 | | 
04-10-06, 03:27 PM
|  | The car that set the bar. | | Join Date: November 2000 Location: Altoona, PA
Posts: 5,575
| | | Thanks 5.0 mustang and Super fords magazine!!!
Thanks KJ for the long overdue tribute/article focusing strictly on the 94-95's. I was VERY excited to see our little nitch get some press. I also liked the little stangnet plug too! Thanks, and I suggest anyone that reads these boards picks up a copy of the June 2006 issue and turns to page 98 and reads up.
KJ, if you are reading this I don't agree that the 96-98 tail light swap is a popular one though, and I think most here would agree! 
Thanks again! |
04-10-06, 03:38 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: April 2006
Posts: 9
| | anyone got a link, i would love to read it. I must admit though...i swapped tail lights  |
04-10-06, 03:39 PM
|  | No 13 year olds are safe around me. | | Join Date: January 2006 Location: Louisiana
Posts: 2,779
| | I dont like the 96-98 tails. I love the horizontal ones. |
04-10-06, 03:42 PM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: September 2004 Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 975
| | I still have stock 95 tails. But the 96-98 tails are clearly better looking.  |
04-10-06, 03:43 PM
| | Official Member | | Join Date: July 2005 Location: Shelby Township, MI
Posts: 72
| | | |
04-10-06, 03:47 PM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: December 2003
Posts: 278
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by whitesnake1994 | +1 |
04-10-06, 03:57 PM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: November 2003 Location: HUNTINGTON BEACH
Posts: 825
| | I finally got my old school 94 - 95 tails, now I have both so whatever mood strikes me is whats going on that week... |
04-10-06, 04:23 PM
|  | I bought a 27" monitor to compensate for my lack of genital size. | | Join Date: April 2004 Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 1,126
| | sweet action, thanks alot KJ!!! I'll have to pick this up soon and have a read....
Putting Vertical lights on your 94-95 mustang is like getting breast implants if you're a man...sure, they look good to you, but everybody's laughing at you at the same time |
04-10-06, 05:19 PM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: November 2001 Location: EVERETT,PA
Posts: 908
| | i'll have to stop on the way home and check out a copy is anyone in there we know? |
04-10-06, 07:04 PM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: May 2002 Location: British Columbia
Posts: 1,963
| | June issue? Its not even the middle of April...? |
04-10-06, 07:06 PM
| | Founding Member | | Join Date: May 2002 Location: British Columbia
Posts: 1,963
| | I have to say I used to like the 96+ tails and that was almost my first mod but decided against it, im glad I did. |
04-10-06, 08:06 PM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: August 2003 Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 303
| | Before i got my 95 that was one of the first mods i had planned, but now that i have it i will never do that. |
04-10-06, 08:10 PM
| | The car that set the bar. | | Join Date: November 2000 Location: Altoona, PA
Posts: 5,575
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by YEAHLOH95 i'll have to stop on the way home and check out a copy is anyone in there we know? |
No, not yet. |
04-10-06, 08:30 PM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: September 2005 Location: MD
Posts: 159
| | | |
04-10-06, 10:09 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: November 2003 Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 33
| | yeah i will admit did not like the 94/95 taillights so i switched to the 96 tail lights the only 94/95 cars i like with those lights are the 95 black cobra's with spoiler think those stock lights look awesome only on that color!!! call me wierd!!
yeah great they finally did something on the 94/95 cars have not read up on it yet!!! they don't like us because they stuck leftover t-bird motors in those cars!!! hahaha |
04-10-06, 10:40 PM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: September 2002 Location: Ravena, NY
Posts: 624
| | Yeah, I saw that article tonight. Nice to know we are not forgotten. 94-95's representing!!!! |
04-10-06, 10:41 PM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: June 2001 Location: La Palma, California
Posts: 586
| | ill def pick up a copy...and i love my 96-98 tails wouldnt go back to the 94-95 tails if you paid me. haha |
04-11-06, 02:09 AM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: September 2003 Location: Hillsboro, OR
Posts: 965
| | The article was okay. A little too short and not technical enough to really get its point across. The article made it seem like modding a 94-95 just wasn't worth the headache because of the EEC-IV in our cars. Well, we all know you can mod a 94-95 if you use the right parts. There is no shortage of exhaust choices for our cars. And, there are OTS cams designed to work with the vacuum needs of the 94-95 ECU. There is more but I don't want to ramble too much here because you already know what I am getting at with this.
I will admit that mod for mod a Fox will be quicker than a 94-95 
I would still rather own and drive my 95 over a Fox anyday
I too am a fan of the horizontal tail lights. Just seems like one of the only ways to tell if a Mustang is a 94-95 from a quick glance. And, I believe our cars are unique in a good way.  
No offense to 5.0 Mustang & SF or its authors. I have had a subscription since I bought my Mustang in April 2002 and enjoy the magazine throughly.  |
04-11-06, 06:47 AM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: September 2004
Posts: 1,044
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by The Green GT I dont like the 96-98 tails. I love the horizontal ones. | +1 |
04-11-06, 07:08 AM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: August 2004 Location: NE CT
Posts: 1,928
| | I like the 96-98 tails better until I learned that the horizontal tails with the GT mean 302 power... If you have a 6 I say swap away... |
04-11-06, 10:33 AM
|  | Official Member | | Join Date: December 2003 Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 496
| | I have a subsciption to 5.0 & SF...why the hell haven't I gotten my copy yet?!
I look forward to reading the section about our cars though |
04-11-06, 10:42 AM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: January 2002 Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 210
| | When I bought my car a wanted the 96-98 tails. To this day most people think I have a 4.6.  It's a fricken 95 look at the tails and the fender badges. I'm glad I stuck with the 94-95 tails. Other wise I would be just another 4.6 rolling around.
-1  |
04-11-06, 10:47 AM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: May 2002 Location: ohio
Posts: 1,521
| | My copy still hasn't arrived yet. |
04-11-06, 12:11 PM
|  | Keep it lubed .... keep it straight .... and keep it slow. It will come out. | | Join Date: March 2005 Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,969
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by xr8d302 Putting Vertical lights on your 94-95 mustang is like getting breast implants if you're a man...sure, they look good to you, but everybody's laughing at you at the same time |   |
04-12-06, 07:41 AM
|  | Founding Member | | Join Date: April 2002 Location: PA
Posts: 2,011
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by JJ95GTID The article was okay. A little too short and not technical enough to really get its point across. The article made it seem like modding a 94-95 just wasn't worth the headache because of the EEC-IV in our cars. Well, we all know you can mod a 94-95 if you use the right parts. There is no shortage of exhaust choices for our cars. And, there are OTS cams designed to work with the vacuum needs of the 94-95 ECU. There is more but I don't want to ramble too much here because you already know what I am getting at with this.
I will admit that mod for mod a Fox will be quicker than a 94-95
I would still rather own and drive my 95 over a Fox anyday
I too am a fan of the horizontal tail lights. Just seems like one of the only ways to tell if a Mustang is a 94-95 from a quick glance. And, I believe our cars are unique in a good way.
No offense to 5.0 Mustang & SF or its authors. I have had a subscription since I bought my Mustang in April 2002 and enjoy the magazine throughly. | My thoughts exactly. i was pissed when i read the first paragraph. And for the sake of all fellow 94-95 stangneters who haven't gotten it, here is that first paragraph: "When it comes to positioning in the Mustang family's food chain, the '94-95 'Stang, without question, can today be considered the red-headed stepchild. While they don't absolutely suck, they're still considered teh Mustang IIs of the their time by some 'Stangologists we know."
Am I the only one who thinks this is complete and utter crap!?
they go on to complain about the weight, the computer, the taillights, and other little things. Maybe i'm just mis construing things, but i didn't think this article was that good. IMO, it really down played our cars as a fad by loosers that go to star trek conventions to see that guy that got killed in episode 492a38.
don't get me wrong, i've had a subscription to 5.0 since '01, and love the magazine, but this article was just crap...
Last edited by ProKiller; 04-12-06 at 07:43 AM.
| | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Rate This Thread |  Linear Mode | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | | |
| |
My Boy
Ol' Johnson
