• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-

How much do 94-98's really weigh?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SHOJOE
  • Start date Start date Jan 10, 2009

SHOJOE

New Member
Dec 11, 2008
20
0
0
Maryland
Jan 10, 2009
#1
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #1
As the title says I am curious how much lighter fox bodies really are than sn95's. Is a sn95 worth building as a budget drag car? Or is the Fox body the way to go.
Either car I build is going to have an aluminum headed 351w.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jan 10, 2009
#2
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #2
You're looking at about a 150-250lb difference at most between two comparable models. Most of which can be attributed to creature comforts, interior upgrade, larger 4-wheel disk brakes, etc. One is as good to build into a drag car as another. If it were me....personally I'd go with the SN95, as there have been several improvements made to the Fox4 chassis that improve over all stiffness and structural integrity over the original Fox.
 

NotQuik

Founding Member
Oct 21, 2000
5,158
29
88
Central Florida
Jan 10, 2009
#3
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #3
my 89 coupe weighted 3150 without me in it...full interior, a/c, p/s, p/l, ect was all intact and this was with 15x3.5 and 15x8 draglites....and full tank of fuel.

My 95 gt with full interior (leather/vynal), a/c, p/s, ect weighted 3290 without me. That was with 15x3.5" prostars up front and stock waffle wheels on the back and 1/4tank of fuel.

so with that comparison gearbanger is pretty much deadnuts.
 

fasterthanthem

New Member
Mar 29, 2008
0
0
0
Hampton, VA
Jan 10, 2009
#4
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #4
Wow, and this whole time I thought I was starting at a 400-500 lb disadvantage. Good to know. I've already knocked out about 115 off my car.
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Jan 10, 2009
#5
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #5
If your looking for EVERY possible lb. a fox is probably going to be the best bet...like a notch or an early 4eye. The fox got heavier as time went on and things were added. A buddy had a 82 with a 347 c4 alum. heads/intake. That thing was 28xxlbs manual windows and doors full interior with drag lights.

The thing is sometimes weight in the right area/way helps too. I know of many people who have gone faster adding weight...in the form of a 4-6pt as it helps the chassis hold the launch. I was talking to the guy who welded in my o2 bungs for my wideband. He did a well known LX fox 6pt and they figured it would slow him down a few 10ths...he picked up 2 or 3 instead.

People think the 94-95's are 400-500lbs heavier...I have always heard more like 200 or so. Put an avg. size adult in the fox and there is no weight benni. In fact I would say if anything the sn95 is more comfy and roomy to accept a passenger.
 

Pokageek

Active Member
Jun 10, 2005
2,767
0
46
MA, USA
Jan 10, 2009
#6
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #6
I lightened my car by removing a/c, fender weight, vert top motor, 4 heavy cats, dogbone, aluminum heads, smog, vert cross brace, abags..altogether that amounts to about 250#..add 50# for 414 with a starting weight of 3450 and you get about 3250#. It is a vert and I still could remove rear seats and spare to take it down to 3180# and there's still more but then you are getting into more of a track car than street.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Jan 10, 2009
#7
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #7
I think the SN95s are a better chassis to build off from. The fox's are far less rigid as the SN95's. Both benefit from full length sub frames but over all I think the SN95 is a better platform also b/c of what was mentioned b/c of the brakes
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Jan 10, 2009
#8
  • Jan 10, 2009
  • #8
Bone stock '93 AOD coupe with full tank - 3,184 lbs.

Bone stock '94 T5 GT with full tank - 3,380 lbs.

The weight difference is nothing.

Many people exaggerate how much an Sn-95 weighs, and cut the weight of a fox way to much.
 
S

sage2k

Member
May 23, 2005
645
0
16
Baton Rouge, LA
Jan 13, 2009
#9
  • Jan 13, 2009
  • #9
I recently weighed my 94 gt coupe

Weight reduce:
aluminum heads
aluminum flywheel
aluminum driveshaft
catless midpipe

Weight addition:
17x9 front wheels, bullits
17x10.5 rear wheels, bullits
subframe connectors



Gas was at 2/3 tank i believe, car weighted 3300 without me in it
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Jan 13, 2009
#10
  • Jan 13, 2009
  • #10
I weighed mine a few years ago. I cant find the slip I wrote the weight down on but It was about 3,6XX with me in it, Im 200 and mines a 351W with Aluminum heads
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Fox body - godzilla, coyote, or 408w stroker - Best route for budget build?
  • jaygee15
  • Jan 27, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 30, 2025
2000xp8
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
H
Forced Induction On3 Turbo Kit- Parts list NEEDED - 302 Stock Motor
  • Hirothecool1
  • Feb 27, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
903
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 7, 2026
slow84lx
S
new :poo: box, may need to hit you guys up for 79-82 info when i fix thIs turd.
  • rednotch
  • Sep 27, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Apr 4, 2026
Noobz347
3
94 Gt to 84 Fox
  • 351C-84'Fox
  • May 16, 2024
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 17, 2024
351C-84'Fox
3
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?