Supra Forums banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
boost hungry
Joined
·
665 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well I am shopping for a new car and turns out I can't get a MKIV Twin Turbo, so I have to go with the next best thing. I've been shopping for a MK3 Turbo and a GT for quite some time and I was wondering which car I am gonna have more fun with and which is more reliable in all around aspects. People with experience who would comment would be appreciated. I know a lot about both cars, and I have heard that in some cases the MKIII can be unreliable. Also my bro just got a 99GT and I love smoken' them tires. so which would you choose? with either car I'd put a fat turbo or blower kit, and in both a built auto would be put in.:cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
606 Posts
mustang GT as in base model V6? .....MK3 supra has a turbo inline 6: very easy to make power from......I've had mine for almost 3 yrs, no problems yet on stock headgasket......valve cover gasket leaked oil, that's it-at least for now :) why not get an SVT cobra? similar power as mkiv but less demand=not overpriced.
 

·
They giggle
Joined
·
1,935 Posts
The base model is just Mustang. The GT is for the V8...just clearing that up. :)
 

·
Wobbiest: Three Laws Safe
Joined
·
6,137 Posts
neither.
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Why not a 98 Ls1 z28/formula or even a 96 SVT Cobra? Most of them can probably be had for around the price of a 98 GT and they're a hell of lot faster. That era GT in stock form is on the weak side.

If you're going to get a GT from that era, go for the 94-95 GT's since they still had the 5.0L in the new body style. 5.0 > 4.6 for the 94-98 cars. Or for a little more than 98 GT, you can find a 99 GT which is faster.

I'd pick them in this order
1) 94-95 5.0L GT
2) MK3 Supra
3) 96-98 4.6L GT

Last summer, i had a T-67 single turbo Outlaw kit awaiting install on the 94 GT i owned last summer, but i ended up selling the car before i got the turbo on. So if you're going to turbo, the 5.0 would make for a potent beast given the aftermarket. MK3 turbo is a fine car as well. You can't go wrong with either a 94-95 GT or MK3 turbo.
 
B

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
outofstep said:
The thing that kept me from getting one of the 94-95 5.0s is the automatic "block splits in half" at around 500 rwhp.
True. Block is a weak link, and the internals aren't that strong either. But the aftermarket has a couple of really tough 5.0 blocks available, but they don't come cheap. You can even get it in aluminum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I'd skip the shitty 96-98 4.6ls and stick with the 5.0l and I'd drop back to an 89-93 since they are lighter and the 89-92 have fordged pistons. I thought the block split was at 650hp but still 500hp is way more then I will ever run?
 

·
Republican
Joined
·
8,421 Posts
you would even THINK of getting a mustang? wow..........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
PSI-GUY said:
which one is more reliable.
Well I was thinking pretty hard about getting a MKIII at one point but you can see what I am driving ;).

The drivetrain on the mustangs is pretty solid and has been around a long time a long long time atleast with the 5.0l but you might have a sensor or electrical do dad go flaky once in a while. The plastic interior parts fall apart and the layout isn't the greatest although that improved in the 94+ cars. The brakes suck on the 93 and earlier cars but there are plenty of ways to fix that from cheap junkyard parts to really expensive aftermarket parts.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top