1989 Ford Mustang LX from North America - Comments

Tranny 2x, but I used junkyard replacements due to extremly high prices of A4LD auto trannies.

Starter Solenoid.

A Good Riding car.

It is underpowered.

18.2 at 71mph isn't exactly fast.

With Dynomax exhaust it sounds a lot better.

Cold air intake was also added. Nice addition.

15 inch wheels and GT seats were added. Best upgrades yet!

Right now my car is apart recieving a 2.3 Turbo engine and 5 spd. 190hp stock from that motor. Visit Stangnet to find out more.

With the 15's and the seats the car is a lot more enjoyable to drive.

To anyone with one of these cars drop in a 2.3L Turbo motor. Makes them faster than the 5.0L cars.

I'm not too sure what kind of condition your mustang is in, but I own a 89' 5.0 EFIHO and I haven't done an incredible amount of work to it and I am racing on a professional (SIR) track @ 12.67 @ 105.3mph my car eats Cameros and many many other GT's. I personally think that throwing in a 2.3 turbo (which I used to own) is a very very poor decision and bad advice. Steve Pinehouse58@hotmail.com.

How about you don't put in a turbo engine and you drop in a crate engine with 470+hp for 5grand. Beating ferraris for under 10k, can't beat that now can you?

Yes, about this comment about an crate engine that 470+ horsepower, Can you please give some more information about this, and cost of installation and where to view information about this? thank you.

I would just like to know where I can find a good engine builder in the roseville-sacramento area so I can build some horsepower.

How about I just be a lemming and jump off the cliff with the rest of you? I suggest you guys look over on www.turboford.org or www.svoca.com or go to www.stangnet.com and go into the 2.3 section. 2.3T's can run very well. We got a local boy here in stl running 9's looking to go 8's on the motor. Also a 2.3T dropped right into a coupe mustang is good for high 14's... about the same that a mustang auto 5.0 runs if I am not mistaken. I have owned a 305 camaro (horrible tbi) have owned a z28 with a GM crate 350 in it and an 89 Mustang GT convertible. None were as fun to drive. 2.3T is a pretty good choice if you look into it a bit more. It's a pretty stout lil motor capable of taking a fair amount of abuse. Also it doesn't throw off the weight as much as a v8 which in turns makes the handling better.

You must be crazy to pick a 2.3 over a 5.0. I have a friend how started with the 2.3 convertable and liked it, but then he decided to get some real power and bought a 5.0. I have drove both of these cars and the 5.0 is a million times better. It would be ridiculous it put in a small I4. You need V8 power in an American muscle car not a little toy box engine like them ricers. Think clearly, V8 power or toy box power. The choice is clear, V8!!

People seem to forget that taking a 4 cylinder Mustang and dropping a V-8 in it is only half the job. The 5.0 cars have a much better suspension. The 4 cyl. models handle very sloppy in comparison to the LX 5.0 and GT. I personally would never buy a Mustang without a V-8 already in it. After all, what's the point? As far as the turbo 2.3 outperforming the 5.0 you better check the specs on both engines. The 5.0 is definitely a better performer. The SVO Mustang was a decent performance car, but it still won't take a 5.0. I had two 5.0's and they were both very fast and super reliable. The turbo engines had many problems associated with them.

Some people aren't reading what this guy says. he has owned a 5.0 and the 2.3T. BOTH. meaning he knows how fast a 5.0 is and the 2.3T. I wouldn't argue with him until you have driven both.

Where did you read that someone had both a 2.3 and a 5.0 other than the guy who didn't recommend going with the 2.3T? I raced my cousins Turbo Coupe T-bird with the same powertain in it and blew him away so badly I completely lost sight of him in about a mile and a half. I know the weight difference would make the Mustang SVO faster than the T-bird, but the Mustang with the 5.0 will kill anything with a 2.3 Turbo in it. Even if the 2.3 is quick off the line it won't pull as hard all the way through the gears as the 5.0 will. No Way!! And contrary to popular belief, the 2.3 is NOT a durable engine. We had 2 Turbo coupes in the family and they both sucked and were broken all the time. Both of my 5.0's were flawless the whole time I had them...

As fair as you guy's with your 5.0L Mustang's think you are, you're not.

Bottom line, any 2.3T out of the box will smoke a 5.0 89 mustang LX, GT or SVO. I have had the pleasure of building all three critter's fairly well.

Keeping this in mind, the 2.3T was 1.7 secs faster in the 1/4 mile than the 5.0 engine. Please don't be upset if your 2.3T won't beat a 5.0L mustang.

As far as reliability goes, the 2.3T or non is very reliable. I have an 89 LX 2.3, with 140000 miles on it; does not burn or leak a drop of oil. My trick, Slick 50 every 3000 miles. The power in the 2.3T will overcome how heavy your 5.0L is by a big number.

Thank You, Scott Murphy Seattle, Wa.

Dude that's a bad ass Mustang. I love them, but like 64-69. Any way I just love the way you made it look because usually I think the 80`s stangs are ugly but you fixed her up pretty good. I`m from Tennessee in Knoxville and don't see them very often where I`m from.

Just to add. Wasn't the Miller Mustang of IMSA fame a 2.3 Turbo?

"As far as reliability goes, the 2.3T or non is very reliable. I have an 89 LX 2.3, with 140000 miles on it; does not burn or leak a drop of oil. My trick, Slick 50 every 3000 miles. The power in the 2.3T will overcome how heavy your 5.0L is by a big number."

Thank you for your comment Scott. Having owned Mustangs with 4's, 6's and 8's I totally agree about the reliability of the 2.3 and the much better balance and handling of the 2.3T versus the 5.0. I'm excited to see Ford coming out with the new Eco-boost 4's in the Mustang. These engines will have a far better weight distribution, handle better and blow the archaic V-8's off the road while getting nearly 40mpg. My last Mustang V-8 was a '90 LX 5.0. My new 4.0 V-6 is faster and gets nearly twice the mileage being driven the same way as my old 5.0. It also seems to have better weight distribution and better cornering ability. The new 4.0 is a great engine and many easy mods are available for it.

I have a question though. I use Slick 50 in all my cars but isn't putting it in at every oil change unnecessary? I add it about every 3rd or 4th change.

I've owned four 87-89 Mustangs, currently own a 88 2.3L and an 89 notchback LX 5.0L... both are awesome cars, the 2.3 gets 35mpg+ and is awesome because of the high fuel prices. My 89 notch has been raced for four years and driven very hard for much longer. I have rebuilt the T-5 in the notch four times in the 11 years I've owned it, and all because I powershift it on the drag track... it's got 338hp/408ft/lbs...

I drove the Coquihalla Highway in BC Canada every day to work, and the 5.0L gets better gas mileage because I don't have to kill it to make the hills at the 110km/h speed limit... 25mpg... of course if I race the car I can get like 8mpg, but it's all in how you drive the car.

The argument between a 2.3T and a 5.0L is a no brainer, for the price of your turbo upgrade I could have 400+hp in my V8 and still just run on 89-91 octane fuel. For the record, you don't get better gas mileage in a 4cyl turbo if you're running it hard, because a certain amount of fuel is required to make a certain level of HP, and it doesn't matter how many cylinders the engine has, if you're on the gas hard in a 2.3, you can easily use the fuel I use in my 5.0L or more!

The 2.3 is a bulletproof motor, stock. The 5.0L is just as if not way more bulletproof stock or with minor mods "intakes, cams, heads, lifters, pulleys, performance chips, etc... it's a well known fact that a stock 5.0L can handle up to 8lbs of boost or 175 shot of nitrous with a stock engine, because it's got a forged bottom end... and it's reliable, the only thing you have to change is your injectors and throttle body size.

All the money you would spend to get a 190hp 2.3T, which is 35hp down from the stock numbers on a 302, which is 225/300ft/lbs, you could have started out with a 5.0L and get 400 or more hp. How can you argue with that. 2.3L cars are good to start out with because they're really cheap to buy, and they don't suffer the same structural damage that a lot of V-8 cars have, mainly rear suspension mounts.

If you're going to build a V-8 car out of a 4cyl, keep the front springs... they are the same ones used in the 93 Cobra... because they quickly transfer weight back to the rear wheels, so basically you only have to change the rear springs to get up to the original v-8 spec. Don't forget to change the rear end, because the 4cyl has the 7.5" diff and the 5.0L uses the 8.8", which is far superior, and not to mention comes stock with a locker "as long as it's from an 87-93 5.0L mustang". The 5.0L comes with larger brakes, larger front sway bar and a rear sway bar.

One of the main things I recommend to anyone running a five speed 5.0L is to change the input shaft housing to a steel unit, to replace the aluminum one... this will save you money in transmission rebuilds in the long run if you drive your car hard.

Other than that, I've had a lot of reliable miles out of all 4 of my Mustangs, and when it comes to bang for the buck you can't beat them anywhere... The Mustang is infinitely upgradable, and no two are alike... whatever you do with your cars, have fun!!!