- Jul 2, 2004
- 10
- 0
- 0
hllon4whls said:NO way in hell would the 96-98 4.6 take a 5.0. Those year motors were weak weak weak. They dont make crap for power. Nothing like the 99 and ups.
NeVeRLiFt said:True
The 1996 GT has a 4.6-liter V8 engine with 215 hp and way less torque, the Cobra has a 305-hp and the 3.8-liter V6 has 150-hp.
The 1987-92 Mustangs make 225hp and 300lb torque. The 1993 is a little less with 215hp and 275lb torque.
So not only does the Fox body Mustang weigh less weight they are making more hp and way more torque.
1996 Mustang
215 @ 4400, 285 @ 3500
1992 Mustang
225 @ 4000, 300 @ 3000
1996 Mustang
Curb Weight, lbs.
Curb weight 3355
1992 Mustang
Curb Weight, lbs.
convertible = 2996
coupe = 2775
hatchback = 2834
Every 100lbs in weight reduction = 1/10th sec faster
This is why the coupes are faster than the hatchbacks in stock vs stock off the showroom.
5spd GT said:The 96-98 Gt does not have "Way less torque"...try 15lbs...300 vs. 285 ft. lbs...
1987-1993 have the same horsepower...their were changes from speed density and maf, and small minor cam changes, and in 93 the hypereutic pistons were introduced witch were actually lighter...(NONE of those changes were even close to significant enough to justify the supposed 20hp difference...)the 205 horsepower rating in 93 was strickly a marketing ploy by Ford to make the 94-95 sn95 with the 5 Liter look better with its 215hp rating...who would want to buy a new model with less horsepower...hence the "marketing ploy"...
Those curb weight numbers you introduced are inaccurate...they appear to be for a 5spd 4 banger...
caine0 said:I have a 90 and I've raced a guy at work who has a 97 several times, and everytime I've won without dispute. Both cars are stock. The original 4.6's just didn't have enough power to push the extra weight they were carrying over the 5.0's.
NeVeRLiFt said:I tried
Bottom line the 87-93 stangs make more power and the Fox body is lighter.