YACT: How do you feel about mid-'90s Mustangs and 3-Series's?

[thedarkwolf]

Try impossible to find one that hasn't been messed with especially the older you go. I don't worry about that to much. Mine had all the typical mustang mods, headers, exhaust, shifter, gears, and pullies and for me that was just stuff I didn't have to do. They all get driven hard modded or not. Think my 55 year old dad drives his 02 GT harder then I drive mine.

 

[MasterAndCommander]

Mustang GT's are to be driven like they are stolen

 

[91TTZ]

My friend had a 3 series. Fun car to drive but HORRIBLE maintenance-wise. Broke down often and parts were very expensive.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: MasterAndCommander
Mustang GT's are to be driven like they are stolen

Yeah but they usaully bring with them some problems and will likely need some money to make them reliable daily drivers. Clutch and transmission problems are sometimes issues on abused Stangs. If the person who owned it prior knew how to drive it and didn't cheap out on the mods it would be a good car to buy but frequently these types of owners want more for their car than market value.

I've owned 2 Mustangs (a GT convertible and a GT coupe). They are good reliable cars and fun to drive. Find a good performance repair shop that specializes in Mustangs. They are familiar with the problems that come up and can recommend upgrades that will compliment each other and not interfere with each other. I would also have this shop look over any car you are considering buying.

Buy the GT, I would pass on the Bimmer though. If you cannot get or refuse to get a GT I would pass on the Stang and get the BMW.

BMW's inline 6 > Mustang V6.

Another car to consider is the Subaru WRX if you can afford one. Those are great cars! Especially if you live where it snows in the winter.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Twista

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Twista

Originally posted by: AMDman12GHz

Originally posted by: notfred
The Mustang (I'm assuming you'd get a GT - don't get a V6) is probably more fun as a recreational car. It's easier to modify if you're into that. It's also cheaper to maintain. The BMW might be nicer to drive to work everyday, though.

I've owned several Mustangs, but no BMWs so I can't really compare.

Yep. I say Get a 87-93 Mustang, Can't beat the body Style is the best IMO. Or If you are set on that body style mustang, then at least get the 94/95 GT Since it has a 5.0 Motor in it still. DONT GET A V6 Though!

Josh

Just wondering if you know the stock esimated HP on 5.0 sn95 compared to the 4.6L 96 and up to 98 sn95? (both hard top)

5.0 sn95 cars were the same as the fox body cars - 215-225hp, 285-300ft. lbs of torque. The numbers for 4.6s were pretty much the same. The differences depend on exactly what year car you get.

Thanks. You owned a white snake @ once right?

Until you move into the DOHC 4.6L the 5.0L and 4.6L in a Mustang were equals....the original stigma is now gone from those that know the cars.

The latest 4.6's have nothing wrong at all from a power making standard. Of course the 5.0 (really a 302 lower end) will have a lot more potential for lower priced parts, however, some of the stuff is equally expensive if you are dealing with Ford.

I had an 1988 GT (last year T-Tops were offered as well), great car...the absolute only problem I had (and this was heavily modified) was during an oil change a mechanic somehow had my clutch cable against my header...I got stuck in 3rd gear until I could get it fixed (about a 30 min drive)....fortunately starting in 3rd wasn't really too much a problem

I have done some work for a lady at the office with a 98 GT (4.6 SOHC)...other than the body difference....seems not much different at all. I didn't think it any harder or easier to do some typical maintenance (it's been over 10 years since I owned mine)....changing the intake manifold seemed about the same job. My dad's 5.8L Bronco was about the same as well (has a little more room to work with, but it's a lot higher and that works against you)...

I had friends during college with 90 something BMW's, one had the original style M3 as well...here in Palm Beach County it's a pretty even break down of the kids with beaters, the Honda/Eclipse crowd, the Beamer crowd, Mustang/Camaro/and a smaller % of Japanese, then you got a very small group with the $50k++++++ vehicles.

The BMW had a nice tight ride, it was quiet, comfortable...not a rocket ship, but definitely quick and agile.

The Mustang creaked sometimes, definitely not quiet....in any mustang I have been in the exhaust is clearly heard inside on the GT's, comfort was ok...the seats can be better....fast though....I can't say I have pushed a 4.6L into turns, but my 88 even with a lot of work seemed to want to push out of turns (understeer). Also it had a definite 'heavy' feel to it.

I like my 98 240SX SE....I'd look into one from 95-98 (97 and 98 have a huge price preminum on them, about $10k-12k on average is the asking price for 5 spd SE's). It's reliable, quick and agile (definitely not a rocket in stock form though), parts are reasonable and the car is simple to work on, the interior is well designed and high end looking. it's rear wheel drive. The earlier hatchbacks (1989-1993) are just as good, giving up a little luxury for lightness and a much lower cost. Low mileage samples of these can be found too.

my website has a good breakdown of the 240sx: DriftKat.com

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Twista
Just wondering if you know the stock esimated HP on 5.0 sn95 compared to the 4.6L 96 and up to 98 sn95? (both hard top)

According to Edmunds, a 95 GT had 215 hp and 285 ft-lbs of torque while a 96 GT had 215 hp and 285 ft-lbs of torque