1993 5.0 Cobra Mustang??

tigroc106

New Member
May 31, 2009
1
0
0
Hey I was wondering if anyone could tell me what makes the 1993 5.0 Cobra Mustang different from other Mustangs that same year? Thanks
 
  • Sponsors(?)


Turd Tops

New Member
Apr 9, 2009
103
0
0
South Lyon , Michigan
Cobra's had
1. Rear disk brakes and a wider axle,, Parking brake cable is diffrent.
2. Tail lights were diffrent.
3. Diffrent spoiler and ground effects
4. 17" wheels
5. Frt disk rotors are taller
6. Cobra intake
7. Roller rockers
8. GT-40 heads
9. Underdrive pulleys on the crank and water pump
10. 24 pound injectors
11. 70mm Cobra MAF and 65mm TB
12. X3Z Computer.
13 Power steering cooler
14. Cobra mufflers differ from stock GT's and LX's
15. Cobra's used 4cyl springs frt and rear
16. Cobra's used the 91-92 Thunderbird H.O. cam

I'm sure there's more but that's all i could come up with right now.


Unless your talking about the "Canadian" Cobra. There just a plain jane GT with a cobra sticker on the hatch....
 

stang&2Birds

Founding Member
Cobra's had
5. Frt disk rotors are taller
Front disks are the same. The 93 Cobra R had the bigger front disks.
Maybe the 93 Cobra came with directionally vented rotors? But, the front rotor itself has the same specs. Check summit and other parts site. For example the
EBC Brakes GD7019

http://store.summitracing.com/partd...859634+4294907915+4294820348+115&autoview=sku

http://store.summitracing.com/partd...859634+4294820348+4294907673+115&autoview=sku

is listed for both the 93 Cobra and the 87-93 GTs.
 

stang&2Birds

Founding Member
Whats that all about?
If that's true, (I'm not sure), then they would have done it because the '93 Cobra was really a car setup for the quarter mile, not for handling. The POS front brakes confirm that it was like the GTs - MASSIVELY under braked!

IMHO, today, if a car had a POS braking system like the Fox Stangs did, the manufacture would be sued out of business.

BTW: From a braking point of view, the rear disks are a "joke" on the 93 Cobra. The moronic font brake setup is what causes brake steer much more than the rear. And, you typically get only ~20-30% of the braking from the rear. Now, add in ?softer springs?, and you get ~5-10% less braking in the rear because of more nose dive.

The rear disks on the 93 Cobra was so that Ford and people could say that the car had "4 wheel disks".
 

Turd Tops

New Member
Apr 9, 2009
103
0
0
South Lyon , Michigan
Front disks are the same.

I belive that to be untrue. The Frt rotors had a taller hat to make up for the longer axle in the rear.

I know the Cobra R had bigger frt rotors. The Cobra r used 94 Cobra spindles and rotors but the calipers were only found on the 93 Cobra R. I am still unclear as to what rear brakes the 93 Cobra R used. Some say they used the Mark 7/SVO rear brakes but i can't be sure.
 

stang&2Birds

Founding Member
I belive that to be untrue. The Frt rotors had a taller hat to make up for the longer axle in the rear.

I know the Cobra R had bigger frt rotors. The Cobra r used 94 Cobra spindles and rotors but the calipers were only found on the 93 Cobra R. I am still unclear as to what rear brakes the 93 Cobra R used. Some say they used the Mark 7/SVO rear brakes but i can't be sure.
That sounded familiar. So, I double checked.
You're right! That hat is taller.

The disk size is the same, but the hat is taller.
Brakes - '93 Cobra - SVTOA Forums


I mainly remember that the disk diameter is the same. :) People of mistakenly say that the '93 Cobra (front) brakes are better. But, the '93 Cobra's front brakes use the same caliper, and the disk diameter is the same.

And, as I said, do not expect a lot of gain from the 93 rear disks on a Fox Stang. IMHO, unless people have 245 or bigger on the back, *I* would be surprised if they saw any difference between the '93 rear setup. The reason people will claim (by means of their butt-o-meter :)) that the '93 rear brakes make their car stop faster is because they often use new good quality pads and rotors. But, compared to a properly adjusted rear drum setup with new pads and drums that were of the same quality, there won't be much difference.

I do agree that drums suck in they can (and will) have brake pull. But, as I said, on the 87-93 Stangs, the front brake pull often dominates (assuming all new and good quality pads, rotors, shoes, and drums) as long as the back brakes are properly adjusted. Often, it takes a few weeks, and a few uses of the hand brake, to get the rear drums "balanced".
 

BigDanTheMan

Member
Aug 16, 2005
63
1
6
San Francisco, CA
The POS front brakes confirm that it was like the GTs - MASSIVELY under braked!

IMHO, today, if a car had a POS braking system like the Fox Stangs did, the manufacture would be sued out of business.

BTW: From a braking point of view, the rear disks are a "joke" on the 93 Cobra.

So then if you don't like the 87-93 cobra brake upgrade kit; which i appreciate, what brakes do would you recommend? baer?
 

stang&2Birds

Founding Member
So then if you don't like the 87-93 cobra brake upgrade kit; which i appreciate, what brakes do would you recommend? baer?
79-93 4 Lug Ford Fox Body Mustang Brake Upgrades
:)

Depends on what you want, why you want it, how much money, and so on.

IMHO, the 73 mm calipers and good directional vented rotors (withOUT slots or ricer holes) is one of the cheapest and easiest brake upgrades.

After that, it's a matter of cost, desire, and mechanical ability.

IMHO, the sn95 brake upgrade is a TON of work for the typical person! Just because some idiot says he can do it in 8 hours (because he's done it a bunch of times) means nothing. You can spend hours/days on simple things like differential drain plug, the bolt inside the diff that has a tendency to break, new rear seals, etc, etc, etc.
FYI:
http://www.fordracingparts.com/download/instructionsheets/FordInstShtM-2300-K.pdf


Also, don't forget that bigger brakes means bigger rims. That means new tires and a new spare. The total cost adds up very quickly!

BTW: I'm one of the first people to agree that the Fox brakes SUCK! I almost got killed because my "brakes went away". The pads, rotors, shoes, and drums were about 2 months old. I wasn't going "too fast". ;) But, fast enough so that my brakes went "bye bye". After that, spending the $4K-$6K (back then) on my brake upgrade seemed cheap compared to me dying.

Now, you could do a similar upgrade with salvage yard parts at a MUCH cheaper price. Still, the new tires are still a good hunk of change by themselves. :) I know, I got a great deal on a set of rims for my 2000 Olds. But, right now, I don't fell like spending the money on the new tires, mounting, and balancing. So, I figure that in a few years, it'll be time for new tires for the 2000 Olds. At that time, I'll already have my rims, and I'll upgrade the tires at that time.

Good luck!