hey, new guy needing some guidance

[dstang01]

Hey all

Im a young car enthusiast from Vancouver Canada. I love camaros, and Ive been a long time member on many camaro boards (sure you guys loove to hear that ) I had my heart set on buying a black lt1 z28 (93-97) and have set aside alot of cash to pay for the initial cost as well as insurance and gas. But.. due to the insane rising cost of fuel here (1.20 a LITRE for REGULAR.. so something like 4.54 a US gallon) and the fact that camaros guzzle premium gas, a young driver like me would go broke quickly..

So.. I started looking at alternatives. Rice rockets dont appeal to me at all, and im not fond of v6 versions of camaros/trans ams/mustangs. So I started looking at gt's, something I havent really thought about... the ford sound is a nice one as well Theres no way I could afford a 99+, so I started looking at the sn95's. The more I came across them, the more they grew on me! Then I saw a clean black one with smoked lights, its amazing how aggressive they can look with that little mod. What I didnt like about the sn95's was that they had such a sweet agressive exhaust note but the front end didnt match it. So now Im interested in the sn95's, Im sure they are as thirsty as a camaro, but at least its not premium fuel they guzzle..

The only thing that bothers me about these cars is that they are somewhat weak in stock form. Im sure the numbers will be fine for a first 'high' performance car, and as long as they have some potential for later on, I think it would be a great car for me. I wanted to find out some more information on the potential of these cars, and also perticulars like what years are the best (and 5.0 vs 4.6) so I came across this site and looked around a little. It looks like you all have awesome, clean mustangs so I decided to join. I hope Ill learn alot from you guys and hopefully be driving a stang in the future

The main question I have to start with is about engine type. Do you think a 5.0 or 4.6 sn95 is better for me? I posted this on 5.0 and 4.6 to get both opinions. Remember I need it to be reliable, cheap to mod/responds well to mods, get somewhat decent gas mileage, and have a good powerband for fun street driving. My plan would be to step up to a kenne bell blower down the road (or some kind of charger), so what engine stands up to boost better in stock form? I know both engines can be made fast and I dont want to start a heated arguement, but for my situation some honest opinions would be cool. In your opinion, which engine is more enjoyable to drive on the street? (if you have driven both) What are the power/torque bands like on each engine and how do they compare? Im guessing the 5.0 is torquier than the 4.6, but im sure theres other things about these engines I dont know. I also bet the 4.6 has better mileage because its a more modern design, but if there close then it doesnt really matter. Because the output of the late 5.0 and early 4.6 is similar, which one 'feels' faster? I dont know alot about the two and I want to hear some opinions to find out which one would be a better choice for me. Thanks

 

[The Green GT]

From what Ive heard, 5.0's are easier to mod, parts are cheaper, and you can get more power from them easier.

 

[95WhiteVenom]

yes easier and cheaper to mod but the cobra does take premium and does guzzle it and has been on mine for 5 years now. happy spending of the $$$$$$$$$

 

[SeventyMach1]

Weird .... your join date is September, 2005.


Anyway ... I have driven both 5.0 & 4.6 cars. My preference is obviously the 94-95 5.0 (currently own my 2nd one). With the torque, it's fun to drive. They're cheaper to modify than modulars are, too. I don't know this for fact, but I think the 4.6 may get a little better fuel economy. Since you said you were interested in the SN95's ... the '96-'98 4.6's are not that fun, IMO.


BTW, most of us probably run premium gasoline. Most of us advance our timing ... and you need higher octane to compensate. But you don't have to do that .... just letting you know. Good luck with your purchase!

 

[1slow95]

For easy to work on and cheap to mod, hands down the 5.0 is the engine to go with. I havn't driven a 4.6, but from what I hear the 5.0 feels faster because of the torque, but they both run about the same time in the 1/4 tho(stock).

 

[dstanggt50]

Another vote for the 5.0. The modular aftermarket has a lot to offer, but I still think its gonna be cheaper w/the 5.0. Plus, they are easy to work on. As far as gas mileage, I don't know if the 4.6 gets a better mpg, although ever since my head swap and injectors, my car guzzles gas.

 

[Zero Signal]

You won't get better mileage with a Mustang though.

 

[94venom5.0]

they are both nice cars, but hands down 5.0...i have a 94 and love it...the 5.0 feels faster and is cheaper to mod..and anyone can work on them...this is a learning car for me and i was suprised at the stuff i can handle by myself or with a buddy.

 

[drakesdad]

I for sure would tell you to go Stang......but I feel I must tell you that my best friend owns a 94 Z28...he has some SLP options and different rockers and that car stomped me before my mods.....we are going to Milan MI tomorrow night for a rematch......he told me today that he runs 87 octane with no problems........with that being said....get a SN95 and be elite..

 

[GRGT1994]

The early 4.6 was pretty doggy. And the 94-95 5.0 was a little under rated (artificially) to compensate for the fact that Ford knew the early 4.6 would be a bit of a dog. So they dropped the claimed factory ratings on the 5.0 in 94 so the 4.6 would look like a step up when it debued. Or so the story goes.

Either way, stock Mustang GT's can definitely use some work. Kenne Belle would be nice either way. So maybe in all fairness you would want to focus on finding the options you want (color, vert/coupe, auto/stick) and worry less about the motor. If you do gears and a Kenne Belle, you will be happy. Well, happy with everything but the gas issue you mention (cause a blown 'stang is gonna get some WOT gas guzzling action)

 

[HGFireHazard]

Don't be surprised to see all the 5.0 thumbs up, you did ask this in the 94/95 talk section... but the vote is the same, stick with the pushrod. From personal experience of wrenching on my car (even though I havn't wrenched on a 4.6) it is a piece of cake if you have a haynes or chiltons. The 5.0 is cheaper than a 4.6 to mod probably just because it's been around longer and companies have had lots of time to design parts. I hear that the 4.6 responds to mods better (I have no proof, but it's what I hear), but those mods are slightly more expensive then ours. Besides, our cars are tons of fun to drive, even stock. Other than the cars themselves, this part of the board is wayyyy cooler than that modular part

 

[xr8d302]

From Vancouver, likes Camaro's, you've probably seen my brother's 87 on some of those boards...

Around here, you're going to hear bias from the 94-95 guys.....there's a million different pros and cons for each group....but i'm sure, bang for buck, a 5.0 would be a good purchase if you intend to mod

 

[Swarzkopf]

My take on this, 4.6 vs 5.0:

Remember I need it to be reliable

Both are real reliable, strong engines...but the early 4.6s are prone to cracked intake manifolds as it's made of cheap plastic and is known to break at the WORST possible time (ie: dead of winter when it's -20 outside).

cheap to mod/responds well to mods

5.0s are still WAY cheaper to modify, and respond much better to simple bolt-on parts (SN95 years, GTs).

get somewhat decent gas mileage

My modified, AODE 95 GT puts down 17 MPG combined driving, my buddies stock 95 AODE GT gets almost 20.

The 4.6 should do even better, I had a 99 GT when I lived in the city and would get 18 MPG in stop and go traffic.

and have a good powerband for fun street driving.

The 5.0 has more power "down low" and I think it's alot more fun than the 96-98 4.6s.

My plan would be to step up to a kenne bell blower down the road (or some kind of charger), so what engine stands up to boost better in stock form?

The 4.6 can take more abuse with a stock bottom end. With a 5.0, you don't want to make more than 500 RWHP on the stock block. I believe the 4.6 can take substantially more power.

In your opinion, which engine is more enjoyable to drive on the street? (if you have driven both)

The 96-98s...honestly kind of suck in stock form. LOL

I had a 99 GT which was significantly faster stock to stock, and I still prefer the feel of my 95 GT. I like the low end torque.

Because the output of the late 5.0 and early 4.6 is similar, which one 'feels' faster?

The 5.0, by far 'feels' faster.

 

[Yobi1Kanobi]

5.0 unless it has 32 valves

 

[dstang01]

Thanks alot guys for the replys, I was leaning towards the 5.0 as well. Another option is to just shell out for the premium fuel a 94-97 lt1 camaro needs and get one, then have alot of power stock and recieve more from mods. The lt1s and ls1s run on 87 fine, but the knock retard pulls timing to prevent detonation and power and economy goes down, its not really worth getting one of these engines and then throwing regular in there.

Anyways, they would get to 300 rwhp with boltons, and Id have good gas mileage (for a v8), I would have to h/c/i a 5.0 to get to this power level and then loose economy and some driveability.. and if I just added a blower to raise the power output I would have to fill up with premium to prevent detonation, and Id get way lower economy with a blown stang than a camaro making similar power.. decisions decisions

 

[dstang01]

also.. does anyone know why my post count isnt working?

 

[The Green GT]

also.. does anyone know why my post count isnt working?

No post count in talk, only tech.

 

[Swarzkopf]

"Reliable" and "Opti-Spark" are two words that don't go well together.

Buddy of mine with a 95 T/A just went though hell replacing his bad Opti-Spark.

 

[dstang01]

Thanks guys, i think ill go out and test drive both. Also there are alot of mustangs for sale around here, which makes them much more resonably priced compared to fbodys.

 

[bimmertech]

i would take a lt1 over a 5.0. imo camaros are a much better vehicle.

i would take a 4.6 over a 5.0. as far as one being cheaper to mod than the other, i have argued this on here for ever----same damn money to hit 300rwhp.

buddy at work has a 96 t/a with a cam, cat-back, cai that put down 289rwhp/325rwtq. my car with mods in sig made 298/320---same dyno, same day.

if i wasn't so deep into my car i would go back to an lt1 and not think twice.