A friend of mine has gotten a 04 gt and I have started reading the 4.6 section some. I came upon 98 gt vs 95gt It is about a 98 gt racing a 95 gt. I think the 95 won, but i forgot. Anways on page 2 I read this "the 95 302 is an embarassment to ford. it is almost as bad as the 1979 115hp 302. i will never understand unless they wanted the 4.6 to look real good. no way he wins. blown 95 302's get 245 rwhp. imagine that. no offense to 203 owners. i don't want a war."
I made a post on there I think are years are alot better than a 96-98 but that's a fight that will go no where.
I agree that the argument the OP posted is pretty stupid. Theres quite a bit you can do with a 302. However, and dont hate me for this, it seems like the engines as they came stock were pretty anemic. I mean, they put out what, 210 HP to the flywheel? I was watching TV the other day and say an ad for some 6 cyl import thats supposed to put out like 230-250 HP. It was kinda depressing.
It only took them 11 yrs to pass a discontinued v8(in stangs at least) . Didn they mention tq probably under 210 compared to our 285 tq.
at the time (well, i was young) the 94/95's were fast enough...what competition did they have...lets see: z28's/trans ams corvettes high-end exotics there were no turbo 4cyl cars or any of the crap we have today, in 1994, the mustang performed well enough
Chronos, I hear your point. The Japanese and Germans (to name two) are getting outstanding power and economy numbers out of midsized V6's. I happen to love low-end torque so that's for me. My bud had a very very nice (albeit fairly stockish) 98GT. Once he hit about about 3-3.5K, it started to sing (analagous to secondaries coming on, for you carb guys). But from idle to 3K, it felt like he was taking off in second gear. It just comes down to what you like.
300zxTT 3000gt VR4 RX7 supra talon TSI eclipse turbo awd grand nationals, syclons/typhoons were a bit more plentiful
I'll agree about the torque. It's pretty nice. I'm just saying the HP thing can be kinda crappy for the stock people. Alot of people who don't know anything about cars (like ricers, for example) only look at HP. They may not have a clue about torque. And of course, when you can't beat them in a race on the highway *cough* you are considered "slow", even if around town you can beat them off the line, get to the next light, and eat a sandwich before they even get to 2nd.
I never understood the 4.6 vs 5.0 wars. Go own one of each and then see how you feel everytime to see one of those pointless threads
blah blah blah war blah blah It's as simple as this, the 94/95 302 produced 10 less hp than a 93, how is that an embarrassment. The 4.6 mill is technology at work, but lets not forget that pushrod 5.0's carried Mustangs for about 25 years and in many cases were considered one of the best engines out there. This kid can say what he wants, but any engine that can hold it's own for a quarter of a century should never be called an embarrassment, no matter what the hp ratings. If it wasn't for the 302, or the "Five Point Oh" the mustang probably wouldn't have survived the 80's, let alone the 90's, so without an "embarrassing 95 302", this kid wouldn't even know what a mustang was....let alone own one. Eat it.
Mike, which is your preference (not having owned a mod motor, and hoping not to, I am curious)? I would think the 5.0 might be nicer in town for stop light marches (beating everything around you, w/o ever taching over 2.5K), but the mod motor might be fun at speed or in twisties (the fun of heel/toeing to keep it in the powerband). I really dont know but I know your tastes so I will understand your opinion.
Well, it's hard to say which i prefer. They both are different cars and have their stong and weak points. That's why i always say 4.6 vs 5.0 threads are meaningless and mean nothing. EVeryone bases what is "better" of what points they favor more. It's not fair to compare a new car vs an old car in terms of comfort. Obviously my 3 year old GT makes a more comfortable daily driver than my 18 year old Fox. You are right though, the 5.0 is a fun stoplight car. It's got the power right off idle so any gear any RPM it will still go. The 4.6L doesn't have as much grunt and is very sensitive about being in the right gear or RPM before i drop the hammer. If i nail it at too low of an RPM, it's gutless. But the 4.6 shines on the highway. I take a LOT of trips where i need to drive 100+ miles in one shot. The 4.6L was made to cruise on the highway. It just zips along effortletless in 4th gear and has plenty of power to pass just by rolling on the gas. And i love to drop it to 3rd at 75MPH and nail it all the way to 130MPH. It pulls hard all the way! Cost of modding has the 5.0 at an advantage. 4.6 mods are very expensive, but the 4.6L engine with it's better breathing heads does respond better to bolt ons. I like em both, can't sya which i prefer because they are two totally different beasts. I will say this though. I get way more attention driving the 5.0!
