I might be looking for a newer mustang, always loved the 'stangs. I like the 94 and newer body style, but I dont know much about them. IF I were to find one, I would like a 94 or newer, V8(Love the 5.0) and an auto tranny. I might consider a stick, I have never driven one as a DD, just the stick farm truck. I dont want to sell my truck, but the more I look at it, I'm not sure its worth putting alot of money that I dont have into it. With 252000 miles on it, stuff's gonna be bad/wornout in the engine. Dont get me wrong, I love the truck; big, bad, loud and tough. Its treason to sell my truck and get a car, but it would be a 'Stang!! Anyways, has anyone got any good/bad to say about the 94+ 'Stangs?? NOT a definite that I'll be getting one, need to find out how much $$$ they go for, who knows I may just get another newer truck! I know I already posted bout maybe selling my truck, Im just keeping my options open. Thanks ahead of time!!

 

I might be buying a 94 cobra over the next few months. The 94-95s were the new body style with horizontal tailights. They were the last of the 5.0Ls. They're a little heavier, and a touch more complicated to modify over the previous car, but since it's not a hatchback it has more structural strength. It's more rigid around corners and it has better brakes. It's a well built car, and one does not really need to worry about it being a first or 2nd year new model design. I've wanted one since I got my license but I might finally be getting one.

You should most definitly get a stick. The mustang's are much easier and more comfortable to drive a stick than an old farm truck. Much tighter, much nicer/smoother going into gear...it's a lot of run to really enjoy a good manual trans car. The automatic is going to be slower, and get worse gas mileage too. It's not uncomfortable to drive a manual stick car. Those cars are cable clutch instead of hydraulic, which is a little more stiff, but it's not that bad.

In traffic you can idle along in 1st gear and just not stop and go like everyone else does. I don't like to stop and go anyway, I just crawl along in traffic. People behind me don't mind because I'm setting a steady pace. So then also your foot doesn't get tired from working the clutch. I've been stuck in traffic a few times, and even a lot of clutch work doesn't phase me. I understand some people just don't like a standard, but those are usually people who havn't experienced them well enough to appricate them. Ya gotta shift your own gears on a V-8 pony car like a mustang...

My sister has a 99 GT with an auto, she didn't want the stick because she convinced herself it would be terrible to drive through the city to work. Lots of stop and go but I drive that same route 4-5 times a week myself and it doesn't bother me at all. She just wouldn't go for it. I've driven the car a few times, handles well, nice sound, but it doesn't have that brute force feel, and it's boring. It's definitely slower than a stick shift GT and even though the tranny is setup for a little firmer shifts and higher performance than say my mom's V-8 cougar, it's still soft and I think it makes the car boring to drive.

I can't say much more, ya gotta drive em to feel the difference.

 

I have another perspective for you to consider:

Mustangs are great, I've always liked them, but there are certain things about the 94-04 Stangs that should be considered:

First, they just plain don't handle. The last time they redid the mustang from the ground up before 2005 was 1981, and the chassis really shows it. structural rigidity isn't very good, and most modern sedans will outhandle a mustang.

I've always liked manual trannies, but the ones on the Mustangs, while better than ANY farm truck, aren't very good, in my opinion. I drove a friend's '96 cobra quite a bit in the past few months, and in my opinion, the manual tranny was the biggest flaws in the car. It just won't shift quickley or precisely due to the odd angle they had to bend the shifter to reach it. That being said, I'd prefer a manual to an auto, regardless.

You might be better served to consider a new 2005 Mustang. It's everything the older mustangs couldn't be, handles great, has great power (even the V6!!!), and the manual tranny is a huge improvement. The older stangs are great, and even with my '05, I'd like to have an older mustang as well. I'd drive one and see what you think!

 

1996-1998 Cobra is a lot better choice than 1994-1994 Cobra because of more powerfull engine. 1996-1998 have 4.6L and 300 hp while 1994-1995 have 5.0L and 240 hp. I even think 1999-2004 GT would be better choice than 1994-1995 Cobra.

 

I have a 94 GT convertible w/5 speed. It's not my daily driver but more of a summertime/weekend kind of car. The only thing I don't care for is the rear seat room. There's enough room for two small kids but definately not enough room for adults. With the 5.0 and 5 speed it's a blast to drive and it gets 24-25 mpg highway.

 

I don't know, I've heard you can do some amazing things with the old 5.0 without spending a fortune on parts.

 

Bad news, looks like the truck is gone. Driving to work today smoke started comin out of the tailpipe. Engine is running rough and studderin. I started to cry cause I knew that it was on its last leg. Dont know wats wrong with it, but I'm gonna have to try to sell it, whatevers wrong with it would require too much $$$ to fix. As much as I hate to say it, shes gone. The first vehicle I ever had, she served me with no problems for 3 years. Racin, muddin, trail riden and just as a cool DD truck, never left me stranded and always was a blast to drive. So today, on this 15th day of August, I bid good bye to my baby, first love and the best damn truck I'll ever have. I'm gonna miss her........

 

The 94-95 cobra was RATED for 240 hp but that isn't what it actually puts out.

Plus, they had 5.0s instead of 4.6s which are much easier/cheaper to modify to get even more power out of them.

You may want to go to corral.net to get some more info.

 

Actually, it was a Fairmont that all Mustangs from '79 untill '04 shared their chassis DNA with.

I will somewhat disagree on the handling part ONLY because the aftermarket supports that car like no other. Stock, the cars handling was marginal but throw a few cheap and easy fixes and the thing flat rocks.

My '95 had the Kenny Brown track kit (basically a panhard rod and pinion re-locating kit) that, springs and shocks transformed the car.


The T-5 trans (used through '05)did benefit from a new shifter(especially to fix the 2-3 shift) and is not a bad piece until you throw some power at it.......the same trans was used in the GM F-bodies befor they switched to the T-56 6 speed.

The mod motors used the T-45, a new shifter helps there too.


Try to remember, you're hammering on a 10 year old car!!!


As far as motors go, the 94-95 5.0 was a PITA to modify because the EEC IV was in transition from OBD-I-OBD-II...... a lot of serious tuners will retrofit the pre-'94 E-9 EEC which solves a lot of headaches.

The '96-'98 Mod motors are the biggest slugs stock and are more difficult to make go fast than a 5.0.

The '99 and up 4.6 is a better starting point than the old 5.0 and blower's exhaust TB, MAF etc are no more expensive than it is for a 5.0

Purely subjective, however, I like the '94-'98 body better.

 

True, but with less than 10,000 miles on it, I wouldn't think that'd be an issue. It's a pace car for a local track, and I used to be the pace car driver.

 

That's true, but stock vs stock 1999-2004 GT is a better choice.

 

How cool is that!!!

But c'mon now, 10K as a pace car? You know that horse was HAMMERED!!!

It really doesn't matter, if doing a serious buildup, the Tremac TKO gets put in or if you got $$$ you throw in a T-56.

 

I 100% disagree with that first statement. Are you talking about the standard model or GT's? The 6 poppers aren't as tight but I've taken my '89 GT around corners so fast that I almost had to pull over and throw up, but the car stuck to the road like glue. I'm also positive that the 94's and up GT's handle better than the old Foxes.

 

They do handle better then the old fox's. I completely disagree with the statement too but didn't want to argue over it. It's certainly no ferarri but for the price you pay for a mustang you get a heck of a deal for performance. That, and the aftermarket supports it like no other. Just for knowledge, the 94 was Motor Trend's car of the year.

 

It depends what your yardstick is in regards to handling.
It can be a right handful - of all the cars I have ever driven, a standard 2001 Cobra is the scariest, going around corners the back end would just step out with no warning, it was unstable over 110mph, steering feel was non-existant.
It will out handle most domestic American sedans of a similar era when stock when going round a corner, but a base model focus will be showing the mustang its tailights...

But for straightline speed, they are hard to beat.