DKilbourne Posted October 18, 2008 Report Share Posted October 18, 2008 I'd take the cash and actually buy something fast... Good point, since it's so hard and expensive to make a fox body mustang run well . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed44 Posted October 18, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2008 Stay away from it. Those are supposed to be nice and flat. Damage in that area could have been caused by a few things, but I wouldn't be excited about the car after seeing that. The owner also forgot the door molding on the passenger side. I am glad you guys noticed these things. i am going to ask him about it. He said it was just painted, has a temec 5 speed and black interior. Motor is stock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 i think your butt hurts cuz you just proved my point you flunky. my bolt on car is faster than a cammed bolt on stang. you will have to do a complete motor swap to do what i do with headders, exausht, and gears. biggest bang for the dollar goes to lt1. im sure your cammed boltont car is uber fast correct? wrong, i beat you in every race we went out for. its just a hassal to do a motor swap and blower for what a gm car does with bolt ons and a cam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Sweet Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 epic fail...bro, just spend some flow on that lt1 and you'll be whoopin ass in no time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hpfiend Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 Make sure it is an E code VIN... looks like a lot of bodywork has been done to it and it could have started out as a 4 cylinder. Make sure it at least has the 8.8 rear. If you want a car that will handle stick with the camaro it has a much better suspension platform than the mustangs with its TA, SLA front end and 3 link rear- add a panhard and some good shocks springs, sfcs you are good to go- you can also fit 275s easy on there, has much better brakes to start and the vette brakes pretty much bolt on. The camaro is much harder to work on than the mustang and my 96 I bought new was nowhere near as reliable as my 5.0 car. You will also get better mileage with the camaro with the 0.50 sixth gear. You do need a 12 bolt though. I loved my fox coupe. I liked my 96 f-body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miller Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 i think your butt hurts cuz you just proved my point you flunky. my bolt on car is faster than a cammed bolt on stang. you will have to do a complete motor swap to do what i do with headders, exausht, and gears. biggest bang for the dollar goes to lt1. im sure your cammed boltont car is uber fast correct? wrong, i beat you in every race we went out for. its just a hassal to do a motor swap and blower for what a gm car does with bolt ons and a cam. sheesh who are you being a meany to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 sheesh who are you being a meany to tyler, he is a total idiot. he is saying the lt1 and the foxbody are baisically on the same platform. im just pointing out the obvious, lt1s make the most pwr for the least amount of money and effort. well atleast in the case of a foxbody. when arguing you have to understand both sides of the situation, he just likes mustangs, thats it. i have owned both, so i have a better argument. he just needs to die with his car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKilbourne Posted October 19, 2008 Report Share Posted October 19, 2008 tyler, he is a total idiot. he is saying the lt1 and the foxbody are baisically on the same platform. im just pointing out the obvious, lt1s make the most pwr for the least amount of money and effort. well atleast in the case of a foxbody. when arguing you have to understand both sides of the situation, he just likes mustangs, thats it. i have owned both, so i have a better argument. he just needs to die with his car. It isn't very expensive or hard to make a fox body fast. Much easier to work on as well. The motor isn't under the windshield on a fox either. I guess when you own one slow ass fox body you know about all of them. Ask around and get back with me when you have more than one car from each side to compare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tbutera2112 Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 tyler, he is a total idiot. he is saying the lt1 and the foxbody are baisically on the same platform. im just pointing out the obvious, lt1s make the most pwr for the least amount of money and effort. well atleast in the case of a foxbody. when arguing you have to understand both sides of the situation, he just likes mustangs, thats it. i have owned both, so i have a better argument. he just needs to die with his car. the same platform? wtf are you talking about... and the post above mine wins, enough said you fail phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miller Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 Phil, you can get a set of assembled aluminum heads for a Fox for 500 pretty commonly. You drop nearly what 35 pounds per head and can put over 50hp on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin R. Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 Fox. 96's suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed44 Posted October 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 well next sunday there is suposed to be someone coming to look at it. If he buys it then i think I am going to get a clean fox. If not then I will keep the camaro over winter and see how it turns out. The trade didnt seem to fall through with the fox I showed pics of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed44 Posted October 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 This is a pic of the camaro if no one has seen it http://i38.tinypic.com/29gipz7.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mopar Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 you will have to do a complete motor swap to do what i do with headders, exausht, and gears. biggest bang for the dollar goes to lt1. really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 the same platform? wtf are you talking about... and the post above mine wins, enough said you fail phil Phil was saying someone else said that the Fox and the F-Body were the same platform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 the same platform? wtf are you talking about... and the post above mine wins, enough said you fail phil i fail, and youve never beatin me. that makes since right? miller you say 500 bucks gets you a good set of assembled heads? ive spent less then $350 and i have ported heads, intake, and they are assembled. i had the same set up on my fox that i have on my fbody, minus the gears, and my fbody would have put bus links on my fox. tyler, you drove my car and said it yourself(when it was fucked up) that my car would stomp your ass. you have a cam, tuner, gears, bolt ons, and a faget shifter. the point im trying to make is simply, biggest bang for the dollar goes to the lt1. yes its a bitch to work on, but the reward is much greater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tbutera2112 Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 im not arguing that the 2v 4.6 is a piece of shit....were talking about pushrod motors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hpfiend Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 i fail, and youve never beatin me. that makes since right? miller you say 500 bucks gets you a good set of assembled heads? ive spent less then $350 and i have ported heads, intake, and they are assembled. i had the same set up on my fox that i have on my fbody, minus the gears, and my fbody would have put bus links on my fox. tyler, you drove my car and said it yourself(when it was fucked up) that my car would stomp your ass. you have a cam, tuner, gears, bolt ons, and a faget shifter. the point im trying to make is simply, biggest bang for the dollar goes to the lt1. yes its a bitch to work on, but the reward is much greater. You obviously feel strongly about this- I really wish I still had my fox to show you otherwise... even before the blower ;-) An LT1 car should be almost a half second faster for the same amount of mods as it has almost 50 more cubic inches and is has been engineered more recently 1993 versus 87 if you dont want to go all the way back to 1979 for the chassis. The reason that they are not is A) that a 1.6 60' is considered average on slicks with a 1.4 being impressive in a fox body due to the ability to bolt slicks on a dump the clutch at near redline and have the rearend take it like a man- unlike the f-body. And the weight disadvantage- fourth-gen f-bodies weigh at least 500 lbs more than fox bodies (Mine was about 3700 lbs (t-tops, ASR, 1sc, you name it other than leather) while my fox was only 3150) so there goes the cubic inch advantage and the launchability and quick revving short stroke overcome the LT1 cars. Still they are pretty close and it comes down to what you want to do with the car- the f-body chassis and for ride quality and handling are worlds above the mustang and they can hold their own at the dragstrip- but you are comparing across generations- the mustang sounds better, the lt1 isn't prone to idle issues like the 5.0, the lt1 gets better mileage due to its t56 and low end torque, but as has been said before- climbing on top of the !@%!% engine to do a plug change is why when I totaled mine I did not get another. If you haven't already done an optispark swap you have some things to look forward to. If you really want to compare mustangs versus camaros you need to look at the 82-92 camaro versus the 87-93 mustang. the 96-98 Mustangs were weak it is well established- I toasted one with my LT1 car in third gear by accident because I thought I was in first. But now compare an LS1 car to a 99+ P motor car... The third gen goes to the mustang hand down, the first half of fourth-gen goes to the camaro hands down and the later half is about even. A fox mustang is much better in the snow/ice however than an LT1 car... it could have been the reduced weight, better differential, or better tires BFG KDWS versus Goodyear RSAs and Pep Boys Futuras but I had a much easier time with mine when I had to pilot it in those conditions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 Good point, since it's so hard and expensive to make a fox body mustang run well . If you take into all the costs associated with fixing leaks, head gaskets, T5's, coolant & oil (I believe the mix ratio is like 1:2), AAA bills, ect. it does get a lil expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tbutera2112 Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 an LT1 is more reliable? last i heard, phils car was sitting at home leaking gear oil all over his driveway...and since his LT1 and his old fox are the only cars that matter, then that means every LT1 is unreliable, and every fox body is slow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hpfiend Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 If you take into all the costs associated with fixing leaks, head gaskets, T5's, coolant & oil (I believe the mix ratio is like 1:2), AAA bills, ect. it does get a lil expensive. Dude you have no idea what you are talking about, no offense. My mustang was 10X more reliable than my f-body and it had almost 190K on the body when I sold it versus 75K on my f-body when I totaled it and I bought it brand new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hpfiend Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 an LT1 is more reliable? last i heard, phils car was sitting at home leaking gear oil all over his driveway...and since his LT1 and his old fox are the only cars that matter, then that means every LT1 is unreliable, and every fox body is slow +2 I tore the rear out of my f-body twice. Carrier bearings, ring gears, pinion seals, etc are disposable in that car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 I'm with Phil on this one... LT1 > fox, hands down. The only time I've been impressed with the performance of a fox was when Chad's single and twin turbo kits were thrown in the mix. It wasn't until '03 that Ford actually realized that they could not build a motor to rival Chevy's LTx and LSx cars, they had to add a blower to defeat the mighty 4th gen. Now with the LSx motors out there, Mustangs are a true joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrousbird Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 all that being said, LT1 is still the lose My little LT1 has whooped enough 5.0 and 4.6 cars at the track to HIGHLY disagree with that statement. And that 4.6 is both the 2v and 4v variety. I'll 100% agree that the stock F-body 10-bolt is a POS, but the tranny is far stronger than the Mustang's (year for year for the most part), so IMO that whole statement is a wash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted October 20, 2008 Report Share Posted October 20, 2008 Dude you have no idea what you are talking about, no offense. My mustang was 10X more reliable than my f-body and it had almost 190K on the body when I sold it versus 75K on my f-body when I totaled it and I bought it brand new. No, I do have an idea of what I am talking about. One car story does not make a car reliable or unreliable... don't base the longevity of a LT1 on your poor driving skills. What I've seen is a lot of people throw CC306 and other high RPM cams in LT1 motors and pop them, this motor was not meant to shifted at 7k in stock form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.