"Camry-Into-Canyon" (Camry-Into-Canyon)
07/03/2014 at 17:56 • Filed to: None
2
29|
"Camry-Into-Canyon" (Camry-Into-Canyon)
07/03/2014 at 17:56 • Filed to: None | 2
| 29 |
The current V6 Mustang is one of the best performance bargains of all time. However things weren't all so rosy for Ford's cheapest pony car. 20 years ago when the SN-95 model was launched, the 3.8L V6 out of a Windstar (one of the crappiest minivans ever) produced just 145 horsepower. Sure it had 215 lb-ft of torque, but as almost nobody paid attention to torque, this strong number was often overlooked. When Ford introduced the awesome New Edge refresh 15 years ago, the horsepower rating grew to 195 and it produced 220 lb-ft. the maximum this motor made was 193 HP and 225 lb-ft. decent for a vehicle that weighed 3066 lbs in it's lightest V6 iteration. The problem is that these cars have depreciated to the point that douche-bros wearing snap-backs and listening to (pick any YMCMB artist) decide to buy one of these over a civic. they then boast about having a 'super-fast' mustang that will 'beat any civic in town.' So here's my question to all OPPOnauts: Is it okay to own an SN-95 V6 Mustang as long as you don't exaggerate it's performance?
T5Killer
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 17:59 |
|
I think its ok to own one. I almost bought one for $500 for a DD until I noticed it was missing rear brake calipers!
Vimto
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:00 |
|
I think it is all about the condition of the SN-95. You can tell immediately how well its been kept - how yellow are the headlights? Do the tires have any tread? Stock rims, are they brown with dust and curbed to death? Does the paint still shine? Is it a stock color?
If the car in that press photo was to drive past me in the state its shown here I would be more than okay with it.
NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:01 |
|
So when people talk about "Fox Body Mustangs," are they excluding the SN-95? I always assumed they were included...
Because Fox Body Mustangs are definitely A Thing around here.
|
Camry-Into-Canyon
> NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
07/03/2014 at 18:04 |
|
When people talk about Fox Bodies, they mean the 79-93 models. Although the SN-95 is a modified fox platform, it is considered separate. I hope this helps.
SaabLife, because Gripen
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:04 |
|
I had a manual one as a dd for a few years in college. Wasn't a bad car and I got it pretty cheap. Useless in the snow, good car otherwise.
GhostZ
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:04 |
|
Even the automatic can do a decent powerbrake/burnout because of that torque.
It's okay to own an SN-95 V6 mustang as long as you're a good enough driver not to a) understeer it into a wall or b) pick fights with cars you know are faster.
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:05 |
|
Every V6 Mustang of this era I've ever encountered has some sort of noisy, shitty exhaust to make it sound like a V8 (hint: it sounds like a broken V6 Camry), and a bunch of body kits and GT/Cobra badges, and is being driven in an aggressive manner by someone, usually a younger male, who doesn't want you to know it's only a V6.
Or it's the one a friend of a friend of mine drives. This kid is very polite and smart, and has the only bone stock, perfect condition V6 Mustang of this era I've ever seen.
|
Vimto
> NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
07/03/2014 at 18:05 |
|
I believe when people say Fox, they intend 1993 or earlier.
Decay buys too many beaters
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:07 |
|
Only if you add lots of stick on Autozone chrome bits...
But in all seriousness if you like the car go for it, who cares what people think.
|
T5Killer
> NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
07/03/2014 at 18:07 |
|
They are excluding sn95s. The fox cars are lighter so that is why they are favored.
|
GhostZ
> NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
07/03/2014 at 18:08 |
|
SN-95 is distinctly different from a Fox body.
The Fox Body started with the Mustang II in 1974. It greatly evolved through the 80s. In 1994, a new Fox platform was released, but it's very very different (and came with the name SN-95) and shared little with the older ones. The "New Edge" mustang rebodied it, but kept the same interior and drivetrain. This means that a 1994 mustang shares more with a 2001 mustang than it does a 1993 (Fox body) Mustang.
The main benefit of a 'fox body' mustang is the light weight, cheapness to buy, and ubiquity of the Ford 302. Since the 1994 (Sn-95) added weight, swapped the 302 for the DOHC 4.6, and until recently were more expensive, they don't carry nearly the same aesthetic.
dogisbadob
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:08 |
|
Honestly, I actually like the original SN95 better than the 99 new edge refresh.
And of course, it should get a pass because it's the base model V6, not the V8 model. Besides, it's reasonably close in output to GM's 3800 V6 in the Camaro/Fbird. Perfectly adequate for the time.
|
NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:08 |
|
TIL the difference between the Fox Bodies and the SN-95. Thanks!
The "modified Fox Body" part kinda threw me.
PheeNoIVI
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:09 |
|
Fox body's are way to common around here. People treat them like they are the pinnacle of performance cars...
|
NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
> GhostZ
07/03/2014 at 18:10 |
|
Awesome explanation, thanks!
|
GhostZ
> NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
07/03/2014 at 18:11 |
|
Source: I happened to have drove a V6 1998 SN-95 through high school.
I can tell you every little quirk about that car.
|
GhostZ
> dogisbadob
07/03/2014 at 18:15 |
|
The New Edge looks better if you're on the outside. But the SN-95 is so much better from the inside.
lone_liberal
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:15 |
|
It's ok to own anything that you like. Now talking out of your ass about it is another question. BTW, I owned a 3.8 powered Windstar and that torque really was the best thing about it other than the cargo room.
|
GhostZ
> PheeNoIVI
07/03/2014 at 18:17 |
|
It's because an early-90s notchback 5.0 is usually cheaper, faster, more reliable, and easier to repair than pretty much any other car on the road. At least, it was, until the hype drove prices through the roof. For a time, you could have a 300HP track car that could keep up with a C5 Z06 for under $10,000.
But all of those other fox bodies? Just regular mustangs.
oldirtybootz
> NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
07/03/2014 at 18:21 |
|
Fox - 1979-93
SN-95 - 1994-98
New Edge SN-95 - 1999-04
Just to clear up the Foxes and SNs.
mcseanerson
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:24 |
|
I'd rather have the ranger that v6 came out of.
|
T5Killer
> GhostZ
07/03/2014 at 18:27 |
|
The Fox body started in '79 the Mustang II was a pinto based platform which is unrelated to the Fox platform. The Fox and SN95 cars are closer than you think. Most major suspension components swap as do all the drive train stuff. The SOHC (GT) 4.6 an DOHC(Cobra) 4.6 didn't get installed in the Mustang untill '96 1994 and 1995 SN95s GT and Cobras have the 5.0. (I have been a 95 Cobra owner for 16 years now and into late model mustangs for about 25.)
Flavien Vidal
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 18:29 |
|
Well, I had a V6... Slow sure... But it's plenty enough fun. I've driven a 96 for 4 years... Loved it... sure it's not fast, but it's fun. Here are two track days video and a few pics of mine at the time :)
Lots of fun!
|
T5Killer
> dogisbadob
07/03/2014 at 18:42 |
|
Same here. I love my SN95 and short of a Azure blue Mach1 or a Termi Cobra vert no new edge will get me to sell/trade it.
NaturallyAspirated
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 19:01 |
|
I had a manual '98 for a while. It was just OK. It could do one-wheel burnouts like crazy with all that torque, but it was NOT FAST in a way that deserves all-caps, and I found it's exhaust note uninspiring.
The handling was not very good either. I put Koni orange shocks on mine, and it helped some, but it would have needed a lot of love in order to corner well.
Comfort-wise it was fine. The cloth seats were fairly comfortable. The back seat was completely useless for anyone with legs and a head. The door panels rattled. The tall trunk lid made for less rear visibility than I like, but otherwise it was pretty easy to see out of.
The styling isn't something I'm particularly fond of. The fake vents (two on the hood, two in front of the rear wheels), the blocked-off holes in the bumper where fog lights would have gone on a nicer model, and the flimsy rear spoiler all seemed kind of silly to me.
The v6 is easy to work on. There's tons of room in the engine bay, since the engine is missing two cylinders. The very simple suspension combined with the solid-axle and FR layout means everything is really easy to figure out.
The biggest insight I had about the car was when I parked it next to my coworkers' 1965 Mustang 289 Fastback. The '65 has a back seat I can actually ride in (as a 5'11" big guy) and has no power steering, but other than that it's mechanically almost identical. It's like the SN-95 is 1960's technology with just enough updates to keep it smog-compliant.
V8Demon - Prefers Autos for drag racing. Fite me!
> GhostZ
07/03/2014 at 19:08 |
|
The Fox Body started with the Mustang II in 1974
NO.
The fox platform was first used in the Ford Fairmont/Mercury Zephyr in the 1978 model year. The Mustang II was on the Ford Pinto platform.
The Mustang was technically a modified fox platform car all the way until the 2004 (aka the fox 4) model year, however the term "fox Mustang" normally refers to the 1979-1993 model years. Kinda like "New Edge" refers to 1999-2004 Mustangs and the term "SN-95" refers to 1994-1998 model years.
The '96-'98 Cobras are growing on me BTW.....
Corey
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/03/2014 at 19:52 |
|
It's perfectly all right to own one of these. If you need a reliable (or cheap to fix when it breaks) commuter vehicle that gets decent fuel economy (relative to its current purchase price) and is easy to park, this is a viable option considering how plentiful and cheap they are. And for the $1500-$2500 you're likely to spend buying one, it can be fun.
|
Camry-Into-Canyon
> NaturallyAspirated
07/04/2014 at 09:10 |
|
I hear that you have to invest in sway bars and lowering springs to fix the handling. the sn-95 sixes didn't have a rear sway bar, so understeer was more than common.
claramag, Mustaco Master
> Camry-Into-Canyon
07/05/2014 at 00:39 |
|
I DD/Hoon a new edge v6. It's not fast. I don't pretend it's fast. It's a cheap PoS with a $40 paint job I'm not afraid to bang up, drift, whack a lightpost, then drive halfway across texas in it knowing that parts are cheap and plentiful around here.
But let me tell you if you do get one you HAVE to get your hands on an LSD and higher ratio rack/pinion gear set, preferably used out of somebody else's 8.8" equipped GT. Don't go upgrading the weak stock rear end. I found a 7.5" somebody put over a grand into and had to sell for $200 (7.5" rear ends are intrinsically worthless in the performance market due to their inability to handle over ~300 lb-ft or so)