5.0 versus 99GT up, Which is better????

Status
Not open for further replies.

revedup

Member
Nov 18, 2005
63
0
6
S.F. Cal,
wrenchers
and gearheads any experience with both???
Areas of acceleration?
Handling?
Braking?
Maintenance?
Parts availability?
Dependability?
Parts cost?
Are they pretty close over all??:SNSign: :SNSign:
Ok Gear heads this is serious
I got an 89 5.0
Its high miles 217,000
Im trying to decide to rebuild and or just buy with lower miles ok!!!!
Rebuild or buy another engine or car which ever is a better deal!!
Considering a 99 gt up maybe even a C-4 yes a c-4 Corvette Maybe?????
Or just restore the 89 mustang 5.0 car!
Got it???????????????:eek: :eek:
 
  • Sponsors (?)


Well, my first stang was an '89GT. Now I have an '02GT. I would say that the newer one is more reliable and has nicer features. However, parts are a hell of alot cheaper on the 5.0's. Plus the basic bolt-on's seem to make more of an improvement over the 4.6 bolt-on's. I think, but I maybe wrong, the 5.0's are around 300-400lbs. lighter than the 99+ also. I would say the 5.0 has a little more power down low, but the 4.6 pulls alot harder on the top end(stock vs. stock). Most 5.0's also came with either a 2:73 or 3:08 rear gear ratio while the 99+ come with 3:27's. Overall, if I was just trying to build the faster, better handling car I would go with the 5.0. You would get more out of you money.

All of this is just my opinion!:D
 
Is it me,or does it seem that this question is asked like once a month!! :nonono:
I have had both.Started with a 5.0l like most,and had it for 6 years,then got my '03 GT.
There both good,they both have there negatives,and they both have there positives! :nice:
 
wrenchers
and gearheads any experience with both???
Areas of acceleration?
Handling?
Braking?
Maintenance?
Parts availability?
Dependability?
Parts cost?
Are they pretty close over all??:SNSign: :SNSign:

Why do you ask?

In the 5.0 section, the 5.0 is. http://forums.stangnet.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=136

In the 4.6 section, the 4.6 is. http://forums.stangnet.com/forumdisplay.php?f=141

Why do you ask all these questions? Are you here to start crap or do you like asking all the questions you've posted in other threads you started?

Is there a purpose?
 
are you comparing a motor with a car?

5.0 = motor
99-04 = an entire car

IMO an entire car would be better than just a motor. Cant do much with a motor but look at it, move it around on a hoist, swap parts. you cant drive a motor. you cant **** in the backseat of a motor.


now the 4.6 vs 5.0 debate is old.

4.6 = more reliable since its newer. Harder to mod because it is more complex and more expensive.

5.0 = still pretty darned reliable. Easy and cheap to mod, parts readily available (just open Summit catalog).


IMO it all depends on your goals and your pocket.
 
Both cars have there benefits. From a speed stand point there is no comparison. The newer cars are magical with power adders and hook a lot better, but alas, are heavier and slower. If you're strictly looking to go fast the Fox bodies are probably better. They are easier to work on and the stock motors are little more durable. The newer cars are so much better as drivers....it's a tough call. There is one caveat to this. Newer Cobra's and Mach 1's I think are better than all the Foxes but cost alot more. You can't beat a 2003-2004 Cobra. A stock 03-04 snake is perhaps the most potent sports car ever built in it's price range. For $750 on top of the purchase price you get nearly 500RWHP out of one with the right parts.

I guess the question is not so simple.......
 
Both cars have there benefits. From a speed stand point there is no comparison. The newer cars are magical with power adders and hook a lot better, but alas, are heavier and slower. If you're strictly looking to go fast the Fox bodies are probably better. They are easier to work on and the stock motors are little more durable. The newer cars are so much better as drivers....it's a tough call. There is one caveat to this. Newer Cobra's and Mach 1's I think are better than all the Foxes but cost alot more. You can't beat a 2003-2004 Cobra. A stock 03-04 snake is perhaps the most potent sports car ever built in it's price range. For $750 on top of the purchase price you get nearly 500RWHP out of one with the right parts.

I guess the question is not so simple.......

Can cobra kick a c-4,s ass????:nono: :nono:
 
Can they handle as good as a c-4 corvette???????????????
Just asking??????????

Different type of car, so not really a fair comparison...if you invest the price difference of a vette into a mustang then yes it will handle as well or close and with the extra money for hp will be faster...

but it looks like Tomustang is correct...
just a troll
 
Come on man a c4, if your looking for a mustang get a mustang. If you want a vette, get a vette. I personally like all cars but am a Ford guy. Daily driver you want a newer car get the newer mustang. I personally bought my '91 mustang after I sold my '99 GT. Now I miss the '99 but will not sell the '91. If you want better handleing and reliability go for the new edge style. If you want a quick car thats goes stright go for the fox car.

If you do get a newer mustang go for the 2002 and newer? The newer ones have the tr3650 trans in it, batter than the weak t45.
 
Come on man a c4, if your looking for a mustang get a mustang. If you want a vette, get a vette. I personally like all cars but am a Ford guy. Daily driver you want a newer car get the newer mustang. I personally bought my '91 mustang after I sold my '99 GT. Now I miss the '99 but will not sell the '91. If you want better handleing and reliability go for the new edge style. If you want a quick car thats goes stright go for the fox car.

If you do get a newer mustang go for the 2002 and newer? The newer ones have the tr3650 trans in it, batter than the weak t45.

well thats what im researching now thats what this sites for to get ideas sugestions isn.t it???
If i knew exactly what i wanted guess i wouldn't need ideas now would I?:shrug:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.