help me me find the perfect mustang

Shuckybrown · 04-21-2001, 11:51 PM

wassup everyone! i'm coming here fresh from the import scene. Over the couple of years of being in it i've come to grip that they aren't really fast cars compared to the classic american muscle (i'm talkin about civics and integra's)unless you turbo charge them , supercharge them,or do an engine swap (neither of which i want to do considering i'm 17 and short on cash even though i'm saving up right now)so i'm debating to get either a new or used mustang.i want either an 89-92 lx coupe (I need to find the specs for them) or a new v6, but I’m not stuck on these two so suggestions are wanted.i pretty much know that I can’t get a gt because of the insurance costs. now can you veterans on this board please help me with all kinds on info such as stock numbers and so on such as horsepower,torque, performace parts, performance links etc. on the lx’s, also how is the reliability factor with the mustangs? are all the rumors true? this is the main thing i'm worried about with mustangs ,i don't want to buy a not so cheap car and insurance and have to add the cost of putting it in the shop every other month for broken parts. what do ya’ll recommend All info is greatly appreciated.i really want a mustang thats perfect for me. thanks alot

82 GT · 04-22-2001, 11:10 AM

The 89-93 mustangs are a good years to choose from. The 5.0 in those years make 225 hp and 300 lb/ft. of torque. There are PLENTY
of aftermarket parts available for those engines, is speed is what you are looking for.
If you are looking to beat insurance cost then i would recommend looking for an '89-93 mustang with either a 4cyl or no engine/tranny at all and install a 5.0
The insurance Co. will never know you have a v-8 because they only go by the VIN#
The VIN# will come up as a 4cyl engine and you will pay the rates of a 4 cyl!!!!
I don't know what rumors you heard about 'stangs but they are probably false.
If you are going to mess around with a v-6 mustang, then you may as well stick with a ricer mobile. In my opinion, a mustang isn't a mustang unless it has a v-8.....period!
(I'm going to hear about that remark!)
A stock 5.0 is good for about mid-high 14's in the 1/4 mile and with simple bolt on mods you can be close or into the 13's

------------------
'82 GT 351W C-4,BBK headers,Carter 625 carb,Comp.Cam,Flowmaster exhaust.
1988 GT...T-5,bone stock

Unit 5302 · 04-22-2001, 01:38 PM

1989-1992 LX 5.0 Coupes are in demand these days.

It may be a little hard to come by one in good shape. As far as reliability according to the data history they are 4 and 5 star car's. In otherwords, reliability is awesome. You are always gonna find some cars that are problematic, but you have to look at how they were taken care of or driven.

It would appear that you are looking at the MAF equipped cars, the 1987-1988 (non CA) 5.0's were SD "Speed Density" equipped and outperform the MAF equipped cars stock for stock by a couple tenths in the 1/4. The rating on the 1987-1992 5.0's is 225hp@4200rpm, 300lb@3600rpm. I don't know as those numbers are all accurate, though. The 1987-1988 cars run quicker, only the 1987 was ever actually rated. They just carried the numbers over year to year after that. In 1993 Ford re-rated the 5.0's at 205hp, and 285lb. Truth be told, the 93's got cast hypereutic pistons, and a crappy computer. Ford said the re-rating had nothing to do with actual output, just a different way of rating (average vs best output). Don't believe it. That's a crock. The 5.0's all dyno pretty damn close year to year. The truth is the MAF cars do not make 225hp and 300lb. Course that's all theory and no documentation exists to support that information. The only thing you can back it up with is 1/4 mile times.

Speaking of which
1987-1988 LX Coupe 14.3/14.7
1989-1992 LX Coupe 14.5/14.9

Those are pretty good base estimates T-5 vs AOD.

I know, I know, it's a GTech run, but my out of tune 87GT Hatch with 145k on the clock just pulled a 14.19@103.8 with the mods in my sig, and a plugged up K&N. The time should be really accurate, but the Gtech reads high by 3-4mph trap speed.

Now down to the nitty gritty.

Auto's- Equipped with the AOD tranny and auto 5.0 will run a good 3-4 tenths slower in the 1/4 mile. They can be modded to do much better, but they are not fast by any means in stock form. They need a good converter, a shift kit, and some low rear gears.

Manual- The Borg Warner T-5 manual's have been given a reputation of being weak. Whether or not that's actually true is another story. I think they are a solid tranny, put an aftermarket shifter on them and they'll go a long time, and they'll handle quite a bit of power. They run 3-4 tenths quicker in the 1/4 vs the auto, and they can benefit another 3 tenths easy with some 3.73/4.10 rear gears.

The 5.0 will go about 120k before it begins to show age, mine has a 145k and it's still running strong, so 120 isn't by any means an exact number.

Most drivetrain parts will never give you a hassle on the cars. There is so much difference between optional packages and models that you really have to shoot an idea of what you are looking for exactly in a car before I can say which one's you should be looking at.

------------------
1987 GT 5spd.
D&D Performance "Z" spec T-5
Dynomax 2.5" Super Turbo system
BBK 2 1/2" H-pipe with cats

Shuckybrown · 04-22-2001, 04:32 PM

thanks a whole lot...i'm gunna try to find out about how much my insurance would be for the 5.0. gettin a 4 banger and putting a new engine doesn't sound too bad, but i want a car that i don't have to spend a lot of time and money on, i'd rather buy the car and jus pay for mods and insurance...thanks anyways.

04-22-2001, 08:16 PM

Hey Shucky.....go w/ an early '90's Stang all the way....plenty fast stock, but soooooo many aftermarket things to choose from to make it a real beast. Insurance may put you in the poor house at your age though (you might want to insure it in your parent's name instead - it'll save you a small fortune you can use on mods instead. Good luck!

------------------
'90 LX 5.0; 12K original miles (no sh*&); 3.55 gears; pulleys;Edelbrock Performer Heads; BBK shorties; MSD 6AL box w/ blaster 2 coil; Motorsport E303 cam; Pro-M 75mm MAF; BBK 70mm TB; Eibach spring kit; Southside welded subs; K&N cone filter charger; Hurst shifter; fiberglass turbo hood; A/C-less; rear seat-less; cat-less; 2 chamber Flos; Corbeau racing seats (fronts);
30# injectors; 190 lb fp; FPR; TFS track heat Intake - 12.513 @ 112 mph (Pre-inj/fuelpump/FPR/intake)

04-21-2001, 11:51 PM	#1
Shuckybrown Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: woodbridge,va Posts: 2	help me me find the perfect mustang wassup everyone! i'm coming here fresh from the import scene. Over the couple of years of being in it i've come to grip that they aren't really fast cars compared to the classic american muscle (i'm talkin about civics and integra's)unless you turbo charge them , supercharge them,or do an engine swap (neither of which i want to do considering i'm 17 and short on cash even though i'm saving up right now)so i'm debating to get either a new or used mustang.i want either an 89-92 lx coupe (I need to find the specs for them) or a new v6, but I’m not stuck on these two so suggestions are wanted.i pretty much know that I can’t get a gt because of the insurance costs. now can you veterans on this board please help me with all kinds on info such as stock numbers and so on such as horsepower,torque, performace parts, performance links etc. on the lx’s, also how is the reliability factor with the mustangs? are all the rumors true? this is the main thing i'm worried about with mustangs ,i don't want to buy a not so cheap car and insurance and have to add the cost of putting it in the shop every other month for broken parts. what do ya’ll recommend All info is greatly appreciated.i really want a mustang thats perfect for me. thanks alot

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Honda Dealership - The only place you'll find a stupid Mustang Owner. =(	1969Mach1	Blue Oval Lounge	4	09-21-2002 07:17 PM
Buy a U.S 1994 V8 5L GT Mustang in Australia (Imported from Japan)?	fearby.com	Windsor Power	8	09-10-2002 09:27 AM
Mustang Monopoly	GONZO99TA	Blue Oval Lounge	4	12-09-2001 10:01 AM
Mustang Club of Central Iowa - Car Show, Swap Meet, Cruise & Autocross - June 2 and 3	KB1991	Ford Show & Go	0	05-31-2001 02:04 PM

04-22-2001, 11:10 AM	#2
82 GT Import Slayer Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 2,241	The 89-93 mustangs are a good years to choose from. The 5.0 in those years make 225 hp and 300 lb/ft. of torque. There are PLENTY of aftermarket parts available for those engines, is speed is what you are looking for. If you are looking to beat insurance cost then i would recommend looking for an '89-93 mustang with either a 4cyl or no engine/tranny at all and install a 5.0 The insurance Co. will never know you have a v-8 because they only go by the VIN# The VIN# will come up as a 4cyl engine and you will pay the rates of a 4 cyl!!!! I don't know what rumors you heard about 'stangs but they are probably false. If you are going to mess around with a v-6 mustang, then you may as well stick with a ricer mobile. In my opinion, a mustang isn't a mustang unless it has a v-8.....period! (I'm going to hear about that remark!) A stock 5.0 is good for about mid-high 14's in the 1/4 mile and with simple bolt on mods you can be close or into the 13's ------------------ '82 GT 351W C-4,BBK headers,Carter 625 carb,Comp.Cam,Flowmaster exhaust. 1988 GT...T-5,bone stock

04-22-2001, 01:38 PM	#3
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	1989-1992 LX 5.0 Coupes are in demand these days. It may be a little hard to come by one in good shape. As far as reliability according to the data history they are 4 and 5 star car's. In otherwords, reliability is awesome. You are always gonna find some cars that are problematic, but you have to look at how they were taken care of or driven. It would appear that you are looking at the MAF equipped cars, the 1987-1988 (non CA) 5.0's were SD "Speed Density" equipped and outperform the MAF equipped cars stock for stock by a couple tenths in the 1/4. The rating on the 1987-1992 5.0's is 225hp@4200rpm, 300lb@3600rpm. I don't know as those numbers are all accurate, though. The 1987-1988 cars run quicker, only the 1987 was ever actually rated. They just carried the numbers over year to year after that. In 1993 Ford re-rated the 5.0's at 205hp, and 285lb. Truth be told, the 93's got cast hypereutic pistons, and a crappy computer. Ford said the re-rating had nothing to do with actual output, just a different way of rating (average vs best output). Don't believe it. That's a crock. The 5.0's all dyno pretty damn close year to year. The truth is the MAF cars do not make 225hp and 300lb. Course that's all theory and no documentation exists to support that information. The only thing you can back it up with is 1/4 mile times. Speaking of which 1987-1988 LX Coupe 14.3/14.7 1989-1992 LX Coupe 14.5/14.9 Those are pretty good base estimates T-5 vs AOD. I know, I know, it's a GTech run, but my out of tune 87GT Hatch with 145k on the clock just pulled a 14.19@103.8 with the mods in my sig, and a plugged up K&N. The time should be really accurate, but the Gtech reads high by 3-4mph trap speed. Now down to the nitty gritty. Auto's- Equipped with the AOD tranny and auto 5.0 will run a good 3-4 tenths slower in the 1/4 mile. They can be modded to do much better, but they are not fast by any means in stock form. They need a good converter, a shift kit, and some low rear gears. Manual- The Borg Warner T-5 manual's have been given a reputation of being weak. Whether or not that's actually true is another story. I think they are a solid tranny, put an aftermarket shifter on them and they'll go a long time, and they'll handle quite a bit of power. They run 3-4 tenths quicker in the 1/4 vs the auto, and they can benefit another 3 tenths easy with some 3.73/4.10 rear gears. The 5.0 will go about 120k before it begins to show age, mine has a 145k and it's still running strong, so 120 isn't by any means an exact number. Most drivetrain parts will never give you a hassle on the cars. There is so much difference between optional packages and models that you really have to shoot an idea of what you are looking for exactly in a car before I can say which one's you should be looking at. ------------------ 1987 GT 5spd. D&D Performance "Z" spec T-5 Dynomax 2.5" Super Turbo system BBK 2 1/2" H-pipe with cats

04-22-2001, 04:32 PM	#4
Shuckybrown Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: woodbridge,va Posts: 2	thanks a whole lot...i'm gunna try to find out about how much my insurance would be for the 5.0. gettin a 4 banger and putting a new engine doesn't sound too bad, but i want a car that i don't have to spend a lot of time and money on, i'd rather buy the car and jus pay for mods and insurance...thanks anyways.

04-22-2001, 08:16 PM	#5
bada$$lx Guest Posts: n/a	Hey Shucky.....go w/ an early '90's Stang all the way....plenty fast stock, but soooooo many aftermarket things to choose from to make it a real beast. Insurance may put you in the poor house at your age though (you might want to insure it in your parent's name instead - it'll save you a small fortune you can use on mods instead. Good luck! ------------------ '90 LX 5.0; 12K original miles (no sh*&); 3.55 gears; pulleys;Edelbrock Performer Heads; BBK shorties; MSD 6AL box w/ blaster 2 coil; Motorsport E303 cam; Pro-M 75mm MAF; BBK 70mm TB; Eibach spring kit; Southside welded subs; K&N cone filter charger; Hurst shifter; fiberglass turbo hood; A/C-less; rear seat-less; cat-less; 2 chamber Flos; Corbeau racing seats (fronts); 30# injectors; 190 lb fp; FPR; TFS track heat Intake - 12.513 @ 112 mph (Pre-inj/fuelpump/FPR/intake)