General Mustang Chat Not Model Year Specific

Curb Weight

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 10, 2005 | 08:55 PM
  #1  
Mestizo's Avatar
Thread Starter
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: May 23, 2004
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
What are the curb weights for the 87-93 and the 94-95? I checked the timeline, and couldn't find it.

Thanks.
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 04:07 PM
  #2  
63galaxie's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
My 86 mustang weighs arund 3080...i tihnk 87-93's were just a little heavier. 94-95's weighed around 3300-3400
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2005 | 04:17 PM
  #3  
bigred0383's Avatar
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
87-93=2,725-3,350 depending on body style and engines. (notchback, hatchback, convertible, 4 cylinder, V8)
94-95=3,050-3,370 depending on body style and engines. (coupe,convertible, V6, V8)

If you have something specific in mind, let me know.

These figures came from a Certified Ford brochure.
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2005 | 01:58 AM
  #4  
Mestizo's Avatar
Thread Starter
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: May 23, 2004
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Originally posted by bigred0383@July 11, 2005, 4:20 PM
87-93=2,725-3,350 depending on body style and engines. (notchback, hatchback, convertible, 4 cylinder, V8)
94-95=3,050-3,370 depending on body style and engines. (coupe,convertible, V6, V8)

If you have something specific in mind, let me know.

These figures came from a Certified Ford brochure.
The verts should weigh the most, but I'm looking at hardtop V8s. I should have been more specific.

So:
87-93 V8 Hatchback
94-95 V8 Coupe


Thanks!
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2005 | 01:03 PM
  #5  
bigred0383's Avatar
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
87 V8: Hatchback 3,058; Notchback 3,000
88 V8: Hatchback 3,193
89 V8: Hatchback 3,194
90 V8: Hatchback 2,715; Notchback 2,715
91 V8: Hatchback 3,102; GT Hatchback 3,191; Coupe 3,037
92 V8: Hatchback 3,069; GT Hatchback 3,144; Coupe 3,010
93 V8: Hatchback 3,096; GT Hatchback 3,144; Coupe 3,035

94 V8: Coupe 3,258; Cobra 3,365
95 V8: Coupe 3,280; GTS 3,246; Cobra 3,354

Probably way more than you wanted to know.
Reply
Old Jul 13, 2005 | 02:02 AM
  #6  
Mestizo's Avatar
Thread Starter
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: May 23, 2004
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Originally posted by bigred0383@July 12, 2005, 1:06 PM
87 V8: Hatchback 3,058; Notchback 3,000
88 V8: Hatchback 3,193
89 V8: Hatchback 3,194
90 V8: Hatchback 2,715; Notchback 2,715
91 V8: Hatchback 3,102; GT Hatchback 3,191; Coupe 3,037
92 V8: Hatchback 3,069; GT Hatchback 3,144; Coupe 3,010
93 V8: Hatchback 3,096; GT Hatchback 3,144; Coupe 3,035

94 V8: Coupe 3,258; Cobra 3,365
95 V8: Coupe 3,280; GTS 3,246; Cobra 3,354

Probably way more than you wanted to know.
Yup!

Nah, it really helps out because I always hear how light the foxes are, but needed some numbers. Currently I'm in the market for a 94-95 Stang.
Reply
Old Jul 13, 2005 | 08:12 PM
  #7  
428CJ's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 10, 2004
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Originally posted by bigred0383@July 12, 2005, 2:06 PM
87 V8: Hatchback 3,058; Notchback 3,000
88 V8: Hatchback 3,193
89 V8: Hatchback 3,194
90 V8: Hatchback 2,715; Notchback 2,715
91 V8: Hatchback 3,102; GT Hatchback 3,191; Coupe 3,037
92 V8: Hatchback 3,069; GT Hatchback 3,144; Coupe 3,010
93 V8: Hatchback 3,096; GT Hatchback 3,144; Coupe 3,035

94 V8: Coupe 3,258; Cobra 3,365
95 V8: Coupe 3,280; GTS 3,246; Cobra 3,354

Probably way more than you wanted to know.
Do you know whly the 90 V8 weighed 400lbs lighter? That is really strange. And who would, (back when those cars were brand new) buy a 91 when it was obviously a lot slower than the 90?
Reply
Old Jul 13, 2005 | 08:52 PM
  #8  
bigred0383's Avatar
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
No idea. Those were just the figures they had.
Reply
Old Jul 14, 2005 | 06:32 AM
  #9  
428CJ's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: April 10, 2004
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Originally posted by bigred0383@July 13, 2005, 9:55 PM
No idea. Those were just the figures they had.
Where did you get those numbers? I'm interested in what the older Fox's weighed....
Reply
Old Jul 14, 2005 | 12:49 PM
  #10  
bigred0383's Avatar
Team Mustang Source
 
Joined: October 15, 2004
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
I got all the numbers from those nifty 1999 35th anniversary collector's cards, believe it or not. For each model year they engine choices with horsepower ratings; all bodystyle choices, what they weighed, and the cost of them when new; chassis info; and production totals.
Reply
Old Jul 17, 2005 | 11:09 PM
  #11  
bob's Avatar
bob
Legacy TMS Member
 
Joined: May 16, 2004
Posts: 5,206
Likes: 18
From: Bristol, TN
Originally posted by 428CJ@July 13, 2005, 9:15 PM
Do you know whly the 90 V8 weighed 400lbs lighter? That is really strange. And who would, (back when those cars were brand new) buy a 91 when it was obviously a lot slower than the 90?
Uhhhh.....because somebody was in the market for a new one.

Anywhosit, something doesn't sit right? There shouldn't be a drastic weight difference for 1 model year considering that the cars were essentially unchanged in general configuration since 1987.

If that were the case the 1990 model year 5.0s would have been the fastest production cars for that generation. I dont remeber any articles detailing mid to low 13 second fox body cars?
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cozyp828
2015 - 2023 MUSTANG
11
Dec 13, 2017 05:53 PM
CiniZter
General Vehicle Discussion/News
25
Apr 28, 2016 05:41 PM
Fred_Garvin
2010-2014 Mustang
4
Sep 17, 2015 04:10 PM
tj@steeda
2015 - 2023 MUSTANG
0
Sep 8, 2015 10:45 AM
earl610
GT
1
Sep 6, 2015 05:48 PM




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:11 AM.