NeedaTerminator

Originally I planned on getting a 99-04 GT if I got a Mustang(and get ridofNeon SXT)but with gas prices the way they are I was thinking about keeping my car and getting a cheaper 5.0 Stang. But I really haven't looked into them all that much so I was hoping you guys could offer some insight into each. I would either be going for an 88-93 5.0Fox Body or a 94-95 5.0 GT. Is one of those better than the other? Like what mechanical problems exist with each, stuff like that. Any driveline problems or suspension problems.I would probably try to rebuild the engine if I could find a kit online. I would eventually want to boost the car, most likely with a Turbocharger instead of a supercharger. What is the maximum safe boost level for a stock 5.0? Not sure if I would get an Auto or a Manual at this point, but if I need to choose one I would probably go with a manual. Thanks for helping out guys.

nitrous_bob

well.... '94/95 is not a fox, it is sn95 and considerably heavier, but handle better stock for stock

i am a foxbody fan.... on my 5th one

i love notchbacks (on my 3rd one) for the clean look and everything else. i can say from all my cars, the '88 (cali '88 mass air) and '89 ran strongest pure stock.

imo, the foxbody cars are the '55 chevy's and '69 camaros of our generation , and are a sound investment.

now just know the basics and everyhting else is kinda personal pref.

'87-'88 cars are speed density (cali '88 went maf) '89-'92 are maf , '93 is maf but not forged pistons , there are subtle interior changes as well... personaly i do not like the '87-'88 large headrest. gt cars had turbines until '91, lx 5.0's had 10-holes til '91

'91+ 5.0 cars had 5-star ponies standard

no sure what else to say really.... my opinion... go for the fox

*** the biggest point i wanna make is the question of auto VS manual

do yourself a favor and go 5-speed (t5) the automatic cars (aod) are a money pit... i had 2 i know. they are power robbing, temperamental and very expensive to rebuild

you cannot manually change gears w/out a manual valvebody due to the 2/3 gears being in the same shifter position ( 4 speed trans only has 3 forward positions) and this si a much much bigger issue than you might think, then comes the gearing... an aod car has to have 4.10 gears to run on par w/ a 5-speed 3.08 geared car. due to the internal gearing of the trans. the aod was not a mustang specific trans... just the auto from the lincoln that ford made to shift smooth so your grandma wouldn't chip her dentures. no where near capable of performance. in fact...they fail under stock hp when driven aggressively in a short time.

what does this mean ???????

my 1990 aod gt w/ 3.73/gt40intake/cheater slicks/shorty headers etc went 14.40's
my 1988 5-speed notch 100% bone stock 2.73 gears on street tires went 14.20's
my 1989 notch 5-speed w/ 4.10's/et streets/long tubes/ac and smog delete went 13.20's and 12.50's on a dry 75 nos kit


proof is in tha pudding... all i gotta say... my opinions are based on real life experience, and my 1990 gt...i bought it brand new.... i was on my 3rd trans after it was 6 years old and that one was bad

ponyboy88

u'll want to go maf if your doing a lot of modding, it will post pone needing to buy a new ecu or chip. foxes are great because the aftermarket available is unmatched, just find a car in good shape, running good with good interior, fun beings there... o yea on transmissions, if you know a good tranny guy the aod can be beefed up pretty good, the t5 tranny (manual) will be quicker off the line usually, but has some short commings in itself

OneFine89Mustang

well everything on a 5.0 is easy to fix..amd cheap on parts..and parts are soo avaible that you never have to worry a part being out of stock or discontinued. But my vote goes towards the fox..the 5.0 in them seemed to be a little stronger and more simplistic

NeedaTerminator

Eh, I didn't know the old 5-Speeds were T-5's. Aren't those like the worst manual trannys ever made?

And what about boosting the car with a turbo. Would the best choice be the 89 to 92 Fox's?

Jbauer

T5? the worse manual tranny ever made? BLASPHEMOUS. T5s a pretty popular, decent quality transmission.

306stang

my vote goes to the 88/89's. As far as auto or manual, my experience with the T5 has been a little rough with the 87 i use to have
and my 89gt with AOD is @ 160,000 miles on it and one standard tranny rebuild.

Its pretty much up to you. I'm more of a manual valve body AOD guy. But to each their own.

golden_eye

Due to the year range of the 5.0, you are gonna get answers a bit biased towards the Fox platform since it was around for 14 years as opposed to the 5.0 sn-95 only being around 2 years before going to the 4.6. I obviously prefer the sn-95 but I would in no way be unhappy with a Fox body. There are some merits to the sn-95: 4 wheel disc brakes standard, 5 lug setup (better aftermarket wheel choice), somewhat stiffer body and better handling, and some other advantages of having a more modern car.Sn-95'sdo havetheir downsides though: heavier (~200lbs usually) andpickier computers w/ a more conservative factory tune.

As far as the aftermarket, the sn-95s use pretty much the same driveline a the Foxexcept for the ECU so getting parts for the '94-5 is just as easy as Fox.

NYMustang50

I would go for a 91-93 wasn't in 91 they changed the body side molding color to match the cars. and you get the pony rims which are cool stock rims if you ask me. Plus you get mass air which is a blessing. But thats me.

TRexGAWD

'89 Fox gets my vote. Other than the '88 it feels the strongest out of all fox's and unlike the '88 has MAF which I prefer over SD.