foxbody VS. sn95

351foxstang · 09-03-2005, 02:39 AM

i heard the foxbody is faster cause of weight but is it realy that noticable?

bfirkin · 09-03-2005, 02:42 AM

how much the sn 95 weigh? my striped somewhat 89 stang prob weighs just at 3000 and weight means alot 10s for this car is only 500rwhp

DR8907 · 09-03-2005, 03:40 AM

Its not too noticeable, but a Fox is always going to be faster.

hopalong_70 · 09-03-2005, 04:30 AM

I've owned both and to me it's obvious. The fox is faster. Whether it's due to weight or some other factor, I don't know. I do know that my current fox is a hell of lot funner and faster feeling than my old similarly modded 95GT.

Jasperstang308 · 09-03-2005, 04:58 AM

there are a few differences besides weight the intakes are slightly smaller in the sn95s which adds up to about 10hp and the pistons are different i think but no for certain and feel free to correct me if wrong

black89gt · 09-03-2005, 04:26 PM

if the smaller intake adds about 10hp then why do the 94 and 95 stangs have 215 hp? ~_^

cammedlx · 09-03-2005, 04:39 PM

I think he meant lost about 10hp due to the intake,but the 94-95 sn95's has all of the thing's that fox guy's are having to buy to upgrade,like 5lug,disc brakes all around,toruqe box reinforcements,chassis stiffeing,etc.. So they have alot of potenial..But they did have hyper pistons in them,they weigh more,and they deff. don't look as good as a fox"IMO"

Jasperstang308 · 09-03-2005, 06:52 PM

yea i did my bad yea it loses 10hp

98gt0311 · 09-03-2005, 07:18 PM

For what it's worth, I have a 98 that I'm going to sell next yr because the REAL mods for em are ridiculous compared to a 5.0.
I agree with stangpower on the upgraded body and so forth; which is why I decided to go for the SN v Fox.

On the other hand, it isn't hard to find some foxes w/ the upgrades for a very reasonable price. Looks wise its all a matter of personal taste IMO. I love all Mustangs so their all pretty to me.