We've all read or at least heard that 1979 to 2004 mustangs are all based on the same 1978 Fairmont platform. How much practical truth is there to this? Would a common, rusty, foxbody parts car be able to offer much more than its engine and trans to my 1994 SN95 project? Does anyone know what, in real life, actually interchanges between the two body styles?
The sn95 makes a better donor for a foxbody then the opposite. The spindles, hubs, brakes etc are all popular for 5 lug conversion. In your case it would just be a driveline donor because the sn95 is an inch wider then the foxbody and already has better brakes.
Tons of stuff interchanges. But for moving Fox parts onto an SN95, I think you'd be limited to engine if you want a 302 under the hood (or a turbo 2.3, everything else is junk) and maybe the transmission. Like if your 94 is a V6/auto car, and you found a V8/T5 equipped Fox, I think you could make a case for that swap. Everything else is not worth talking about.
a turbo 2.3 SN95 would be pretty awesome 
Some people will swap to the foxbody style intake manifold for a few more options for parts but you would want to use an aftermarket intake rather than the stock if you're going to do that.
Foxbody valve covers are a nice aluminum which is nicer than the stamped steel of the SN95.I think the bellhousing is also used for transmission swaps but I can't quite remember.
In reply to Enyar:
Doesn't the T5 in a 94-95 SN95 have a longer input shaft vs. the Fox part? I'd be careful about that bellhousing idea.
The fox axle is narrower if you want to run deep dish wheels on an SN95, but you give up discs. Rear control arms are the same.
Non-Fox parts are cheap enough that I don't think the Fox donor route makes sense. As many have mentioned, the SN95 is a step up from the Fox in many regards (4 wheel discs, 5 lug, etc.). Should be easy to find a cheap SN95 donor, and it may be cheaper than a comparable Fox-body because they are already appreciating.
You might want to stick with the t5 behind the v6. It has the longer input shaft and the v6 bellhousing should bolt up to the 302. I'm pretty sure the t-5s behind the v6s are identical to the t-5s that were behind the 5.0's of those years (you should double check..I'm talking about the gear ratios here)....by this time, all the t-5s were considered "world class" (ha). If you use the bellhousing/t5 from the fox, the shifter will be moved a little bit forward in the sn95's console.
pres589 wrote: In reply to Enyar: Doesn't the T5 in a 94-95 SN95 have a longer input shaft vs. the Fox part? I'd be careful about that bellhousing idea.
It's been a while but I think this is what I was thinking of. If you were swapping from the SN95 transmission to something else like the 3550 you would want the fox bellhousing. It's been 10 years but I'm pretty sure I have something like that going on in my SN95.
In reply to marks93cobra:
You can run a 94-04 v6 transmission and bell housing behind a sbf but you have to use the flywheel and clutch out of a f150. Also the 99-04 trains are the strongest out of the bunch but they use a electric speed sensor that needs a signal adjuster to work on the earlier cars
You'll need to log in to post.
