Stock Stang Questions

[Death Metal T/A]

Alright, i never used to like Mustangs but recently, they've grown on me. Out of nowhere i've REALLY started to like them. I have a 95 Trans Am right now but some time in the future, i'd love to get a 5.0. I've got a few questions about them before i even consider buying one though. The first problem i have is what year to buy. I like 79-93's but then again, the 94-95 models are really freakin cool too. How do Mustangs handle stock? I've heard that they don't handle like sports cars from some people while others say they handle great. What do they feel like power- wise without any mods? I don't want to supe up my Trans Am since it gets me around 27 MPG or maybe even more and it's still a beast so i want to keep that as a daily driver. From what i've seen, 5.0's respond amazingly well to mods though so i'm gonna get one of them to race in and beat on. Don't hate me for being a GM guy. The way i see it, Ford and GM are the only possible allies in the battle against rice. Dodge is pretty much neutral as many of their cars have Mitsubishi motors in them I think we need to put any animosity we have for each other aside and stomp out the ricers.

 

[HISSIN50]

i think you would like a stang. the newest iteration of foxes are 87-93's. 94 and 95 had the newer body style. they are heavier and down on power.

i have a 94 camaro, so i will make some crude comparisons. i have an 88GT vert, so the camaro handles a lot better, IMHO. both cars have interior creaks, etc. the 4th gen camaro electronics are more high tech (RAP, etc). foxes dont have a BCM, as far as i know.

the 302 is a TON easier to wrench on. being a TA guy, you will appreciate that plugs take ~20 minutes to swap.

each has its pluses, but i bet you would enjoy one for the purpose you have intended for it.

good luck.

 

[Death Metal T/A]

There's no possible way to get to the plugs or the wires on a Trans Am. I've actually lucked out on my Firebirds. My 88 Formula has t tops and does not leak whatsoever. My Trans Am is comfortable enough that my grandpa who's 6'3'' and just has knee problems nearly falls asleep in it whenever he's in it, as does my girlfriend. That's why i love the Trans Am as a daily driver. I'm not just looking for pure performance from Mustang though. I think they look real nice in black. I'm more than likely getting a fox body. I just want the Mustang because i want a car that i won't be afraid to modify. Thanks BTW.

 

[dvs bullet]

they are a fun car, the more you wrench on them the more you'll like them!

 

[mattkimsey]

http://maximummotorsports.com/articles.asp go to the bottom and click on third fastest slalom time. I was surprised to see the fbodies at the bottom of the list....notice a 91 gt handled better than a 97 vette wtf?

 

[HISSIN50]

There's no possible way to get to the plugs or the wires on a Trans Am. .

i hear you - that was my point (that it is impossible to do plugs on a 4th gen).

i think the stang is very comfy. im a big guy and am uncomfortable in the camaro - i like my legs to be lower than my butt. also, on the pass side, the hump in the floor (console side) really gets me, when riding shotgun. i think we differ on what we like, so im just trying to relate my stang to the camaro.

you feel a lot higher in the stang, IMHO. the camaro seats are a lot comfier, IMHO. and you are right about modding - stangs are very wrench and adaptability friendly. we plug and play, compared to a camaro. you can pull codes up through 95 with a paperclip.

good luck - i hope you like!!

 

[Death Metal T/A]

Thanks Guys! Right now i'm trying to find some specs on Stangs but it's real hard. I'm trying to find the different weight, horsepower and toque ratings.

 

[HISSIN50]

might find some info here:
http://www.mustanggt.org/gt.htm

 

[Nosfurato]

http://maximummotorsports.com/articles.asp go to the bottom and click on third fastest slalom time. I was surprised to see the fbodies at the bottom of the list....notice a 91 gt handled better than a 97 vette wtf?

Yeah, but the Vette more than likely had a stock suspension, where the stang had over 2k in its suspension.

 

[mattkimsey]

Yeah, but the Vette more than likely had a stock suspension, where the stang had over 2k in its suspension.

The Mustang with suspention work ranked 3rd, way above the Vette. All the foxes besides #3 are stock.

 

[Nosfurato]

The Mustang with suspention work ranked 3rd, way above the Vette. All the foxes besides #3 are stock.

Dude, your talking about 4 TENTHS of a second in a slalom. that could be anything from weather conditions, driver in the car.. to tires.

Myself, personally. im a hard-core ford guy. but there is no way in hell a 91 stock 91 GT should beat a stock 97 vett in the slalom. it just isnt gonna happen.

A stock 97 C5 Vette pulls down around .92 g's on the slallom where a stock 92 mustang GT is around .85 g's on the skidpad. now, this is lateral traction. and there is a difference between the two. ( a rather noticible one at that) so, if you still want to argue that the 91 GT is a better handling car,.. go right ahead.
but, just to let you know.. i'll be gigglin behind your back.

Im die hard Ford. but really. the two cars cant compare.

 

[mattkimsey]

Dude, your talking about 4 TENTHS of a second in a slalom. that could be anything from weather conditions, driver in the car.. to tires.

Myself, personally. im a hard-core ford guy. but there is no way in hell a 91 stock 91 GT should beat a stock 97 vett in the slalom. it just isnt gonna happen.

A stock 97 C5 Vette pulls down around .92 g's on the slallom where a stock 92 mustang GT is around .85 g's on the skidpad. now, this is lateral traction. and there is a difference between the two. ( a rather noticible one at that) so, if you still want to argue that the 91 GT is a better handling car,.. go right ahead.
but, just to let you know.. i'll be gigglin behind your back.

Im die hard Ford. but really. the two cars cant compare.

I never argued that a stock GT would out handle the vette, I just pointed out that in these test it DID so I guess technically it can be done. The skidpad doesnt even tell you how good a car handles, it tells you how well it sticks to the road, body roll and balance have more affect on handling-for example a viper will pull 1.02 g's and a porsche 911 carrera .96 g's and handle better. I'm not sayin that stock stangs out handle vettes but 5 mustangs did run faster slaloms.

 

[millhouse]

Welcome to the board

If I were you, I would take a look at a few of the picture post threads going around in some of the forums to compaire a bit looks wise.

I would also stick with the 87-95 model years, as the 96-98 4.6's are a bit lathargic stock, and more expensive to modify.

The 87-93's are lighter than all later years, with the coupes staying at the bottom of the weight list weighing right around 3000-3050lbs stock.

The 87-93's are quicker due to their lighter weight...and some were even able to rival stock lt1 1/4 times.

With the weight though comes a bit of sacrafice. The chassis is not as rigid as later years, but it can be upgraded with a decent set of subframes...which are pretty cheap.

The brakes on the 87-93 are absolute junk imho. Every time I rebuilt the brakes, the rear self adjusters for the drums (yuck ) would never seem to work properly. After a couple of runs down the strip (and some decent burnouts), they needed adjusting again. I also warped several front rotors. This too though can be upgraded for a relativley low cost using components from later year mustangs.

Anywho, I'd post more, but work calls

 

[Death Metal T/A]

Cool, thanks a lot guys. I have a friend who's not very big on Mustangs but when i get it (i'm not sure when as i have to finish paying my T/A off first) i'm sure he'll change his mind. The first thing i'd do with it is some weight reduction. I've been very lucky as i've been in a ton of high performance vehicles. I've never been in a Mustang but i hear nothing but good about them as far as performance goes. Lots of people claim they aren't very reliable but that's usually about 96+. I've never really heard too many bad things about the 5.0's. Thanks again guys.

 

[CManT1914]

The 5.0 is practically indestructable. The 4.6Ls are good too, but the 5.0's are cheaper to modify, respond better to mods, and are easier to work on. Plus they sound better!

 

[Death Metal T/A]

What are the first mods i should do when i finally get one?

 

[MadMatt5oh]

gears, tires,subframes, exhaust, shifter, lca, uca and then HCI followed by a power adder or a stroker and then a power adder!

Of course youll go through stock T5s like nothing if you beat it mercilessy. A tko trans would be good. Not to mention pain in the ass supporting mods like ignition and fuel system but these cars are the best bang for the buck bar none

 

[CManT1914]

gears, tires,subframes, exhaust, shifter, lca, uca and then HCI followed by a power adder or a stroker and then a power adder!

Of course youll go through stock T5s like nothing if you beat it mercilessy. A tko trans would be good. Not to mention pain in the ass supporting mods like ignition and fuel system but these cars are the best bang for the buck bar none

He pretty much summed it all up right there. Cold air, advance the timing, get some gears, some exhaust, and do some weight reduction, that's the best you can do for pretty cheap. Also, I noticed some nice gains from just pulleys, definitely worth $90.

 

[Death Metal T/A]

How much is all this stuff?

 

[CManT1914]

How much is all this stuff?

You can buy an eBay CAI for around $40, or make one for around $30. Gears are gonna set you back between $400 and $500. The exhaust depends on what you want. I got my mufflers for $60 a piece, and welded in for $70 total. If you want a midpipe it would cost more, but it's worth it. Advancing the timing is completely free, except you will probably have to switch to a higher octane gas. Weight reduction is totally free also. The pulleys are around $90 from Summit Racing. A shifter is about $160 or so. Hope this helps.