Can the 94-95 5.0's run with the 87-93's?

xspeed02 · 04-27-2001, 10:36 AM

Well I've decided I want a newer mustang but I think I want the 5.0 again. I haven't been very impressed with the 4.6 SOHC's. I just want to make sure the 94-95 gt will run as fast as my 90GT with similar mods. Also, does anyone have an idea of how much more insurance a 20year old male with 0 points on his license would pay for a 96 Cobra as opposed to a GT? I've seen a couple Cherry Cobras around where I live for only like 2 or 3 more thousand dollars than the 94-95 GTs I've been looking at. Thanks guys.

------------------
Team Xspeed Leader/Co-Founder
1990 Black Mustang GT 5spd
Current Mods: 2 1/2 Offroad H-Pipe, Borla Cat-Back Exhaust, 91-93 5 Star Pony Wheels, K&N Filter, Free Mods, Pioneer Headunit, MB Quartz Speakers, Orion Xtreme 300 Amp, 2 JL Audio W0's, 130 Amp Alternator, 3.73's
Future Mods: Engine rebuild with Trickflow Heads, GT-40 Intake, Custom Ground Cam, and 14lb ATI Procharger!
AIM=xspeed02

1HOTGT · 04-27-2001, 11:54 AM

I think the SN95's are a bit heavier than the Fox body. Mine's a ******' pig!

Also, the computers in the 94-95's aren't worth a sh*t!

Chevyguy · 04-27-2001, 11:54 AM

According to stock car 1/4 times you will always be about 0.5 sec behind a Fox car with identical mods. That just means you gotta spend more to run with the 87-93's. There still is a real 5.0 under there so it will run the same after the mods.

I dont know how much of the diff is due to the setup of the 94-94 5.0 vs the heavier weight of the SN95. My dads 98 GT convertible is a much nicer overall car than my 90 even though I can blow it away stock vs stock, so that is someting to consider.

------------------
Frank W
90 5.0 LX coupe Daily driver. Silencer removed, K&N filter. Flexalite fan, 3 core radiator. FMS flywheel and Clutch
88 Notch 2.3L 5 speed Parts/beater car

74 Chevy Laguna Type S-3 305 fixing soon, getting a 454 to put in garage
www.chevellepages.com/folingo

95mustanggt · 04-27-2001, 12:04 PM

Berfore my H pipe and chip I ran a stock 90-93 5.0 LX. The best that I could muster was to keep my nose by his rear tire. And he was slowly pulling away the whole time. I have run at real high speeds with a fox or 2 and I seem not to lose as bad. The car has less air resistance.

I may not be quite as fast, but I get a lot of completments from people. Most that don't know a lot about mustangs, think my car is a 98-99 (which if they knew the difference between the years could never be!).

I like the 5.0 in it. But I still like the newer stangs as well.

------------------
Driving: 1998 F-150
Far way in Edmonton==>

1995 Mustang GT

Blacksn95 · 04-27-2001, 01:28 PM

I own both a 89 fox body and a 94, I find that the 94 is slower stock than my 89 was stock. The computer on the 94 is also shitter. but if you get a chip and the usual bolt ons you should be running about the same with the 87-93's

Skankin · 04-27-2001, 02:48 PM

Ya, the SN95's computer pulls timing away when it shifts (manual & auto). And they're heavier.

You do get a stiffer chassis & 5 lug though.

RAINSTANG · 04-27-2001, 03:36 PM

1992 was the last year for a stock 5.0 with a 225 HP rating. In 1993 it dropped to 215, so even the last Fox (93) had the 215 HP motor along with the 94 & 95. AS far as insurance goes, you may find this interesting. My Farmers rep told me insurance is actually lower on a Cobra than a GT because of the actuarial tables. More GTs on the road than Cobras = more GTs in accidents. Wierd but true.

fordmanck · 04-27-2001, 05:50 PM

I've owned both althouh my Fox was a Speed Density car. With pullies, off road, flows and a k&n on both cars the Fox went 14.0 with a 2.73 gear. The Sn-95 had the same mods except for a 3.08 gear and it went 14.4. From what I know Speed Density cars ran a little better than Mass Air cars, but my SN-95 had a little better gear and was heavier so I'll call that a wash. As previously stated, the computers suck in SN-95's and the intakes arent the greatest, but it's not hard to get them to go fast.

------------------

94GT Mac Headers, BBK Off-road H-pipe, ASP Pulleys, Pro 5.0 Shifter, 4.10 Gear, Weld in subs, Flowmaster 2 chambers, NOS 150 shot. Best ET 12.34 @ 110.

fastang · 04-27-2001, 06:41 PM

I know that mines a hartop stick and it hit a 14.6 totaly stock without powershifting. It had the factory 308's. Some GT's have the 273's and some had the 308's. My modding has gone horribly though. I think my combo is missmatched because its only hitting 14.40's

------------------
95GT B303 cam, 1.7 rockers, 65mm TB, 73mm MAF, milled heads, 355's K&N, BBK Longtubes, Flowmaster cat back, pulleys, msd coil, 9mm wires, Tremec 3550, Pro5.0 shifter,10.5 Motorsport clutch, FMS aluminum driveshaft, weld in subframe connectors

95mustanggt · 04-27-2001, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RAINSTANG:
1992 was the last year for a stock 5.0 with a 225 HP rating. In 1993 it dropped to 215, so even the last Fox (93) had the 215 HP motor along with the 94 & 95.

They didn't drop the HP in the motor though. I thought they just changed the HP calculation from Peak to average? Also didn't the '93's have 205 HP after the new rating and the 94/95 had 215/225 HP? Which would actually give the SN95 5.0 a 10HP advantage.

Unit, buddy, you are the man on this stuff...

------------------
Driving: 1998 F-150
Far way in Edmonton==>

1995 Mustang GT

xspeed02 · 04-27-2001, 10:46 PM

Thanks for the info, really appreciate it. I think the newer bodystyle is better to look at but I just can't seem to pull myself completely away from my fox. Maybe I'll have my cake and eat it too.

Dunno, but I found a couple cherry 94-95 gts with less than 20k miles on them. And 96 cobras with less than 15k or so miles on them. Only a 2k dollar price difference though... So I guess insurance willing, I'll see which one I get, or if I just decide to stay with my 90. Car payments are starting to look less and less attractive... Ugh, decisions.

------------------
Team Xspeed Leader/Co-Founder
1990 Black Mustang GT 5spd
Current Mods: 2 1/2 Offroad H-Pipe, Borla Cat-Back Exhaust, 91-93 5 Star Pony Wheels, K&N Filter, Free Mods, Pioneer Headunit, MB Quartz Speakers, Orion Xtreme 300 Amp, 2 JL Audio W0's, 130 Amp Alternator, 3.73's
Future Mods: Engine rebuild with Trickflow Heads, GT-40 Intake, Custom Ground Cam, and 14lb ATI Procharger!
AIM=xspeed02

04-27-2001, 10:36 AM	#1
xspeed02 Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Kettering, Ohio Posts: 119	Can the 94-95 5.0's run with the 87-93's? Well I've decided I want a newer mustang but I think I want the 5.0 again. I haven't been very impressed with the 4.6 SOHC's. I just want to make sure the 94-95 gt will run as fast as my 90GT with similar mods. Also, does anyone have an idea of how much more insurance a 20year old male with 0 points on his license would pay for a 96 Cobra as opposed to a GT? I've seen a couple Cherry Cobras around where I live for only like 2 or 3 more thousand dollars than the 94-95 GTs I've been looking at. Thanks guys. ------------------ Team Xspeed Leader/Co-Founder 1990 Black Mustang GT 5spd Current Mods: 2 1/2 Offroad H-Pipe, Borla Cat-Back Exhaust, 91-93 5 Star Pony Wheels, K&N Filter, Free Mods, Pioneer Headunit, MB Quartz Speakers, Orion Xtreme 300 Amp, 2 JL Audio W0's, 130 Amp Alternator, 3.73's Future Mods: Engine rebuild with Trickflow Heads, GT-40 Intake, Custom Ground Cam, and 14lb ATI Procharger! AIM=xspeed02

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Hey were the 94-95 5.0's faster then the 96-98 4.6's?	96_4.6	Blue Oval Lounge	14	05-15-2003 05:43 AM
Two 5.0's at the same time and turbo probe smack down.	Dark_5.0	Stang Stories	9	08-09-2002 09:26 AM
5.0's burning oil??	MattwantsSpeed	Windsor Power	8	05-27-2002 01:22 AM
Icing the Intake on 5.0's....	95mustanggt	Stang Stories	6	05-10-2002 09:24 AM
V6 Camaros killing 5.0's regularly?	fastang	Stang Stories	17	01-05-2001 10:10 PM

04-27-2001, 11:54 AM	#2
1HOTGT Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 12	I think the SN95's are a bit heavier than the Fox body. Mine's a *****' pig! Also, the computers in the 94-95's aren't worth a sht!

04-27-2001, 11:54 AM	#3
Chevyguy Backyard Mechanic/Chemist Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Acton MA USA Posts: 435	According to stock car 1/4 times you will always be about 0.5 sec behind a Fox car with identical mods. That just means you gotta spend more to run with the 87-93's. There still is a real 5.0 under there so it will run the same after the mods. I dont know how much of the diff is due to the setup of the 94-94 5.0 vs the heavier weight of the SN95. My dads 98 GT convertible is a much nicer overall car than my 90 even though I can blow it away stock vs stock, so that is someting to consider. ------------------ Frank W 90 5.0 LX coupe Daily driver. Silencer removed, K&N filter. Flexalite fan, 3 core radiator. FMS flywheel and Clutch 88 Notch 2.3L 5 speed Parts/beater car 74 Chevy Laguna Type S-3 305 fixing soon, getting a 454 to put in garage www.chevellepages.com/folingo

04-27-2001, 12:04 PM	#4
95mustanggt Registered Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Kamloops, BC Posts: 2,875	Berfore my H pipe and chip I ran a stock 90-93 5.0 LX. The best that I could muster was to keep my nose by his rear tire. And he was slowly pulling away the whole time. I have run at real high speeds with a fox or 2 and I seem not to lose as bad. The car has less air resistance. I may not be quite as fast, but I get a lot of completments from people. Most that don't know a lot about mustangs, think my car is a 98-99 (which if they knew the difference between the years could never be!). I like the 5.0 in it. But I still like the newer stangs as well. ------------------ Driving: 1998 F-150 Far way in Edmonton==> 1995 Mustang GT

04-27-2001, 01:28 PM	#5
Blacksn95 Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Delta, B.C. Canada Posts: 5	I own both a 89 fox body and a 94, I find that the 94 is slower stock than my 89 was stock. The computer on the 94 is also shitter. but if you get a chip and the usual bolt ons you should be running about the same with the 87-93's

04-27-2001, 02:48 PM	#6
Skankin Registered Member Join Date: Dec 1998 Location: London, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,349	Ya, the SN95's computer pulls timing away when it shifts (manual & auto). And they're heavier. You do get a stiffer chassis & 5 lug though.

04-27-2001, 03:36 PM	#7
RAINSTANG Registered Member Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Portland, OR, USA Posts: 98	1992 was the last year for a stock 5.0 with a 225 HP rating. In 1993 it dropped to 215, so even the last Fox (93) had the 215 HP motor along with the 94 & 95. AS far as insurance goes, you may find this interesting. My Farmers rep told me insurance is actually lower on a Cobra than a GT because of the actuarial tables. More GTs on the road than Cobras = more GTs in accidents. Wierd but true.

04-27-2001, 05:50 PM	#8
fordmanck Registered Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Seminole, FL Posts: 193	I've owned both althouh my Fox was a Speed Density car. With pullies, off road, flows and a k&n on both cars the Fox went 14.0 with a 2.73 gear. The Sn-95 had the same mods except for a 3.08 gear and it went 14.4. From what I know Speed Density cars ran a little better than Mass Air cars, but my SN-95 had a little better gear and was heavier so I'll call that a wash. As previously stated, the computers suck in SN-95's and the intakes arent the greatest, but it's not hard to get them to go fast. ------------------ 94GT Mac Headers, BBK Off-road H-pipe, ASP Pulleys, Pro 5.0 Shifter, 4.10 Gear, Weld in subs, Flowmaster 2 chambers, NOS 150 shot. Best ET 12.34 @ 110.

04-27-2001, 06:41 PM	#9
fastang Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: santa ana ca Posts: 1,349	I know that mines a hartop stick and it hit a 14.6 totaly stock without powershifting. It had the factory 308's. Some GT's have the 273's and some had the 308's. My modding has gone horribly though. I think my combo is missmatched because its only hitting 14.40's ------------------ 95GT B303 cam, 1.7 rockers, 65mm TB, 73mm MAF, milled heads, 355's K&N, BBK Longtubes, Flowmaster cat back, pulleys, msd coil, 9mm wires, Tremec 3550, Pro5.0 shifter,10.5 Motorsport clutch, FMS aluminum driveshaft, weld in subframe connectors

04-27-2001, 10:46 PM	#11
xspeed02 Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Kettering, Ohio Posts: 119	Thanks for the info, really appreciate it. I think the newer bodystyle is better to look at but I just can't seem to pull myself completely away from my fox. Maybe I'll have my cake and eat it too. Dunno, but I found a couple cherry 94-95 gts with less than 20k miles on them. And 96 cobras with less than 15k or so miles on them. Only a 2k dollar price difference though... So I guess insurance willing, I'll see which one I get, or if I just decide to stay with my 90. Car payments are starting to look less and less attractive... Ugh, decisions. ------------------ Team Xspeed Leader/Co-Founder 1990 Black Mustang GT 5spd Current Mods: 2 1/2 Offroad H-Pipe, Borla Cat-Back Exhaust, 91-93 5 Star Pony Wheels, K&N Filter, Free Mods, Pioneer Headunit, MB Quartz Speakers, Orion Xtreme 300 Amp, 2 JL Audio W0's, 130 Amp Alternator, 3.73's Future Mods: Engine rebuild with Trickflow Heads, GT-40 Intake, Custom Ground Cam, and 14lb ATI Procharger! AIM=xspeed02