Opinions on fox vs SN95
- Thread starter 87lc2
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
foxes are older, suspension is crappy, and they are getting harder and harder to find in decent shape
on the plus foxes look light years better than the sn95
on the plus foxes look light years better than the sn95
trav_19
New Member
i own both right now....and since i got the sn95 i havent touched my fox....the interiors are so much nicer....i think they handle better and with a good wax tinted headlights a drop and some wheels sn95 are the best looking stang IMO..... i love mine to death
The SN's are much better DD's IMHO (creature comforts, etc).
Foxes are fun weekend toys but can take a bit more upkeep if used as a DD.
What year of SN are you thinking of getting?
Good luck with the decision.
Foxes are fun weekend toys but can take a bit more upkeep if used as a DD.
What year of SN are you thinking of getting?
Good luck with the decision.
trav_19
New Member
Well I sold an SN95 GT, and built a 5.0 SN95 for my cuz (converted V6 auto to 5.0 5-speed)
I like the fox body because:
- light weight
- looks (looks are subjective but I prefer the fox)
The SN95 has :
- better brakes, 4 wheel discs
- 5 LUG! (don't know why the fox has the stupid 4 lug)
- handling, there isn't much difference between the two IMO but it is better
- no frame around the door windows
- more solid body
- interior is more friendly, looks nicer with the round shape (but again that's subjective, I prefer the basic no BS interior of my fox)
- two choices of engines in the SN95 modular or pushrod
- easier to find clean and cheap SN95 cars than clean fox's (in my area)
I prefer the fox hands down. I love the looks and no one will forget the true 5.0L Mustang that ruled the streets in its day and the fox is sometimes considered to be a muscle car. The SN95 is too bulky and round for me and all the extra comforts get in the way of pure accelerating fun
I like the fox body because:
- light weight
- looks (looks are subjective but I prefer the fox)
The SN95 has :
- better brakes, 4 wheel discs
- 5 LUG! (don't know why the fox has the stupid 4 lug)
- handling, there isn't much difference between the two IMO but it is better
- no frame around the door windows
- more solid body
- interior is more friendly, looks nicer with the round shape (but again that's subjective, I prefer the basic no BS interior of my fox)
- two choices of engines in the SN95 modular or pushrod
- easier to find clean and cheap SN95 cars than clean fox's (in my area)
I prefer the fox hands down. I love the looks and no one will forget the true 5.0L Mustang that ruled the streets in its day and the fox is sometimes considered to be a muscle car. The SN95 is too bulky and round for me and all the extra comforts get in the way of pure accelerating fun
SN95s are uber awesome and everyone should run out and buy one!!!
(and leave the rest of the Foxes for me)
(and leave the rest of the Foxes for me
)
302fordracer
New Member
As has pretty much been said...the sn95 is hands down the better dd...there is no comparison...The sn95 is also a better road racer...the brakes are light years better in the sn95 and the interior is much nicer and more comfortable...Looks are of course a preference thing but let me tell you I got a lot more attention and more of my friends liked the sn95 but yeah due to the weight the fox is a better race car...just depends on what you want, I love my fox, but if I could have my 95gt back I'd do it in a heartbeat...
Sn95 is the better car, but the Fox is lighter and have TONS of cheap mods you can do and really make it badass.
Plus a nice Fox gets far more attention on the road than a Sn95. I see 10 SN95's a day....but I see a fox maybe once a week. Even the 4-banger Foxes are getting hard to find on the road
Plus a nice Fox gets far more attention on the road than a Sn95. I see 10 SN95's a day....but I see a fox maybe once a week. Even the 4-banger Foxes are getting hard to find on the road
Aliate X
Member
I disagree, I saw a black SN95 cobra with black interior and FR500 wheels with a polished lip and I fell in love. But then I woke up when he was looking at my tails lol.
Foxes are more fun to make into race cars, SN95's make more fun street machines IMO
85_built5.0
New Member
i had a really nice red 95 gt with bullit rims looked cool but everone has one and you seem to get alote more stares in a fox. The fox always seemed to feel more muscle car to me to.
DMAN302
My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.
The fox body stands out more...SN cars when clean get kind remarks....Fox body cars when clean get covered in fingerprints when parked.
I think without a doubt the best thing about an SN95 over a Fox is that you can fit steamroller sized tires in the back without hammering on everything. I personally would love to have a '96 Cobra
blackened88lx
Active Member
Most of the pros and cons have been covered. sn95s just don't do it for me. The fox is just badass, and imo much better looking. Plus the fox is a better car to build off of being lighter, etc.
hsean
10 Year Member
fox all the way sn 's are ugly except for the cobra sorry if i offended anybody the 94 reminds me of the mustang2 they both came after nice looking cars and ford messed things up. i can understand the oil embargo in the early seventies but in1994 what the hell was ford thinking?again sorry if i offended anyone i see these cars on the road and they don't get a second look but the foxes i may come across one once a month and i live five minutes from where they were built. you have to appreciate the foxes more now more then ever because they are becoming more and more rare.
This right here says it all. I'll be a Fox guy at heart forever but i'll own one of these someday
Shakerhood
Dirt-Old 20+Year Member
'66 coupe
Founding Member
I think the biased comments about which ones look better are amusing. I mean does a 3rd gen. Camaro owner think their car is ugly?
Honestly, I like the look of all Mustangs. But IMO the ugliest Mustangs were made from 1971-1984. The SN's are far from the ugliest.
I like the way foxbodies look, but most people don't. I'm not talking about "most people on a 5.0 forum," or even "most people on a Mustang forum." Everytime I'm involved in a conversation about Mustangs with someone outside the hobby, they usually reference "the boxy Mustangs" as the least attractive. This is just why I find it funny that people on a fox-forum are making such bold statements about SN's. It's like the Civic forum where all the cars are fast, or the 240 forum where everyone's a drifter; the rest of the world disagrees, but everyone in this little group will say otherwise. Not trying to be rude, but the looks of the SN's always get crapped on in this forum, and it's never ever lined up with the consensus I get elsewhere.
That said, I wouldn't mind a clean LX (GT's look dated, IMO). But it would have to be a hobby car. For daily driving, I like my '95, and it doesn't look too bad either.
Honestly, I like the look of all Mustangs. But IMO the ugliest Mustangs were made from 1971-1984. The SN's are far from the ugliest.
I like the way foxbodies look, but most people don't. I'm not talking about "most people on a 5.0 forum," or even "most people on a Mustang forum." Everytime I'm involved in a conversation about Mustangs with someone outside the hobby, they usually reference "the boxy Mustangs" as the least attractive. This is just why I find it funny that people on a fox-forum are making such bold statements about SN's. It's like the Civic forum where all the cars are fast, or the 240 forum where everyone's a drifter; the rest of the world disagrees, but everyone in this little group will say otherwise. Not trying to be rude, but the looks of the SN's always get crapped on in this forum, and it's never ever lined up with the consensus I get elsewhere.
That said, I wouldn't mind a clean LX (GT's look dated, IMO). But it would have to be a hobby car. For daily driving, I like my '95, and it doesn't look too bad either.
Similar threads
