Question - which year is cost effective, and good driving ?

Mustang -
If I was going to buy one in the next few months, which year is the most
cost effective, good driving with high horsepower ?
the 93 5.0 has 220 HP and with a blower up to 300 but that is almost 20
years old and about $9,000
the 2011 has about 400 HP but $30K
and which years would you avoid ?
If I added a blower it would be a keene bell, $3k for 5,0 and up to $6K for
2011
Reply to
huhie
I personally dont like the 93 body style but it is lighter, cheaper to upgrade and insure. You can get more than 300hp with engine upgrades and still be way way under 30k. The blower is only part of the cost. You have to upgrade pumps, wiring (sometimes), add gauges, tuner, etc. My $5700 blower on my '05 ended up around 9k after all the ancillary stuff.
Reply to
RM V2.0
I think you need to do some test driving to narrow down your choices.
Patrick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Reply to
huhie
All opinion here. Of the Fox cars, I'd get any year 5-liter, 5-speed LX. I'm not a fan of the '94-'98s. Of the '99-'05s I'd opt for '01 Bullitt, '03-'04 Mach 1 or '03-'04 Terminator. With the '05 and ups, I'd get an '08 Bullitt, any Shelby GTs or GT500 and any '11 and up GT. To me these are the cream cars, that's not to say there aren't other really good Mustangs in those years.
Between the older Foxes and new GTs, understand they are completely different animals, and as different as a Fox Mustang is to '65 Mustang. The Fox feels like a go-cart in comparison to the new GT. That said, the new GT drives small -- it doesn't feel like a big car.
Again go do some test driving, so you can decide what is better for you.
Patrick
Reply to
patrick.mckenzie84
I would go with an 03/04 Terminator. Just slapping on a blower is kind of a waste, if you don't hook that power to the road.
Reply to
Gill
All opinion here. Of the Fox cars, I'd get any year 5-liter, 5-speed LX. I'm not a fan of the '94-'98s. Of the '99-'05s I'd opt for '01 Bullitt, '03-'04 Mach 1 or '03-'04 Terminator. With the '05 and ups, I'd get an '08 Bullitt, any Shelby GTs or GT500 and any '11 and up GT. To me these are the cream cars, that's not to say there aren't other really good Mustangs in those years.
Between the older Foxes and new GTs, understand they are completely different animals, and as different as a Fox Mustang is to '65 Mustang. The Fox feels like a go-cart in comparison to the new GT. That said, the new GT drives small -- it doesn't feel like a big car.
Again go do some test driving, so you can decide what is better for you.
Patrick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Reply to
huhie
. > > > > Mustang - > > > > If I was going to buy one in the next few months, which year is the m= ost > > > cost effective, good driving with high horsepower ? > > > > the 93 5.0 has 220 HP and with a blower up to 300 but that is almost = 20 > > > years old and about $9,000 > > > > the 2011 has about 400 HP but $30K > > > > and which years would you avoid ? > > > > If I added a blower it would be a keene bell, $3k for 5,0 and up to $= 6K > > > for > > > 2011 > > > I think you need to do some test driving to narrow down your choices. > > Ive driven 93 a lot, not the newer ones, the 94s seemed cramped > > > know of any years to avoid? > > > I heard the 2011 is great, will test drive it. > > All opinion here. =A0Of the Fox cars, I'd get any year 5-liter, 5-speed > LX. =A0I'm not a fan of the '94-'98s. =A0Of the '99-'05s I'd opt for an '= 01 > Bullitt, '03-'04 Mach 1 or '03-'04 Terminator. With the '05 and ups, > I'd get an '08 Bullitt, any Shelby GT or GT500 and any '11 and up > GT. =A0To me these are the cream cars, that's not to say there aren't > other really good Mustangs in those other years. > > Between the older Foxes and new GTs, understand they are completely > different animals, and as different as a Fox Mustang is to '65 > Mustang. =A0The Fox feels like a go-cart in comparison to the new GT. > That said, the new GT drives small -- it doesn't feel like a big > car.
> Again go do some test driving, so you can decide what is better for > you.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Reply to
patrick.mckenzie84
Quickest car I have been in.
another question, or add any comments!
he has a vortech v2 set at 8 # boost, and intercooler (which looses 1 psi) , I dont know if it had a bypass valve for street driving (part throttle) Seems they spent a lot of time tuning it all up, perhaps they started with too much boost from Vortech (they heat the air a lot hotter than an KB) and worked down. Could have engine heat soak on long trips (?)
(you end up going slower and slower to avoid det, happened to me in aridzona after 1.5 hours in 100+ temps, 8# KB with no air bypass, in a 93 5.0, got down to 55 mph. one cylender probably had some extra oil. it was an 14 hour trip, night was better, new rebuilt engine and adding on air bypass made huge difference)
But it seems a Keene Bell at 6 or 7 lbs would not need intercooler, assuming you could program the computer air/fuel/timing maps for both. So it seems that one could drop a KB on a stock engine and do OK, as long as the engine has lower miles (not yet plugged up with stuff)
Cooling the supercharged engines is the big problem.
Reply to
huhie
in message
That's something I'd want to know about before I'd buy. And to find out I'd ask for a lot of seat time, in all sorts of driving/traffic, to find out. And if the seller baulked at the idea, I'd walk. Because mods improperly/incompletely done, can be a real pain to sort out and fix.
I think the key to a happy SC'd street motor is low/moderate boost. It's when you get greedy -- upping boost -- is when problems arise.
And excessive rear tire wear. :-)
Patrick
Reply to
patrick.mckenzie84

Site Timeline Threads

  • Buy a collector car, store it away and never drive it, then 16 years later hope...
  • next in

    Ford Mustang

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.