• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

SN95 Block vs Fox Body Block

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redsnake2
  • Start date Start date Oct 3, 2005
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

Redsnake2

New Member
Aug 8, 2005
374
0
0
Philly, PA
Oct 3, 2005
#1
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #1
I was at the shop the other day and the Mech said something that tweaked my interest. He said that the SN 95 engines blocks were better that the Fox blocks. Would be nice to know that someone slipped an R302 block in there during those 2 years of building the SN95 302's.

Has anybody heard anything like this??? If so whats the diff??
 
W

wytstang

Mustang Master
Mar 14, 2004
4,988
4
78
Summerville,SC missing South Fl. weather :(
Oct 3, 2005
#2
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #2
Same blocks 87-95 stangs share the same blocks. If you can find/buy a early 92-87 short block get it, ford used forged pistons in those and stoped using them (I believe) mid 92-95.
 
8

8950HO

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
658
2
0
Oct 3, 2005
#3
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #3
Redsnake2 said:
I was at the shop the other day and the Mech said something that tweaked my interest. He said that the SN 95 engines blocks were better that the Fox blocks. Would be nice to know that someone slipped an R302 block in there during those 2 years of building the SN95 302's.

Has anybody heard anything like this??? If so whats the diff??
Click to expand...

I doub`t very much the SN-95 blocks are better.I`m sure there all the same thinned out roller block junk.
Ford removed a lot of metal in the roller blocks compared to the blocks of the 60`s and 70`s. .
 

mo_dingo

20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 26, 2003
3,031
2
58
Tucson, AZ
Oct 3, 2005
#4
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #4
89-92 had forged pistons. That is the only difference.


Our blocks are very similar even to 289's. I can't imagine why this guy thinks that, but obviously he doesn't know what he's talking about.
Scott
 
8

8950HO

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
658
2
0
Oct 3, 2005
#5
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #5
mo_dingo said:
89-92 had forged pistons. That is the only difference.


Our blocks are very similar even to 289's. I can't imagine why this guy thinks that, but obviously he doesn't know what he's talking about.
Scott
Click to expand...

Go compare an older block from the 60`s early 70`s side by side with a roller block and we`ll see who obviously doesn`t know what he`s talking about. .
 
W

wytstang

Mustang Master
Mar 14, 2004
4,988
4
78
Summerville,SC missing South Fl. weather :(
Oct 3, 2005
#6
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #6
8950HO said:
Go compare an older block from the 60`s early 70`s side by side with a roller block and we`ll see who obviously doesn`t know what he`s talking about. .
Click to expand...
No ones talking about 60's & 70's blocks....
 

SMOKEDYA

20+ Year Stangneter
Jul 13, 2003
3,637
8
79
Tucson AZ
Oct 3, 2005
#7
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #7
the only diffrence i've ever heard of was that the S/N's had hyperstethic pistons???? peace



john
 

BlueOvalStangGT

Active Member
Oct 27, 2003
2,849
0
46
Tampa Florida....USF!!!
Oct 3, 2005
#8
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #8
93 up had hyper crap pistons, 86-92 had forged, 86 are flat top pistons, 4.6s suck./story.
 
8

8950HO

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
658
2
0
Oct 3, 2005
#9
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #9
wytstang said:
No ones talking about 60's & 70's blocks....
Click to expand...

Sorry...thought the "doesn`t know what he`s talking about" comment was directed at me.

But still the late model 5.0L roller block are thinner in critical areas compared to the 60`s and early 70`s blocks...as a comparison.
 

OinkAodeOink

Founding Member
Jun 5, 2002
3,026
1
0
Daytona bch, Florida
Oct 3, 2005
#10
  • Oct 3, 2005
  • #10
As someone mentioned above...
Ford removed a lot of metal in the roller blocks compared to the blocks of the 60`s and 70`, along with the loss of nickle content over the years..
 

HISSIN50

"How long does it take to get help in here?
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
31,179
34
129
Oct 4, 2005
#11
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #11
and if anyone actually looks for one, hypereutectic pistons started in late model year '91. It seems to be ~ the same time the FP relay moved under the hood.
 

xr8d302

I bought a 27" monitor to compensate for my lack o
Apr 29, 2004
1,113
0
36
Medicine Hat, AB
Oct 4, 2005
#12
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #12
What was the advantages of the Hypereutectic Pistons??
 
C

ChrisA#5

New Member
Jan 10, 2004
60
0
0
Indianapolis
Oct 4, 2005
#13
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #13
hypers are lighter and theres another advantage or 2 supposedly (i forget). but they suck
 

xr8d302

I bought a 27" monitor to compensate for my lack o
Apr 29, 2004
1,113
0
36
Medicine Hat, AB
Oct 4, 2005
#14
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #14
yeah, i hear they're not boost friendly at all
 
W

wytstang

Mustang Master
Mar 14, 2004
4,988
4
78
Summerville,SC missing South Fl. weather :(
Oct 4, 2005
#15
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #15
The only advantage was to ford they were cheaper..........
 

95COBRA241

New Member
Sep 3, 2005
339
0
0
Delray Beach, FL
Oct 4, 2005
#16
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #16
HISSIN50 said:
and if anyone actually looks for one, hypereutectic pistons started in late model year '91. It seems to be ~ the same time the FP relay moved under the hood.
Click to expand...

Not doubting you, but all the resource books state that Ford changed to hyper pistons for the 1993 Model year...whick also means these motors were probably assembled late 1991 thru 1992 to be used in 1993 cars.
 

95COBRA241

New Member
Sep 3, 2005
339
0
0
Delray Beach, FL
Oct 4, 2005
#17
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #17
xr8d302 said:
What was the advantages of the Hypereutectic Pistons??
Click to expand...

They are harder than forged which means the engine can be assembled with closer tolerances.

The cons are that they are much more brittle than forged which is bad for s/c or juice. They break under hard load.

The only Pro I can see is that when a hyper piston fails is does less damage than when a forged piston fails. The hyper won't expand from excessive heat; it breaks apart while the forged expands and eventually melts from excessive heat, causing much more damage to the block.
 

Scott_95GT

New Member
Oct 8, 2004
387
0
0
Sacramento
Oct 4, 2005
#18
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #18
ChrisA#5 said:
hypers are lighter and theres another advantage or 2 supposedly (i forget). but they suck
Click to expand...

Hyper's don't expand with cold weather, and they are lighter. But they are not as durable as we all know.
 
S

strokedandblown

Banned
May 3, 2005
555
0
0
USA
Oct 4, 2005
#19
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #19
hyp pistons have less piston to wall clearance, they have silicon in them to make em more flex, since there so rigid, they are better for longevity and emmisions. they CAN handle boost what they cant have is any sign of detonation, many people run these pistons with s/c and nitros w/ no probs. You tune needs to be 100% dead on for these aplications. there is nothing wrong with a hyp. piston from the factory's point of view.

87-92 MUStang 302 v8's should all be forged.
 

HISSIN50

"How long does it take to get help in here?
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
31,179
34
129
Oct 4, 2005
#20
  • Oct 4, 2005
  • #20
Paul, you are correct. I am down to typing with one hand right now. I meant to type '92 but missed.

Late '92 was when hypers started being used (it was not right at the model year change for '93, but rather a few months of production before). Most folks round up and say one is good through '92 (to get forged slugs). But if hunting, checking date codes is a good idea.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

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
0
V6 to V8 Swap info
  • 02_2v_Curtis
  • Jan 11, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
834
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jan 11, 2026
02_2v_Curtis
0
Engine 302 production block selection
  • FastDriver
  • May 19, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
48
Views
8K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 1, 2025
FastDriver
S
Requesting Guidance for 306 motor swap - Fuel? - SD? MAF?
  • So_Flo
  • Jul 26, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jan 4, 2026
Mcmahst
Which one of these 3 intakes make the most sense for my 331 combo
  • from6to8
  • Jul 25, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
7
Views
2K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jul 26, 2024
AeroCoupe
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
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?