I'm trying to decide if I want another fox coupe or maybe get a 94/95 body style. If I'm going to buy a fox I'm going to have to put a lot of parts from a sn95 car to make it decent. I love both but, want to stick with a 302 car for the simple fact of being able to do more for less and 4.6 cars always need boost to make decent power. I have had friends that built 94 cars and been happy. Whats the price to do mods and up keep on the cars? Do the cars have to keep that stupid elbow in the intake manifold. I thought I'd get some pros and cons of fox vs. sn95 to make a decision.
94/95 or a fox
- Thread starter bditty50
- Start date
BlackVert
15 Year Member
fox pro: parts are more plentiful and generally cost less
fox pro: the fox cars are lighter
sn95 pro: stiffer body
sn95 pro (personal preference): i like the body style more
you can do a fox throttle body conversion on 94/95s ... it's been done alot
of course, given the fact that even the newest 95 is almote 15 years old, either a fox or sn95 car is bound need stuff and have annoyances due to age
what sn95 parts are you talking about swapping over if you get a fox?
fox pro: the fox cars are lighter
sn95 pro: stiffer body
sn95 pro (personal preference): i like the body style more
you can do a fox throttle body conversion on 94/95s ... it's been done alot
of course, given the fact that even the newest 95 is almote 15 years old, either a fox or sn95 car is bound need stuff and have annoyances due to age
what sn95 parts are you talking about swapping over if you get a fox?
Sounds like you're under the mistaken impression that the 94/95 GT and Cobra are 4.6 modular engines. This is not true - there is a 5.0 under our hoods from the factory. The long block is 100% identical to the fox's, tho the intake was taken from the Thunderbird 5.0 "supposedly" so the engine would fit under our hoods. Don't understand that one myself, a lot of folks have done the Fox throttle body conversion (as BlackVert mentioned) without any problems. The accessories and brackets are different from the Fox 5.0
Point is, a 94/95 GT or Cobra will give you the 5.0 you want to keep.
Point is, a 94/95 GT or Cobra will give you the 5.0 you want to keep.
NO I was saying that I want to stick to a 302 like a 94/95 car. I know 4.6s started in 96 thats why I'm considering a 94/95 car. Well the long block isn't exactly identical the 94/95 cars can without forged pistons if I'm not mistaken. As for the computer they have a weird setup with ECU and OBD which I never understood. I hate the intake elbow deal I think its weird I would change that right away. What is the weight on gt coupe?
As I understand it 
There wern't really all that many Fox stangs that had forged pistons
About the elbow
Opinion on how it looks when you pop the hood is one thing
however
When talking NA and making power .........
I've yet to see ... Hard Data ... that shows it offers
more restriction
Hey ... Our pcm ain't weird
Its just different :Word:
Grady
There wern't really all that many Fox stangs that had forged pistons
About the elbow
Opinion on how it looks when you pop the hood is one thing
however
When talking NA and making power .........
I've yet to see ... Hard Data ... that shows it offers
more restriction
Hey ... Our pcm ain't weird
Its just different :Word:
Grady
skunk21
Active Member
As I understand it
There wern't really all that many Fox stangs that had forged pistons
About the elbow
Opinion on how it looks when you pop the hood is one thing
however
When talking NA and making power .........
I've yet to see ... Hard Data ... that shows it offers
more restriction
Hey ... Our pcm ain't weird
Its just different :Word:
Grady
only the very late 1992's and all the 1993's -95's had hypereutectic pistons, the 85-early 92 5.0 H.O's have forged pistons. I'm not going to knock the sn95 it has it's +'s but the fox is lighter and easier to tune. The chassis on the fox can be tightened up very easy, the sn95 has a little more in the comfort area though.
My priority is always about power
thus
The lighter Fox gets the nod with power to weight ratio
Now ... about that easier to tune thing
Sure ... If you just got a few bolt ons
but
A serious h/c/i NA combo on a Fox will not be totally efficient
without optimizing the pcm :Word:
I mean ... A Pro or Self Tuner who knows his stuff
He shouldn't have any more difficulty with one or the other
Now ... if we are talking about ..........
fartin around with fuel pressure
and
twistin the dizzy
That Ain't Tunin
Grady
I like the looks of the 94/95 cobras. All GT's should have come with the circle fog lights bc they just go with the car better. Interiors on the 94/95 were much better than the fox.
The fox has weight on its side, forged pistons and the looks of the Vert GT are among the BEST mustang ever made in my o. I actually liked the fox vert gt better than my 94/95 but I couldnt find one that hadn't been trashed so I went 94. It was neck and neck and of course I would go fox if I did it again to be differnt..
The fox has weight on its side, forged pistons and the looks of the Vert GT are among the BEST mustang ever made in my o. I actually liked the fox vert gt better than my 94/95 but I couldnt find one that hadn't been trashed so I went 94. It was neck and neck and of course I would go fox if I did it again to be differnt..
nmcgrawj
Advanced Member
Its funny how the rumor of a non-tuned 94-95 vs. a non tuned fox runs over to all of a sudden a fox being a walk in the park and 94-95's still being nightmares. LOL SO no fox's have tuning issues?
I've had a h/c/i 302, a h/c/i 351w, and now an explorer engine with a cam.....
I tuned EVERY COMBO with EASE. I was using a PMS at the time, and i have no doubt that any professional (im farrrrrrrrr from a professional) or anyone using a tweecer/quarterhorse could acheive the same thing.
Our computers are in fact superior in some ways.
I personally dont care for any fox mustang. Dont get me wrong, i can respect a nice one, but for my personal taste, they just dont do it for me.
And what parts are more expensive for a 94-95? Anything you do, is fox specific. Besides the transmission and TB.....everything is pretty much the same.
I'd vote 94-95 all day long.
I've had a h/c/i 302, a h/c/i 351w, and now an explorer engine with a cam.....
I tuned EVERY COMBO with EASE. I was using a PMS at the time, and i have no doubt that any professional (im farrrrrrrrr from a professional) or anyone using a tweecer/quarterhorse could acheive the same thing.
Our computers are in fact superior in some ways.
I personally dont care for any fox mustang. Dont get me wrong, i can respect a nice one, but for my personal taste, they just dont do it for me.
And what parts are more expensive for a 94-95? Anything you do, is fox specific. Besides the transmission and TB.....everything is pretty much the same.
I'd vote 94-95 all day long.
Husky44
10 Year Member
What's your goal? Define "decent power"?
Sounds like you've had foxes in the past, so you know what you like/dislike. Here's why I prefer my SN95 5.0 over a fox:
1) Way more comfortable/better looking interior
2) Tighter body/suspension out of the box (yeah, I know you can put subframes on a fox--you can do the same with the SN95)
3) PRIMARY REASON: It just looks more like a Mustang. Being a representative of the old-fart crowd here, I have to tell you that my idea of a Mustang is 1st-generation (65-70). I love what the Fox bodies did to bring back the intent of the original Mustang, but they missed the looks completely, IMHO. Not saying they're bad-looking, just saying they don't look like a Mustang to me. I remember when the 94s came out, I saw it and said "wow, someone at Ford gets it!" Not "retro" like the S197s, but they pulled the styling cues from the first gen cars forward--grill opening, side scoops (still haven't figured out why they made the tri-bar taillights on our cars horizontal instead of vertical, but I'm keepin' mine so people don't think I'm runnin' a mod motor
). How about a pony logo or two?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to dis Foxes, just that I like the looks of our cars a lot better.
Sounds like you've had foxes in the past, so you know what you like/dislike. Here's why I prefer my SN95 5.0 over a fox:
1) Way more comfortable/better looking interior
2) Tighter body/suspension out of the box (yeah, I know you can put subframes on a fox--you can do the same with the SN95)
3) PRIMARY REASON: It just looks more like a Mustang. Being a representative of the old-fart crowd here, I have to tell you that my idea of a Mustang is 1st-generation (65-70). I love what the Fox bodies did to bring back the intent of the original Mustang, but they missed the looks completely, IMHO. Not saying they're bad-looking, just saying they don't look like a Mustang to me. I remember when the 94s came out, I saw it and said "wow, someone at Ford gets it!" Not "retro" like the S197s, but they pulled the styling cues from the first gen cars forward--grill opening, side scoops (still haven't figured out why they made the tri-bar taillights on our cars horizontal instead of vertical, but I'm keepin' mine so people don't think I'm runnin' a mod motor
). How about a pony logo or two?Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to dis Foxes, just that I like the looks of our cars a lot better.
'66 coupe
Founding Member
If I were you, I'd just look at both and pick up the best deal you can get. I've seen some good deals on foxes in my area on craigslist lately. '94/'95s are obviously a little harder to find.
The strange thing to me is that USUALLY the '94/'95's seem to be better cared for than foxes. And if you do find a nice fox-body, the owner seems to be trying to get all his money back(sorry but $6,000 for a fox is absurd, you can pick up 32v Cobras for that now).
There are exceptions though, and I've seem SN95's that are POS's.
Pluses for the sn95, IMO:
-already 5-lug.
-nice interior parts are more easily sourced since the SN didn't die 'til '04.
-More solid body stock.
The only real negative I can think of is transmissions. 5-speeds are specific to sn95 cars (some people use those adapters for fox trannies, but some have had problems). If you're looking for an automatic, the AODE sucks.
The strange thing to me is that USUALLY the '94/'95's seem to be better cared for than foxes. And if you do find a nice fox-body, the owner seems to be trying to get all his money back(sorry but $6,000 for a fox is absurd, you can pick up 32v Cobras for that now).
There are exceptions though, and I've seem SN95's that are POS's.
Pluses for the sn95, IMO:
-already 5-lug.
-nice interior parts are more easily sourced since the SN didn't die 'til '04.
-More solid body stock.
The only real negative I can think of is transmissions. 5-speeds are specific to sn95 cars (some people use those adapters for fox trannies, but some have had problems
). If you're looking for an automatic, the AODE sucks.
Kind of arbitrary, but the hypereutectic pistons of later years seem to stand up to more abuse than the factory forged pistons of earlier years. People always assume that forged pistons are stronger, which isn't necessarily true.
Kurt
Kurt
Zero Signal
Active Member
Something I don't think was mentioned: The fox cars are rattle traps. We have a 93 GT hatchback and it's about as rattley as my Bronco. I can't stand driving it because it feels so cheap. The 95 is much nicer, newer feeling and can be built to perform just as well as a fox. With a good coat of sound deadener and some silencing treatments, the 95 can feel like a modern car. It makes for a much better daily driver. After buying an 07 Xterra, I can't seem to get rid of that 93 fast enough.
Nik_95Cobra
Founding Member
I have to say overall it's very close between the two but I liked my 92 fox slightly better. I can't pinpoint what it was though, I think because I worried about it less as far as door dings and such. It was nice and tight too, zero rattles (not that my 95 has any), but it only had 40k on it. My Cobra feels err, piggish? Even so when it was stock. Hard to explain I guess. My 95 is slightly more comfortable though, and you don't see a 94/95 near as often as an older fox. Seems like everywhere I look around here there's a young kid in a fox with a 1/4 turned straight billed ball cap, but I rarely see a 94/95 and when I do it's rarely modded so it makes me feel mine's more unique and far less trendy, around here anyway. I think my 92 was pretty cool but I get way more thumbs up in my 95 than I ever did in it. As far as maitenence, I think that greatly depends on what you buy. You can't search out the cheapest car out there and expect it to be maitenence free. Over about 7 years, nothing major has broken on mine. I just upgrade as things start to go...It's all very cheap compared to european cars, and as long as you don't cheap out on crap parts, it will stay reliable.
GTA_V6_Mustang
Active Member
I always have and always will like the SN 5.0, but thats just my preference. As far as driveability goes never had 1 issue on my Bolton and intake sn or the full HCI 5.0. And tuning was never a problem with either. Both my sn's turn heads and get thumbs up wherever I go. Girlfriend and all other fe-male friends tell me all the time they prefer my style to the fox's. And as far as the pistons go its kind of a moog point to me because the block gives out before the pistons in either. The forged pistons just cause piston slap on cold starts. And I have seen more issues fox motors with motor problems then sn's. But then again there are only 2 years for the sn5.0 lol. So I guess thats reasonable.
I've owned both. I've had two 93' GTs and a 95' GT. I'm glad I had the 93' when I did, because I was in college and it was a hatchback. It is much easier to haul stuff around in a 93' hatchback. Now I am more into the notchbacks though. Other than that the 95' wins in every category. I was surprised at how much more stable it was considering it's basically the same car. The 95' is about 150lbs heavier, but you get a lot more car for that money. You get 4 wheel disc brakes, an ABS option, and a much stiffer chassis. You also usually get leather seats, and a much nicer looking interior. All the interior panels are secured in a much stirdier fashion to keep down the rattles. If you pull the interior off the A-pillars, you can see that Ford put a double pinch on the A-pillar. The 93' doesn't have that. That's going to make a big difference in a roll over.
Kurt
Kurt
I've had 3 foxes, 2 lx hatches and an 89 notch. I loved the notch it was my dream foxbody but, that was short lived because I ended up having to sell it. I had a full maximum motorsport suspension the only thing that I didn't get around to doing was switching it to a manual tranny. As far as rattles I know what your talking about. I love notches a lot but, there are things I don't like about them as well. First I love how lightweight I like the interior but, I love sn95 interior its probably one of the best ford has made over the years. Things I don't like about foxes is that there are too many body seams like the bumpers dont go all the way to the bottom of the fenders they have to have that urethane piece under the fenders. Also, the fenders aren't made to take corner piece over the headlights so it has that crappy piece added to the top of the front bumper. I think ford could have also done without the side moldings as well and just made the body smooth but, that I can live with. I admire the fox cars because the raw power and they are the cars that got me into mustangs and I can't forget that. My neighbor's bf had 15 notches over the years and I remember his first notch that he pulled up in. It was black with ponies and tinted windows and had an ecam it sounded amazing with the old 40 series mufflers. I think I'm going to move on for awhile and go with a sn95 car. I can get one that is clean and not shredded like most foxes that need a complete restoration
Similar threads
