86-93 or 94-95?

andrewgarland · 02-23-2001, 03:42 PM

What happened as far as a power difference in the last decade of the 5.0? Which ones are faster? I know about the new body style, but how much changed? I have a '95 GT, and like to think that it's good cause "it's the last year of the 5.0"... but how realistic is that?

Thanks,
Andy

fastang · 02-23-2001, 04:40 PM

94-95's are 200lbs heavier because of sound reducing materials and crap, but they have the same hp at 215. They outhandle fox bodies but are usualy a tenth or so slower in the qtr. Mine hit a 14.6 stock but most I have seen are hitting a 14.7-14.8 stock. Speed density stangs are faster stock but harder to modify.

------------------
95GT B303 cam, 1.7 rockers, 65mm TB, 73mm MAF, milled heads, 355's K&N, off road pipes, pulleys, msd coil, 9mm wires, Tremec 3550, Pro5.0 shifter,10.5 Motorsport clutch, weld in subframe connectors

95mustanggt · 02-23-2001, 06:51 PM

It all comes to personal taste. I love my 95GT and would not trade it for anything. I love that it was the "last year for the 5.0L". It is a nice looking car, but has an easily moddified engine. For me that is enough to never want to trade mine.

I'd go with the 94-95's. The Fox's are faster, but I think the SN95's handle better.

------------------
White 1995 Mustang GT
Dynomax Cat-Back, Offroad H-pipe, a chip, K&N Filters w/o Air Silencer
My 1995 Mustang GT

mustang17 · 02-24-2001, 12:17 AM

If you wanted the best drag car you go with the 86-93. The 94-95 has better handling and brakes. I find that is a more pleasing road car. I'm glad I don't have a 96-98, nothing against them, the're just more expensive to mod. Happy I did get the "last of the 5.0's" when I think about it.

------------------
1995 GT Black sleeper
Edelbrock 6037 heads,Edelbrock proformer intake,Edelbrock cam, 70mm TB,75mm pro-m mass air,Taylor wires, Underdrive pulleys,Equal length headers,K&N filter
Flowmaster cat-back, Eibach pro rate springs
lower control arms
3.73 gear Centerforce clutch

andrewgarland · 02-24-2001, 04:07 AM

Thanks for the responses! I'd have to agree, the 94-95 are more pleasing to drive. (I also have an '87). I was trying to decide which to hang on to in the long run. The '95 is definitely in a lot better condition, but the '87 is paid for. I got another couple years to finish the '95 (I just got it, it's super clean). In any case, what would you guys suggest as far as mods? I want to get somewhere between 270 and 300 HP. It's completely stock right now. It's AOD also. Thanks!

Andy

Unit 5302 · 02-24-2001, 02:11 PM

This is what I'd do. The total will run around $3500, I'd expect low 13's out of that combo with traction.
[list=1][*]Timing[*]Cold Air Induction[*] Underdrive Pullies[*]3.73 gears[*]B&M Shift Kit[*]PI Stallion Converter[*]Hi-flow H pipe[*]2.5" Cat Back[*]Kenne Bell 6psi.[/list=a]

[This message has been edited by Unit 5302 (edited 02-24-2001).]

02-23-2001, 03:42 PM	#1
andrewgarland Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: El Monte, CA, USA Posts: 34	86-93 or 94-95? What happened as far as a power difference in the last decade of the 5.0? Which ones are faster? I know about the new body style, but how much changed? I have a '95 GT, and like to think that it's good cause "it's the last year of the 5.0"... but how realistic is that? Thanks, Andy

02-23-2001, 04:40 PM	#2
fastang Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: santa ana ca Posts: 1,349	94-95's are 200lbs heavier because of sound reducing materials and crap, but they have the same hp at 215. They outhandle fox bodies but are usualy a tenth or so slower in the qtr. Mine hit a 14.6 stock but most I have seen are hitting a 14.7-14.8 stock. Speed density stangs are faster stock but harder to modify. ------------------ 95GT B303 cam, 1.7 rockers, 65mm TB, 73mm MAF, milled heads, 355's K&N, off road pipes, pulleys, msd coil, 9mm wires, Tremec 3550, Pro5.0 shifter,10.5 Motorsport clutch, weld in subframe connectors

02-23-2001, 06:51 PM	#3
95mustanggt Registered Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Kamloops, BC Posts: 2,875	It all comes to personal taste. I love my 95GT and would not trade it for anything. I love that it was the "last year for the 5.0L". It is a nice looking car, but has an easily moddified engine. For me that is enough to never want to trade mine. I'd go with the 94-95's. The Fox's are faster, but I think the SN95's handle better. ------------------ White 1995 Mustang GT Dynomax Cat-Back, Offroad H-pipe, a chip, K&N Filters w/o Air Silencer My 1995 Mustang GT

02-24-2001, 12:17 AM	#4
mustang17 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Concord, MA, USA Posts: 264	If you wanted the best drag car you go with the 86-93. The 94-95 has better handling and brakes. I find that is a more pleasing road car. I'm glad I don't have a 96-98, nothing against them, the're just more expensive to mod. Happy I did get the "last of the 5.0's" when I think about it. ------------------ 1995 GT Black sleeper Edelbrock 6037 heads,Edelbrock proformer intake,Edelbrock cam, 70mm TB,75mm pro-m mass air,Taylor wires, Underdrive pulleys,Equal length headers,K&N filter Flowmaster cat-back, Eibach pro rate springs lower control arms 3.73 gear Centerforce clutch

02-24-2001, 04:07 AM	#5
andrewgarland Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: El Monte, CA, USA Posts: 34	Thanks for the responses! I'd have to agree, the 94-95 are more pleasing to drive. (I also have an '87). I was trying to decide which to hang on to in the long run. The '95 is definitely in a lot better condition, but the '87 is paid for. I got another couple years to finish the '95 (I just got it, it's super clean). In any case, what would you guys suggest as far as mods? I want to get somewhere between 270 and 300 HP. It's completely stock right now. It's AOD also. Thanks! Andy

02-24-2001, 02:11 PM	#6
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	This is what I'd do. The total will run around $3500, I'd expect low 13's out of that combo with traction. [list=1][]Timing[]Cold Air Induction[] Underdrive Pullies[]3.73 gears[]B&M Shift Kit[]PI Stallion Converter[]Hi-flow H pipe[]2.5" Cat Back[*]Kenne Bell 6psi.[/list=a] [This message has been edited by Unit 5302 (edited 02-24-2001).]