94 5.0 or 2002 gt convertible

IMO the 2002 is a better daily driver. Much better electrical and ODB2 support. But at that mileage it's no "show car".

If its for the summer then you don't have to worry about the worst problem, water leaks(just be careful washing especially with power washers). Tops are expensive to replace and you gotta be a little bit a masochist to DIY IMHO. Check the floors and under the back seat for rust(although usually a problem on older cars). I think the 4.6's will last a long time as will the 5.0, I do think proper maintenance is more important on the 4.6 though. The extra oomph in the '02 is much appreciated. No claimed expert here but I have owned 6 or so rag tops, 63 1/2 Falcon sprint, '59 Pontiac Catalina, 1963 Corvair Spider, '85 Mustang GT, '86 Mustang GT, and '94 Mustang GT. Oh and a 1971 Bronco with top off most of the time. Nothing like a top down ride in the warm evening in shorts and t shirt going up the coast or mountains or hell anywhere. I do miss mine sometimes.
Sorry went off there(old age).
I would want receipts and to research what was done to the engine rebuild etc. wm burns is right IMHO about the '02 being a better choice. After owning 39 cars(so far)I have found patience usually helps with the search, I looked for many months to find my '02 GT( not a ragtop this time)cream puff with 83K and gorgeous inside and out for $5340.00(Cali. car too).
Good luck and post some pix when you get it.