9th Jul 2010, 10:12
"105 hp 4 banger tapping away under the hood."
Actually, I think the 4-banger in the old Foxes only made 90 HP...
9th Jul 2010, 15:43
"Actually, I think the 4-banger in the old Foxes only made 90 HP..."
It was originally 88 HP, but was upped to 105 in '90 or '91 I think. I was giving it the benefit of the doubt really, as 88 HP was even more dismal in a Foxbody Mustang! Not sure how ANYONE enjoyed driving one of those around really.
9th Jul 2010, 17:28
I have no idea where the idea that the 4-cylinder Fox HANDLED POORLY came from. Due to the better front-rear weight bias, it actually handled much BETTER than the 5.0. I have to assume that those making these comments have never actually DRIVEN a Fox 4.
9th Jul 2010, 18:41
"To each their own, but you don't see old 4 cylinder Fox body Mustangs around much anymore do you?"
I see lots of them around. There's over a dozen I see driving around my hometown. You can tell the 4-banger 'stangs just by the exhaust sound they make. I've also seen a few at shows that were kept completely original.
9th Jul 2010, 20:16
I have a C5 Vette and a couple hundred diecast on shelves in my garage. I truly prefer the real thing. I can take my car to track days, and it's OK at 70 mph on the Fla legal expressways as well.
10th Jul 2010, 06:52
I saved and waited to drive a new loaded V8 manual shift convertible rather than a 4. If you are patient, maybe drive an old econobox you still have. I just preferred no car loans and paid cash. I now drive in cruises and car shows, helping charities as well. Maybe most do not have the discipline to wait 6 or 7 years, but I did. Why go from a 4 to an anemic disappointment 4 cyl again? I also drive my new car on nice days only. I still drive the beater to malls and at night around town. If it was a plain 4, no one would want to take it though. My highways are 65 mph and it's nice to have the great adrenaline rush with a V8 top down and manual trans. Well worth waiting and saving up for. Otherwise an old VW bug instead.
10th Jul 2010, 09:47
A lot of people on here are mentioning high insurance and forgetting the very large population of baby boomers on here now over 50 with better insurance rates. I am over 50 and am in a very large Vette club with many in my age bracket. I am paying exactly the same if not less than my insurance costs as in the early 70's. My C5 Vette only cost $800 a year and is a convertible. My C3 also a Vert and a 4 speed car and that's through Haggerty Classic Insurance is under $200 a year. It has mileage limitations 2500 mile year where the C5 is not limited.
In addition, many of us can afford cars now up to and over $100k such as the new supercharged Vettes.
I recommended to my son when in high school to pick up an older used Mustang GT and join a Mustang club. I have no issues with it being a Ford at all, and I actually think it is the best bang per buck used that a teen can actually afford to buy today. And in all fairness, when income rises, there are some really great extremely fast newer ones. He joined a Mustang club and learned through the club tech support and hands on sharing skills, and especially how easy it is to find new and used parts. He stripped parts bought off old donor cars and sold the old parts and upgraded a lot Shelby parts wheels etc. using ebay.
I am a GM guy, but today I admire and respect most any car that someone worked extremely hard to buy, restore and enjoy.
I would rather buy an older V8 with a good frame then a newer 4 cylinder. In fact I would rather buy a roller GT if I am strictly about styling or even a diecast than a 4 cylinder or even a 6. I saw my son and his friends cars that they put rebuilt drive trains in, and the cars are reasonable. If my son had not added nitrous, he would still be running the 302 he had. I say the wait for a V8 is well worth it and driving vs. an anemic one.
As far as having no place to drive, that's totally untrue. Join a large car club and see how many legal track invites you get to drive your car. I cannot make them all with my schedule. I am not into the 1/4 mile dragstrips, but they are also available and I have 2 of them near my home as well.
The ones that do not understand the concept of a V8 likely do not own a sports-musclecar at all and are economy oriented. That's fine if you just want a basic car; it's your choice.
After I paid my home off and survived college expenses, I wanted to have great cars again. I watched Barrett Jackson last night, and just about every car crossing the block reaffirmed why I still love these great cars. I have one from my high school era and one with current technology to enjoy. I highly recommend the experience, and it's something positive you can enjoy with your kids. A basic to the store and back grocery getter just does not enthrall me.
10th Jul 2010, 11:16
Same here. There was a mint Fox 4 convertible at the last show I attended, as well as a rare 1983 6 Convertible. There are far more Fox 4's around here, simply because so many more were built and sold.
10th Jul 2010, 13:36
WHAT?!?! Are you kidding me? Yeah, okay Ford puts out a base econobox Mustang 4 cylinder and then makes it handle better than the top of the line 5.0?!? I think it is you that has never driven a 5.0 Mustang. I have driven both, and the 4 cylinder rides on a much softer suspension that has smaller anti-roll bars and narrow tires. There was so much body roll around corners it was scary, while the 5.0 Mustang would stay flat and tight on corners. Night and day really between the two. Truth is the Escort of the day was a much better handling car than the 4 cylinder Mustang, as it was front wheel drive and had a better suspension setup. I sold them and have driven them all.
The 5.0 had much a much beefier suspension package that was MADE FOR HANDLING, unlike the base Mustang. There was a reason the 5.0 was an upgrade. You are just trying WAY too hard to make some argument that smaller engined cars are better. Sometimes that is true, but let's not get carried away. The top of the line Mustangs have always outperformed the base cars. It is actually funny to me that anyone would claim that anything about the 4 cylinder Mustang was as good as the 5.0... except the gas mileage of course!
10th Jul 2010, 13:49
You must live in an area that people drive old beater cars around a lot if you are still seeing 4 cylinder Fox Mustangs running around regularly. Here there are virtually none left, and all I ever see are 5.0's nowadays. The easiest way to tell the 5.0 LX from the 4 cylinder is the polished pipes coming out the rear, and the wider tires and stance the 5.0 has. Even when they started putting the 10 hole mags on the 4 cylinder in '91, they put 205 series tires on them and they were easy to spot as 4 cylinder cars. The "5.0" on the fender was added to a lot of the 4 cylinder cars by wannabes, so that is not always a sure sign. Of course they should have put "0.5" instead since they only had half an engine!
Look on Ebay and put in any particular year of the Foxbody and count how many 4 cylinder cars are up compared to 5.0's Usually it is NONE. There are a lot of 5.0's there though, and there always is.
As far as a completely original 4 cylinder at a show... what a waste of time that would be and I'd be pretty disappointed in going to a show like that. Was there a Fairmont next to the 4 cylinder Mustang? How about an Escort? That would be about as exciting as a base Mustang to me!