Shopping for a Mustang

Unit 5302 · 08-28-2001, 06:40 PM

I've seen the 99 GT priced as low as $14k. Try www.classifieds2000.com.

It's a better search engine than Autotrader. More options, better for narrowing searches.

I would personally avoid the 1996-1998 GT's. To make them fast is just too much money. The 1996-1998 Cobra's need very little to be very fast, and they are a little bit better as a platform for very hi performance street/strip applications, because they have a solid rear axle. They make less hp and are a different body style though.

A 1999 or 2001 Cobra (there is no 2000 model) makes 320hp and should run mid 13's stock. Differences from the GT are significant. Independant rear suspension, DOHC 32v engine, styling package, bigger brakes, better wheels/tires, and some other odds and ends. I've shopped these cars recently, and right now, it's hard to come by one of these, unless you max your price range. On a side note, gears and tires will put the car into the 12's or damn close to it, and you should be able to keep your warranty.

The 1999-2001 GT has 260hp. You can find a 99 with 20k miles at as low as $14k right now. Stock they should run about a 14 flat with a good driver. The 1999 GT is what I will most likely be buying in the late winter of next year.

As far as the 5.0 vs 4.6 debate, I currently drive a 1987 GT with 152k miles on it. The engine doesn't tick, knock, or stutter. Even with it's horrible gearing (2.73's) I pull LT-1's in 3rd gear and all it has is exhaust, H pipe, and a K&N. I don't even have the timing bumped. Gteched last spring, missing from a bad vacuum line to the BAP sensor, with stock 10* timing, on a shitty country road, with a z spec 2.95 1st gear, with 100 extra lbs of crap in the car and 30k on it's last tuneup it ran 14.19@103.8mph. Even after subtracting the 3-4mph Gtech variance, it traps just as fast as a new GT. Had it been properly tuned with a clean airfilter and 30min of work I could have probably pulled a 13.8x@105 out of it. In my opinion the 5.0L stock for stock will usually lose to a new 4.6L GT, but it's got a bit of Musclecar to it, where the new GT feels more like, well, a GT.

[This message has been edited by Unit 5302 (edited 08-28-2001).]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Safety Issue 64 - 70 Mustangs	Mach1 Cobra Jet	Classic Mustangs	20	07-11-2005 08:06 PM
t-5, is it the same in the 4 cylinder and V8	ex-lt1-guy	Windsor Power	12	03-03-2002 01:59 AM
89-Mustang pulling trailer -vs- 2000 Mustang	Five0	Stang Stories	7	04-01-2001 02:50 AM
Salaeen, Shelby, Cobra please define these for me.	Taqus	Blue Oval Lounge	3	01-17-2001 02:39 AM
Attn: Canadian Mustang Owners shopping in US	95mustanggt	Windsor Power	10	01-09-2001 09:35 PM

08-28-2001, 06:40 PM	#1
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	I've seen the 99 GT priced as low as $14k. Try www.classifieds2000.com. It's a better search engine than Autotrader. More options, better for narrowing searches. I would personally avoid the 1996-1998 GT's. To make them fast is just too much money. The 1996-1998 Cobra's need very little to be very fast, and they are a little bit better as a platform for very hi performance street/strip applications, because they have a solid rear axle. They make less hp and are a different body style though. A 1999 or 2001 Cobra (there is no 2000 model) makes 320hp and should run mid 13's stock. Differences from the GT are significant. Independant rear suspension, DOHC 32v engine, styling package, bigger brakes, better wheels/tires, and some other odds and ends. I've shopped these cars recently, and right now, it's hard to come by one of these, unless you max your price range. On a side note, gears and tires will put the car into the 12's or damn close to it, and you should be able to keep your warranty. The 1999-2001 GT has 260hp. You can find a 99 with 20k miles at as low as $14k right now. Stock they should run about a 14 flat with a good driver. The 1999 GT is what I will most likely be buying in the late winter of next year. As far as the 5.0 vs 4.6 debate, I currently drive a 1987 GT with 152k miles on it. The engine doesn't tick, knock, or stutter. Even with it's horrible gearing (2.73's) I pull LT-1's in 3rd gear and all it has is exhaust, H pipe, and a K&N. I don't even have the timing bumped. Gteched last spring, missing from a bad vacuum line to the BAP sensor, with stock 10* timing, on a shitty country road, with a z spec 2.95 1st gear, with 100 extra lbs of crap in the car and 30k on it's last tuneup it ran 14.19@103.8mph. Even after subtracting the 3-4mph Gtech variance, it traps just as fast as a new GT. Had it been properly tuned with a clean airfilter and 30min of work I could have probably pulled a 13.8x@105 out of it. In my opinion the 5.0L stock for stock will usually lose to a new 4.6L GT, but it's got a bit of Musclecar to it, where the new GT feels more like, well, a GT. [This message has been edited by Unit 5302 (edited 08-28-2001).]