looking at a 94 mustang gt with 150,000 5.0.i was wondering the differance in 94 5.0s as to a little older 5.0.also pros and cons of them.i wanna upgrade it,but i just want a fast mustang that for the most part looks stock,and is legal.thanks for any info and great forum.by the way hes asking 3000 but i happen to know hell take 2000.

 

Any pics?

 

not yet,ill post when i get

 

The 94 has 10 less horse than the 87 style.Not sure if horse dropped in 91 or 92 but the 94 is much heavier,I feel they drive much better but are slower in stock trim

 

Icould be wrong but i remember reading that they dont actually have less horsepower the just corrected the horsepower rating or something along those lines. but they are slower due to the weight difference, the accessories are a bit different too larger altenator and tb i believe, if its auto the trannys a aod-e as opposed to an aod

 

Theres not that much of weight difference. Most people think its alot but it really isnt.

 

You are somewhat correct. In 1993 Ford changed the way they test the output of the engines. They began testing the engines with all of the accessories connected. So in stead of 225HP they made 205HP because of the way they tested them. The engines actually make appx. the same exact horsepower, just the 93+ have the hypertectic (sp?) pistons. In 1994, the cars were rated at 215HP, so if the engine was tested like they were pre-1993, then you could say that technically the SN95 actually made more power than the Fox's. But yet they will be slower for obvious reasons. They are bigger cars, and weigh more.

The MAF was also bigger on the SN cars.