJSTANG Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Maryland Posts: 123	Although there were no mechanical changes from 1992 to 1993 (aside from hypereutectic pistons replacing the previous forged aluminum pistons), both the horsepower and torque ratings dropped for ‘93 - horsepower by 20 and torque by 25. The reduced ratings were influenced by a stack-up of minor mechanical changes and by changes to Ford’s engine evaluation processes. Dictated mainly by emissions, fuel economy and customer satisfaction requirements, a series of mechanical revisions had been made since Ford initially assigned the engine’s 225-horsepower rating for 1987. These include a restrictive resonator added to the inlet tract (1987-1993) that produced a 5-7 horsepower loss. The small camshaft profile change in 1989 reduced HO output by 3 horsepower. The restrictive mass airflow meter in the inlet tract introduced in 1989 yields 2-3 horsepower less than the speed density system. Some minor exhaust system revisions made between 1987-1993 also add up to another small reduction in engine output. The second contributing factor in the re-rating of the ‘93 V8 involved changes in the processes that Ford used to select engines for testing and the engine’s state of dress (with all engine-driven accessories) during testing. Combined with the ‘87-93 mechanical revisions, the revised-for-1993 testing procedures add up to the ‘93 model year’s reduced output ratings. www.mustanggt.org