ModernMuscleCars.net - Modern Muscle Cars Archive

Pages: 1

94-98 Cobra
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: RiceKill3r

What year between 94-98 Cobras respond the best to mods, and have the best factory suspension set ups?

Also, I've also been looking into a fox 1990 Cobra. Are those any good?

Posted by: EvilLS1

I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as a 1990 fox body Cobra.. They made one in 1993 though.

As for the other years, the 94-95 models are 5.0s and they have a big aftermarket, but I believe the 97 & 98 models are quicker in stock trim.

Posted by: JustaV6

97&98 are the best to mod

Posted by: Grape Ape

The 5.0's respond the most to basic boltons, but they aren't really quick to begin with. As stated, the 94-95 are 5.0's and 96-up are 4.6L's. The 4.6's love superchargers, but the biggest problem most people run into with the later models is the returnless fuel systems.

There was no 1990 Cobra. 1993 was the 1st model of it's kind, regarding the engine used, etc.

The suspension was tweaked in 94-up models and never got much better, but post 95's had less noticeble dive when on the brakes hard and the brakes on Cobras were larger on those(SN-95's) than on the Fox body. Overall, if you're looking to get a Mustang,the later bodies are better, but 94-95's were factory slugs by comparison to most other post 84 V8's models. Value is better with the SN-95, save afew low production models.

Posted by: StoneFox

Personaly I like the 93 Cobra.

Posted by: gunstar34

1993 was the first year the cobra was produced, with the exception of the 03 cobra, 98 is the best cobra made.

just my 2 cents!

Posted by: GT500

why is a '98 cobra better then like a '99 cobra..? im pretty sure the '99 was the last year till they got the new look which they have today. Did the '99 weight more? only thing i can think of

Posted by: 28

I think they had a diff. fuel set-up....Returnless,I think....

And the 96-98 are all equally good ....Only difference(noticeable)was that the 98 had a little more aggressive comp. tune....Easily fixed with a diff. chip...

Posted by: Grape Ape

The 99 Cobra made about 40 more hp than the 98. Ford claimed 20hp at the time, but dyno results show it was more. It also had IRS, and an upgraded suspension system with stiffer spring rates, unlike earlier models. The body changed in 99, so it's got the "sharper" looking edges. just like newer Mustangs. They weigh about the same, but IRS does make the 99 and newer Cobras a little heavier.. They handle better and are definitely quicker(.5 from 0-60) than the 98 was.

Posted by: gunstar34

Quote:


	Originally posted by GT500 why is a '98 cobra better then like a '99 cobra..? im pretty sure the '99 was the last year till they got the new look which they have today. Did the '99 weight more? only thing i can think of

They did change the body style in '99, but they advertised one HP but when put the the dyno in dyno'd less then what was advertised so there was a recall and they put on a borla exhaust on all 99 cobras to make up the diffrence.

Posted by: SVOno5oh

Actually, the '99 Cobra was the hp problem year. They made less hp than the '98s until the silent recall "fix." Don't buy a '99. If you want a new one, get an '03 and don't screw around.

If you want a '94-'98, go with a '94/'95 or a '98. The '96s had cooling problems. The '97s were DOHC 4.6s like the '96s with the cooling problem fixed. The '98s had nicer wheels, cooler colors, and a better computer. The '98 will also have less miles. DOHC 4.6s don't really have much of an aftermarket. The engine was made for 3 years prior to intake manifold and cylinder head changes in '99. You can get very custom aftermarket parts, but they cost a lot. I used to have a '97.

The '94/5 has the 5.0, which is a better platform for mods.

The '94-'98 Cobras all have the same brakes and suspension. The brakes are awesome, and the suspension pretty much blows but does well considering its mediocre design.

I wish I would've bought the black '95 Cobra I could've instead of waiting and getting the '97. I also wish I'd have waited one more year and got a '98 in Atlantic Blue.

If you want to go quicker for less, and have a better suspension, get a used LS1 F car.

Posted by: 28

What are you talking about the modular not having much of an aftermarket?Maybe not compared to the 5.0,but there is plenty to have on the 4.6.....And the cooling problems on the 96's was not as common as made out to be anyway....It was blown way out of proportion.....Most 96 owners I've conversated with have had no cooling problems on their cars.....Not saying it didn't occur.Just not that common of a problem...Maybe if you live in a hot ass place like Arizona or somethin....And the 96 to 98 have the same puter,just different tune(98 was only 10 to 15 ponies stronger than 96)...A fix that a chip will take care of...And yea,don't get a 99..Someone here wrote they had 40 horses over the 98...NOT.....Like SVO said...they came with less from factory..:roll:..Oh,and the 94-95 were the slowest and weakest from factory stock out of all the Cobras...But they have the 5.0,wich is a modders dream...Good luck

Posted by: 28

Posted by: SVOno5oh

Quote:


	Originally posted by 28 What are you talking about the modular not having much of an aftermarket?Maybe not compared to the 5.0,but there is plenty to have on the 4.6.....And the cooling problems on the 96's was not as common as made out to be anyway....It was blown way out of proportion.....Most 96 owners I've conversated with have had no cooling problems on their cars.....Not saying it didn't occur.Just not that common of a problem...Maybe if you live in a hot ass place like Arizona or somethin....And the 96 to 98 have the same puter,just different tune(98 was only 10 to 15 ponies stronger than 96)...A fix that a chip will take care of...And yea,don't get a 99..Someone here wrote they had 40 horses over the 98...NOT.....Like SVO said...they came with less from factory..:roll:..Oh,and the 94-95 were the slowest and weakest from factory stock out of all the Cobras...But they have the 5.0,wich is a modders dream...Good luck

Stop your whining. I could give a crap about you and your '96. Everything I said was true. The 4.6 has a small aftermarket, especially the '96-8 DOHC engines. They have the smallest aftermarket of any V8 put in a Mustang of all time. That is a fact. You can't change it. So, get over it.

Posted by: VETTKLR

Let's keep the bullshit in the Pit, Anthony. Ricekill3r wants some advice. You posted what you thought, now let everyone else post theirs.

Posted by: 28

Quote:


	Originally posted by SVOno5oh Stop your whining. I could give a crap about you and your '96. Everything I said was true. The 4.6 has a small aftermarket, especially the '96-8 DOHC engines. They have the smallest aftermarket of any V8 put in a Mustang of all time. That is a fact. You can't change it. So, get over it.

Dude,what the hell?

Your Miata slip up your ass and rust or something...And your posts are lies...all lies I say

Posted by: 65fairlane

I think the 255 probably has a smaller aftermarket than the DOHC 4.6.

Posted by: VETTKLR

Quote:


	Originally posted by 65fairlane I think the 255 probably has a smaller aftermarket than the DOHC 4.6.

true, true...instigator!!!

Posted by: cswrench

Settle down boys! Try to keep it civil will ya?

Posted by: Grape Ape

Quote:


	Originally posted by 65fairlane I think the 255 probably has a smaller aftermarket than the DOHC 4.6.

Not even I was going to touch that one..

Of course, there's not much 390 aftermarket, and Ford didn't sell it, but they did use a Cammer 427 in a couple Mustangs... Prolly not much aftermarket there, not to mention the 5.4L... low "A/M" there too.. And the 260 doesn't have much A/M either...

Posted by: SVOno5oh

Quote:


	Originally posted by VETTKLR Let's keep the bullshit in the Pit, Anthony. Ricekill3r wants some advice. You posted what you thought, now let everyone else post theirs.

Since when are facts BS? I said the '94/5 has more of an aftermarket, and they cost less. They all have the same brakes and suspension until '99 when you get IRS. I said the '99 had the low power output recall problem. I said the '96 had cooling problems, and the '97s had a cooling upgrade. The '96s got it as a recall. The '98s have better wheels, better colors and a better computer. It's not like any of this is a secret. I said if you want to buy a '96-8, get a '98 as it is a better car with less miles. I also said if you want a newer than '98, get an '03 and don't waste the time or money. If you want cheap with a bigger aftermarket, get the 5.0. I also said, the '96-8 4.6 DOHC has a smaller aftermarket (than any of the cars that are OT in this thread since you guys don't understand context).

A 260 is the first SBF after the original 221. The aftermarket is huge. You can also get aftermarket heads for a 390 FE series engine, and you cannot for a DOHC motor. You can buy Ford's later '99 offerings, but they aren't aftermarket. You can actually get a few different aftermarket FE offerings, more cams, more intakes, etc. for the FE. So you "Ford" guys are wrong about the aftermarket for the 260 and the 390. And people wonder why I'm no longer a "Ford" guy. Ford guy's don't even know their own shit for the most part. A '96-8 DOHC is a great car to put a blower on if you like seeing piston #7 in pieces, but it'll make lots of power until the piston goes (it will). It has no aftermarket hardware outside simple bolt on crap.

I also said if you wanted to go fast for less, get a used LS1 F car, which is also true. Is that what you Ford pansies are all upset about?

Gotta love Ford people..... Ford where truth = BS. Ford, over 100 years of denying reality. Congrats.

So why don't you all actually refute what I said with facts, or take a nice big can of STFU.

Posted by: Dr.Bleed

Not a ford guy anymore, yet you drive a mazda... I'm a bit

Posted by: 65fairlane

I don't think that my statement was B.S. and since it was not addressed in your reply I will assume that you have excepted it as fact as well.

Edit: I didn't think that they ever put a 260 in a mustang. I thought the first ones had an I-6 then the V-8 ones came out for the 65 model year with the 289 option.

Posted by: 96cobra

i may be a little late for the people actually in this conversation but i just bought a 96 cobra and after 3 days replaced the water pump. it has 83k miles. after that though it has stayed really cool and has had no problems at all. i agree about not being able to mod the 4.6 that much. mine has a bbk throttle body, k&n intake, flowmasters, and eibach springs and some kind of polyurethaine? bushings but i don't know what kind. also a bbk strut tower brace in the front. i was wondering if anyone may know about the power seats not working. mine is stuck all the way back and nothing electrical works on it. i have checked fuses and they were all good? any suggestions? thanks.

Posted by: Grape Ape

Search for relays and trace wiring back to fuseable links that it surely has. Afterall, they make it break, so why not use them?

Oh, and

is an understatement.

Posted by: 96cobra

ok, thanks. i will try that. i know i was way late. last night was the 1st time i had ever been here. thanks though.

Posted by: damnit

cool

Posted by: BlackLight01

Quote:


	Originally posted by 65fairlane I didn't think that they ever put a 260 in a mustang. I thought the first ones had an I-6 then the V-8 ones came out for the 65 model year with the 289 option.

Didn't the 64 1/2 Mustang have a 260? I could be wrong.

I may be partial since I had one, but I always liked the '98 Cobras better. There were a few things that were unique to that one year. The clock pod was deleted on the dash, and it had the best looking wheels, IMO.

Posted by: BlackLight01

Google is awesome.

http://www.svs.com/zim/mustang/64engine.html

Posted by: 65fairlane

I guess they did have the V-8 in the 64-1/2 models. How many of you guys have ever encountered a 5-bolt bellhousing sbf?

Posted by: Grape Ape

The 5 bolt bell(I never had one) was used in both the 221 and the 260, and 289 but changed to a 6bolt for the 289 after 1964,

The 260 was used before the 289 and, while some parts are definitely interchangeable, the 289 block was different than the 260 and the 302 was different from both. There are many things about the early engines that make most "302 parts" unsuitable for the earlier engines due to a string of changes in everything, from the block to the crank and rods to the heads. In other words, the performance end of a 260 or 221 is basically nil. The biggest reason for that is likely in the fact that you can't even bore the engine to 4.0" without(more than likely) hitting a water jacket. 289 and 302 blocks started that way(4.0) and that's a big help.

Posted by: Nazman

Gents,

Sorry for jumping here at the last minute but I just have to talk about the 99 Cobras and the "FIX".

The dreaded "FIX" as everyone calls it is actually Ford Program Number 99B27. It incorporated an Intake Manifold change (either a "Greed Dot" (Accid Ported or Dipped) or a "Blue Dot" (Extrude Hone). The "Green Dot" proved to have just a little more volume on the runners than the "Blue Dot" but on the other hand the "Blue Dot" have smother runners. They make about the same power.

Also, Program 99B27 included a revised Cat-Back with 2.25 in pipes and better flowing mufflers. The original pre-fix cat back was a 2.25 in as well but it was heavily crimp in several areas. The also changed the Computer Program to accomodate the better flowing manifold and catback as well as some other modifications.

Lastly, they changed the idler pulleys as well.

Just to give you an example of what numbers a 99 Cobra put down before and after the fix, I'll use mine as an example:

Before Fix: 264RWHP/268RWTQ (that's about 303HP/308TQ

After the Fix: 290RWHP/293RWTQ (that's about 333HP/336TQ)

A gain of about 25HP/TQ, not bad. That was stock with the exeption of a K&N Replacement Filter and 3.73 Gears. To put it into perspective, my buddy Oscar's 98 Cobra put down 273RWTQ/269RWTQ with a K&N, Bassani X, 3.73 Gears and Flowmasters.

Here is the Before and After Fix Dyno Sheet:

http://www.nazman.stangnet.com/My%2...After%20Fix.jpg

Now, after many mods the car makes 333RWHP and 331RWTQ with Cats, and no long tube header.

Who said that the 99 Cobras were weak?

Naz

Posted by: 28

No doubt they run great...But only after getting the fix.There's still some who have not gone in and had it done believe it or not...I've run into a couple(on internet)asking for info on what to do about it...

Posted by: Tang

Quote:


	I guess they did have the V-8 in the 64-1/2 models. How many of you guys have ever encountered a 5-bolt bellhousing sbf?

Yes, the 64 1/2 had a 260, but they had generators insteads of alternators. I seen a 5 bolt bellhousing, it was on a '64 Fairlane. Never messed with it any

Posted by: Nazman

Quote:


	Originally posted by 28 No doubt they run great...But only after getting the fix.There's still some who have not gone in and had it done believe it or not...I've run into a couple(on internet)asking for info on what to do about it...

I have to agree with you. I have meet a few who have not done it for one reason or another.

I'm glad that Ford has it right with the Mach 1, the 03 Cobra are great as well along with the Z06s!

Naz

Posted by: SVOno5oh

Quote:


	Originally posted by Tang Yes, the 64 1/2 had a 260, but they had generators insteads of alternators. I seen a 5 bolt bellhousing, it was on a '64 Fairlane. Never messed with it any

Yes the 260 was in the Mustang..... and you silly guys think I don't know Fords. Maybe that is why I don't drive them as much anymore huh?

The 221 was the first small block Ford. It has the same bore spacing, bladditty blah as the 260, 289, 302 and even the 351. They can all share heads. The 221-302 can share intake manifolds. The 351 uses a taller block and needs a wider manifold. They can all share cams. The blocks are different for the for the < 260 and 289+ versions of the 8.2" deckheight small block, but they interchange easily. I personally installed a new 302 in a '65 with a 289, painted it to look like the 289 from '65 used the correct valve covers and manifold, and there is no way in hell you can tell it isn't a factory stock 289 without running block numbers. This engine has tons of mods available.... intakes, heads, cams, rods, cranks, stroker cranks... you name it.

As for PNS aka Grape Nuts saying the 390 family doesn't have mods, he is an utter dipshit. The 390 is an FE. You can take a 352, 390, 406, 410, 428, or 427 and modify the hell out of them. There are heads (aluminum, several), cams (tons), cranks, stroker cranks, rods, you name it. You can take a 390 out to 450+ cubic inches with boring and stroking for cheap these days.

For all you "Ford experts" that seem to be doubting my knowledge, tell me how in the hell you get a 406 and 410 from the FE family, and which one of the two was Ford's first racing big block. And then what in the hell is the difference between the 427 and 428 and why the different designations for 1 cubic inch? Then for grins what is the biggest you can do displacement wise using all factory Ford parts made prior to 1971 and what parts do you need.

Then the doubters and PNS can kiss my ass.

As for the Cobras, the '98 was the best of the '96-8 grouping. It had the best computer and that made a huge difference at the dragstrip. The '96s had the cooling problems and got new water pumps and radiators.

The '99 was a great idea bringing IRS and the engine mods were supposed to be good for some big power increases. Well the engine fizzled. The '99 engine intake and heads are very different from the '98 and prior. Since Ford is still using the '99+ heads, this makes the roots blower and stuff for the '96 and prior cards a PITA unless you want the KB kit which isn't as good as Ford's stuff.

They are nice cars for the price, but they don't corner well, have the ride height of a lot of SUVs, and they aren't built very well. If you want to go fast for cheap and drive a Ford though, they are good cars. I just don't want another one. I'd rather buy a GT for a whole lot less, put on a turbo and have fun munching Cobras, if I were to go the Ford route again. I had a '95 GT that was 80% paid off that I traded for my '97 Cobra. I still regret that! I should've kept the GT. I could have it 351 stroker powered and much faster, paid off long ago and plenty of cash in my pocket.

If I were to do the Cobra thing again... I'd want a white '94/'5. I'd make it look like the R with the wheels and hood and go with a 408 cubic inch Windsor underhood. Built properly, it'd have no problem with most cars and be dead stock reliable.

Posted by: RacingJason

Quote:


	Originally posted by SVOno5oh And then what in the hell is the difference between the 427 and 428 and why the different designations for 1 cubic inch? Then for grins what is the biggest you can do displacement wise using all factory Ford parts made prior to 1971 and what parts do you need.

427- large bore (4.23) , 390 stroke (3.78)

428- smaller bore (4.13) 410 stroke(3.98)

Stroker FE? 427 block, 428 crank(447" unless you bore it)

And you're still an idiot, and I still think you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about IC engines.

Posted by: Tang

Quote:


	For all you "Ford experts" that seem to be doubting my knowledge, tell me how in the hell you get a 406 and 410 from the FE family,

406 = 4.13 bore x 3.78 stroke
410= 4.05 bore x 3.98 stroke

Quote:


	, and which one of the two was Ford's first racing big block.

The 406, it came about in 1962 after the 390's had to compete against the 409 Chevy's in 1961. The 406 came with 11.4 compression and rated at 385hp with a 4-barrel, and 405hp with three 2-barrels.

Although I'd say the 352 was the first racing big block, didn't it go Nascrap racing ?

Quote:


	And then what in the hell is the difference between the 427 and 428 and why the different designations for 1 cubic inch? Then for grins what is the biggest you can do displacement wise using all factory Ford parts made prior to 1971 and what parts do you need.

427 4.23 x 3.78
428 4.13 x 3.98

You can get a 454ci, with a 427 bore took over .030 and using a 428 crank.

Posted by: Tang

Quote:


	The 221 was the first small block Ford. It has the same bore spacing, bladditty blah as the 260, 289, 302 and even the 351. They can all share heads. The 221-302 can share intake manifolds. The 351 uses a taller block and needs a wider manifold. They can all share cams. The blocks are different for the for the < 260 and 289+ versions of the 8.2" deckheight small block, but they interchange easily.

221 and 260 blocks were cast differently, and can't be bored out to 4".

The heads from a 289-351W will NOT go on a 221, sure they will bolt on, but the valves won't open due to the 221 having a 3.50" bore. I think they will work on a 260 because the 260-302 (exc. Boss) had 1.78/1.45 valves. The 221's had tiny combustion chambers, something in the 40cc range, but the intake ports are a tad shorter on the 221/260 vs the 289-351.

Bellhousings, pre '65 SBF's had the 5 bolt bell housing, between 65 and 66 Ford switched to the 6 bolt we're used to.
221-260 all have 5 bolts
302-351W all have 6 bolts
289 can have either 5 or 6 bolts depending on when it was cast.

221= 3.50 bore 2.87 stroke
260= 3.80 x 2.87
289= 4.00 x 2.87
302= 4.00 x 3.00
351= 4.00 x 3.50

I don't know what I did to piss you off, but I never claimed to be a Ford Expert. I assume you were talking about me since you quoted me above.

Posted by: RacingJason

Here is an easy trivia question. I am sure SVO will get this in 10 seconds flat since he is the end all authority on IC engines.

Name this engine:

4" bore.

3.94" of valve head diameter.

What engine is it? When did they make it?

If you know PM me. I want to give SVO the chance to look around on the internet for the answer.

Posted by: SVOno5oh

Why would I bother to look? 99% of this is about pissing off idiots like you, and you're pissed. Point made.

What some of you fools did was say there wasn't a 260 in a stang after I said there was. And then some of you claimed there were no modifications for 260s or 390s all of which is utter crap.

Wanna play internet look ups and stupid crap like that then fine... what's the difference between a 391 FT and a 390, and what is involved in putting a 391 crank in a 390 and why in the hell would anyone want to do it?

Posted by: RacingJason

Quote:


	Originally posted by SVOno5oh Why would I bother to look? 99% of this is about pissing off idiots like you, and you're pissed. Point made. What some of you fools did was say there wasn't a 260 in a stang after I said there was. And then some of you claimed there were no modifications for 260s or 390s all of which is utter crap. Wanna play internet look ups and stupid crap like that then fine... what's the difference between a 391 FT and a 390, and what is involved in putting a 391 crank in a 390 and why in the hell would anyone want to do it?

Wow...you bought an FE engine building handbook on ebay. Good for you. Now answer the question dumbass.

Oh and for the record: Nobody believes the "I do this to piss off idiots, and now your pissed" line. It is, however, rather humorous that you say that EVERY time someone flames on you. Defense mechanism? Get some spine.

Posted by: 65fairlane

Gentlemen, this is quickly turning into a thread for the pit. If you want to ask engine trivia fine, if you want to flame, that is not so fine...

Posted by: Tang

the 391 was really no diff. than a 390, that was just to distinguish it from a 390 car motor. The 391 had a steel crank, but they were not cross drilled, and the snout has to be turned down for car balancers and such.

Dont forget the 361, same as a 360 only with a steel crank and bigger snout,, minus cross drilling.

Posted by: Tang

Quote:


	Gentlemen, this is quickly turning into a thread for the pit. If you want to ask engine trivia fine, if you want to flame, that is not so fine...

Good call, you beat me to it

Posted by: 65fairlane

Quote:


	Originally posted by Tang the 391 was really no diff. than a 390, that was just to distinguish it from a 390 car motor. The 391 had a steel crank, but they were not cross drilled, and the snout has to be turned down for car balancers and such.

Aren't the heads and intake different than the car ones as well?

Posted by: Tang

I think they may be slightly taller, but I'm not 100% about that, so no quotes please.

Posted by: RacingJason

Well times up. Tang was really close with his guess of a 351 cleveland. It is in fact a 1969 Boss 302 engine. And the only way to fit those valves in there are to angle them (known as "canted valves"). They used smaller valves when the 70 Boss 302 was released. Ford adapted the not yet released 351 C heads to the 302 block to compete with Chevrolets rip snorting 302 in 5 liter T/A racing.

So now you know the rest of the story...

Oh yeah- SVO is still an idiot.

Posted by: Tang

Damn it ! I forgot about the '69 Boss having bigger valves. I do remember the '70 heads were actually better for the street driven crowd. The '69 heads had 2.23" intake valves and , in '70 they went to the 2.19" intakes.

Man how could I forget that.

Posted by: 28

Talk about a Thread hijack...

Posted by: RacingJason

Quote:


	Originally posted by Tang Damn it ! I forgot about the '69 Boss having bigger valves. I do remember the '70 heads were actually better for the street driven crowd. The '69 heads had 2.23" intake valves and , in '70 they went to the 2.19" intakes. Man how could I forget that.

That was a good guess though. Most people think it is some old Hemi.

Back to the Forums