5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

Guys who owned fox and SN95 pls reply

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 01:34 AM
  #11  
94gtcoupe's Avatar
94gtcoupe
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,809
From: michigan, living in O Hi Hoe
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

+1 to the chick magnet, and lucky they are rated the same as far as torque and hp... and they don't weigh more than 300 lbs.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 01:47 AM
  #12  
zemog's Avatar
zemog
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 158
From:
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

exactly

ORIGINAL: shibby_cbs

Sn95 = Sexy Chick Magnet
Fox = All Business
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 01:54 AM
  #13  
musclemustang94's Avatar
musclemustang94
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 799
From:
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

I almost bought a black notch...If i had the money i would have a fox race car and a street SN95 notch. I bought my 94 because it was just a nicer car. They pretty much cost the same. Plus the SN95 has rear discs, 5 lug, abs, power everything and they look sick as hell! I love 'em both though. I dont know about them being more expensive to mod, maybe computer wise...its the same friggin engine.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 02:00 AM
  #14  
svt99redcobra's Avatar
svt99redcobra
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 646
From:
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

ORIGINAL: musclemustang94

I almost bought a black notch...If i had the money i would have a fox race car and a street SN95 notch. I bought my 94 because it was just a nicer car. They pretty much cost the same. Plus the SN95 has rear discs, 5 lug, abs, power everything and they look sick as hell! I love 'em both though. I dont know about them being more expensive to mod, maybe computer wise...its the same friggin engine.
sn95 notch? am i missing something
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 02:16 AM
  #15  
musclemustang94's Avatar
musclemustang94
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 799
From:
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

Before I bought my 94 when I was lookin for a stang.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 02:26 AM
  #16  
HC_CrAzYHoRsE's Avatar
HC_CrAzYHoRsE
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,401
From: Montreal, Canada
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

ORIGINAL: shibby_cbs

Sn95 = Sexy Chick Magnet
Fox = All Business
you say it's a "chick car" like it's a good thing [sm=smiley36.gif]
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 03:29 AM
  #17  
AdderMk2's Avatar
AdderMk2
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,374
From: Lil' Rhody
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

ORIGINAL: luckythirteen13

cons: 94-95 have less hp, weight a lot more and the motors have hyper pistons.
pros: cant think of any
SN-95's had just as much HP
What do you consider the weight if its "alot more"?
93's had hyper pistons as well

ORIGINAL: Boss_Hotrod

94-95 have less head room, a little harder to access motor
SN-95's did not have less headroom, Infact, the passenger compartment was made LARGER in the SN-95
A little harder to access the motor??? the only difference in the engine bays between the two styles in room in front of the motor for that big stupid clutch fan, and room above the motor to allow for heat to disapate under that big steel hood

ORIGINAL: ddeaton66

They both have many pro's and con's. Looks aside (which is a personal preference), sn95's have greater creature comfort and are inherently safer because of the technology for crashworthiness improves each year. Con's - They are slightly heavier (500# or so depending on the model) and can be trickier and sometimes more expensive to mod.
500 pounds difference huh??? the lightest factory trim fox body would be a notch... tipping the scales at 3023lbs. thats with manual windows, manual locks, and no A/C
A STOCK SN-95 COBRA weighs 3365 with power windows, power door locks, power mirrors, power drivers seat, a REAL stereo system, AND air conditioning.... AND THATS NOT EVEN THE LIGHTEST!!! the 95GTS weighs a mere 3150 lbs...


So you fox owners really need to take your heads out of your ***. You foxes arent all they are cracked up to be. I'll take a car with style and comfort over something that rattles like a tin can and is a mere... 2/10's or a second faster in the quarter.

Im really sick of these one sided arguments, no one 79-95 is better than the other. They all have the same heart, and thats all that matters.

FOR CHRIST ****ING SAKE.... ATLEAST IM DRIVING A FORD!!!!!!
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 03:57 AM
  #18  
Black95MustangGT's Avatar
Black95MustangGT
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,175
From: Fredericksburg, Virginia
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

ORIGINAL: AdderMk2

ORIGINAL: luckythirteen13

cons: 94-95 have less hp, weight a lot more and the motors have hyper pistons.
pros: cant think of any
SN-95's had just as much HP
What do you consider the weight if its "alot more"?
93's had hyper pistons as well

ORIGINAL: Boss_Hotrod

94-95 have less head room, a little harder to access motor
SN-95's did not have less headroom, Infact, the passenger compartment was made LARGER in the SN-95
A little harder to access the motor??? the only difference in the engine bays between the two styles in room in front of the motor for that big stupid clutch fan, and room above the motor to allow for heat to disapate under that big steel hood

ORIGINAL: ddeaton66

They both have many pro's and con's. Looks aside (which is a personal preference), sn95's have greater creature comfort and are inherently safer because of the technology for crashworthiness improves each year. Con's - They are slightly heavier (500# or so depending on the model) and can be trickier and sometimes more expensive to mod.
500 pounds difference huh??? the lightest factory trim fox body would be a notch... tipping the scales at 3023lbs. thats with manual windows, manual locks, and no A/C
A STOCK SN-95 COBRA weighs 3365 with power windows, power door locks, power mirrors, power drivers seat, a REAL stereo system, AND air conditioning.... AND THATS NOT EVEN THE LIGHTEST!!! the 95GTS weighs a mere 3150 lbs...


So you fox owners really need to take your heads out of your ***. You foxes arent all they are cracked up to be. I'll take a car with style and comfort over something that rattles like a tin can and is a mere... 2/10's or a second faster in the quarter.

Im really sick of these one sided arguments, no one 79-95 is better than the other. They all have the same heart, and thats all that matters.

FOR CHRIST ****ING SAKE.... ATLEAST IM DRIVING A FORD!!!!!!
hell yeah, you speak nothing but the truth
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 04:21 AM
  #19  
w8less's Avatar
w8less
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,396
From: KY
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

ORIGINAL: 8URWS6

con #1 for me, I couldn't get my tall butt in there. I'm 6'3 and my knees were in my chest.
i am 6'3 also and didn't have either of the problems that u mentiioned. and my seat wasn't even all the way back
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 04:41 AM
  #20  
uni_uni's Avatar
uni_uni
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 366
From:
Default RE: Guys who owned fow and SN95 pls reply

I'm 6'4 and while riding around in my vert I have no head room issues



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:11 AM.