Fav Year Fox Body and Why?

85_SS_302_Coupe · May 3, 2004

The one in my sig, because it's one of only 9 SSPs used in Louiville Kentucky in 1985, not to mention 5.0 '85 coupes are rare as it is.

WORD.

aete2 · May 3, 2004

90 25th year

85GTlover · May 3, 2004

85_SS_302_Coupe said:
The one in my sig, because it's one of only 9 SSPs used in Louiville Kentucky in 1985, not to mention 5.0 '85 coupes are rare as it is.

Is it only coupes that are rare? I like them too, but I like the hatches better, I bet many people might argue that one. but we can all have our own opinions.

C&R Racing · May 3, 2004

84 1/2. This one had the most unique nose (Foglights like the 85-86 only in last half of 84. Early 84's looked like 83's)

Good: had the 5.0 HO 4bbl, serpentine, t5, first with quad-shocks, same rear spoiler as 85-86 GT's and later LX's (early 84 had old-style rear spoiler) Nicer seats than 85-86 (no ugly red piping) Same tail-lights as 85. No chmsl like 86.

Bad: no roller cam, cast iron exhaust manifold, ugly steering wheel if you had cruise, though non-cruise wheel was nice.

I like the 93 Cobra best of the aero-nose cars (not crazy about the blocky look that the GT rear bumper and wing had and those bogus side scoops in front of the rear wheels. I think the 93 Cobra rear bumper is a lot nicer and it's side skirts much cleaner)

85GTlover · May 3, 2004

C&R Racing said:
84 1/2. This one had the most unique nose (Foglights like the 85-86 only in last half of 84. Early 84's looked like 83's)

Good: had the 5.0 HO 4bbl, serpentine, t5, first with quad-shocks, same rear spoiler as 85-86 GT's and later LX's (early 84 had old-style rear spoiler) Nicer seats than 85-86 (no ugly red piping) Same tail-lights as 85. No chmsl like 86.

Bad: no roller cam, cast iron exhaust manifold, ugly steering wheel if you had cruise, though non-cruise wheel was nice.

I think the one set of headlights that is flush and the other recessed kind of looks a little strange, some SVO's around then have the same I think. Me no really care for that style. I no mind red piping on seats but I want Recaro's. Gold stang around corner here has black recaro's, looks sweet.

D0cks · May 4, 2004

cool, anyone else?

Black331Stang · May 4, 2004

89....first year of mass air, no airbags...(good and bad) some bugs worked out etc etc

D0cks · May 4, 2004

ya i think if i didnt want a 91, id buy a 89, why would someone want a 88 over a 89?

v8only · May 4, 2004

Another vote for the 86 gt. The 86 gt will hands down be the most sought after fox body to collectors. (along with the 93 cobra, and the 85 gt) Meanest looking fox of them all, has the efi and computer, good rear end, true dual exhaust. Swap on a pair of e7 heads, and it'll run away from any 87-93 stang. The interior is more american looking, and doesn't have that cleaned up aero look to it. I've got an 86 gt vert, and 85 gt ttop, and my bro has an 86 gt ttop. The 86 gt ttop is a HUGE head turner. My brother gets absolutely NO attention in his 88 5.0 notch, but everytime he takes the 86 gt ttop out, he gets hit up for a race, it simply looks mean as all hell.

maxine1970 · May 4, 2004

i agree with 85gtlover.....why didnt you put the 79-86 body in there?! they are foxes too. picking your favorite 87-93 is pretty lame, they all looked the same other than wheel options basically, and two different computer systems.
85-86 is the best to me. Nothing better looking in the mustang lineup than an 85-86....the 4 headlights, the square foglights, the hood blackout, no ground effects, the long chrome tailpipes that the 87-93 LX's got....and between 85 and 86 stangs you can choose if you want carbed or injected and still look the same externally. Never got into the plastic headlighted 87-93's, the louvered taillights, and never liked the ground effects either. If i had to get an 87-93, it would have to be an LX though.

Doug

bgjohnson · May 4, 2004

93 cobra baby, but since you don't have that as an option I'll have to go with my ole 89, woot!

85GTlover · May 4, 2004

1993 Cobra is the ultimate but the 85&86's are contenders.
$$$$$ wise I vote 85 but $$$$ no issue 1993 cobra.

Besides 93 in the 87-93's. I vote 1989 cause it has all the goodies of the others and the 140mph speedo and late year
25th year edition, will make em rare.

blkstangman88 · May 6, 2004

heres y i like my 88 gt over any 87-93 fox:
1987 Ford Mustang GT 6.7 15.3
1988 Ford Mustang GT 6.4 15.0
1990 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.4 14.9
1991 Ford Mustang GT 7.3 15.6
1992 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 6.2 14.8
1993 Ford Mustang Cobra 5.9 14.5
1993 Ford Mustang GT(auto) 8.0 16.1
the 88 gt has the fasted 1/4 and 0-60. im not talking about lx or cobra here, im talking the 88 is the faster gt. this info came from http://web.missouri.edu/~apcb20/times.html#Ford any comments plz let me know

BlueDevil95 · May 6, 2004

i've always been partial to the 86's. although i do like the triple white droptop special edition and the 93 cobra quite a bit......

85_SS_302_Coupe · May 6, 2004

85GTlover said:
85_SS_302_Coupe said:

The one in my sig, because it's one of only 9 SSPs used in Louiville Kentucky in 1985, not to mention 5.0 '85 coupes are rare as it is.

Is it only coupes that are rare? I like them too, but I like the hatches better, I bet many people might argue that one. but we can all have our own opinions.

Click to expand...

Well '85s in general are getting scarce, but the coupes especially. I dont know if i'd call them "rare" but i searched my rear of to find this one.

2NDTIME · May 6, 2004

92 because it was the first year for the painted side molding and last year of forged pistons.

5literPwr · May 6, 2004

blkstangman88, holy smokes, according to that website it lists the 1993 GT auto at 8.0 seconds (0-60mph) and 16.1 in the 1/4?!! I know ford changed their method of HP ratings for 93, but I dont beleive there was any major difference to the 93 model (other than the HP ratings method) to put it in the 16+ second 1/4-range. Even though the figures are based on an auto trans, it still seems oddly high. The site does looks quite informative and in-depth, but those times listed look unusually high for a 93 auto. Yikes!

88stangmangt · May 6, 2004

88- here for me.

Musclecarfan88 · May 6, 2004

79, but im biased. But the 85/6 were awesome.

blkstangman88 · May 6, 2004

i do realize the times on that site seem a little high, but heres y i believe it........ i raced a 94 rx-7 that was completely stock and according to that site the Mazda RX-7 does a 14.5sec 1/4 mile time and my 88 does a 15sec 1/4, well when we raced, he beat me by one car length. i figured a car length would be equal to a good .5 sec, probly a little less. what do u guys think about that?

Fav Year Fox Body and Why?

Fav Year Foxbody

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

it sucks (I know) to be on the receiving end

Active Member

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency