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.

92 vs 93

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-25-2007, 01:08 PM
  #1  
93cobra22
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
93cobra22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 257
Default 92 vs 93

is there really that big of a difference in speed in the 92 vs the 93 foxbodies
93cobra22 is offline  
Old 04-25-2007, 01:13 PM
  #2  
cassidymustang
4th Gear Member
 
cassidymustang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location:
Posts: 1,208
Default RE: 92 vs 93

there are differences between the to but i dont think much difference in speed
cassidymustang is offline  
Old 04-25-2007, 01:16 PM
  #3  
koesterca1
2nd Gear Member
 
koesterca1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SC
Posts: 316
Default RE: 92 vs 93

The 93 on paper had less horsepower due to a HP ratings change in 93.The horsepowers were the same though. The difference engine wise is the 92 had forged pistons and the 93 had hypereutic pistons. But on a well tuned engine the block will give before the hypereutic pistons do.
koesterca1 is offline  
Old 04-25-2007, 01:17 PM
  #4  
PJB
5th Gear Member
 
PJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rotterdam, NY
Posts: 3,333
Default RE: 92 vs 93

I wouldnt think so.
Ford did downplay the horsepower of the '93 to make the Cobra look more powerful though.
The '92 has forged pistons and the '93 has hypereutetic pistons. Forged are better.
PJB is offline  
Old 04-25-2007, 01:33 PM
  #5  
93 LX FiveO
5th Gear Member
 
93 LX FiveO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Haverhill, MA
Posts: 3,664
Default RE: 92 vs 93

Ford switched to hypereutetic pistons because the forged pistons heat up and expand, causing the car to smoke on a first/dry start.

they are still used today in newer mustangs.. no noticable power difference at all.
93 LX FiveO is offline  




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