13th Apr 2010, 12:15

Okay, the 2.3 handled better??? No way!! The 5.0 had a much tighter suspension and wider tires, and easily outperformed the 4 cylinder. The 4 cylinder Mustangs were the sloppiest handing thing Ford had in the day. Even a Tempo was better due to its front drive configuration.

They were very much "distinguishable" from one another as well. The wider tires led to a much more aggressive stance and the big polished stainless pipes out the rear end gave a hint of what was under the hood too. Also, if you had a '90-'93, you got the full GT interior on the LX hatch, which was much nicer than the base interior. Why people continually think the Mustang is all about the engine is beyond me.

There is no comparison at all from the 4 cylinder to the 5.0 Fox Mustang. The 5.0 was a complete driving experience with power, sound, and yes handling and the 4 cylinder just looked like a Mustang stuck on a Tempo chassis with tires that were too narrow, and a soft riding suspension that pitched and rolled more than most SUV's of the day.

Things haven't changed that much either... The V-6 Mustang of today is still a far cry from the complete driving experience of the GT. The V-6 Mustang is no old 4 cylinder Fox body, but it just screams rental and falls short on most of the excitement of the GT. There's nothing wrong with more power and performance, especially when you can still achieve mid to upper 20's for mpg on the highway like the Fox body cars (with EFI) did and the current GT does today.

The new 305 hp V-6 should be much better than the current one, but we'll see if they get smarter with the handling and at least offer something more sporty to go along with it.

13th Apr 2010, 12:25

Hmmm, if you do 30 in ANY car over railroad tracks, you'll be feeling any inadequacies in suspension design and even the seats you're sitting on. I wouldn't even count that as a good test really, as I would never drive a Mustang over rough tracks that fast...or any other car for that matter. I did 50 around an entrance ramp easily that was concrete with expansion joints, and the rear end didn't even hop once like it would in an older Mustang. I was amazed at the advancement of the old rear end. They really have done wonders with it.

Trouble is they would tack on another few grand in price to go with a full independent rear end, so the best bang for the buck title would suffer greatly. You just can't have it all unless you want to pay for it. You can always get the GT500 I guess as long as you don't mind the extra $20K.