Definitely needs a mention. Handling was boss in this thing.
I think this is a case of remembering things better than they actually were. When you really break down the parts list, the SVO just doesn't have much to make it that much better than a standard Fox GT.
So, as is common knowledge it had better than stock brakes and 5 lug axles.
It has the same wheel/tire size as a 91-93 5.0 Mustang.
It has a slightly wider track than a standard 5.0L car.
Koni shocks are certainly a plus... I'll venture to say that they probably made the most difference in terms of how the car felt as stock Mustang shocks leave a lot to be desired.
Stiffer Bushings - In my research every SVO site says stiffer bushings, but there is zero data on the differences. How much does could it add to the handling?
Front Suspension
Re-valved rack and pinion - 20:1 ratio is actually slower than later model GT's.
The SVO spindle/Control arm setup is the biggest difference compared to the standard Fox. According to MM...
Spindle, rotor and caliper were sourced from a Lincoln.
Diameter of the ball joint taper is that of the Lincoln, which is larger than a typical Mustang ball joint. This requires a ball joint adapter when swapping this spindle onto any other 1979-04 Mustang ball joint.
Steering arm geometry is slightly different than that of the other Mustang spindles of the same era, increasing the Ackerman geometry effect, but also slowing the steering ratio.
Strut mounting ear is 0.230" (5.9mm) thinner than the first generation Mustang spindle.
Bolt holes for the strut mounting are 0.130" (3.3mm) further apart than the first generation Mustang spindle; are the same as the 1987-93 V8 Mustang spindle, and all 1994-04 Mustang spindles.
However, in context the change is similar to that made on the SN95 chassis. Some slight front track increases and slightly better ackermann. Not enough IMO to classify it as a great handling car.
Stiffer front ARB - Ford changed the swaybar size a lot, but from Maximum Motorsports...
SVO Sway bar is 1.25 inches, an 87-93 GT is 1.313 and a 93 Cobra is 1.125. Upgrade? I'm not so sure it really matters that much.
Rear Suspension
7.5 inch axle - From a handling perspective, it is lower weight than the 8.8 (although until 1986 all Mustangs had a 7.5 anyway) which is preferred.
Same quadrabind rear
suspension setup with quad shocks. The Mustang achilles heel is not fixed on the SVO.
Rear bar (article claims it is added, but MustangGT registry shows the GT always had one) size difference is seemingly impossible to find, but like the front bar these things changed a lot through the years.
Weight
Despite commonly held beliefs, the SVO just isn't that much lighter than a Stock Mustang GT. The 2.3L is all cast iron, and it is heavy for a four cylinder. Add in the turbo components and you are knocking on the door of 5.0L weight. A 5.0L with aluminum heads is about the same weight as a full dress 2.3L turbo. Weight distribution is nowhere near 50/50, it is about 57/43, which isn't anything to write home about.
Now, the point I am making here is that if I were to make these changes to an 87-93 5.0L Mustang with new aftermarket parts and then claimed that I had a great handling car, I would be rightly laughed out of the room. The fact is, the SVO was a poor handler just like pretty much every other Mustang from 79-04.
Links -
Spindle tech -
http://www.maximummotorsports.com/store/index.php?main_page=tech_front_susp_svo_spindle
Sway bar tech -
http://www.maximummotorsports.com/store/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=88_219
General history and specs -
http://www.svoca.com/history/svo_history.php
