What's the best year from 1994–2004 Mustang GT Convertible?

aliensquale

New Member
Mar 22, 2011
28
0
0
I am looking to buy a Mustang GT Convertible of this body style generation (1994–2004)... what would be the best model years to look at?

I really wanted the 2003/2004 Cobra 'Terminator' but they are very hard to find un-modded to hell and they are also very expensive.

What dollar amount should I expect to pay for a nice lower mileage GT Convertible?
 
  • Sponsors (?)


What I find is weird is that there are a lot of 2003/2004 Mustang GT Convertibles for sale and I found some really nice ones with low mileage (30-40k miles) and yet the owners are asking $13-$15k for these cars...

meanwhile the KBB says this car with that mileage should be in the $10-$11k range... what gives?

as a comparrison, I found some nice condition 2003/2004 Cobras Convertibles with similar mileage for around the $19-$20k figure... and yet the KBB on this car with the same mileage is $21-$23k... so it's very strange why the COBRAS are selling for LESS than KBB value but the regular GT's are selling for OVER KBB values????
 
Probably cause the GT's are peoples DD and people are more than likely upside down with owning them for only a couple years which forces people to ask for more.

The termis are more than likely a weekend toy, which means they are owned in cash and in the current state of the union are probably needing to be sold off for extra cash.
 
I just recently picked a 2004 convertible in CT for 12800 at a dealer ship it had 49K, in real good shape. When I checked KBB it was at 14K, private sales should realistically should be less. i think the older years are the best bet, by then the intake problem, and spark plug blow out were most likely resolve by the factory instead of the 99 to 2000 model years. just my .02 cents
 
If possible, I'd get either a 94-95 with the great 5.0, or I'd get an '02-'04 so you can avoid the plastic intake.

It comes dow to what you like, '94-'98 or '99-'04...same underpinnings and interior but completely different styling. Personally I think the New Edge cars are very pedestrian and bland looking (sorry folks), but I didn't want want a '94-'95 as a daily because it's just getting too old, and I liked the refreshed tails/wheels of the '96-'98 cars, so I went with a '98 since it was the newest.

So first decide if you want a '94-'95, a '96-'98, or a '99-'04. Then get the newest/lowest mile one you can. If modding, a 5.0 is tempting but if it's just a cruiser don't let the plastic intake of newer cars scare you, if you get a good deal compared to an '02+.
 
Plastic intake here in weather ranging from +30 to -42 and no problems in 10 years.

That said, imho, 94,95 and 99-04 is the only choice.
94 and 95 you get the 205-220hp 5.0 (a lot of debate on actual hp numbers). The 5.0 is easily modded into making crazy power. Personally not a fan of the styling but you get the 5.0 instead of 4.6. Quite slow stock actually but modable into a beast.

96-98 convertibles are typically known as the slowest Mustangs ever built (second only to the Mustang II). Heavy and producing at best 215hp. Definitely known as the 'dogs' of the Mustang world. Modding starts off with replacing parts with 99-04 parts (PI intake) and then you hit the same modding scene as the 99+'s.

99-04 your looking at 260hp, pre 02 there's the plastic intake that some people worry about. Modding scene is decent now, best mod is a power adder like an SC.

Appearance is obviously a personal choice, interiors are practically identical... Though 96-98 there is a third 'pod' in the center console that contains a clock, as well i believe they stopped making the dual color interiors in 98.

... I've owned a Mustang of every generation except for 05+, so I don't have any qualms telling people how I feel about the various years. My dads 68 428CJ we worked on growing up will always be my pinnacle:nice:
 
^^^How do you figure a 215-225 hp '96-'98 is slower than a 205-220 hp '94-'95?

Ford actually rated both those years at 215hp, the numbers I've listed are what I've been told are closer to accurate numbers. As for why 96-98 is supposedly the dog years I couldn't tell you... detailed specs the 96 shouldn't be much slower than the 95, very close in fact.

95: 215hp, 288 torque curb weight: 3517lbs
96: 215hp, 290 torque curb weight: 3554lbs

But as was said, they just were.