I'm not all that seriously considering one, but at the price point I have budgetted for my next car, I've noticed I can get into a 6 cylinder Mustang.
Can folks with knowledge/experience give me the Pros and Cons of the 3.8 versus the 4 liter? This car will be a cruiser, with perhaps some suspension mods, the engine will remain "stock" with maybe a CAI and/or exhaust mods.
4.0 has more power, But I have heard about some timing chain issues. 3.8 is just about bullet proof. 99 and up is split port. thats one the one you want
V6 F-body is superior in every single measurable way.
Do you mean the 3.8L V6 that was used from '94-'03? Or the 3.7L that's used in the '11 and newer?
There's also a 3.9L in the '04s which is just a mildly worked 3.8L.
If you're talking 3.8L, make damn sure to get a '99 or newer. Talking 165hp in the old engine vs 195hp in the new.
Of course, if you're talking 4.0L, that means fox-chassis vs S197, and the S197 is a better car in every conceivable way, though it is a bit bigger/heavier.
If you're talking 3.7L vs 4.0L in the S197s, the 3.7L is a tremendous jump forward over the 4.0.
Did the 4 liter ever come in the older (SN95?) Mustangs?
The SN95s and S197s are very different cars. Which ones are you looking at?
Edit: The good Reverend beat me to it...
Yeah - you're gonna have to say what year you are considering. It makes a BIG difference.
Didn't the older 3.8L ones have some head gasket issues?
+1 for the f body being better in every way
corytate wrote: +1 for the f body being better in every way
3.8L F-bodies are garbage compared to a 2006+ mustang with the 4.0L and the V6 track pak thing. We have a guy that time attacks a bone stock mushtang really friggin' quick with that combo. No way a 2002 V6 camaro could keep up.
Best V6 F-body is the 89 Anniversary Trans Am, 3.8L GNX power in better handling chassis. Too bad they only made 1500 of them.
corytate wrote: +1 for the f body being better in every way
Again - it depends on the years in play.
V6 Mustangs have won the last two SCCA Showroom Stock C races at the Run-Offs.
This years race:
http://www.speedcasttv.com/#/races/273
cghstang wrote: Did the 4 liter ever come in the older (SN95?) Mustangs?
Nope. SN95s had 3.8s and the one-year 3.9L (which for all intents and purposes is a 3.8).
4.0 was introduced in the Mustang with the S197.
Insofar as headgasket issues, I know those were common in early-90s Thunderbirds, but if the Mustangs shared that issue it was resolved by the time they went to the split-port 3.8L with the New Edge ('99-'04).
I can't speak for the engines, but stock-to-stock, a 3rd or 4th gen F-body is certainly much better suspended than a fox-chassis ('79-'04) Mustang. Where the fox mustang runs the crappiest 4-link every put under a car and an inboard-spring McPherson up front, the 3rd-gen F-body runs a torque arm out back and McPs up front (inboard spring, like the Mustang), and the 4th gen runs a torque arm out back and has SLA up front. Mustang chassis is wet-noodle, not sure about the F-body's.
For the S197 Mustang ('05 to current), the car was effectively built from a clean sheet. The chassis is MUCH stiffer, the front suspension is coil-over and the rear is a 3-link/panhard bar. Change spring and damper rates and you can match what's under a Boss 302 (and we all know how well that works). The biggest issue with an S197 V6 is that near as I know they all came from the factory with an open diff, and being that it's the 7.5" rear instead of the 8.8" found in everything else, you're not just gonna go pull an LSD out of the junkyard (though they're still easily found, this IS a Mustang you're talking about, lol).
My opinion though is if you can afford a New Edge V6, you can afford an older GT with the 5.0 (up through '95), which will only cost you a mpg or two around town, and get the same mileage on the highway (Mustang V6s have traditionally sucked where mileage is concerned). You could probably also afford an early-style SN95 with the mod motor ('96-'98), however the early 4.6Ls are known to be dogs and are more expensive to work on. I'd also take any S197 over any fox-chassis car that's not a 4v (Cobra, Mach 1).
Yeah, I was about to ask why you were looking at those particular v6 mustangs. You can find Mustang GT's, LX 5.0's, and LT1 Fbodies in the same price range. The only exception to this rule is the new V6 Mustang. That thing kicks ass.
I wouldn't touch a 2004 or earlier V6 Mustang unless you're looking for a serious project to wake the thing up. They're a pretty disappointing drive, especially with an automatic, although I guess forced induction (Supercoupe setup perhaps?) and either a transmission reprogram or a manual trans wouldn't be horrible. It'd also be a lot of effort when V8's are a drop-in.
The S197 4.0 with maybe a little head work and cams could be pretty good perhaps, I don't know, I've never driven one.
My opinion is pretty similar to everyone else's when you put all the pieces together..
All 5spd here.. obviusly. 
94-99 v6 stang, junky and really slow.
93-97 (or so) 3.4 f-body.. not as junky but almost as slow.
~95-02 3.8 f-body, quick, fun to drive, imo. Deceptively quick even..
99-04 3.8 mustang: not terribly slow but it'll probably bother you because the acceleration is still the best thing about the entire car, and its not that good.
05-10 4.0 mustang- quick, torquey, big-ass car, ugly interior imo, but lots of chassis potential.
Of all of them id take the 3.8 f-body by a mile.
I'm picking up a 2006 v6 5-speed mustang soon. I purposely went this route over a GT because (a) I already have another v-8 fox body cobra and a 2007 gt autotragic convertable and (b) frankly, I like the simpler body lines of the v6 over the GT's bodywork. My inspiration is to build a clone (performance wise, not necessarily in the looks department) of the Shelby Terlingua mustang. They put a Vortech supercharger on it, claim it made 375hp at the crank and still weighed > 200lbs less than a GT. We shall see....
ReverendDexter wrote: The biggest issue with an S197 V6 is that near as I know they all came from the factory with an open diff, and being that it's the 7.5" rear instead of the 8.8" found in everything else, you're not just gonna go pull an LSD out of the junkyard (though they're still easily found, this IS a Mustang you're talking about, lol).
marks93cobra wrote:ReverendDexter wrote: The biggest issue with an S197 V6 is that near as I know they all came from the factory with an open diff, and being that it's the 7.5" rear instead of the 8.8" found in everything else, you're not just gonna go pull an LSD out of the junkyard (though they're still easily found, this IS a Mustang you're talking about, lol).There's always this...
Exactly. I wasn't trying to say they didn't exist, just that they aren't like LSDs for 8.8s that you can't spit without hitting. Hence the parenthetical at the end of my post 
I'm fairly sure that a good number of Rangers had limited slip 7.5s.
the only thing a v6 Fbody has over a fox is suspension, PERIOD
In reply to Blitzed306:
I disagree, the 3.8 F-body carried an engine nearly as powerful as the 5.0 and is extremely reliable. That said, I don't like the ergonomics of the F-body at all, with the seat on the floor and doors a yard long.
Oh, and there's also a torsen type diff for the 7.5; http://www.summitracing.com/parts/DTL-912A316/
the only thing a v6 Fbody has over a fox is suspension, PERIOD
Clearly there are some matters of opinion involved.
I disagree, the 3.8 F-body carried an engine nearly as powerful as the 5.0 and is extremely reliable.
Funny how that works, eh? I've driven a stock 5.0/5spd mustang and a stock 3.8/5spd camaro and i enjoyed the camaro a lot more, and it felt just as fast. The mustang failed to live up to expecations and the camaro exceeded them. The 3.8 camaro is also the best (4th gen) camaro for ease of working on, imo
81cpcamaro wrote: Best V6 F-body is the 89 Anniversary Trans Am, 3.8L GNX power in better handling chassis. Too bad they only made 1500 of them.
1550 i think.
I've got a hardtop. Tell people you have a V6 Trans-Am and they start talking to you like you're a retard. "Firstly, a V6 is just a Firebird. Secondly, they didn't use a 3.8 in the 3rd gen.."
pres589 wrote: I disagree, the 3.8 F-body carried an engine nearly as powerful as the 5.0
Which 5.0? The Mustang 302 or the Chevy 305?
You'll need to log in to post.
