Retro Review: 1994 Ford Mustang Cobra

[@SavageListener]

Back in high school in the year 1999 some kid bought a '94 Cobra then traded to a '97 then '93 while working at Safeway. We were jealous. He dropped out to get his GED so he could have more time to get laid. He still works at a Safeway now and stalks women. Don't peak too early, kids.

[@joshn938]

Indeed. Not all of us can be Wooderson or Milner. lol

[@barsaf9989]

igotwhips But does he still have his 93 fox? If so, then he is still cool 😎

[@letsroll2463]

true, all those kids that were in highschool that were so quick to get their cars are stuck with dead end jobs now.

[@cali2468]

Irvin Hoover Except that's not a foxbody.

[@ssimon64]

igotwhips Does he still drive a 90's Mustang? and does he have a mullet? Because that would be legendary!

[@vividvulpe9842]

one of my favorite mustang models

[@TunerGuy_90]

Everything from the 90's is sooooooo much cooler than today!! The music, tv shows, movies, cars, trucks, toys etc etc

[@TunerGuy_90]

hitek9wittafulclip I said cooler. Not better.

[@TunerGuy_90]

hitek9wittafulclip Not everyone is into racing and who's got the most horsepower. Growing up in the 90s and seeing cars like this on the cover of magazines, and thinking about how much times have changed. I love cars, but I always run into someone also trying to prove which one is better, and who has the most hp. Cars would be more interesting if it wasn't for people who constantly think it should be a pissing contest. A Kia is faster. Who cares.

[@man_on_wheelz]

The car sniffs a line of coke every time it brakes

[@andyleo8418]

Well we know what one of your hobbies is...

[@classicv8dude268]

What it’s really doing is sniffing for humans to run over.

[@danielgabriel5539]

Lol

[@angelgjr1999]

Needs them KONI shocks :)

[@styldsteel1]

Long live the 302 Ci!!!

[@IceFoxTrainSpotting]

YES

[@mavadoroaster]

the quality of these reviews are so nostalgic

[@captaintom9521]

I bought a 95 Cobra with a few mods and a chip last month. Love the sound of the Flowmaster. It's fun to drive, and you win some and lose some.

[@takforce06]

Growing up my brother-in-law had a black 95 cobra. It was faster than my brother’s 88 irocz. The torque was fantastic.

[@JBAutomotive794]

They loved the Interior's Duel Cockpit theme so much, they didn't change it for 10 Years!

[@bb2status]

do you guys have a retro review. for the 96-98 Cobra, that would be amazing.

[@Motorweek]

We'll look into it!

[@MorbidThrasher666]

Yes please do as i own a 96 cobra myself.

[@bb2status]

Same i have a 98 cobra all black with only 47k mile! I love the sn-95

[@carfeens1878]

Yes! I own a 97

[@mattcox3373]

They posted one for a 96 cobra and 98 cobra vs ss camaro

[@IndependenceCityMotoring]

The original 5.0 Ford pushrod motor, in a better body style than a foxbody. Best of both worlds.

[@klasseact6663]

WOW...did you see the motion of the body on that braking test, we've come a looooong way in 23 years, damn!

[@kz1000ps]

A lot of nose dive, but like mipmipmipmipmip said there's way worse from the '80s. AND for 1994, to go 60 to zero in 110 feet is actually really, really good and is on par with today's cars.

[@klasseact6663]

kz1000ps braking times are helped a lot because the car isn't over weight AND has large front brakes! 15.0 at 94 mph though, my Abarth is faster than that, LOL!

[@kz1000ps]

Ha, I just checked out Car and Driver's review on the '94 Cobra, and for negative qualities they wrote "squirrely rear suspension, COPIOUS BRAKE DIVE." And to your other point, their verdict is "It's the ultimate Mustang, but it still poses no performance threat to the Z28." Ha!

[@evilone6785]

kz1000ps that's cause those old z28s don't run anymore so no it's not a threat

[@mikepinder8128]

my 96 z has over 200k i drive it everyday gets 21mpg on the highway i love it

[@tsav6952]

Good car for the era.

[@boxerdog5979]

Wow, look at those wheel gaps! This must be the ultra rare 4x4 Cobra ;)

[@joshn938]

Every stock SN95 looks like it has a built-in lift kit. Thank god for lowering springs lol

[@Highgear145]

So much body roll

[@NMTHEGAME]

Got the 1997 I love it my first car had it for 8 years love every minute of the driving time

[@PANTYEATR1]

the car that got me into cars and I fell in love with. it took me 17 years after they came out to get one of my own.

[@CodyFialkowski]

I just got my '94 Cobra about a month or so ago. Other than a cold air intake, the car is bone stock. Is it as fast as a comparable Camaro of the same year? Not even close. Is it still a fun car that's sure to appreciate? Yep.

[@wickedhouston5538]

upgrade the engine

[@chrisdooley6468]

I’ve had a 94 and a 93 Cobra. The 93s were noticeably faster. Weight had a lot to do with it. I ended up putting a built 347ci stroker in the 94 because I wanted to upgrade power and the blocks can’t handle north of 500hp. It’s a great start to Cobras but I really wasn’t happy till I got into my 2000 SVT and my Terminator models. If you’re doing the FBOs I’d put an upgraded BBK throttle body and a cat less Flowmaster exhaust with a true cold air intake. Those gave me good power gains. Good luck

[@slowstang88]

@@chrisdooley6468 Was your 347 built on an aftermarket block?

[@Hawk-hb1xi]

I have a cammed 94 with a few modifications. They are light for what they are. They can definitely be fast.

[@Highgear145]

I remember when this came out my older brother worked at a doctors office and his boss got one brand new 5 spd manual, the best part about it was the sound

[@jamiecinder9412]

The SN95 Mustang is my all-time favorite Mustang generation, but I prefer the "New Edge" version that existed from 1999-2004.

[@Blackout_1692]

how very appropriate MotorWeek a retro review of a Mustang on the 4th of July

[@mustanlab302]

wow that sits high up but I love those mustangs

[@theinvisibledude1141]

Got me a 94 gt so I’m happy :)

[@sidefx996]

Damn I was hoping John would call the spoiler "Oriental" looking. Guess by '94 we moved past that.

[@jflow08]

sidefx996 John is classier than that.

[@nostalgiadad7137]

I wanted one of these so bad. my tiny E-4 pay check said no. The F body twins were faster but no one cared. They went out of production eventually. Leaving the mustang with no real in class competition. The Z, Supra,and others were different cars and even they went nearly extinct. Mustangs have always been turnkey fun and easy to mod.

[@davenhla8195]

eh, no one cared because the F body twins (and GM in general with this type of thing) were nightmare-ish for both reliability and maint. and depending on where you lived could cost significantly more. People like to cite MSRP but dealers had their own ideas about pricing in the time before internet megasites gave everyone nationwide price averages. For instance, late 90's/early 2000's WS6 TA's were sitting at my local dealers for just shy of $40k. Supply, demand, and regional brand loyalty(idiocy) determined a lot when it came to sales back then.

[@cali2468]

Davenhla Speaking on the time when these cars were out, I remember lightly optioned Formula's and Z28's selling for under $20k. The Cobra's were the ones with the ridiculous dealer mark ups, NOT the f-body's.

[@davenhla8195]

Perhaps where you lived. My local dealer had 3 WS6 cars sitting on the lot in fall 2001 for $39k+ on the window sheet. They all sold before Christmas. The dealers set the price as high as they could and still sell it. Camero fanbois in my area had more money than brains and my dealer knew it(small town here)

[@cali2468]

Davenhla 39k? Good gosh. I paid a little over 35k for mine at a lot in Sacramento. T'was a 2002. Had everything but the trunk mounted 12-disc changer. BTW, if your comment was directed towards me, this discussion is about the price of the base V8-powered '94 f-bodies NOT ls1 ram-air cars.

[@davenhla8195]

You overpaid by 6k also. GM MSRP was right around 29k for a well optioned car. Don't feel bad though because market price is market price, and to avoid that kind of stuff usually requires looking hours away, which wasn't as easy to do back in early internet days like 2002 before all the car megasites popped up. I would agree Ford went a bit overboard with the Cobra sticker price for 94/95. However, their mentality at the time was the HP out of a GT was already pushing the boundaries, and adding more(quite a bit more as it was factory under rated) was worthy of an extreme premium to keep production numbers in line. Goes hand in hand with their refusal to put a 351W in the car to answer GM's 350 powered cars. "Can't have another HP war" and all that rubbish. That said, Mustang prices in my region were going for less then window sticker, sometimes quite a lot. 94 GT's were selling for 2-3k under MSRP. There were ads in the paper for 5 speed GT's sitting on lots for 14999. This held over for the Cobra's also, the sticker price is not what they sold for. Unnofficial sources(fan web pages, forums) claim average selling price just under 22k. Ford wanted the new cars out there and over produced. As for the Camaro's, it was similar in 94 to the last model years around here. My best friend's older sister graduated that year, got a full time job and was car shopping. I went over to his house one day that summer and she had a bunch of the dealer materials for the "new" Camaros. They had quoted her 21k for a "loaded" V6 car. 25 and some change for a V8. I know MSRP went up from 93 to 94, but it was a bit insane, and yet there were several new ones tooling around town(one purple one lol that drove it through winter, in WI!) She ended up buying a Dodge Avenger V6(hindsight is 20/20 and all that) So yeah, regionally, my point very much still stands. Camaro fanbois overpaid like heck in my area, and Ford overproduced and the dealers cut the mark ups so they wouldn't get stuck with old inventory.

[@jasonmoreland8155]

I sure enjoy these Retro Reviews!

[@Loachie90]

This is the first time I've seen a 90's mustang that doesn't have oxidized headlights

[@sidefx996]

+Michael Vuong well besides the fact that most idiots don't know how to take care of stuff the Cobras came with more modern looking "clear" headlights that the GT and base models did not.

[@volkspanzer831]

No kidding, this review was made when the car was new.

[@ME-bh9gc]

Well no hes got a point ive seen old foxbodies with mint looking headlights i think its a quality vs cost thing

[@Loachie90]

B W bingo

[@unknownname7426]

Still see these cars on the road all the time. Never ever see camaros or trans ams of the same year...

[@johnathandoe5357]

Holy shit it's a monster truck. Wheel gap is like the Grand Canyon

[@magneto8002]

My '89 5.0 lx ran 14.5 stock. This Cobra was slow.

[@rockyarchambeau5820]

Mag neto my buddy had a 94 cobra 🐍 he ran a 14.2 @96mph ....that was a little slow in the video ,but I live in Texas wonder what the elevation was where they ran ??my other buddy had a 1989 mustang gt ran a 14.6 stock .......

[@nutz4gunz457]

Say what you want about Mustangs, for the price they are hard to beat.

[@cali2468]

Nutz4Gunz45 Please. The Camaro was better at everything and could be had for a little over $17k.

[@Magnero]

Unlike Mustangs on a racetrack.

[@cali2468]

unknown name From a performance aspect, no, they were not!

[@unknownname7426]

MOST H8D uhh yes they were lol. You're basing your argument and the hp numbers that GM claimed. GM massively overrated the Camaro. In the real world the mustang was and still is the faster and better car.

[@cali2468]

unknown name You're obviously a troll. Go play elsewhere.

[@hemingsgarage]

Now we need the review of the 2003 Cobra Mustang.

[@nathanlopez5667]

3:55 gears or even 373s from the factory would have really helped the car

[@LeoM-zt3pl]

I'm guessing they weren't allowed to avoid gas guzzler tax. But agreed, those need at least 3.73 or ideally 4.10+ to get into the powerband in a decent time

[@nathanlopez5667]

@@LeoM-zt3pl just that more than likely looking at some High 13s or even mid in the quarter with the right tire and supporting bolt ons

[@bizzleb3002]

In high school my friend had 97 Woodward Dream Cruise edition mustang. White with blue stripes and side pipes that said SVO on them. We had lot of fun in that car lol

[@6thGearGarage]

Although slow by today's standards (as were most cars of the 90's) the sn95 mustang 94-98 has some of the smoothest body lines of all mustangs. 99-04 were too edgy and 05-09 were too chunky. 2010+ look great though.

[@CH_eatthesand]

A lot of comments about the body motions during the testing of this car. What most of you don't realize is muscle cars through the decades were never meant to be exactly corner carving track monsters. They had solid axles, lousy suspension, big horsepower V8 engines, and bottle cap brakes. Go fast in a straight line, and pray that it doesn't understeer like a pig in the turns. That's a muscle car. At least, until recently. To my eyes, this 1994 Mustang Cobra was the clear defining definition of a muscle car. This video is proof.

[@clutchcruiser2750]

"Inside Cobras began with the Mustang's highly praised twin cockpit theme" And with that, Ford stuck with the exact same interior design for TEN YEARS...

[@6thGearGarage]

ClutchCruiser and the same chassis for 25 years.

[@dsavish]

94-04 interior one my fav.

[@davenhla8195]

That was hardly unusual in the auto industry for the times. The previous gen Fox body ran for 14 years with mostly insignificant interior changes. Same with C3, and C4 Corvettes, G-body GM cars, Panther platform Fords, etc.

[@clutchcruiser2750]

Davenhla American companies just wanted interiors that were cheap and simple to keep costs down. I don't really fault them for that since one of the big perks of buying an American car at the time was that they tended to cost less than the foreign competition. I own a 2003 Mach 1 and I love it to bits, but to say the interior design is unoriginal is an understatement even with all of the retro touches Ford did.

[@joshn938]

Let's not forget they had the same chassis since 1979 at that time too, that lasted until 2004. They were practically a classic car underneath before the 2005's came out! The Panther cars too, though they were body on frame. Same chassis since 1979 ( until upgraded steering in 2003) and same basic body design since 1992 . They were relics by 2011.

[@RetroCarsForever]

Can you guys post your review of the 2001 Mustang Bullitt? Just bought one and I know the Bullitt guys would love to see it!

[@alcanhg]

My first Mustang was a black 95 Cobra, followed by a black 97 Cobra. Both cars are humbled by my 14 Mustang GT.

[@frankez99]

humbled is putting it lightly......your 14 GT would slaughter those.

[@mattcox3373]

Gotta respect the ol sn95s though

[@michaelhillard4158]

​@@frankez99almost 20 years of technology. Compare the 95 cobra to a 1980 mustang....

[@joedirt7091]

Hey motorweek do have a review on 95 ford mustang cobr R?

[@TBird100636]

MotorWeek, do you have a review of the 1995 Mustang Cobra R with the 5.8L in the archives?

[@Some_Person6]

TBird100636 yep, it's in there. just search it

[@Some_Person6]

TBird100636 we have the 2000 model. I don't think we had a '95 but I'll check next week

[@Mustangrocket98]

Nice video i own 1998 mustang gt 5 speed its got cold air intake underdrive pulleys and x pipe with slp exhaust

[@josephvahabzadeh1289]

It's been a while, but didn't the standard fox body Mustangs, whether LX or GT, with the 5.0 do 14.9 or so in the 1/4 mile? I want to say at 93MPH, but don't hold me to that. Somehow 14.96 @ 93 MPH seems to be in my head.... Did the SN-95 gain weight relative to the fox-body?

[@torres3800]

The pushrod 5.0 was coming to an end. I want to see a review on the cobra with the modular engine.

[@mattcox3373]

torres3800 they posted one for the 96 cobra

[@leeejoynerr8700]

It's out there

[@camaro69green31]

That wasn't Nose Dive.... that was SUBMARINING!! Woo, insane for the year.

[@LukeO-1234]

my brother had a 96. I loved that car.

[@dragonbrownies517]

Could you guys do one for the Chevy S10 Baja, Cameo and or regular S10? especially for 1991

[@efthimios]

Man I had one it was a dog to be fair a Bigger cam would wake this up the newer 32v COBra When it came out sounded so awesome-much better

[@FORDboy357]

Was the 2001 Bullitt ever on Motor Week? I'd love to see that review

[@hotwheelsmustang1662]

Those cars were cool back in the day. It was only mustangs camaros and firebirds

[@ErwinSchrodinger64]

Just like everyone is stating, the 96 and up is when the Cobra became my favorite Pony car... well, my all time favorite American automobile. At the time, I was around 14 years old and I remember everyone saying that the car had a DOHC 32-valve V8 and couldn't believe 300 horsepower was emanating out of 4.6 liters. The front calipers were painted black with Cobra written on them along with the circular fog lights... did I know what any of this really did or meant... no, but as a kid it was all magic that became nostalgic. Thanks Motorweek for posting this. It really is important to remember the history of automobiles and the feelings a lot of us felt of yesteryear.

[@antonlee2655]

2020 I still want one

[@davenhla8195]

The 5.0 in the Cobra cars was factory under rated HP wise. They ran closer to 290-300HP. You don't drop .6 seconds off an ET with 25HP lol. Fast forward to late 90's, this engine showed up in Ford Explorers(minor difference in heads) and surprise, rated at right around the 300HP mark. The biggest failing Ford did with the Mustang in general in the 90's was not offer different gear ratios. The Factory 3.07 gears were probably fine for most consumers, but swapping them to 3.55 or 3.73 completely changes the way an SN95 behaves, and Ford should have offered them in a performance package with the Cobra brakes as an option for the GT's. Further, for some reason, going all the way back to '74, Ford was for some reason 100% against offering a 351W in these cars, and went so far as offering a whopping 250 Cobra R cars in '95 that you had to take a race driving course to be allowed to order one, and likely only begrudgingly offered as a last hurrah before switching everything to the gutless mod motors. The Sn95 cars can handle surprisingly well if you upgrade the rubber, as evidenced in this video. You can fit 315's on the back and 275's up front with no modifications to the car. Mustangs have always had haters, and yet they have always served as the benchmark for a fast car. "I beat a Mustang" is used as justification your car is fast for years now, while simultaneously the Mustang gets crapped on as some kind of slow jelopy of a car. The Mustang is faster then most of the average passenger vehicles out on the road for every era it has been made, while being cheaper then a lot them at the same time. That was it's original designed function in '64, and the mentality has held for a long time now.

[@FoDaddy]

The Explorer 5.0L was rated at 210 HP (which was underated),nowhere near 300 HP. The 3.08 gears were for fuel economy standards, CAFE was a thing even back then. Same reason the 351W was never offered in a mainstream model.

[@jacobking3752]

not 290. smoked my buddies in my lt1 roadmaster

[@abewatso8410]

yeah a Northstar Cadillac ran the 1/4 mile faster and that was a 4,000 lb car with 4 speed slush box , so i doubt these are anywhere near 300 hp

[@josephvahabzadeh1289]

This seems dubious - didn't the fox body ones with the 5.0L do just a hair under 15.0? I think when they were still speed-density rather than MAF.... And it does NOT take a ton of horsepower to do 15s... Raceway Park, Englishtown NJ, my car did 15.6 @ 90 MPH. A 1974 Dodge Dart Sport with a stock 318 2-bbl - It was factory rated at 150hp, though the dual exhaust (from stock manifolds) probably put it in the 170-ish horsepower range. It had a 2.45:1 highway cruising rear axle.

[@Mr1986camaro]

Thats a longass excuse right there.

[@duster0669]

I've been a bit unkind to Motor Week and the driving I've been seeing in their reviews. But this is a comfortable exception. They found themselves a driver with some real on track experience. The driver is smooth and in control for this entire video. This is the driver Motor Week should've been using for all of their at speed on track testing. It's not hard to find skilled race car drivers who are also automotive media professionals. I'm sure it was more challenging to find such a driver 40 years ago, but damn it couldn't have been that hard!

[@brandonwright2067]

My favorite mustang 5.0 generation of all time jeez I miss those looks and in another year or two I'll be looking at either a 04 gto or 94-95 mustang gt it's not about but it is about comfort which that mustangs seats are amazing and that sound is well the best sound of all mustang 5.0's

[@MyCatInABox]

I was 15 when these came out (in'94) and even though I loved the '93 Cobra, I've ALWAYS, always wanted a '94/ '95Cobra No, they're nothing like the DOHC 4.6 Cobra's of '96 and up and yeah, they can get beat up on by the lt1 'F' bodies of the same years But, I just love that it has the new SN95 body with the "old" 302 under the hood IMO, the comparative 'power deficit' Wasn’t anything that a set of TFS heads, "Ford racing" E303 cam, "GT40" tubular intake manifold, BBK75mm T-body, 80mm Mass air and shorty/long tube exhaust headers couldn't solve 😉👍

[@Charvel86]

Those performance figures 0 to 60 and quarter mile are exactly the same as the 1993 Volkswagen Corrado VR6 reviewed by Motorweek!

[@anthonylaudano9751]

My dead stock 93 cobra that I still own today would spank the 94 cobra. I still like the 94 95 cobras. They just need a few mods.Number one lower them and xhaust

[@johnkowalsky1988]

Hey I thought the Cobra had over 300 horses. Kind of disappointed. Only 240 from a 5.0? I’m looking for an American sports car to import to Germany. Can’t decide between a camaro z28 and the mustang.

[@MyMfDominoes]

Can y'all post the 93 Cobra review?

[@BurtSampson]

LOL, did they pull that shifter out of a pickup truck? Jesus.

[@davenhla8195]

Manual transmission shifters from the F-series pickups in the 90's(and earlier) were approx 24-30 inches long. An F-series shift handle mounted onto the T5 in these Mustangs would have the shift knob at about the same height as your forehead if you were sitting in the car. You might hit the rearview mirror on the windshield shifting into 3rd.

[@DUNEATV]

Love these reviews!

[@braddietzmusic2429]

Surprised something with the "Cobra" name on it, particularly a modern variant, has so much body roll and nose dive. Seems like Ford took the Springs and spring rates out of the Town Car.

[@sk8terboi510]

nürnburgringwurst 😄

[@davenhla8195]

The Fox and Panther platforms have almost nothing in common, especially steering geometry. Critics have a lot to say about the SN95 cars, but "loose steering" has never been one of those things, ever.

[@davenhla8195]

The Mustang was always a sporty designed passenger car. That's why things like rear window defrosters and all season tires(yes, Ford had winter/snow driving in mind for consumers with these cars) have been available. Sporty driving was a goal, but it was not to supercede daily driving ride quality or even MPG, to a point. So we had "comfy" highway cruising and mid 20's MPG with 3.07 factory gear ratios competing with typical performance things like stiff bumpy rides that corner better and acceleration. I am sure "market research" showed Ford more units would sell with a cushy ride. The cars don't handle as bad as people say either, despite appearences. Big rubber solves most of the SN95's stigmas, as shown in the video partly, but even more so if you push the tires out to 315's in back and 275's up front.

[@SillyPuddy2012]

For those not paying attention to what was said in the review, Ford didn't set out to make this Cobra a hardcore street racer, or Nurburgring record holder, but a compliant and livable muscle car in so many words. Ford especially has almost always taken the middle road in hopes that will translate into high sales volume, and it's usually worked out for them. This was coming off of the 80's when nearly everything was choked for power. Even still I recall thinking back then how this Cobra's power seemed pretty conservative when offerings from GM were putting out something around 275 horses. Only in more recent years has Ford aimed for street performance in line with the best in any given class.

[@500erider]

Ford actually gave the 1994-1995 Cobra's softer suspension than the GT's, which does seem somewhat strange. But they wanted to give it a more luxurious ride, more than they wanted to run it through slaloms. That's fact. Look it up. I don't understand it either.

[@erics6894]

what year did they up the HP in the cobra to 305?

[@thooke222]

Wow, that nose dive! Can you believe that just one year later the M3 was making the same HP with a 3.0 6cyl. Surely SVT could have squeezed more out of that 5.0!

[@BoardwalkBullies]

It's the little things about the Cobra that people don't realize that explain what Ford did with the engine. 10-15 extra horsepower seems meager for the huge head and intake upgrade over the GT right? There are two reasons for that, no.1 they changed the hp rating system and no .2 while the cobra received better flowing everything over the GT engine, Ford went and actually made the cam smaller and compensated by giving it 1.7 ratio rockers (they say it's the same cam that the MN12 cars had in 1991 to 1993 but I have not seen that to be true). Aside from an attempt to keep fuel mileage numbers up, the 5.0L was getting to the point, well EMISSIONS standards were getting to the point where the 5.0L was exceeding its emissions limit for the class of car that the Mustang was in. After 1993 it was the only "car" made by Ford that had the 5.0L, all others had the extremely low emissions and fuel efficient 4.6L which made as much power and used less fuel and put out a fraction of the emissions. Even the almost 300hp DOHC 4.6L that at the time only came in the Lincoln Mark VIII not only put out gobs more power but also got better mileage and fewer emissions. After 1995 Ford finally compromised and started putting the 4.6L in the Mustang as well. Obviously the 2V in the GT and the 4V in the Cobra. In order to make usage of all of the leftover 5.0L mustang V8's that Ford had left, they made it an optional upgrade for the 1996+ Explorer (because new emissions standards, the 5.0L was now only a "truck" engine) and created a whole new vehicle as well (the Mercury Mountaineer) and made the former Mustang 5.0L as the standard engine in the Explorer "sister" car just to use up the remaining supply of 5.0L V8's that could no longer be used in the Mustang. The idea did so well that Ford continued the model after the 5.0L officially seized to exist and the made the 2nd and 3rd gen Mountaineer come standard with the 4.6L V8 in the "Premier" (again, the fully loaded car was standard, you had to "ask" for a lesser optioned one, the line of thinking is you should just buy an explorer instead).

[@thooke222]

@@BoardwalkBullies interesting

[@nolarobert]

245 HP seemed so powerful back in that era but now pales in comparison to the EcoBoost 4 bangers in current Mustangs. The good old days of Pony Cars is right here, right now.

[@bliglum]

Yup, the present will be remembered as the second golden age of Pony cars.. So many different versions of Camaro and Mustang, and they're all so damn powerful!

[@leebrown6153]

kid's please go to bed

[@PrivateEyeYiYi]

245hp pales in comparison to what the same engine put out in the 60 when.a 302 (now called 5 liter) could make 306hp.

[@Loachie90]

Lee Brown Don't be a grump

[@CamaroAmx]

the same year camaro was putting out 275hp for less money

[@traingp7]

Chris Fix test driving it?

[@briansmith8361]

While I am not much of a Ford guy, I must say the 1994 Mustang was an attractive redesign that looked much better than the aging fox body of the previous model. The chassis was carried over, though.

[@moejr1974]

I love the kids coming in here bragging about how their car is faster than a 23 year old car. Take your car and put it against a new Mustang and see how you fare stock for stock

[@MICKSHRED]

Them coyotes are junk

[@roninkraut6873]

Fonzo Hernandez Aww, did someone beat your little Camaro in their Mustang and now you have to come on here and cry about it?

[@andye5573]

@@roninkraut6873 He's just mad because he bought the inferior car. That's why he's in here trolling the comment section of a 1994 Mustang video. It's just all around pathetic lol.

[@mikealbert728]

Dang. You guys ran a 14.3 with the 1985 GT lol.

[@moejr1974]

The 85 had much better breathing. When the 94 body style came out they couldn't use the Mustang intake as it was too tall for the hood. They instead used the T-Bird intake which was more restrictive. The 85 also had a 600 GFM 4bbl carb that could suck in alot of atmosphere.

[@ghostridertm945]

I love both 💖 Cobra and Z28 but hands down, The Z is the champ overall best stock better design and build you don't see a Z nose dive on hard braking lol .. .

[@camaro69green31]

Amen to that.

[@Kee-Von]

Watched the 93 Cobra they did last night and noticed the newer one seen here was about a full second slower to 60 and in the quarter...what the hell

[@clintonwatkins3718]

I have a 95 Hard top convertible Cobra. I love that car.

[@based_will]

lmao, that bumper almost smacked the ground in that braking test

[@nighthawk6895]

While the power made in sports cars back then was rather hefty, it's amazing to see vehicles with engines half the size making similar power. Shit, my 2012 Optima SX turbo made 274 ponies, all from an engine 60% smaller than this Mustang's. Still, I'd love to have one of these older Mustangs. The availability, cost, and plethora of mods continue to make these a favorite among enthusiasts and many young, dumb kids.

[@timomomomo969]

My 2018 car has 6 factory analog gauges: speedometer, tach, boost, coolant temp, oil pressure and oil temp. For speed I also have a more legible digital display but if the speedo was more legible, I wouldn’t miss it. I realize that the coolant temp gauge is likely stepped and not true analog. Would it have been a deal-breaker to not have this gauge set? Of course not. Do I like having the info Immediately available and visible while driving? Yes! Also, something to remember is that particularly for performance cars, oil temp, oil pressure and voltage were more critical to know back in the day when many of these retro reviews were done; watch Motorweek today and these gauges don’t get nearly as much mention. So kids, it’s misguided to blame the show when having these gauges was more a sign of the times.

[@jonathanhudson4623]

The mustang wasn't even competition for my beater 1989 tpi305 formula firebird. My tpi305 with almost 200,000 miles on it ran 14.2 with just the emission crap removed and a catless exhaust. The pre 94 mustang sometimes were a decent race but once they went with the 4.6L it was a joke. I watched them run mid and low 15s every week at Darlington dragway (just down from the nascar track). Year for year the mustang never had an edge over the f-body (except for maybe made up numbers on paper). They waited until GM stopped making the LS1 f-body in 2002 before they released the 03 cobra and it took it 8psi (over 50% more power than naturally aspirated) to run close to what the LS1 cars were running from the factory. I built a full race 383 and swapped it into the 89 formula and converted my 89 to a 6 speed manual by then, so those cobras weren't even close against it. I did buy a factory box stock 2002 ws6 6speed Trans Am with 33,000 miles on it in 2012. It ran a best of a 12.8s on its first night out at the track. It took me a bit to get used to the peak rear wheel torque being at 4500rpm and peak rwhp being at 5500rpm. The closest to stock 03 cobra I could find to race only had a cold air intake before the blower and that wasn't impressive at all and I was running 2.0 60 ft times because of the 275 street tires. Once I got traction I drove right around him every race (he had drag radials). Even now with the new 5.0 mustangs, I see ls1 f-body cars with headers, catless ypipe, cat back exhaust and a simple slp filter lid out run the new 5.0s. The fastest mustangs around here are turboed and 99% of them are fox bodies with a turbo and a junk yard 5.3 liter Chevy LS truck engine swapped under the hood. The factory mustangs are set up to launch better but don't have the power to stay in front (if they ever even get in front), they also can't corner for shit. The only thing they have going for them is they are front engine and rear wheel drive. They pretty much ruined that with their stupid independent rear suspension (which every dumbshits company has gone to). I'll keep my 02 ws6 because honestly I don't like any of the new "muscle cars. My 15 year old 65,600mile lightly modified (stock engine) will run with or just flat out out run them. The new 5.0 is the best mustang they ever built and it still is an exhaust kit away from being beat by a car that at it's newest is 15 years old.

[@pbandj37]

@Motorweek Do you have a Terminator (03-04 Cobra) review?

[@Some_Person6]

pbandj37 yes we do. a real nice dark blue one. we'll get er up soon

[@pbandj37]

Lile the postman, I eagerly await your video. Also, your 1992 Ford Probe video.....is actually a 1993. They went to that body style in 1993, 92 atill had the boxier/wedge shaped Probe.

[@pbandj37]

And thank you in advance for the Termi video!

[@timkelly1399]

Chevy boys are so hilarious. The LT1 Camaro only beat the 93 Cobra by 3 tenths of a second...with 10.25 compression compared to 9.0...aluminum heads compared to iron, 3.42 gears to 3.08 gears and 48 more cubes AND BARELY BEAT A LITTLE 302. If all the above were equal aside from the cubes the f bodies would have gotten SPANKED by a little 302! The LT1 cars were NOTHING to brag about. The 1994 Cobra was no different than the 93 other than computer, weighing 100 pounds more and 5 more factory rated horsepower. Clearly they had Pat Goss driving in this test! This quarter mile race came down to the drivers every single time. After that obviously the inevitable is going to happen.

[@kirkkrieger9360]

Exactly. I was a 20 year old kid pulling gears in my 89 LX 5.0 and that car ran mid 14's all day long

[@LifeAfterLosing]

That suspension looks terrible. That car would get roasted on a track like that by most economy cars of today.

[@farhenheit628of1200]

15 second quarter mile? For real?

[@user-dn8fp7ol5z]

How about the ultra rare Mystic Cobra 'Stang with the super cool chameleon paint job? Try finding one of those these days ain't going to happen lol

[@7171-Ws6]

Love the videos! Keep it up!

[@grandemage]

lol always funny to look at performance specs from the past...

[@frankez99]

Nice car, but the Cobra didn’t get serious until 96

[@bigbline405]

The gt40 Windsor program never seemed to hit the home run in the 90s the corba mustangs and f150 lightning showed a glee but then they botched it when gm tired of the l98 getting kicked by the 5.0 they pulled out the lt1 and up the ante Ford could of easy keep the top drawer with a revised gt40 5.8 for option gt mustang thunderbird and base Cobra instead they went high tech and still do so today

[@brianr987]

Mustangs GTs today have literally twice the horsepower.

[@michaeldodge735]

But they will NOT run twice as fast!

[@fastfordman1965]

The 4.6 Dohc cobras were much faster. And FBodies were still beating these things at the stoplight.

[@bam_henry]

This one also looks cute!

[@marktrankle]

only 58 more hp than my 7 year old hybrid..... boy we've came a long way

[@ITRIEDEL]

Had one. Same color. But had a 70mm turbo hehe

[@wranbojeep8686]

It’s too bad they didn’t make a video comparing this Foxbody to the previous generation Foxbody

[@clubalbert]

3:40 $20,765 back in the days when cars were price to match your "real life budget"; instead of increasing the yearly plan to match your "monthly budget".

[@bmanjohnson51]

Good thing there were no crowds on that test track

[@braydenjones2515]

Just got this exact model for my first car

[@skaught7289]

Early mid 90's cars sucked in general. I would know I had a few that required many lost weekends working on them in high school. It impressive how reliable cars are now.

[@justsumguy2u]

Solid car, solid review.

[@BRIANBOBCHAPMAN]

COOL Retro Review: '94 Ford Mustang Cobra

[@5litreho]

Had a 1994 Mustang GT Convertible with automatic transmission. What a dog. Engine would not rev past 4,000 rpms. Now I have a 2004 New Edge GT, 4.6 and 5spd. 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. Qtr mile 13.8 @ 100mph. A lot faster !

[@jonathanhill7295]

It’s crazy how only 24 years later dodge could make an production car that can do a wheely

[@bryanwashington9511]

Better looking than the hideous Fox and Mustang II

[@imrighthere5878]

Had a 96 4.6 gt with flows, k and n, and a performance tune......my buddy had this car and I beat him at least 6 times before he would accept it.

[@80GP400]

So the Fox Body Cobra with the same engine and 5 less Hp did 0-60 in 5.6, and this 94 with the new improved Body style and more Hp did it in 6.4 .

[@timkelly1399]

radsky They must have had Pat Goss driving the 94....