how does the fox 5.0 compare to the 99+ 4.6 ?

I just sold my fox not too long ago and thinking I should have kept it. I would be a divorced man but I would have two of my favorite mustangs. I drove an 06 mustang and the pwoer was nice but it looks too plain jane. Just like when the 99's came out. not much difference between a GT and a V6 until a few years later when they put scoops on the hood and on the side. Of course the dual exhaust and such but look too much a like for my tastes. 01-04 just have more character IMO. FOXES = DAMN SEXY BIOTCHES......

power- I had $2000 into my fox which included the purchase price and off the line it would smoke my new 01 GT (373's) but the top end goes to the 01. I also paid $7k for the GT so right there I have more into it than the fox. If I could have put 7K into the fox..... holy shyt!

the only modular id touch is a cobra. They can keep everything else. Both have their strengths.

If you like torque and not having to wind your engine up to the redline to feel any power stick with a 5.0...unless of course you plan on bolting on a Kenne Bell to your 4.6 to get the best of both worlds

I have driven several 4.6's including my Uncle's old car, a 2003 GT with decent bolt ons. It is a very smooth, civil ride below 4k rpms and screams over 4k. But to me it just didn't *feel* like a Mustang. I didn't feel like I was driving a powerful beast of a car, I got a similar feeling driving the 2003 GT as I got driving my old 94 Lincoln Mark 8. Now I am not comparing the two in power at all, just in feel. The 4.6's (at least non supercharged) do not feel like a musclecar to me. Through 1993 Mustangs were, by my definition, musclecars. After that, eh, not quite so much.

Now you 4.6 guys do not take offense to that please! The 4.6 has come into its own in the S197 platform and I cannot comment on how much they feel like a musclecar, but they damn sure look like one at the least! And yes I know by the numbers they smoke factory Foxes...numbers don't mean everything though

holy thread resurrection batman!

Mustang5L5 said:

Granted those bolts ons do cost more than 5.0 mods, but it's very easy to make 300HP at the crank on one of these without ever pulling a head off. 300HP E7'headed cars do exist, but aren't exactly typical.

Click to expand...

Or an intake or a valve cover

Bolt-ons and a cam swap set-up can get you 300rwhp.

.........................................................................................................................

The 2v' 4.6L vs. the 5.0L and the 4.6L out powers them. Different powerbands.

It is kind of like comparing a 5.0L and a 5.4L (331), and the 5.0L coming out on top And you have some complaining how horrible an engine it is...

I ran (1000 ft. track) a 12.3 in my first ever run/race in my '98 non-pi/bone stock (at the time) car at 86 mph.

The PI Headswap should net me an 11.6-11.7 at 90 mph.

My old 2000 Gt (best run) was an 11.7 at 89.67 mph with prochamber/cat-back/shifter/k&n.

4.6L owns after 20mph+...once the revs are past 3k, it starts If 20mph is the 'highway', then so be it...

Power is not everything

When you go from 302 to 281 something is lost. the 302 has some of the muscle car feel. the 281 has non. The muscle car sound is lost. You did not just here the old muscle cars, you could feel them. The throttle response was wicked! low end torque has a fun factor that can not be replaced.

i own a 03 gt 5spd and a 95 cobra...both stock. Both have different feels to them though. The gt is peaky in power....it feels like a dog then all of a sudden comes on!The 95 cobra feels like someone has there hand on your chest and slowly increases the push up untill 5200 rpms! As far as the ease of modification.....we all know the answer to that one!

enyawix said:

Power is not everything

When you go from 302 to 281 something is lost. the 302 has some of the muscle car feel. the 281 has non. The muscle car sound is lost. You did not just here the old muscle cars, you could feel them. The throttle response was wicked! low end torque has a fun factor that can not be replaced.

Click to expand...

i have to disagree with you............. the 281 sounds wicked for what it is

Mustang5L5 said:

crapola








just kidding.




I'm always amazed at how quickly the 2V 4.6L is dismissed by a lot of 5.0 guys. They engine puts out better numbers than a typical 5.0 (260HP/302TQ vs 225/300) did from the factory, the block can handle 500HP, the heads breathe better then E7's do from the factory and they take to bolts ons as well as any 5.0 does.

I know the 4v's are awesome motors and all, but i have friends putting down 280HP to the wheels on their little 2V's with nothing more than average bolt ons.

Granted those bolts ons do cost more than 5.0 mods, but it's very easy to make 300HP at the crank on one of these without ever pulling a head off. 300HP E7'headed cars do exist, but aren't exactly typical.

I do agree they drive different. The 5.0 has a more rumbly muscle car feel to it while the 4.6L engine feels more "exotic". I don't know how else to describe it really. To each his own.

Click to expand...

You make some good points, 4.6s put out a lot of power and are undeniably stronger and better equipped from the factory to make power. I guess the problem for me is where it makes the power It just doesn't feel like a muscle car. When I look at the powerplants in the upcoming Z28 and Challenger I see a lot of cubes that are going to put down a lot of low end grunt and to me that is a true muscle car. If I may be so bold...the high revving 4.6 is rice compared to either of those engines! haha I just had to make that comparison with all the silly OMG RICE threads that have been in 5.0 talk lately! Seriously though, the 4.6 is obviously a great engine that keeps getting better as it evolves from the 215hp dog it once was. It makes more power than any 5.0 from the factory is technologically dominant.

I just don't enjoy it like I enjoy a good ol' fashion pushrod torque monster. I would go as far as saying that the 96+ Mustang is more closely related to a 350Z or RX7 than it is to a 5.0 Fox or Camaro. I say that mainly due to the high winding nature of the engine and just the way the car "feels" to me when I drive it.

Mustang5L5's last sentence sums it up pretty well.

On the flipside I absolutely have thought about owning a 2V GT from the shameful 215hp days and fixing it up with some PI heads, bolt ons, and a roots type supercharger. And of course I have daydreamed of being able to afford a S197 Mustang since I first saw it, but that has a lot more to do with the awesome looks than anything else

I just wonder if Ford is going to stick it out with the 4.6 after Chevy and Dodge introduce there new muscle cars. I really hope we don't see a repeat of the 90's where Mustang GT's are severely underpowered compared to the competition. It was a shame to have to spend $10k more to even be able to come within a few tenths of keeping up with the competition. The way it is looking the GT is going to need a serious engine upgrade to keep up....or the Shelby's are going to need a HUGE price cut and a HUGE ramp up in production LMAO! I think I read that the base Challenger will come with a 5.7 hemi and the upgrade is a 6.1 I haven't read much about the new Camaro but if the past is any indication it will basically be a Corvette in cheaper sheetmetal. It is awesome that there will be some competition in the segment, Ford needs to step up!

I like both engines and respect how they both perform. That is why I have one of each. I hate when people come into my work with a 5.0L fox body, and they say " My car is so fast, those 4.6's are garbage. I raced a Cobra last night on Gratiot and I smoked him." I have a Cobra, and I see the car that they drive, and I just have to bite my tongue. I hate when people start talking about stuff they have no idea about. My car was in the parking lot that day, and I wanted so bad, to be like, "Do you think that you can beat my Cobra?"

Tasandmnm said:

You make some good points, 4.6s put out a lot of power and are undeniably stronger and better equipped from the factory to make power. I guess the problem for me is where it makes the power It just doesn't feel like a muscle car. When I look at the powerplants in the upcoming Z28 and Challenger I see a lot of cubes that are going to put down a lot of low end grunt and to me that is a true muscle car. If I may be so bold...the high revving 4.6 is rice compared to either of those engines! haha I just had to make that comparison with all the silly OMG RICE threads that have been in 5.0 talk lately! Seriously though, the 4.6 is obviously a great engine that keeps getting better as it evolves from the 215hp dog it once was. It makes more power than any 5.0 from the factory is technologically dominant.

I just don't enjoy it like I enjoy a good ol' fashion pushrod torque monster. I would go as far as saying that the 96+ Mustang is more closely related to a 350Z or RX7 than it is to a 5.0 Fox or Camaro. I say that mainly due to the high winding nature of the engine and just the way the car "feels" to me when I drive it.

Click to expand...

It shouldn't feel like a muscle car…it should feel like a pony car! Keep in mind too there have been several other high revving engines during the "muscle car" era that found their way into the mustang (cough…boss 302 & 351c…cough).

millhouse said:

It shouldn't feel like a muscle car…it should feel like a pony car! Keep in mind too there have been several other high revving engines during the "muscle car" era that found their way into the mustang (cough…boss 302 & 351c…cough).

Click to expand...

have you ever driven a 351c? beside a 351c the 281 is a dog on the low end, mid range, and top end!

You opened that can of worms

enyawix said:

have you ever driven a 351c? beside a 351c the 281 is a dog on the low end, mid range, and top end!

You opened that can of worms

Click to expand...

Driven…no.

The 351c (4v) is a dog on the top end? Your kidding, right?

Opened a can of worms, how so?

you can make any of them fast if you got the money

i was not calling the 351c a dog

Keep this nice.

enyawix said:

Power is not everything

When you go from 302 to 281 something is lost. the 302 has some of the muscle car feel. the 281 has non. The muscle car sound is lost. You did not just here the old muscle cars, you could feel them. The throttle response was wicked! low end torque has a fun factor that can not be replaced.

Click to expand...

The main reason you can 'feel' it, is because it was an old car, and doesn't have the luxuries/suspension/smoothness of a new car.

Ever been in a 'new' 14 second car and then been in an 'old' late 60-early 70's muscle car than ran 14 seconds?

The muscle car feels way faster...although they run the same time

Tasandmnm said:

You make some good points, 4.6s put out a lot of power and are undeniably stronger and better equipped from the factory to make power. I guess the problem for me is where it makes the power It just doesn't feel like a muscle car. When I look at the powerplants in the upcoming Z28 and Challenger I see a lot of cubes that are going to put down a lot of low end grunt and to me that is a true muscle car. If I may be so bold...the high revving 4.6 is rice compared to either of those engines! haha I just had to make that comparison with all the silly OMG RICE threads that have been in 5.0 talk lately! Seriously though, the 4.6 is obviously a great engine that keeps getting better as it evolves from the 215hp dog it once was. It makes more power than any 5.0 from the factory is technologically dominant.

Click to expand...

High revving 4.6L You do realize that the 4.6L get shifted at 5,500-5,800 rpm when racing. The stock 5.0L gets revved to the 5,200-5,500 rpm mark. I'm trying to see the huge difference

Tasandmnm said:

I just don't enjoy it like I enjoy a good ol' fashion pushrod torque monster. I would go as far as saying that the 96+ Mustang is more closely related to a 350Z or RX7 than it is to a 5.0 Fox or Camaro. I say that mainly due to the high winding nature of the engine and just the way the car "feels" to me when I drive it.

Click to expand...

There is a difference between 'feel' and what they actually do

In my opinion, having been in a 350Z and RX7, the 4.6L Mustang is closer to the 5.0 Fox, and then exceeds it

Tasandmnm said:

On the flipside I absolutely have thought about owning a 2V GT from the shameful 215hp days and fixing it up with some PI heads, bolt ons, and a roots type supercharger. And of course I have daydreamed of being able to afford a S197 Mustang since I first saw it, but that has a lot more to do with the awesome looks than anything else

Click to expand...

The PI heads almost do nothing except increase compression, it is the intake and cams for the 'fault' in power.

3v 4.6L is 300 hp from the factory, dynos 300rwhp with a couple bolt-ons and a tune. A fox needs a good h/c/i to reach that, and with other things upgraded to 'take' the power.

Tasandmnm said:

I just wonder if Ford is going to stick it out with the 4.6 after Chevy and Dodge introduce there new muscle cars. I really hope we don't see a repeat of the 90's where Mustang GT's are severely underpowered compared to the competition. It was a shame to have to spend $10k more to even be able to come within a few tenths of keeping up with the competition. The way it is looking the GT is going to need a serious engine upgrade to keep up....or the Shelby's are going to need a HUGE price cut and a HUGE ramp up in production LMAO! I think I read that the base Challenger will come with a 5.7 hemi and the upgrade is a 6.1 I haven't read much about the new Camaro but if the past is any indication it will basically be a Corvette in cheaper sheetmetal. It is awesome that there will be some competition in the segment, Ford needs to step up!

Click to expand...

Mustang outsold the Camaro/Trans Am line, 3:1.

What cost 10,000 dollars to keep up with an ls1 in a 2v 4.6L?

I hope they keep the 4.6L around, it is a much better all around engine...

Just my opinions