about the 96 GT

jaxter1 · 11-07-2003, 11:10 AM

Well a car w/near 100K will need work soon, but the modular should be good for many more miles before overhaul if it's running solid now. I wouldn't trust any 5.0 after 80k or so...that's when I dumped my last one, shaft seals went, also other things pushrod motors require at that age made cutting losses the smart choice. Don't buy that post before about a 91 GT (what, 7+ 0-60, high 15's?) 'waxing' a 96 GT (mid-6 0-60, low to flat 15's). I call BS on that, read some reviews (C&D, R&T, etc.). The 96 is faster. I had an LX 5.0 notch, low rear gears, that was the quickest stock Fox made, I think...hey, just get a Fox and drop in the biggest rebuilt/hotrodded engine you could pass emissions with. I wouldn't trust any engine w/close to 100K mi. Or...spend a few more bucks and get a lower-miled car. The 4.6 is a good engine. The less miles/yrs of service, the better, less money down the road. But overall, any late 90's GT w/good miles should go for 7-8K depending on options. And it's quicker/faster/more buildable than a Fox. Sure, if you have a few grand burning a hole in your pocket, put a blower on a 5.0 or drop in a stroker. For me, a lower-miled 4.6 would be a better choice....they make blowers for them, too. Not everyone needs to spend 2-3K blowing a motor....heck, a later Cobra/SVT or even Rousch still makes more HP than most blown/turbo'd 5.0's bone stock. And they handle better/look cooler/have way better sound systems. Not to mention OBD-II vs. the dreaded EEC-IV or whatever it is....look at the money you'll need to dump into it to make it fast. Think of that money better-spent on a newer car to begin with, and start saving up. Do I make any sense? Then again, I drive my 'stangs daily, even in winter...duh.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Raced a 99 GT 5-speed	StoplightWarrior	Stang Stories	4	05-15-2002 09:13 PM
1988 Gt - 1998 Gt Hp Each Year	steedamustang01	Modular Madness	13	05-09-2002 07:26 PM
1996 Cobra vs 2000 Mustang GT	Milktasd	Stang Stories	2	04-05-2002 03:11 AM
RESULTS - Grand Prix GT vs. Celica GTS	302 LX Eric	Stang Stories	7	09-25-2001 06:46 PM
Just got my '89 GT! Time slip guesses?	84stangLX	Blue Oval Lounge	6	07-25-2001 09:44 PM

11-07-2003, 11:10 AM	#9
jaxter1 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: il Posts: 10	Well a car w/near 100K will need work soon, but the modular should be good for many more miles before overhaul if it's running solid now. I wouldn't trust any 5.0 after 80k or so...that's when I dumped my last one, shaft seals went, also other things pushrod motors require at that age made cutting losses the smart choice. Don't buy that post before about a 91 GT (what, 7+ 0-60, high 15's?) 'waxing' a 96 GT (mid-6 0-60, low to flat 15's). I call BS on that, read some reviews (C&D, R&T, etc.). The 96 is faster. I had an LX 5.0 notch, low rear gears, that was the quickest stock Fox made, I think...hey, just get a Fox and drop in the biggest rebuilt/hotrodded engine you could pass emissions with. I wouldn't trust any engine w/close to 100K mi. Or...spend a few more bucks and get a lower-miled car. The 4.6 is a good engine. The less miles/yrs of service, the better, less money down the road. But overall, any late 90's GT w/good miles should go for 7-8K depending on options. And it's quicker/faster/more buildable than a Fox. Sure, if you have a few grand burning a hole in your pocket, put a blower on a 5.0 or drop in a stroker. For me, a lower-miled 4.6 would be a better choice....they make blowers for them, too. Not everyone needs to spend 2-3K blowing a motor....heck, a later Cobra/SVT or even Rousch still makes more HP than most blown/turbo'd 5.0's bone stock. And they handle better/look cooler/have way better sound systems. Not to mention OBD-II vs. the dreaded EEC-IV or whatever it is....look at the money you'll need to dump into it to make it fast. Think of that money better-spent on a newer car to begin with, and start saving up. Do I make any sense? Then again, I drive my 'stangs daily, even in winter...duh.