I have a chance to buy a 94 Mustang convertible with 81K miles. Good condition overall – has been stored for two years with minimal driving. Were these cars relatively solid vehicles? Would it be somewhat economical for a second car for highway driving? The car is in good shape for a 94. Thanks
Just keep in mind that these are GAS HOGS even the 6 cylinder version did not get great gas mileage. The other thing to keep in mind is that these are rear wheel drive and do not do as well in the snow as front wheel drive vehicles do. They are also not very roomy. I’m only 5’ 7" and feel like I’m crammed into the vehicle. We rented one for a week of driving around in California and would have loved a convertible. No Question but the car has lots of POWER. We drove over a few of the passes and were passing everything on the steep up hills. I would not spend more then $4000 on this vehicle, figuring that fuel costs are not going down too much lower then they are now. Hope I’m wrong about that since my ride is also a gas hog but it caries my house on its’ back.
Probably due for a clutch replacement at this point in its life.
If you love the vehicle…pay for an inspection and find out what it will need.
The car has value too people who like performance convertibles. The car while not as bad as driving a 1 ton pickup around town should not be your first choice for an “economy” vehicle.This car should sell very easy and at a preminum if all is as you state, they have a loyal following.
Myself, I am not interested in any pre OBDII cars unless there is something special about them (around 1995)
If it’s a V6 skip it. They had head gasket problems. The single-port V6 is also weak in the performance department. As far as fuel mileage goes, it’s a matter of perspective. If you’re used to driving a V10 F-350 then the Mustang will seem quite frugal, if you’ve been driving Geo, you won’t be impressed. I have a 03 GT with a Kenne Bell supercharger and 4.10 gears. I get about 18 MPG driving back and forth to work, with thrift reaching upwards of 22 MPG on the highway. Stock the V6’s tend to get around 17-18 around town and about 26-27 on the highway. If it were me I’d hold out for a GT or Cobra.
The body was all new in 1994, but the powertrain was not…Still had the old 302 pushrod engine at 215 hp. While the Crown Vics got the new 4.6L all aluminum overhead cam motor in 1992, the Mustangs had to wait until 1996 to get the modern engine…
The 2011 Mustang GT will have a “new” 5.0L 32 valve mill (based on the 4.6L modular engine) producing 415 hp. It’s EPA rated at 28 MPG highway…It has double the horsepower of the '94 you are looking at and gets almost double the fuel mileage…Amazing…
My son and his wife have a 1995 Mustang GT with the 5.0 liter V-8 and the 5 speed manual transmission. His wife brought the car to the marriage. She now has back problems and isn’t able to drive the car, so my son drives the Mustang while his wife drives their minivan. The car isn’t particularly comfortable for my son, and the gasoline mileage isn’t the greatest. My son lives in a warmer climate and they don’t see much ice or snow. When he drove up to Indiana for a funeral and encountered some ice and snow, the Mustang was a handfull. The good part about the Mustang is that its V-8 engine is practically bullet-proof and repairs aren’t expensive. To my son, ‘a car is a car’. He doesn’t particularly like the Mustang, but it gets him to workand back.
To summarize, the Mustang isn’t particularly comfortable, the gasoline mileage isn’t the greatest, although it isn’t terrible, but the car is easy to maintain. Before you think about this as a highway car, drive it for a while and see if it has comfortable seating for you.
The cars are reliable and I don’t understand completely the part about their being gas hogs. Both the 6 and 8 cylinders are rated at 23-27 on the highway. My oldest son has gone to TX to the car races a couple of times with a friend of his who owned a '91 GT and he said that car got 25 on those road trips; and that’s with the truck loaded and 3 people inside. And with a guy who is a bit heavy on the foot anyway.
My hot rod car here with an '87 GT 5.0 that has been converted to dual four barrel carburetors even gets a steady 21 MPG at a 65 MPH cruise. Not too shabby for a non-electronic, over-carbureted engine. (Iknow, 1200 CFM is overkill but it looks good.)
Maybe a lightening of the foot would improve the mileage.