6th Jan 2007, 15:34

Someone forgot that the 1993 cobra was also a fox body car. Outside of the Cobra the 1987 5.0 coupe LX was the second fastest fox off the production line. 225hp/284tq. not 300tq.

S50wpb@yahoo.com.

23rd Oct 2008, 12:07

All of the Fox body Mustangs from '87-92 had 225 hp and 300 lb feet of torque. In '93 they re-rated them to 205 hp but they actually were the same as the previous years. All were exactly the same as far as fast goes. The Cobra was a little quicker as it was rated at 235 hp in 1993.

8th Mar 2009, 16:30

Lets be honest. These Mustangs are not that fast unless you add on power goodies, which these foxes love and respond great with. Excellent cars and truly long lasting motors, but stock it runs like a 98 to 02 3.8 V6 Camaro.

29th May 2009, 12:54

Okay, I'll be honest. No way a V-6 Camaro would ever touch a 5.0 Mustang even stock. 0-60 in 6.2 seconds vs. like 7.5 - 8.0 for the Camaro. The most the Camaro ever had for power in those years was 200 hp (in V6 form). It is also bigger and heavier. Get your facts straight before making claims. Yes, by today's standards the 87-93 Mustang isn't as quick as it once seemed but in its day there wasn't much that could touch one, especially for the price. Now you can simply bolt on a supercharger, adding around 100 hp and get right back in the game with pretty much anything out there today. Aftermarket support is still among the best for these cars and there are so many ways to modify them.

29th May 2009, 22:28

I've found comment 16:30 to be true. I owned 2 Fox 5.0's and I drove several 2000-2001 Camaro V-6's. There was little (if any difference) in the power and acceleration. I was outrun by several V-6 Camaros. Granted, both my 5.0's were 100% factory stock. These engines are very solid and reliable and there are tons of after market parts available at great prices. If you want to add horsepower all it takes is a healthy dose of cash.

I opted out of the V-8 in 2007 and bought a 4.0 V-6. it is mildly modified and is faster than either of my two 5.0's. I can drive it exactly like I drove my 5.0's (pretty hard) and get 9 to 11 mpg better fuel mileage. I'm out of the V-8 game from now on. Smaller and more efficient engines offer plenty of go with much better mileage and much lower insurance rates. They are also more environmentally friendly.

30th Jul 2009, 20:53

My brother has a 99 Camaro with a V6 3.8 and it runs quicker than the Mustangs I have owned stock.

Stock 87 to 93 are good in 1st and 2nd, but run out of breath in 3rd gear and just are slow unless you bolt on some goodies, then the Mustang will run badass. I'm sure that the Mustang is a way way better car than the Camaro V6 or V8. Those 93 to 02 Camaros are just big problems; go and see the posts on those, you'll see about 90 percent are bad.

30th Mar 2010, 21:28

I am currently driving a 1988 Mustang GT that is fixed up, and I'm doing 350 hp. There is no way any Camaro is going to get close to touching my car. They will have to settle with looking at the tail lights.

Cold air intake has made a big difference in my car, and I recommend it for any other Mustang drivers (also I am 18 and am very blessed to have this car at this age).

31st Mar 2013, 22:22

Yes, you're right on that. The 87 is the fastest. I've owned a 89 LX, 90 GT, 87 GT T-TOP and Convertible.

1st Apr 2013, 14:05

Some of us were in high school late 60s and early 70s. We had first gen Camaros and many Mustangs. Teens then could handle the power and they were easy to work on. Our fastest car was a 396 Nova. In college we had the gamut. The 428 CJ Mustang and a 70 454 SS were the hottest.

2nd Apr 2013, 17:43

I'm wondering what modifications it took to get 350 horsepower out of a 1988 Mustang. That's nearly twice the stock horsepower. I'm a member of two Mustang clubs, and the only Mustangs I see showing that much of a power increase are equipped with fabulously expensive superchargers.

I'm a big fan of cold-air induction systems and put them on all my vehicles. I've found that they make a much more noticeable difference on small 4-cylinder engines. The effect on larger engines is barely noticeable. I installed a system on my Mustang, and I can't really feel much difference at all. The biggest measured horsepower difference I have seen was in a 2007 4.0 V-6 Mustang featured in Mustang magazine some years back. It was a very complex short-ram system that included a computer re-tune and a special hood that fed air directly into it. The dyno showed a 32 horsepower increase for it. The typical cold air induction system only adds 3 to 12 horsepower in most cases.