Air conditioning.
Total brake system.
Door ajar light stays on.
Flywheel cover fell off so there's a little oil leak.
The car is my dads and I'm only 14 so I don't get to drive it. I get it when I'm driving and I can't wait. It's a Sport and I've yet to see another one. I wonder how many Ford made? Even at 239,000 kilometers the car's going great.
5.0 beating the 4.6? Maybe in the supermodifieds, but never stock. I assure you, a 4.6 Thunderbird and a 98-01 4.6 Mustang reduce quarter mile times by a full second from their 302 counterparts, usually more. Not only do they make the same amount of horsepower in a broader powerband, but they by far out torque it (though few cars made these days can out torque it... Corvette included).
The 302 can be built to be an efficient small block, but the much more sophisticated 4.6 SOHC and DOCH are, I believe, far more potent. While they're very expensive to modify, I think that the attempts at doing it are well awarded. Just wanted to clarify.
Actually being a long time Fox chassis fan I assure you the statements being said about the 4.6 against the 5.0 are not very well founded. The 4.6 does not generate more torque than the 5.0... it does however have more hp. But lets remember one key line, HP sells cars... torque wins races. I couldn't tell you how many early 4.6 (sn95) stangs I could pull pretty well off the line in my stock 5.0 (remember as well that a sn95 weighs more then a fox chassis which even in GT form weighs in around 3200lbs while LX's weighed 3000 even).
Also parts for a 4.6 cost a pretty penny to get the same performance goals out of a 5.0... the aftermarket simply isn't there for the 4.6.
Anyhow, there's my millions in info regarding the debate between a 4.6 powerplant and a 5.0. Have a good day.
There IS a 91 Sport. I have one with 94,000 miles. I also did the research, and dug up documentation proving that the sport exists. I had to get the Ford brochure from canada on that model, and it lists SC, LX and Sport.
What some people don't know is that the V8 was optional in the sport. You could get a V6 sport. Even the "sport" badge on the trunklid was optional. Some people really own sport models when they think they just have base models.
Easy way to identify a sport model is the presence of premium cloth interior, rear defrost, and a stripe on the side trim.
There were less than 500 V8 sports made in 91, and only a few thousand V8 sports in 92. There were several more V6 sports.
Also, on the 5.0 Vs 4.6 argument, yes some 4.6's will tear apart a 5.0. For Example the 4.6 DOHC found in Mustang Cobras, Lincoln Mark VIII's and Lincoln Continentals has 280+ HP, and will beat almost any stock 5.0. The 4.6 SOHC found in Mustangs, Tbirds and other cars can be slower than the good old 5.0. BUT, the newer 4.6 SOHC motors are undoubtably faster. Look at the 99+ GT mustang with 260HP.
Anyone looking for info on the 91-92 sport can visit the Thunderbird and cougar club at www.tccoa.com and post a question, and we can answer it!
Yes, there IS a 1991 Sport.
Mine has 95,500 miles and is a pleasure to drive!
So there isn't any performance or horsepower difference between my Sport and a LX? All I got with the Sport package is the plusher inside and the big pink pin stripe that I ripped off the day I bought it. Isn't there more than that! Oh well, still love my 92' Sport bird.
I love my 1992 Ford Thunderbird sport. It is fast and gets pretty good miles to the gallon. At first I really did not know that mine was a sport until I really started reading the book on it. The dealer did not say anything about it. Then I drove my friends LX and there is a definite difference in the horsepower and speed of these two models. There is a mjor difference in these two cars. I have a 1981 Z28 Camaro and the thunderbird will take it in a race where the LX got beat. So there is a difference.
Have any of you actually rebuilt or modified the 4.6 or 5.0? Or are we all talking about what we read on-line and from magazines? I own a 92 thunderbird 5.0, a 96 4.6, a 90 3.8, and a 89' 3.8 SC. I collect and restore thunderbirds. The deal here is that the 302 is my preferred engine / car out of the group. The SC has more torque and lower end, but the 5.0 has more potential. The 4.6 on the thunderbird is gutless. Anyone thinking 4.6 tbird has pull obviously has never driver a car with torque before. I own it for the collection. And it's a nice car. But it's no sports car. The 302 has a whole world of aftermarket parts available. It can be stroked with a lot of meat added and stay together. I've never modified a 4.6 but I have rebuilt one. I cannot say I would trust, strength wise, a 4.6 over a 302 once we were talking about the 450 plus HP range. Now this was a 4.6 SOHC out of a grand marquis. A 32V DOHC may be beefier. But since we are talking thunderbirds that engine is irrelevent. I'd say good fuel economy and a little snap..4.6 is great. Serious mods should be left to the tried and true 302.
I Have a 1991 V6 3.8 fuel injected thunder bird, but I can't find out how much horsepower my car has. It has no other model name on it such as the SC, LX, or Sport. I was wondering if you could help me out.
3.8 V6 Thunderbird (Non Supercharged) was 140 HP in 91. Supercharged models were 210 HP.
I got literature stating that 5.0 HO was standard on the Sport, but at the same time I got stuff that says you can order a V-8 in base T-Bird and Sport for $1,080. I guess that means there were v-6 Sports. I'm not so sure about the '91 Sport though. I have seen 91s with sport badges and V-8s, but anyone can glue the badge on their LX. My 92 model year LX was actually made in November 91, could that be the case with 91 Sports. Plus real Sports came with "handling suspension", I guess that means stiffer springs or bigger sway bars. I got JJJJ for spring code on the door of my Sport, what do you have? Seventh digit in the vin is the body type: 0=base coupe, 2=LX, and 4=Super Coupe. Look at your vin. I also heard that the Sports were only 1% of T-birds made in 92, since there were 77,789 'birds made that year, it would only be 777 of them made, sounds far fetched. Can anyone confirm or deny that?
I had a 91 Sport. I bought it in the summer of 1991 and was told it was a 91 and a half. It had a the V8 and the sport plate on the trunk. It also had the pinstripe, red, I had the titianium frost color. That car was beautiful and very fast. I wish I still had it, considering all of what I am hearing now about how many were made. Mine was definitely a Sport model, I have the window sticker to prove it. This just sucks that I don't have it anymore, I sold it 6 years ago and bought a Durango.
There is NO such thing as a 1991 Ford Thunderbird Sport-even though dealerships may have added the badges and striping before delivering the car to the customer-something that was very easy for the Dealer to do. There is no option listed for the Sport Preferred Equipment Package in 1991 like the one listed for the 1992 Sport.
Here are the listed options for the 1992 Sport:
PEP152A
99T
52N
64M.
That came directly from my sources at Ford Motor Company.
Tony Poole
Cedar Valley Thunderbirds.
Anyone out thier be able to give me some info on the driver side rear wheel baring on my 1991 ford thunder bird lx its doing funny thins and I can't find any help on the internet.
Chuck.
I bought a Thunderbiird Sport June of 91. It was red with a black pinstripe, 5.0l v8 and a sport badge on the rear. Still have the window sticker.
The 1991 ford thunderbird sport was released half way thru the selling season so it is considered a 1991 1/2, that is what ford has told me, and when I buy parts for my car I do need to ask for 1991 parts,5.0 H O.