Go to car


Latest Comments
Car: Fpost   By: DiRF   Comment: "Now do Classical Gas!..."
Car: 98681   By: DiRF   Comment: "This must have been right around 1979, when the US..."
Car: Fpost   By: DiRF   Comment: "Very nice...."
Car: Fpost   By: Adambomb   Comment: "So, I pre-odered these last August and they finall..."
Car: 98680   By: Skid   Comment: "Neat! I don't know if I've ever seen one of these ..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Linkage
Plates
Bling Bling
Photo
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images

 Other

Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
FAQ
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

0 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List

 Login

Username:

Password:


Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password


View this image at full size
Click here to let us know if the image above is broken.


Go back and vote on this image.

Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=18884
Submitted by: Lemming
Comments: 34  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 0  (View)
Submitted on: 02-14-2003
View Stats Category: Vehicle Misc
Photoshops of this image:
18887, 20839,
Description:
SN95 Mustang interior. --Insert rant about questionable ergonomics here--


   Comments

Showing page: 2 of 2
[
1 2 ]

#21
2-14-2003 @ 08:26:47 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#19, I prefer the 87-93 fox to the square headlight ones

#22
2-14-2003 @ 08:27:52 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
i like all the 84 plus fox-bodies, the early square light ones just looked to pussyish to me

#23
2-14-2003 @ 08:29:06 PM
Posted By : ricerocketboy Reply | Edit | Del
#22, 86 to 93

#24
2-14-2003 @ 08:31:30 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#23, 85 and 86 were the same, and i think the 84s were too

#25
2-14-2003 @ 08:32:50 PM
Posted By : ricerocketboy Reply | Edit | Del
no

86-93


#26
2-14-2003 @ 08:35:44 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#25, crack head, 87-93 are the same body. 84(i think)-86 were the same except for the fact that the 86s were fuel injected

#27
2-14-2003 @ 08:36:35 PM
Posted By : fordtacomaz Reply | Edit | Del
#26, correct

#28
2-14-2003 @ 08:38:07 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#26, and the 86 5.0 was rated at 200 hp

#29
2-14-2003 @ 08:44:25 PM
Posted By : fordtacomaz Reply | Edit | Del
#28, how much torque though?

#30
2-14-2003 @ 08:46:25 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#29, well mine has 285 lb-ft but I'll look

[Edited by solid_snake on 2-14-2003 @ 08:47:54 PM]


#31
2-14-2003 @ 08:47:16 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#30, doesn't say

#32
2-14-2003 @ 08:47:56 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
300 lb-ft @3200rpms

#33
2-14-2003 @ 08:48:58 PM
Posted By : fordtacomaz Reply | Edit | Del
#32, not too shabby

#34
12-26-2003 @ 07:56:40 PM
Posted By : OldSchoolSpeed Reply | Edit | Del
you know...mustangs plus did a piece on lowering the actual pans below the seats to accomidate the taller blue oval fans but it was on a 65 i believe...just a little FYI

Showing page: 2 of 2
[
1 2 ]


Login to leave a comment

Classifieds 
Click here to post your own classified ad






Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Sunday, May 5, 2024 11:23:02 AM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Ricecop. All rights reserved.