what year mustang
12-10-2006, 07:59 AM
#3
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location:
Posts: 14,917
RE: what year mustang
Barely the same. The 5.0 will actually respond to mods & won't be restricted to being a 230rwhp turd for the duration of it's life without a head/cam swap + a tune which would total out to be double that of a similar swap on a 5.0.
Oldskool, the car is going to be old and more than likely driven hard more times than you would want to know. It'll suffer typical Ford issues, TOB's, need to be gentle with the tranny, typical Ford stuff like I said.
Oldskool, the car is going to be old and more than likely driven hard more times than you would want to know. It'll suffer typical Ford issues, TOB's, need to be gentle with the tranny, typical Ford stuff like I said.
12-10-2006, 03:45 PM
#4
★★★★★
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Banned Camp (Counselor)
Posts: 10,200
RE: what year mustang
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
12-10-2006, 04:09 PM
#5
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,089
RE: what year mustang
The engine is the same. The only difference was Ford's decision to list the minimum HP of their sample versus the average.
ORIGINAL: ARdoller
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
12-11-2006, 01:53 AM
#6
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 26
RE: what year mustang
ORIGINAL: Colorado_Mustang
The engine is the same. The only difference was Ford's decision to list the minimum HP of their sample versus the average.
The engine is the same. The only difference was Ford's decision to list the minimum HP of their sample versus the average.
ORIGINAL: ARdoller
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
there were a couple differences in years...
86-88 used speed density instead of mass air wich does not respond to cam changes well...but were the fastest n/a
87-93 used mass air wich used a meter to read the incoming air instead of the map sensor..really easy to modify and very inexpensive to go fast if you choose the right combo..
and as for 93 the big differnce in the motor was that they used hyper pistons..wich people frown apon for power adders.. i myself have (2) 93 mustangs.one running 10.0s on a stock 93 bottom end motor
12-11-2006, 02:38 AM
#7
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,089
RE: what year mustang
ORIGINAL: illdrag
there were a couple differences in years...
86-87 used speed density instead of mass air wich does not respond to cam changes well...but were the fastest n/a
88-93 used mass air wich used a meter to read the incoming air instead of the map sensor..really easy to modify and very inexpensive to go fast if you choose the right combo..
and as for 93 the big differnce in the motor was that they used hyper pistons..wich people frown apon for power adders.. i myself have (2) 93 mustangs.one running 10.0s on a stock 93 bottom end motor
ORIGINAL: Colorado_Mustang
The engine is the same. The only difference was Ford's decision to list the minimum HP of their sample versus the average.
The engine is the same. The only difference was Ford's decision to list the minimum HP of their sample versus the average.
ORIGINAL: ARdoller
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
dont get a 93 unless you have to. 93 5.0's were rated at 205bhp where as the rest of the aero 5.0's were rated at 225bhp
not too much of a big deal, but if you have the option, id definitely choose another year than 93.
there were a couple differences in years...
86-87 used speed density instead of mass air wich does not respond to cam changes well...but were the fastest n/a
88-93 used mass air wich used a meter to read the incoming air instead of the map sensor..really easy to modify and very inexpensive to go fast if you choose the right combo..
and as for 93 the big differnce in the motor was that they used hyper pistons..wich people frown apon for power adders.. i myself have (2) 93 mustangs.one running 10.0s on a stock 93 bottom end motor
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Diode Dynamics
Vendor For Sale / Group Buy Classifieds
28
05-26-2022 12:02 PM
MustangForums Editor
Mustang News, Concepts, Rumors & Discussion
8
01-06-2016 07:03 PM