Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

'96-'98 or '02-'04 Mustang GT?

P

puma1552

Suspended
Original poster
Nov 20, 2008
5,559
1,948
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

Looking for a new daily driver to remain bone stock, wheels and all--already have a summer toy to mod.

Which would you choose and why? Spending cap is around $9k, and I can get both body styles with lower miles at that price with some searching.

Truthfully the '99-'04 body style never grew on me, they look so blah and pedestrian--the earlier cars looked fantastic and sporty. Interiors are the sane sans seats so they both look fine inside.

The newer car has 260 hp vs. 215 in the older one, and the newer one is, well, newer. The newer one is the better deal no doubt. But when I think of a Mustang, I think of the '94-'98 body style--that was a homerun. Reliability seems roughy the same sans the plastic intake issue on the older ones.

I know which one I should choose but it's just so blah looking in stock form. I know which one I want and it's a black '98 GT with the 17" split spoke wheels.

Would you take the car you want or the newer, faster, better value car even if it looks stale, mileage and price the same? The older ones hold their value better.

Not getting a '94-'95 5.0 because it's staying stock so the newer 4.6 is fine since power is the same, and not going into the '05+ price bracket.
 
I personally concur with Tomorrow and would not buy a car that old; I would only own a car from 2000-2004 if I knew the owner and knew that it was well taken care of. I don't know about you, but in my area via cars.com I have found ones like this (list price $8,999):
2hqauk7.png


I don't think with the year you're looking at that you're going to be finding cars with less than 70-80K miles, so why not just have one with 90? Not to mention the 05-09 look SO much better than the old ones.
 
Really the 98 GT? Those were the ugliest Mustangs ever made. When I think Mustang I think muscle car not generic sedan.

Start with the 05 Mustang. That is what the car should look like.
 
Last edited:
Get the car you want. If you want a '98, get a '98.

I'm going to differ from some of the others on the age of used cars. Sure, it's great to say "I'd never buy a car that old", and most of us would buy new if we could, but frankly I've never been able to afford a car that cost more than $6-7k, so I've made do with 10-15 year-old cars. If you do your homework and find a solid example, it will last.

However, when buying a 10+ year old car you must budget at least a couple thousand dollars for immediate use on maintenance and/or repairs. A ten year old car may need brakes, suspension bushings/shocks/struts, a CV joint, exhaust work, hoses/belts (particularly the timing belf for interefence engines), a transmission flush if you have an automatic, various electrical work, probably tires etc etc.

So if your budget is $9k, I recommend looking for a $7k car and then putting $2k into it. Otherwise your $9k car will turn into an $11k car very fast after a couple repairs. All too often peoiple stretch their budget to buy a car, then have no money left for maintenance and end up driving the car till it's trashed.
 
Anything other than the 2010-present models. The "cute" rounded back and lights are so feminine.
 
I would definitely get a 96-68. I just love the way they look, and with a summer toy i would not care about speed.
 
Not interested in '05+. It's getting to be more than I want to spend, and the earliest years of any body style for any car more often than not look like butt compared to the later years. If I got an '05+, it would have to probably be an '05 which just doesn't look good compared to the other years of the same body style, since it was the earliest. I tend to get the last few years of body styles once they've been refreshed a time or two. Truthfully I'm not a huge fan of the '05+ anyway. They are OK (I do like the interior), but man are they pigs.

I was really close to making a deal on a '98 GT this week. Black (flawless), black leather, 5 speed, premium 17" split-spoke wheels, Mach 460 stereo, etc. etc. with 78k miles. The mileage was a bit higher than I wanted to do, but everything else with the car was what I wanted. They were asking $10k, I got them down to $8700, which would've been $10k flat out the door delivered to my dad's house (had to transport it from the neighboring state). Still too high, so I told them $9000 out-the-door including fees and delivery and you've got a deal but they won't budge so I walked. Played the economy card, the selling a Mustang in a northern state in February card, etc. etc. but no dice. If the car had 40-50k miles then yes $10k out the door would've been realistic IMO.

Anyway back to the search. It's a lot easier to find '02-'04 models, but that's not surprising. The things I don't like about them is how the front fascia curves UP towards the center along the bottom which is counter-aggressive, and all of the wheel options sucked in those years, every one of them. I don't know what it is about the wheels, if they don't fill out the wheel wells like they should, bad job of sizing backspacing/offset at the factory or what, but the wheels just don't fit the cars right. My other gripes are that the front wheels are not centered in the wheel wells, they sit back a very noticeable couple inches from center which is wack. The nose emblem with the surround is hideous, and the fender emblems aren't any better. These are petty gripes but nonetheless they are gripes I don't have with the older models, and I don't want to put a dime into the car appearance-wise; I want to buy it, like what I bought, and drive it being that it's a daily. Also the nose is a little stubby. They are also a little fat.

I don't know, I kinda like them but they just don't look like a Mustang. They look far too much like a basic, bland transportation car. I spent three hours looking at them last night on Stang forums and I found very few that appealed to me, even with cosmetic mods.

I want that black '98 GT, I'd put $1800 down, and take a loan for $7200 for just three years at 3.99% financing through my credit union. That's a pretty smart loan; small, short term, super low interest rate. Payments would only be a hair over $200 for three years, which I'd pay off sooner. I can certainly spend more ($11k or thereabouts), it would just mean adding to the term of the loan instead of having a nice short one. I wish they'd just sell me the black one, but I'm not gonna pay what they want, especially knowing they own that car for $5k.
 
If you are going to take a loan out why not go for something newer. It seems like a waste to pay off a car that old for 3 years.
 
Because it would be a bigger loan and a longer term.

I qualify for a $35k loan @ 3.99% if I want, doesn't mean I should.
 
FTR this is the one I was looking at, undercarriage is spotless as well:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ds=25&cardist=204&standard=false&rdpage=thumb

Here are a couple newer ones:

Still higher than I want on miles, but just shows that the asking price is less than the haggled price I got on the one above, with the same mileage:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ds=25&cardist=489&standard=false&rdpage=thumb

'01, 25k miles, same owner since '03:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ds=25&cardist=294&standard=false&rdpage=thumb

'03, 30k miles:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ds=25&cardist=294&standard=false&rdpage=thumb

This one looks decent but it takes a set of Saleen rims to make it look that way:

newwheelsfrontangle.jpg


So I can definitely get more car for the money with the newer one, but I don't know. That 25k mile on is cherry from what I see.
 
ok i am to much biased towards chevy , but if it has to be a ford mustang and in between those years then please one with a proper engine ..read big block
 
MacHamster68 said:
ok i am to much biased towards chevy , but if it has to be a ford mustang and in between those years then please one with a proper engine ..read big block
Click to expand...

Uhh, you do realize they haven't made a big block Mustang since the muscle car era right? Also you know all of these cars come with the same engine, right?
 
I'd look for a 95-96 5.0 or a 97+ and swap a new Coyote into it.

Regardless, I'd make a call to Griggs Racing or Maximum Motorsports and get a Torque arm/panhard bar setup installed on any '79-04 non-IRS Mustang. It will fix the snap oversteer problem and give you a smoother ride to boot.

But what do I know, I drive an '82 6 banger Econoline and an '85 Mustang SVO :D
 
I just don't understand why you want a Mustang that looks so generic. Unless you are getting a newer or a true classic style what is the appeal?
 
LumbermanSVO said:
I'd look for a 95-96 5.0 or a 97+ and swap a new Coyote into it.

Regardless, I'd make a call to Griggs Racing or Maximum Motorsports and get a Torque arm/panhard bar setup installed on any '79-04 non-IRS Mustang. It will fix the snap oversteer problem and give you a smoother ride to boot.

But what do I know, I drive an '82 6 banger Econoline and an '85 Mustang SVO :D
Click to expand...

puma1552 said:
Not getting a '94-'95 5.0 because it's staying stock
Click to expand...

It's a daily driver, I already have a summer toy. Also the 5.0 was '94-'95, they switched to the 4.6 in '96.:)
 
MacNut said:
I just don't understand why you want a Mustang that looks so generic. Unless you are getting a newer or a true classic style what is the appeal?
Click to expand...

Because I don't want a huge ass loan? That's not that hard to comprehend. I've got a house to buy too.

Not everyone creams themselves over 2005+ models, either. Too bloated, too fat, too piggish. The only ones that look good are the last couple years, but even the '11 are saddled with that ugly black unpainted plastic lower fascia all around the car--wait two years and Ford will paint it from the factory, to keep the body style fresh.

I agree with you, the '99-'04 is a bit generic but it's a better overall car than the '96-'98 models even though those look far better IMO, that was the point of this post.

After driving tin cans here in Japan for the last three years, I want something RWD with a V8 and torque. I also don't want to spend a ton of money. The short list gets awfully short with those criteria.

I'm not going '05+, end of story.
 
Well, 12 hours after I told the dealer I'd be passing since they couldn't do $9,000 out the door, delivered to my dad's driveway, I got an email from the sales manager telling me that surprise, surprise, they were ready to sell at my price. So originally they wanted +10,000 for the car, plus TTL, plus $350 delivery; it would've been over $11,500.

I just put a deposit down on the black '98 GT. In the end I got it delivered and out the door for $9000 even. 2 owner car, new brakes, very clean, and spotless underneath. Carfax sucks and doesn't tell you much, but everything on it checks out which is marginally better than nothing. I strongly believe it to be original paint as well. It looks really well cared for.

Trying to get a hold of my credit union before they close in the next half hour though to get the ball rolling.

Can't wait!!!!
 
Hope it works out as your daily driver.

I'd put myself as another not wanting a 13 year old car as a daily driver car for $9k, but meh, it's your money.

(for what it's worth I bought a 05 with 44k miles for about $7,500 this summer)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back