Would you rather a fox body or a sn-95 mustang? The fox in question

>>17140685
sn95

>>17140685
What year is the sn95? Actually, doesn't matter, unless you love the fox look the sn95 is the better car. If I had to do it again I'd get a 94-95 SN95 for the 5.0 and the SN95 chassis upgrades. I'm assuming both are v8 manuals.

Foxbody

Every single 95 I've ever seen has been treated like shit and they're falling apart, inside and out.

SN95

much better car
not ugly as fuck either

File: foxybody.jpg (295KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1200x900px

who would ever want an sn95??????????????

worst model maybe besides the mustang and that is cutting it close

Bubble Back Capri

File: CCW502.jpg (763KB, 2816x2112px) Image search: [Google]

763KB, 2816x2112px

>>17140703
Its great compared to the rounded ass early sn95

New edge cobras are ok but still

File: 5401787444_d73c8a42e5_o.jpg (787KB, 3264x1374px) Image search: [Google]

787KB, 3264x1374px

>>17140730
nope

Foxbody is worst Mustang without any competition

only one Id be embarrassed to be seen in

>>17140685
fox

File: Saleen 2.jpg (58KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 800x534px

>>17140697
2000 GT, has saleen bumpers which I don't know how I feel about. looks well kept. anyone know which has more headroom, the 04 probably had enough but wasn't great.

>>17140706
>literally an improved fox chassis
>worst
>>17140745
>not the Mustang ii
>>17140779
How tall are you? I fit in my fox at 6'3, sn95 might have slightly less IIRC.

>>17140816
6'4

>>17140779
>Saleen kit

I'd pass man. That shit hasn't aged well.

>>17140829
That might be cutting it close but I think you can do it. What sucks is you won't have an adjustable steering wheel. You will have an airbag though. Worst case scenario you could maybe find a used corbeau seat for cheap and fit that in it, might lower the seat height a few inches.

>>17140745
fox mustangs are great looking cars

>205 HP from a fucking 302 CID engine
>absolutely disgusting weight balance

Why would anyone actually want a Foxbody?

File: 00909_qxJHOUCTd5_600x450.jpg (47KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 600x450px

Fox of course.

>>17140868
its not like the engine has a huge aftermaket and is relatively light

>>17140868
>factory specs
wew lad

>>17140880
it's also not like the thing can corner either.
I'd go for an F-body over a Fox/SN95 just purely for the handling.

>>17140868
The engine is deliberately choked. They're super cheap to get 300+ crank out of with literal junkyard parts.

>>17140891
lol its not like it has a massive aftermarket to make it handle extremely well and is light unlike those pigfat camaros

>>17140868
This one should make over 350, I don't know how these drive I guess I need to drive it I just don't want to waste the guy's time.

>>17140905
"Extremely" might be an overstatement

>>17140913
Holy shit dude forget the sn95. Get that fox if it's in good condition. What's he done to it? Heads, cam, intake manifold, exhaust, headers?

File: 3773277171_62fdaf25e4_b.jpg (645KB, 1024x654px) Image search: [Google]

645KB, 1024x654px

>>17140853
the only year that looks half decent is 82

the rest are ugly as hell

>>17140891
yas

>>17140905
lmao

yeah that 1-300 lbs is so much

Fox is a shit platform the fact that you have to keep bringing up aftermarket just proves that

>>17140905
except the F-body aftermarket is just as large and diverse. Try again when you do some research. Anything you can get for a Mustang, you can get for one of the F-twins.

>>17140918
You'd have to spend a lot and do a lot of labor but he is technically correct thanks to maximum motorsports. Them being truly awful is a meme, but an f body is no question better stock for stock.

>>17140918
>>17140920
>>17140927
many many companies making cheap kits to make it handle extremely well you cant get the performance out of an f body for the same price

>>17140920
>>17140939
oh and besides who the fuck keeps a car stock?

>>17140939
Dude. Do you actually own a fox? I do. It's not cheap and not easy. I've done the math. It can be done, but not easily.

>>17140951
yep fox not a mustang though and its literally the cheapest option out of any car you can get ive done the math

>>17140913
The rear wanders. The steering angle is somewhat limited. It's front heavy. Four-eyes might have a 4 speed toploader transmission instead of a modern feeling T-5.

File: 82-92-gm-f-body-handling-kit-1_2.png (1MB, 1325x1463px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1325x1463px

>>17140939
umm you can get the same thing for F-bodies?


>>17140943
modifications dont make a car not shit
you just sugar coated it

>>17140939
confirmed for having done zero research whatsoever.
You can get better handling from an F-body for less than you'd spend to get the fox to corner like a stock F-body. It is not cheap to get a Fox to handle.

If you mean straight line shit, the 305 was shit but the 350 is king.

>>17140965
ha holy shit qa1 what fucking garbage do you put on your car

>>17140970
meanwhile he thinks the shit he puts on a garbage chassis is good

>>17140969
http://www.maximummotorsports.com/1987-89-Mustang-hardtop-Sport-Box-P194.aspx

ayy lmao

>>17140959
Really now? A new k member, front control arms, new struts, a rear torque arm conversion, larger front calipers, rear disk swap, SFCs, torque box reinforcement, a Panhard bar, rear lower control arms, that's all cheap and easy?

>>17140973
>he needs to spend over 1.5k to match a stock F-car in handling

>>17140973
meanwhile you spend the same on a Fbody (which is already better) get what I posted above and still kick a Foxes ass in the corners and the straights

>>17140984
Yeah this dude is retarded. That's not even including the torque arm to fix the rear geometry completely nor the new front k member and control arms to fix the front geometry.

>>17140993
ive never see an f body go for the same price as an sn95 or fox and with that 1600 it would kick the fuck outta of an f body and you can actually find one with a stick

>>17140999
I like Mustangs. But if you want to corner, the F-body cars have ALWAYS been better.

>>17141005
Just last month there was an IROC-Z in my area for $1500

>>17140999
fun fact maximum motorsports didnt even mess with the front geometry they said its pretty great stock

>>17141013
Uh, what is their k member for 300 dollars alex?

>>17141012
i will admit stock for stock an f body is way better at handling but once you start diving into aftermarket a fox will stomp the shit outta of an f body any car guy worth their salt works on their car

>>17141005
lolwat

Foxbodies are overpriced garbage

I could get a LS1 powered Fbody for less than what people want for them and LT1s easy as fuck to find

third gens are even cheaper

>>17140919
new crate motor, looks like the whole car has been gone through looks like a great deal but it would stretch my budget.

>>17141032
because you cant modify an Fbody or anything

its cool that you have to modify your car to try and keep up with a stock car that btfos you with the same amount put into it tho

>>17141042
lol i didnt say stock vs modified i said modified vs modified

File: 1429927169149.jpg (73KB, 551x481px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 551x481px

>>17141032
>but once you start diving into aftermarket a fox will stomp the shit outta of an f body any car guy worth their salt works on their car
not really. The Fox cars really can't compete The only things they have going for them is the lighter weight, and the oversquare 302 V8 versus Chevy's undersquare 305.

But you put the same work into an F-body and it WILL murder the Mustang. The F-twins have JUST as large an aftermarket. Stop using that as your only defense.

>>17141045
>i will admit stock for stock an f body is way better at handling but once you start diving into aftermarket a fox will stomp the shit outta of an f body

k

and a F body will destroy a Fox with the same money put into it

>>17141040
See if you can jew him down. The thing is this thing won't need mods or anything if the handling's been touched a bit as well. Or just wait for another affordable car you like, mustangs are a dime a dozen.

>>17141040
literally cheapest v8 f body is 6500 and its an auto no thank you sir and then you can find a fox for half of that and its a stick

>>17141067

wrong guy meant >>17141042

>>17140816
what the fuck does an "improved chasis" actually do that would make you choose it?
its not like you're gonna be towing with a mustang, and if you plan on crashing it then you shouldn't be buying either

>>17141067
https://newhaven.craigslist.org/cto/6115442685.html
fight me faggot. You're not looking hard enough.

>>17141049
http://timingscoring.drivenasa.com/NASA_Championships/Eastern%20State%202016%20Watkins%20Glen%20International/Official/Group%20C%20Championship%20Official.pdf

other than you know mustang have always dominated in racing

http://timingscoring.drivenasa.com/NASA_Championships/Western%20States%202016%20Buttonwillow%20Raceway/October%2016%20-%20Group%20D%20(NP01,%20SU,%20ST1-3,%20AI).pdf

>>17140874
My brother has this car lol!

>>17141100
the whole improved chassis thing kinda only has its merits with the whole you can have wider wheels thing other than that its really not that much better

>>17141067
there is a manual LS1 Firebird on my CL for 6500

there is a modified 350 manual Firebird for $2900

cheapest 5.0 is $3500 for a dented and rusted 1986 with a shitty interior and headers

File: shoveling-money-into-fire.gif (542KB, 500x378px) Image search: [Google]

542KB, 500x378px

>>17141110
oh look. The Mustang has more people willing to dump money into a furnace.
Moving on...

>>17141023
the maximum motorsports k member is of course better but they themselves have said that the stock geometry is good

>>17141134
so your saying you would want to keep your f body stock? its a hobby every single hobby you can get is a money pit

File: 00v0v_lBStYvMQYY4_600x450.jpg (49KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x450px

>>17141120
Then he must have just stolen it out of my garage.

>>17141138
Jesus dude are you high? That stock Ackerman is good? Fuck no.

>>17140685
fox body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNoxgMlLJPI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYHTYgUALWo

>>17141150
He did lol!

Third gen f bodies with the 350 are all automatic. If you want a stick you're stuck with the shitty 305.

>>17141100
Disk brakes, 5 lug, wider control arms in the front (better ackermann) stiffer due to roof structure.

>>17141146
I'm saying the F-body teams don't have as big a budget dipshit.

>>17141164
On the upside, the 350 just slots right in with no need to change anything.

>>17141174
all things fixed by the junkyard or aftermarket you guys sound lazy

>>17141177
if your fbody needs so much less money than that point is null all these cars are heavily restricted to basically stock suspension

>>17141195
BS

>>17141208
Control arm mounting points are unrestricted on all cars but may not violate any rules herein (i.e.
frame modification or IRS
rules). so bolt on griggs or maximum motorsports stuff for mustangs idk about f body cars

How is turd gen headroom?

>>17141187
It's work and money. That being said, the fox OP's looking at has a nice engine so it's better value. I don't like working on even a rust-free car, although I'll do it for the sake of money.

>>17141195
thats wrong af

a quick google of the rules prove that

>>17141233
and you call yourself a car guy?

>>17141239
literally just posted a section from it stock mounting points of frame meaning you can hack up the rear of the car you have to run 4 link panhard bar or irs on a mustang and front suspension is literally maximum motorsports bolt on shit

File: 01.jpg (271KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 800x533px

>>17141255
thats not basically stock suspension you fucking retard

why Fbodies always winning when its actually stockish spec racing

and they likely let Mustangs run aftermarket and force Fbodies to use oem since Mustangs are shit like they do with the CMC (pic related)

champions last year were still Fbodies

>>17141299
still arguing stock? your f body is gets its shit pushed in on the corners with a s197 and they literally go for the same price on my craigslist except for i can find them in manual

>>17141255
except the fact remains that both the Camaro and Mustang have bolt in IRS solutions that could get around those rules.

>>17141299
oh and most of GM cars run restricted engines too while some Mustangs are allowed engine mods

>>17141314
this retard brings up basically stock then gets proved wrong and damage controls

lmao

whatever enjoy your shit you deluded fanboy

Mustangs are garbage

a S197 is still slower than a 90s Fbody around the track and in a straight line

>>17141336
? i was pointing out the fact that comparing stock for stock is retarded because theres always another car that is better stock a car really shows its worth in the aftermarket

>>17141325
the bolt in irs for an f body is 7 grand other than that you have to modify the car extensively in comparison to bolt an 8.8 irs into a fox

>>17141351
and?

difference is a Fbody isnt complete shit without aftermarket

>>17141364
fair enough, but the options exist.

>>17141366
s197 is a great car without aftermarket and so is the foxbody and sn95

>>17141369
look home slice i love turd gens theyre amazing cars on of my favorite i would love to own one some day but mustangs dominate aftermarket, racing, price etc its how its always been

File: pny.jpg (137KB, 1071x640px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1071x640px

The SN95 just looks like a normal woman's car. Its the rounded edges. New Edge was a lot better.

But god damn I love the Fox Body.

>>17141378
no theyre not

theyre all awful unless you lower standards

File: 1482139781926.jpg (176KB, 1300x975px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1300x975px

>>17141391
>its how its always been
except when they lost.
1968 and 1969 Trans Am series want a word with you. GM had a rule against sponsoring race teams from the 1960s right up until the C5 Corvette launched.

File: 143510d1321389455-swapping-460-engine-d1ve-into-s197-mustang-50rrpic1[1].jpg (941KB, 2300x1069px) Image search: [Google]

941KB, 2300x1069px

>>17140874
Fox Body Capris look like S197s if they were made in the 80s

>>17141409
to me driving a 90s f body would be lowering my standards its all opinion at this point

>>17141412
trans am is neat but there was still competition in not manufacturer sponsored events and the cheapness and other things that have changed over the years the mustang still dominated

>>17141423
Mustangs have pretty much always been BTFO by the fbody tho

>>17140685
aussie here

we have tonnes of sn95's here they are junk.

i like the terminator and thats it

Fox body all the way

>>17141439
The major achilles heal of the F-body is that 10 bolt rear end.

File: 20170405_021917.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>17141240
Yes, that's why I pulled several nights of no sleep fighting siezed bolts and shit to do my cobra brake conversion.

>>17141441
pretty sure the fox was cheaper and faster in a straight line and the sheer amount of them created a vast aftermarket extremely fast which alleviated the handling issue which reviewers really didnt have a problem with

>>17141454
yeah you guys got it rough there its literally the same as a ford 7.5 in strength its not bad once you dump like a grand into it but at that point its not worth it

>>17141455
how the fuck unless your car is rusted to shit theres no way i live in the rust belt and i still crack bolts loose easily in my fox and theres still no way it took that long

>>17141461
wrong its handling was complained about and were BTFO by Firebirds and Camaros even the automatic 305 killed a 5 speed GT on the track

only thing they had were being cheap and straight lines

>>17141481
Front and rear brakes. Also replaced a few chewed up wheel studs. Spent several hours fighting driveshaft bolts and learning how to put the spider gears back in the diff. And of course there's the new master cylinder and proportioning valve (I should have bought line wrenches) and bleeding the brakes with Chrisfix's solo method.

>>17141470
which is why I think they aren't as successful in racing. Unless you pony up for a Moser engineering 12 bolt or Ford 9", you're fucked in the rear end.

>>17141505
no reason to tear out the spider gears unless you were rebuilding the diff the wheel stud thing if its rear axles is as simple as pulling the axles and hammering them in

>>17141524
eh the ford 7.5 or 10 bolt can support about 600whp on slicks if completely built which would be like 1000-1500ish its plenty strong but for ford guys the same money will build an 8.8 for the same price that will support over 1000whp so its not what makes it less successful its prob because its just an overall less common and more expensive car you can build a mustang much cheaper

>>17141529
Spider gears fell out and you have to take the axles out to put in the adaptor plates for the rear calipers. New studs did NOT go in easy either, I was hammering for a good long time with an 8lb sledge for each one, wasted too much time on them. Didn't have the drill bit to drill the axles out slightly bigger and stores were all closed. Made it work but damn it sucked.

>>17141542
damn just sounds like bad luck and ive never had spider gears fall out on me sounds like your diff is in pretty poor shape but axles are fucking easy and fast to take out

>>17141555
Apparently it's common on the traction loc 8.8. With the cross pin removed the two it goes through can fall out with a bit of bad luck. Getting the axles out was easy, pounding the new studs in was hard. Also rear hardlines were a bitch, as was removing the driveshaft to route the new parking brake cables.

File: maxresdefault[3].jpg (170KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1920x1080px

Does anyone here know why my rear axle swings about when I alternate between putting it in reverse or any forward great?
It also clunks too but by 3rd usually you can't hear it anymore as you're moving.
I can't even roll forward because it will swing back and ford and make like it wants to stall but then swings the other way.
Its like I have to give it the right enough gas so it swings back and doesn't return until I'm making a stop and obv it helps engine braking there.

But anyway it doesn't seem normal. I jacked it up the other way saw nothing wrong and I tried moving it with my hand and no luck but lol spaghettis

>>17141569
huh never had that happen and ive never had trouble dropping a driveshaft the stud thing was just bad luck since you didnt have the bit and the store was closed

>>17141577
What the fuck are you talking about? How do you know the axle's swinging?

>>17141577
are you sure the axle is moving? well if it is make sure your upper control arms or stock stamped and have good rubber not urethane and replace the lower control arms with some spherical bushing maximum motorsports pieces but what your saying really doesnt make sense man

>>17141578
What was hard about the driveshaft was just immobilizing the damn thing, because I was an idiot and had the rear end torn apart when trying to remove it. Breaker bar would just turn the engine over. Had to get creative with wedging a crowbar into the u-joint. I don't even remember how I did it.

>>17141592
i put my car in park to stop it from moving if you have a stick just put it in gear to immobilize it

File: 1992_00019_01[1].jpg (170KB, 782x436px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 782x436px

>>17141583

Because I had my friend switch gears while I peeped below.

ofc this only happens when the engine's running.

>>17141591

I'll double check it.
Sometimes when I'm switching gears it clunks too. Even before I engage the clutch.

And when that specific clunk happens I feel it on my shifter.
Then I engage the clutch and clunk again but it sounds like its comin from the rear

>>17141605
i really doubt it is moving like that you prob wont be able to move it by hand just do a close inspection but if it is use that advice i gave you and rear end clunking can also be caused by a worn diff rear end gears bearings etc so check that too

>>17141604
That was the thing, I HAD it in first.

>>17141626
im pretty sure you would have to throw her in reverse with a stick car

It's the same car just different body panels that's why most chassis parts are sold as 79-04, me personally I'd only take a lx coupe other than that sn95 or new edge

>>17141647
That explains a lot. I probably should just buy or download a FSM at some point.

>>17141455
>LMR boxes everywhere
I know that feel my nigga

>>17143212
>still have 4 in the trunk for interior shit
I need help

>>17143228
i really wish they people made parts for the other foxbody cars im super jelly of you mustang guys

File: SN95_SVT_Mustang_Cobra_Black_Rear.jpg (64KB, 604x403px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 604x403px

Can I have this one?

>>17140685
Foxbody all day long. SN95s are new enough that the survivors are thrashed to shit. Also even more shitty Ford plastic.
God there is just so much you can do with a fox body and it's so fucking cheap, including the cars. I'll tell you right now too, nobody will give a single fuck when they see your SN95 4.6L. You're a total dick magnet in a 5.0 Fox.

>>17145072
You get all the chassis shit, just not the interior. Also you don't pay the meme tax on the car itself.

File: 1999-2004-mustang-with-aftermarket-rims.jpg (225KB, 630x450px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 630x450px

sn95 cobra's look nice af

>>17143228
Dude next time I move it's going to be mostly LMR boxes. I put one of those fucker's kid through college at this point.

>>17145072
It's a great resource. A big factor in my decision to purchase the car as a project.

>>17145097
lolwat

Foxes are more expensive than SN95s and have worse chassis

shits garbage

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (83KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1280x720px

I hope your mention of the SN95 includes the facelift version.

Choosing between a melting blob and a square soviet tier design would make me want to just off myself desu.

>>17145197
>Foxes are more expensive than SN95s
WHOA 5k for a decent fox body versus 3k for a thrashed to shit SN95.

HOW WILL I EVER RECOVER.

I never said a fox body is always cheaper, I said it's cheap you mouth breather.
>worse chassis
Except you know it's the same fucking chassis and 200 dollars worth of aftermarket fixes the major issues.

You're garbage, your taste are garbage, and your children will be garbage.

File: 1459785541521.jpg (439KB, 2550x1650px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 2550x1650px

>>17145671
this is the most upset pile of shit taste Ive seen today

more like 5 k for an abused Foxbody and 6 k for a nice Cobra SN95

the extra 1000 is worth it

>>17140685
get a thunderbird, its a far better car and they are rare

>>17145671
>200 dollars worth of aftermarket fixes the major issues.
>$200 somehow fixes the suspension
No it doesn't.

>>17140685
I personally love to start stock, clean slate to make it your own.

File: 071.gif (2MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x250px

>>17145950
Oh look, it's Nigcaros the tripfag come to shitpost
No 200 fixes the floppy chassis, a panhard bar fixes the suspension.
>inb4 vague complains about control arms

>>17145801
Shhhh, you and Jamal can both proudly say you drive SN95s.

Also
>Nice Cobra
>6k
Pick one.

Fuck out of here with that one time you saw a half rotted roller for 6k.

I got a nice 97 cobra for 4k. The only problem was the odo was broken and its one of the ones with the white paint problem.

No rust no problems and the engine is smooth as silk.

File: 00E0E_6bvtS8KJ6UV_1200x900.jpg (180KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1200x900px

>>17146440
lmao

pic related is $5,600

there is another Cobra for $6,500 with some mods'

meanwhile people want 5-8k for shitass Foxbodies that are basically stock

the era where the Foxbody is a decent option on a budget is long gone

File: 14955983_10208065996516723_148812903204645908_n.jpg (81KB, 960x596px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 960x596px

>>17140922
My biggest beef with the 4th gen F twins is the shitty wiring that plauges 90's GM. New electrical gremlin every week.

>2000 Firehawk owner with less then 105K miles.

>>17140685
OP,
Ended up picking up a 97' SN-95 with 76K for cheap, haven't had any problems with it surprisingly, besides maintenance level stuff like ball joints, Serp belt, and Clutch.

Now its not perfect, the Interior is 90's cheap shit, Seat sucks ass, Shifter is far as fuck away for anyone tall, unless you like being manspread raped by the steering column. And the T45 is the least fucking crisp transmission ive ever driven the moment you toss a short throw shifter on it.

>Pros, Reliable with the 4.6 or 5.0, handles decently well stock, and has alright power.
>Cons, Holy fucking driver ergonomics, They dont exist. Trans is solid but about as crisp as a moldy apple when shifting.

File: 18221951_1301094143343276_1292017207157239719_n.jpg (83KB, 720x543px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 720x543px

>>17146494
Wow, real cool

Pic related is 3.5k.

Good luck on those 5k cobras tho

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/2003/Ford/Mustang?startYear=2003&numRecords=25&sortBy=derivedpriceDESC&firstRecord=0&endYear=2003&modelCodeList=MUST&makeCodeList=FORD&trimCodeList=MUST%7CCobra&searchRadius=0

File: 00303_81OkH9q7BGF_1200x900.jpg (141KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1200x675px

>>17146558
>he has to cherry pick Terminators
kek

and lmao at that shitty 4 eyed boomer mobile

people want $6k for shit like this around here

slow
overpriced
cant handle for shit

I can find new edge and SN95 GTs for $3-5k all day

File: 13664565_10209873016447349_1758134422_n.gif (406KB, 304x206px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 304x206px

>>17146588
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/Ford/Mustang?startYear=1995&numRecords=25&sortBy=derivedpriceASC&firstRecord=0&endYear=2002&modelCodeList=MUST&makeCodeList=FORD&trimCodeList=MUST%7CCobra&searchRadius=0

Just look at those pristine 150k 5k Cobras. Truly a better choice than a 100k fox that's been taken care of.

>I can find new edge and SN95 GTs for $3-5k all day

And? Nobody said you couldn't. You don't even know what you're arguing anymore, do you dickwasher? Nobody ever said all fox bodies are cheaper than SN95s.

You live in a shit hole, that's why people want 6k for that.

>>17146621
nah

Foxbodies are just overpriced piles of shit who cares about how many miles thye have when every part is shit and needs to be replaced anyway

bad value for a bad car

all there is to it

File: initial-B.png (302KB, 540x308px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 540x308px

>>17146641
>mfw you've run out of arguments
You have shit taste and you owe everyone here an apology for your niggotry. Apologize faggot.

File: 1464267560008.png (161KB, 500x313px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 500x313px

>>17146647
>mfw you dont have anything but fanboyism

lmfao you cringelord

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Having had a 92 foxbody as well as two 98 sn95s I can say they're the worst cars I've ever owned.

That said the sn95 was the better car in every way except a few subjective things like sound and looks. Still, the foxbody was the only one that I loved of the three.

>>17146678
I know they handle like boats but I dont think people in glass houses can sink Mustangs

>>17146440
>a panhard bar fixes the suspension.
It doesn't fix all the geometry. It's why it takes a shitload of money to get a Fox to handle.