Edumacate me on Mustangs

All, I come here for the fountains of wisdom, and the great one liners. I need some help, mainly opinion based but some actual facts would be helpful.

I am a dedicated jap sport car guy, Z cars, Mazdas, Acura etc etc. I am know looking to get into more power.... cubic inches to be honest. I have started looking at mid 80 to mid 90 mustang GTs but I have no idea what I am looking for, what to look for, what years to avoid, what years to search for etc etc. My budget is under 5K so that covers everything from pristine 5.0L GTs and notchbacks to the varied 4.6L GTs of the mid 90s.
Car will be used for fun drives, autoX and possible track days here in NJs new track.

Help please before I make a mistake...end luck into the crappiest year with the worse gear selctions.

Plenty of really knowledgeable Mustang guys on here, but here's what I know:

87-93 5.0 (GT or LX); Good performance, T5 manual is decent, crappy rear gear (2.73 or 3.08) plus drum brakes in the back. Hard to find un-molested ones, but a few nice mods might make it better anyways. Ugly (inside and out) with really bad seats. Goes like stink for ridiculous cheap. MASSIVE aftermarket support.

94-95 GT 5.0; Great performance, decent T5, better rear gear ratios, four-wheel-discs plus 5-lug, MUCH better looking inside and out. Also a LOT stiffer structure, same high level of aftermarket support. Probably your best bet all-around.

96-98 4.6 GT; DOG! Sloooooow as molasses stock, mods don't help unless it's a PI head swap. Expensive to mod the Mod motor. Just stay away.

99-04 4.6 GT; Much improved performance stock, but still no 5.0 in terms of aftermarket or go-fast goodness. Neat styling if you play with it a bit (Mach 1 grill/spoiler, different hood).

Cobra's are probably out of your price range, except for maybe the fair-to-meddling DOHC 96-98's or the horrible DOHC 99's. Same story on the Bullitt and Mach 1.

Might want to find a clean 4-eye (85 or 86 GT), they have a neat look to them and all of the aftermarket love.

All of them are fox-chassis and suffer from the same maladies (poor stiffness, cheap interiors, marginal suspension) and positives (8.8" rear end, good front discs, huge aftermarket, cheap parts). I'd still lean towards the 94-95 5.0 GT.

Watch for rusty trunk lids on notchbacks and leaning seats = cracking floorpans on all.

P71 wrote: All of them are fox-chassis and suffer from the same maladies (poor stiffness, cheap interiors, marginal suspension) and positives (8.8" rear end, good front discs, huge aftermarket, cheap parts). I'd still lean towards the 94-95 5.0 GT.

This is the same rationale I used when I bought my 1994 GT track car. Don't get me wrong, I like it fine...but I've been exposed to the new s197 GT's...and now I have the urge to unload my car.

To give you an idea of what's out there, I bought my car last year for $6000 and it has the Griggs GR40 coilover suspension, Baer brakes, an Autopower rollbar, and a few other niceties.

If you'd like more info on the car, PM me!

P71 wrote: except for maybe the fair-to-meddling DOHC 96-98's

id call it a bit more then that if your leaving it stock. 90 horse more then the fastest 302 car to leave the factory.

it depends on what class you want to go into and how competitive you want to be.

for ESP the 96-98 cobra is actually a hot package from my research. (ok, i might be biased, i have one)

87-93 gt or LX 5.0 is a good entry car. looks lack, but they are a great starting point for a track monster. for HPDE or TT plan on upgrading brakes.

94-95gt better brakes and stiffer chassis (not that much stiffer though) 302 in these.

96-98gt unless you go through the PI head upgrade or want to supercharge i would put these at the bottom of the barrel. for the same coin you could build a hotter 302 as it would take to upgrade these. if your happy with ~215hp though, take one for a spin and see what you think, in stock form they are decently durable.

stock the 302 isnt that hot of a motor, that said, aftermarket heads, superchargers, strokers, you name it and it exists from several different sources. want a part? call summit/jegs

overall the big expense department is going to be the suspension.
http://www.miracerros.com/mustang/t_suspension.htm <- READ THIS

I picked this car up over the summer - taken it to Roebling Road once already. It cost less then caging my 1999 Corvette FRC - not as fast but not a dog either. Hope to get it to Barber next weekend and Comp School at Rockingham the weekend after.

1988 Mustang 5.0 LX Track Car

Exellent CMC candidate. This car was professionally built with the intentions of participating in HPDE until eventually moving to CMC competition. The modifications are CMC legal. This car would not need much to race CMC and is a great and safe HPDE car as it sits. All modifications were done in late 2006 through 2007.

The whole suspension was rebuilt with the following parts: SN 95 brakes and hubs 2003 cobra control arms Steeda x2 ball joints K-member brace strut tower brace welded subframe connectors steeda caster/camber plates Steeda 1000 lbs front springs Steeda 350 lbs rear springs Steeda HD front and rear swaybars( new end links) Tokico 5 way shocks and struts Steeda weight jacker LCA Steeda HD UCA 1997 Cobra complete rear end( 3.73 installed July 2007)

Safety Items: Roll cage w/ 1 3/4 x .120 DOM driver and passenger Kirkey road race seats 5 point cam lock harnesses fire supression system

The engine is a bone stock state patrol pulout with about 100,000 miles and 12 track weekends on it. It has been very reliable. The following has been done in preparation of future engine mods: oil cooler with twin filter remote mount adjustable fuel pressure regualtor Walbro 255 fuel pump

Guages: all AutoMeter ProComp Ultrlite Florida 5.0 dasch insert for tach(with shift light), speedo, volts and gas. this mounts guages in stock location oil temp oil pressure water temp oil temp idiot light water temp idiot light

Misc: 2 sets of 1995 GT wheels 1 w/ RA1's (3 weekends) and 1 w/ cheap roll arounds Steeda tri-ax shifter smog pump eliminator pulley I/O port camera mount

$5K is a reasonable budget, unfortunately you're probably not going to get a decent '96-98 Cobra in that range. The best deal really depends on what you find out there, if you can pick up a Fox with some better brakes (Cobra brakes are a popular upgrade) and 5 lug rims, that might be your best bet. However, if you're starting with a stock (or relatively stock car), the 94-95 GTs are a good bargain, as they'll save you at least $1200 over a comparable Fox when upgrading to 5 lug and better brakes (i.e. larger front and disc rear). You won't want to do HPDEs or Open Track events with a stock Mustang's 4 lug brakes, they eat rotors and wheel bearings for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Here's a good post to explain why: http://forums.corral.net/forums/showpost.php?p=8072415&postcount=16

'94-95s are tougher to find engine parts for that a Fox, but there's much more out there than for the non-Cobra 96-98s.

If you're looking at a Fox, I'd go with an '89 or later (or an '88 CA car) to get the mass air induction system, which works much better with small modifications than the Speed Density setup on the '87-88s.

I'd avoid the '85 and '86 Mustangs, as they had even worse brakes than the '87 to '93 Foxes, along with less power.

HTH -

DJ

I would go with the 94-95 SN95 chassis 5.0's. For cheap power, you cannot beat a 5.0, and the newer chassis is much improved in handling. Lower center of gravity, lower drag coefficient etc.

the styling is love it or hate it though.

So does anyone know anything specific when talking about TRX suspension package for Mustangs. I know they also came on some BMW and Alfas of the same time period, but what specificaly did it do/not do? I understand they had some goofy sized tire/rims that get expensive quickly when replacing with new equipment.

dj06482 wrote: I'd avoid the '85 and '86 Mustangs, as they had even worse brakes than the '87 to '93 Foxes, along with less power. HTH - DJ

Don't these also have the 7.5 rear end instead of the 8.8?

Yup

If it matters, the 85 was the last year of the carbed car. the 86's look nearly identical, but had fuel injection.

brakes suck, steering feel is kinda crappy, seats suck (weird ergonomics),

but

easy to go fast, easy and cheap to modify to taste, plenty of places to race (auto-x, drag, drift, roundy round, road race......etc), V8 torque, sound great

good luck! I'd look for a 86-93 notchback 5spd. (hwy patrol if possible)

RossD wrote: So does anyone know anything specific when talking about TRX suspension package for Mustangs. I know they also came on some BMW and Alfas of the same time period, but what specificaly did it do/not do? I understand they had some goofy sized tire/rims that get expensive quickly when replacing with new equipment.

pretty much what i have inferred from what i read is that its a shock/spring/wheel package..

IE, if your tuning your car for HPDE/TT/Auto-x its all stuff that your likely to replace. The big PITA was that it ran metric tires that you had to approximate to the conventional size because you cant get the metric size for it or something.

I never really hear anything about it being a pain from trackday people.

this is the biggest pain i hear about http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/5-0l-tech/79122-1982-mustang-trx-suspension-tires.html

then theres this sum up of what it is...

http://www.mustangregistry.org/lx_79_82.htm said: Special handling suspension package was based upon the new TRX radials. This suspension package was designed around new sticky Michelin 190-65R 390 TRX tires mounted on TR 390 forged aluminum wheels. (The diameter of these rims was 39cm or 15.4".) Special shocks, springs and stabilizer bars were designed for the TRX tire and wheel combination

essentionally it was designed around a now-defunct performance tire. all the parts are either consumables (shocks and tires) or things you would upgrade for the car anyways (springs/shocks/sways) todays performance tires will plain old WHOOP those old things anyway and it only matters if your one who insists on maintaining the factory tire brand/type

so as i read it, its only a pain for the restoration weenie pureist.

so not really a problem then if you are replacing the rims. thats good to know. no wonder there isnt any good specifics.

Some corrections and additions.

'85 and '86 cars have 8.8" rear ends, provided they were behind a 5.0.

'86 is first year of fuel injection (speed density).

'89 is the first year of mass air fuel injection ('88 in California), necessary if you plan on doing any decent power upgrades.

'92 is the last year of factory forged pistons in the 5.0. '93 went to hypereutectic(sp?).

'93 First year of SVT Cobra. Motor has GT40 heads/intake for +20 or so hp over GT, Car gets better brakes, suspension, and 17" rims.

'94 is the first year of the SN95 bodystyle, many upgrades: better brakes, 5-lug, longer A-arms, with a tradeoff of increased weight.

'96 was the first year of the OHC motors. Cobras have DOHC, and are a LOT of bang for the buck. 305hp@5800 rpm/300tq@4800, redline at 6800 and they pull ALL they way to the fuel cutoff at 7k. Cobras also get much better brake package.

'99 First year of New Edge bodystyle. SOHC get better heads, cams, and intake manifolds (known as the PI motor). Gives 40+hp increase over non-PI. Cobras get IRS and new heads (C-port) which give better low end, rated at 320hp, were recalled for not making advertised power.

I can keep going, but I think anything newer than a New Edge GT will be out of your budget. I also left out Cobra Rs for the same reason.

ReverendDexter wrote: Some corrections and additions. '85 and '86 cars have 8.8" rear ends, provided they were behind a 5.0. ( Sorry, the first year for the 8.8 was 1986. I bought an 86 GT new.) '86 is first year of fuel injection (speed density). '89 is the first year of mass air fuel injection ('88 in California), necessary if you plan on doing any decent power upgrades. '92 is the last year of factory forged pistons in the 5.0. '93 went to hypereutectic(sp?). '93 First year of SVT Cobra. Motor has GT40 heads/intake for +20 or so hp over GT, Car gets better brakes, suspension, and 17" rims. ( I also had a 93 Cobra and with a few minor bolt ons you can get a bit over 300 HP from this engine. You need a bigger Mass Air meter, port the exhaust side of the heads, add long tube headers and remove the cats. You'll get around 270-275 HP at the wheels, that means over 300 at the flywheel!) '94 is the first year of the SN95 bodystyle, many upgrades: better brakes, 5-lug, longer A-arms, with a tradeoff of increased weight. '96 was the first year of the OHC motors. Cobras have DOHC, and are a LOT of bang for the buck. 305hp@5800 rpm/300tq@4800, redline at 6800 and they pull ALL they way to the fuel cutoff at 7k. Cobras also get much better brake package. '99 First year of New Edge bodystyle. SOHC get better heads, cams, and intake manifolds (known as the PI motor). Gives 40+hp increase over non-PI. Cobras get IRS and new heads (C-port) which give better low end, rated at 320hp, were recalled for not making advertised power. I can keep going, but I think anything newer than a New Edge GT will be out of your budget. I also left out Cobra Rs for the same reason.

If it matters, for the Fox Body run '79-'93, '89 was the last year for the tilt, non-airbag steering wheel. Only year where cars in all 50 states were mass-air equipped with the tilt wheel.

Driver's side airbag came into play in '90, which co-incided with the removal of the tilt wheel.

Also, the seats are not that bad if they're in good shape. It is tough to find a seat in good shape, though.

So can you swap doch heads and such to a sohc 4.6L block?

Only if both came from the same factory. There were two, Romeo and something else. FWD stuff is incompatible with RWD stuff also. The modular motor isn't modular at all.

P71, What came FWD with a 4.6?

I rescind my former statement, and amend it with the following.

If I were you, I would try to find a 1986 Mustang SVO...I know it isn't full of cubic inches, but the 2.3 turbo has almost as much support as the 4.6. plus it is different. and makes a wooshing noise.

Romeo and Windsor are the two modular engine families. If you want DOHC it's probably easier and cheaper to get a 96-96 Cobra than convert a SOHC car. In fact, that car would be my choice for the one to buy: relatively light, good power, decent brakes...I'd like to build one for ESP, now that I think about it.

If you can find one the 94-98 Mustang GTS is sort of neat (also called the 148a). It's a GT with a spoiler delete, foglight delete, power window delete, manual cloth seats and more all in the name of weight savings. They're not terribly fast, but it's a nice concept.

Will wrote: I'd like to build one for ESP, now that I think about it.

and what parts would you use out of curiosity, im doing just that.

In addition to the 4-cyl Tubo SVO option, there was also a V6 available for a short while so I hear, and a Mercury Capri RS version in the early 80's available with either the 5.0 or the turbo-4. None of the guys with the Mustang knowledge have mentioned it so that might mean it was a POS, but IIRC it was just a Mustang with a different facia and rear hatch. If you are searching for something in the sub $5K range you could include this car as well. Who knows?

If you get a pre-93 5.0 Mustang, go for the LX is it lighter then then GT and I have noticed it seems to be cheaper.

Apexcarver wrote:

Will wrote: I'd like to build one for ESP, now that I think about it.

and what parts would you use out of curiosity, im doing just that.

Bear in mind that I'm not 100% familiar with the SP ruleset, but I think a MM torque arm, some MM tubular A-arms in front, Delrin bushings, spoiler delete, rear seat delete (I think this is allowed because Cobra R is on the same line, but I'm not positive), foglight delete, manual window doors, Aviator intake manifold, 99-04 front calipers (I think they're different than the 94-98 stuff, but again, not positive), 2-pc rotors...not sure about shocks and spring rates because I've never had one of these cars. I think the key to a Mustang in ESP is making the most of the same rule line. The engine stuff should be straightforward and the torque arm setup is well tested and liked.