94-95 owners (bastard children)

[Screemin3o2]

Found a pretty good article.

http://www.blueovalnews.com/plugins/p2_news/printarticle.php?p2_articleid=144

[gmkillr]

Cool article, Thanks!!

[dads95gt]

Nice article:thmbsup:

[Steve-0]

Nice article! Thanks!:highfive:

[yeahloh95]

nice read but i disagree with some of it ,there are quite a few fast 94-95 cars here on this board:highfive:

[Pure Stock]

nice read but i disagree with some of it ,there are quite a few fast 94-95 cars here on this board:highfive:

Where??:takepic:

[Screemin3o2]

Article isn't saying that there aren't any fast 94-95 cars. It's just showing a few ideas that might make the car a little more difficult to work with whether for getting the performance out of it or the cost of it. I don't know if all of that is true or not but I think it should be open for discussion so I posted it.

[yeahloh95]

oh i know first hand about our year cars and the problems, i have been lucky i did my motor and supercharger all at once and it drove fine til i got it tuned i know other guys that put a cam in and his car won't stay running, thanks for posting it maybe it will help someone :goodidea:

[Pure Stock]

The 1994-1995 5-Liters have/had a stigma attached to them from day one. Ford added weight for the 1994 model year and bumped power over the 1993 model. However, the 3.08's struggled even more to get the portly fox4 up and running. I have had the opportunity to race and document a 1994 that I acquired with a scant 18,300 miles. This model was a non A/C car from the factory with 3.08's. At an elevation of 1210'(PRP) it attained a mph of 97. and some change. This was full weight, sway bar in-tact, spare tire and jack, and 1/2 tank of Sunoco 93. 3 mods were made to the sn-95. Adv. timing, air silencer/horn deleted, and serpentine belt pulled. I was really impressed with the horsepower it was making(never dyno tested it) from the trap speed and vehicle weight. Especially, since the weight increase, "restrictive" upper intake, and the less aggressive tune in the computer.

I would have liked to add a steeper gear, slicks, longtubes, off road x, a cat-back, pull so:thmbsup: me weight out of it and see how deep in the 13's it would have gone.

[Killercanary]

I hated to see your car go Joe. Was it a GTS? It sounds like it.

Its no secret that the 94-95's hold a special place in my heart and I LOVE seeing them go fast and change people's minds about them.

We do have a number of quick ones here! The EEC in the 94-95's also has a bad wrap as it was a little more touchy than the previous fox's EEC. The biggest difference is the 94-95 EEC is load based rather than RPM based like the fox's. The load is determined mostly via the MAF, this is important to understand because when we start running larger injectors and "calibrated" MAF's you are changing the load, and load is used in all spark and fuel maps in the EEC. A calibrated mass air sensor is nothing more than a meter that has been modified to alter the output voltage of the MAF to the EEC to trick the EEC to think there is less air coming in than there really is... this makes the EEC cut back on the pulse width and therefore deliver less fuel, but since the injector is larger than the stock unit more fuel is actually supplied.

The major turning hurdle for the 94-95's comes when a new cam is added. When a cam is added with a shorter than stock LSA the EEC often has a hard time finding an idle. It will surge up and down until it finally stalls. There is a lot of speculation as to why this occurs, but the easiest fix is to simply bump the idle speed with a tuning devise like a chip/tweecer/eec tuner, etc.

[yeahloh95]

yeah what paul said ..:iagree: i had mine out this weekend and just because i had the to jump start it it ran better than the last time i had it out:rolleyes:

[Steve-0]

The 1994-1995 5-Liters have/had a stigma attached to them from day one. Ford added weight for the 1994 model year and bumped power over the 1993 model. However, the 3.08's struggled even more to get the portly fox4 up and running. I have had the opportunity to race and document a 1994 that I acquired with a scant 18,300 miles. This model was a non A/C car from the factory with 3.08's. At an elevation of 1210'(PRP) it attained a mph of 97. and some change. This was full weight, sway bar in-tact, spare tire and jack, and 1/2 tank of Sunoco 93. 3 mods were made to the sn-95. Adv. timing, air silencer/horn deleted, and serpentine belt pulled. I was really impressed with the horsepower it was making(never dyno tested it) from the trap speed and vehicle weight. Especially, since the weight increase, "restrictive" upper intake, and the less aggressive tune in the computer.

I would have liked to add a steeper gear, slicks, longtubes, off road x, a cat-back, pull so:thmbsup: me weight out of it and see how deep in the 13's it would have gone.


Hey, thats what I ran in our 95 GT almost exactly.... at the time we had a bbk cai, bbk h-pipe with cats, flowmaster cat back, and BFG drag radials, car has most power options and is at stock weight with 17" buillits, and the 3.08 gears. Hopefully it will have more power soon, as long as Dad gets on the ball!:yes:

Edit: it made the power in my sig with those mods.... bone stock, it made 198rwhp, and 269rwtq.

[Screemin3o2]

I feel a little sad that technically, I won't be able to join in the fast 94-95's on here in the future since most of you guys are still running the EFI 5.0l and I'm not doing anymore to mine. But I guess since I have a strong sentimental value to mine and even if I could get half of what I payed for it and what I have put into it, I'll have this car forever so I might as well take it as far as I can.

[Pure Stock]

I hated to see your car go Joe. Was it a GTS? It sounds like it.

Its no secret that the 94-95's hold a special place in my heart and I LOVE seeing them go fast and change people's minds about them.

We do have a number of quick ones here! The EEC in the 94-95's also has a bad wrap as it was a little more touchy than the previous fox's EEC. The biggest difference is the 94-95 EEC is load based rather than RPM based like the fox's. The load is determined mostly via the MAF, this is important to understand because when we start running larger injectors and "calibrated" MAF's you are changing the load, and load is used in all spark and fuel maps in the EEC. A calibrated mass air sensor is nothing more than a meter that has been modified to alter the output voltage of the MAF to the EEC to trick the EEC to think there is less air coming in than there really is... this makes the EEC cut back on the pulse width and therefore deliver less fuel, but since the injector is larger than the stock unit more fuel is actually supplied.

The major turning hurdle for the 94-95's comes when a new cam is added. When a cam is added with a shorter than stock LSA the EEC often has a hard time finding an idle. It will surge up and down until it finally stalls. There is a lot of speculation as to why this occurs, but the easiest fix is to simply bump the idle speed with a tuning devise like a chip/tweecer/eec tuner, etc.

Pual,

What actually identifies or is significant when trying to identify a GTS?


How were you able to "improve" drivability considering you are/were running a custom cam? Was the LSA kept near stock specs?

[Killercanary]

Jonny, are you really saying that you are leaving your car alone and not doing anything else to it??? If so you have more restraint than anyone I know. :ohno:






Pual,

What actually identifies or is significant when trying to identify a GTS?


How were you able to "improve" drivability considering you are/were running a custom cam? Was the LSA kept near stock specs?

In a nutshell the GTS was the stripped down lightweight "LX" version of the 94-95 mustang. It was a options delete package, and if your car was one it was VERY rare as there were only 25 vibrant red GTS's ever made. They had V6 cloth seats, no fog lights, no rear wing, and some other option deletes that I can't remember right now. The GTS was only offered in 94-95 and I think it was option code 248a if memory serves me right.


Well, I did a little more searching while I was typing this and found the following...


The Mustang GTS- When less is really more!

Mustang enthusiasts are familiar with the SN-95 Mustang Cobra and the speciality vehicles produced by Saleen, Steeda, Roush and a few others. Some are even aware of the turbocharged 4 cylinder SVO Mustang's of the mid 80's. True rarity of these cars is not dictated by how many people are aware of their existence or how much money is needed to put one into an owners garage. Rarity is based on uniqueness and production numbers. The Mustang GTS is a prime example of these qualities.

What exactly is a Mustang GTS? To make it simple, think of it as a throwback to the old Mustang LX's of the pre-SN-95 era. GTS' came standard with the basic equipment that made a Mustang a GT. This included the HO 302cid pushrod V-8 powerplant, Borg-Warner T-5 manual transmission and a Traction-Lok axle. Obvious external characteristics of a GTS are the absence of a rear decklid spoiler, lack of fog lamps in the front airdam and 16"x7" 5 spoke SN-95 "waffle" pony rims. Factory original GTS' will have the "Mustang GT" logo embossed on the rear bumper cover, as is the case on standard GT's, and "Mustang GT" badging on the front fenders. Dual 2.25" stainless steel tail pipes exit the back.

Inside the passenger compartment the GTS Mustang shares the same amenities as the base V-6 Mustang. Seats are cloth and only the drivers side, 4-way power adjustable is an option. Windows and door locks are manual. Only the driver and passenger side mirrors are powered. Air conditioning and an AM/FM stereo cassette player are standard. Visor mirrors are non-illuminated, as opposed to illuminated like the GT and convertible Mustang's. The instrument pod is the only interior amenity borrowed from the GT (7000rpm redline tach, 150mph speedometer, fuel, volt, oil, and temp gauges.)
As a side note, all options on V6 models were also available on the GTS. These options are easily broken down into two categories. Package Group 1 consisted of power windows, door locks and remote decklid release(standard on GT and convertible.) Group 2 consisted of cruise control, dual illuminated visor mirrors (standard on GT and convertible) and AM/FM stereo cassette player with premium sound. 4-wheel antilock brakes, an AODE transmission*, and remote keyless entry* were also options. Customers were able to order GTS' from the factory with as little or as many options as they wanted. Options were also available at the dealer, on request of the purchaser.
Ford did away with the GTS designation in 1996, with 1995 being the only year a true GTS model existed, replacing it with the 248A option package, which deleted many things from the car and made it comperable to the GTS. This package continued to be offered until the end of the 1998 model year. As of late, Ford does not plan to offer a stripped version of the current Mustang GT


As for my cam, it definitely gave me fits when I first installed it. Its LSA is 110* I use an EEC Tuner on my car and with it I am able to adjust a ton of stuff. Pulse width and idle speed are what made the biggest difference in getting it to idle. If I set the idle to 850rpms it has no issues.

[Rio94gt]

I love my little red headed stepchild. I just love that every time i have to buy an eftermarket part, there usually is a 1994-1995 adaptor to go with it.

[gmkillr]

I thought the GTS was only made in 95, not 94, but I could be wrong. I think they made them in 96 too.

[Screemin3o2]

Paul, no way in hell do I have that kind of restraint. I just meant I won't be modding the 302 anymore. Its coming out and it will be strictly a track car. I figure with some more learning and of course when the money is there it can be done in a few years.

[Mater]

I thought the GTS was only made in 95, not 94, but I could be wrong. I think they made them in 96 too.

i had one,a 96 & it was orange:hyper:

[Pure Stock]

i had one,a 96 & it was orange:hyper:

I heard you sold it because it was super quick:jump:

[Mater]

I heard you sold it because it was super quick:jump:

:rollingfloorrlol:

[Pure Stock]

:rollingfloorrlol:

Laugh all you want, mid 14's is super quik for a STOCKER!!!!!!:rotflol:

[yeahloh95]

yeah and low 15's is super quick for a stock:cutie: small block chevy :thmbsup:

[Mater]

yeah and low 15's is super quick for a stock:cutie: small block chevy :thmbsup:

ls1 & lturd's went lows 13's & high 12's,enough this is a very nice stang site!:highfive:

[Pure Stock]

ls1 & lturd's went lows 13's & high 12's,enough this is a very nice stang site!:highfive:


Read about LS1's doing that, BUT LT1's???????:rolleyes:

[Rodeheaver's]

wow, those are some neat facts, although i found a few of those flaws on customer cars prior to reading that...