3rd Jan 2012, 15:46
You're right the '93 Firebird V6 did 0-60 in 9 seconds... sorry about that. The 3800 V6 cars did do better, but still only around 7.5 seconds to 60. Both of my 5.0 Mustangs hit 60 in about 6.2 seconds, so a V6 F body was not even in the same league. In fact the V8 F body wasn't in the same league until they upped it to a Vette engine.
Mustangs have pretty much always outsold F body cars 3 to 1 anyway. They are still much more prevalent even today. Plus, if you bolt on a supercharger and did nothing else, the 5.0 Mustang would drop around a second to 60, which would wipe the pavement with pretty much every F body out there.
Go on Ebay any time and look up 5.0 Mustangs year to year through the 80's and early 90's, and there are tons of them. Look up Firebirds and Camaro's, and there is not even a quarter as many of them on there.
If you had an automatic Mustang or a 2.73 rear end in it, it made a huge difference. Why anyone would buy one with an AT is beyond me, and the 3.08 upgrade was FREE to order back then. I have driven a few AT 5.0's, and they were boring and slow comparatively, and were not even close to the potential the car had.
4th Jan 2012, 11:48
Your 4.0 Mustang does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds ONLY with the manual tranny in it. It is over 7 seconds to 60 with the AT. So, do you have a manual? Not many V6 Mustangs of the 4.0 years do. And you can believe all you want that V6 Camaro's keep up with 5.0 Mustangs, but it will never be the case with any of the Mustangs factory equipped like mine both were. Even the 3800 V6 version of the Camaro was a dog in comparison. Heck, even the brand new Camaro with a V6 only gets to 60 in 6.5 seconds, and that is over 300 HP.
The 2011 and up Mustang V6 is more worthy at 5.4 seconds to 60. Even the AT version will best the 6 second mark. A Mustang with a manual transmission is the only option for me though. There is just no point to owning this type of a car with an AT in it. The manual is a huge part of the fun.
13th Jan 2012, 16:57
Got rid of this car on Monday 1-9-11. Bought an 02 Z06 Vette. What a night and day situation.
As for the other comments, my car was quick for what it was. Now I have a beast of a car to build to eat Mustangs, Camaros and Trans Ams.
14th Jan 2012, 11:13
Yeah, NOW you can beat a Mustang. It takes buying a Chevy that costs three or four times as much as a comparable Mustang to beat one... LOL!!
16th Jan 2012, 17:54
All these comments about 0-60 times and outrunning each other may be great for illegal street racers, or those who spend weekends at the drag strip. I DON'T. I use my Mustang to get to and from work, go on errands and out to dinner. Nowhere here can I accelerate flat-out up ramps, do burn-outs or drift. My criteria for a car is looks and LOOKS ONLY!! My 4.0 Mustang turns heads everywhere. No one ever gave my GT a second glance because it was bland as hell, 100% stock and might as well have been a fleet car. Everywhere I go in my customized 4.0, I draw a crowd and get very favorable comments. Not one single person has ever asked "What engine is in it?".
17th Jan 2012, 16:53
Okay, so that is you. Anyone I know that is into Mustangs only has one question. Is it a V8? Mustangs are all about performance. I agree the looks are great too, but the package isn't complete until the V8 rumbles under the hood. The 2011 and up V6 is a worthy engine though at 305 HP. I don't drag race illegally or do anything stupid on the roads, but the occasional quick burst is a great thrill. I am more than sure you don't keep that V6 going 65 mph or less on the freeway. I also love the pull of a V8 when passing, and just plain when driving around. It is completely effortless. The V8 gets almost as good of mileage as a V6 too, and the difference is more than worth it.
Ironically, with every V8 powered car I've owned, I usually drive slower most of the time. Seems when there is nothing to prove to anyone, there isn't the need to go really fast every time you drive. This is honestly what I notice with V6 Mustang owners. They floor it at every light, and just plain overcompensate for the engine to make it seem like they have a fast car. I see V6 Mustangs doing 80 on the freeway all the time, while the GT's are usually going much slower. It is a misconception that you need to use every last ounce of power just because you have a V8. Just having that "5.0" on the fenders is enough for everyone to know. I'm waiting to start seeing 5.0 badges pop up on V6 Mustangs, just like they did back in the Fox days. Nawwww, people don't care about engines....they just want people to think they have a 5.0 under the hood.
Fast cars are always going to be around (hopefully). Even regular sedans have over 300 hp in many models. They up the power regularly to satisfy consumer thirst. To claim that no one is into power is inaccurate. Why do the companies spend $billions to keep upping the ante every generation? I just think it is a shame to have a Mustang 4.0, and every Honda Accord or Altima with a V6 in it leaves you totally in the dust. It's not about drag racing, but it still kinda leaves me flat. Looks are good for standing still, but out on the road, I want performance with the looks.
18th Jan 2012, 18:31
Again the hilarious argument of "buy a big monster V-8. You'll never USE it, but at least you'll know it's out there." PLEASE! Some of us are out of high school you know!!
18th Jan 2012, 20:08
Really, it's my weekend driver, Mon-Fri I have a Ford Crown Vic.
As for the price, I spent less than 20K for it. Would have been more if I got it at a lot, but my friend was hurting for money.
Every car has its ups and downs. Mustangs look great, and the new 5.0 is a beast of a car. I love Mustangs, but everywhere you look, some kid has one. They are very common. Like the other guy said, you see kids flying around at 80 mph, like they have got something fast.
I'm not gonna lie, I'm 22, I still run sometimes like that, but that's on a few occasions. I'm in school for law, and don't need tickets out the ass, so I got a car I can take to shows and things like that. But for the most part I run around my Crown Vic; sure it's an old folks car, but who else can say they are 22 and own 2 cars LOL.
2nd Jan 2012, 12:30
Yes, the post-1993 5.0 Mustangs generally were faster than a V-6 Firebird (or Camaro), though just barely. No V-6 F-body that I ever drove took 8 seconds to 60. I have no idea where such a figure comes from. My I-4 Fusion is that quick 0-60 and my 4.0 Mustang does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds (which is typical, check the Internet before making statements to the contrary). I owned a 5.0 Fox Mustang and a '99 V-6 Camaro or Firebird (or my 4.0 Mustang) was faster. I can easily believe this reviewer's claim that the V-6 Firebird can run with the older V-8 Mustangs.