hellas85stang

94s were over rated and redone to like 205-210///and u can make anything fast..my 85 convert weighs 3165....so depends on yrs...

Bumsdeclaf

lets talk facts here. there are advantages to having a fox over the SN95, but the SN95 does have some advantages over the Fox too. first off, disc brakes all around. also the body is sturdier, hence the extra weight. SN95 do corner faster and are more aerodynamic than Foxes. therefore more stable at higher speeds. also the main reason that they arnt as powerful as Fox is not really the intake, while the stock intake isnt that good im not saying that both have the same, what really made the hp difference was the computer. the SN95 sacrificed hp for better gas milage. but its like 10 hp? and if you planning to upgrade your stang, fox or SN95, your probably gonna change the intake manifold, and then guess what, now your both on the same page when it comes to the engine (not if u still have SN95 comp, but just change the prog). as for weight, do lil things like Aluminum anything u can. personally i went with driveshaft. also things like the K member, a 50lbs part can be changed for high performance low weight alternatives. ive gone through extensive weight reduction on my SN95, and it weighs less than any stock Fox i could think of right now.(cant tell u wat i did though) point is that both cars have one thing in common, THE 5.0, whether u decide on Fox or SN95, youll find that the 5.0 is a real easy engine to work with and really fun too. also REALLY CHEAP. so if your gonna compare Mustang to Mustang, go with things like 4.6 vs 5.0, and thats a good discussion cause on one hand 5.0 is easy and cheap to work with compared to 4.6, but 4.6 is a much more efficient and sturdy design. 4.6 stock block handles more HP than 5.0 stock block. but thats another story