FormaCars

Visit our community sponsor

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: differences between 87-93 donor and and 94-95 for MKIII?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like

    differences between 87-93 donor and and 94-95 for MKIII?

    I have a MKIII chassis/body.

    I recall specing it for a 87-93 mustang donor when i bought it, however I have a really good 1994 donor.

    What are parts will not fit on my chassis?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Norton, MA USA earth
    Posts
    3,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Everything will work. The only thing you might want to change is the rear axles. They are about 3/8 wider per axle as compared to the 87-93. or buy wheels with the right offset. If you switch the axles you will also need offset brake brackets. Richard Oben at North Race cars has everything you need. Other that that, they make a great donor.
    Mike

  3. #3
    Senior Member MPTech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    8
    Weren't there some anomalies with the front engine cover that were only available a year or 2 and not widely supported with after-market?
    I believe the wiring / computer is also a little more complicated.
    F5R #7446: MK4, 302, T5 midshift, 3.55 Posi IRS, 17" Halibrands
    Delivered 4/4/11, First start 9/29/12, Licensed 4/24/13, off to PAINT 2/15/14!! Wahoo!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Norton, MA USA earth
    Posts
    3,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes the front dress is different. But if you use the engine as is, it won't be an issue.
    Mike

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like
    thanks Guys.

    I am installing the donor parts from the 1994 on my chassis tommorow and i wanted to make sure i wouldnt run into any problems.

    For the record, I have sourced a 4.6 Cobra motor with tranny and solid rear end from a 2003 Mustang race car.
    What problems will i have with the 87-93 5.0L motor mounts on my chassis?

    With my 94+ rear end, will FFR be able to spec me a set of Trigo wheels to fit or will i be better off converting rear end to 87-93?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Norton, MA USA earth
    Posts
    3,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Convert the rear end. It will look better with deeper wheels. chassis engine mounts are the same.

    Mike

  7. #7
    Not a waxer Jeff Kleiner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Bloomington, Indiana
    Posts
    8,000
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by tcsracing1 View Post
    ...and solid rear end from a 2003 Mustang race car...
    The 2003 rear end is even wider than the '94 version. Here's how they stack up:

    '93 and earlier=59.25" wide
    '94-'98=60.75" wide
    '99-'03=62.25 wide

    The '94 through '98 axle HOUSING is the same width as the '93 and earlier Fox version however the axle SHAFTS are longer. All of the extra shaft length is outside of the housing to accomodate the ABS tone rings. The '99 and later rears have a wider housing and longer axle shafts and can only be brought to Fox width by cutting the housing and replacing the axle shafts. The '94-'98 rears are much simpler; without modifying the housing they can be brought to Fox ('87-'93) width and retain their 5 lug disc brake configuration by swapping axle shafts and using caliper relocation brackets available from Richard Oben at North Racecars as Mike mentioned.

    http://www.northracecars.com/Brakes.html

    If you decide to stick with the wide rearend Richard is also your source for custom offset Team III wheels (but IMHO you'd be money ahead to trade for a '94-'98 unit, convert it to Fox width and use "off the shelf" wheels).

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kleiner View Post
    The 2003 rear end is even wider than the '94 version. Here's how they stack up:

    '93 and earlier=59.25" wide
    '94-'98=60.75" wide
    '99-'03=62.25 wide

    The '94 through '98 axle HOUSING is the same width as the '93 and earlier Fox version however the axle SHAFTS are longer. All of the extra shaft length is outside of the housing to accomodate the ABS tone rings. The '99 and later rears have a wider housing and longer axle shafts and can only be brought to Fox width by cutting the housing and replacing the axle shafts. The '94-'98 rears are much simpler; without modifying the housing they can be brought to Fox ('87-'93) width and retain their 5 lug disc brake configuration by swapping axle shafts and using caliper relocation brackets available from Richard Oben at North Racecars as Mike mentioned.

    http://www.northracecars.com/Brakes.html

    If you decide to stick with the wide rearend Richard is also your source for custom offset Team III wheels (but IMHO you'd be money ahead to trade for a '94-'98 unit, convert it to Fox width and use "off the shelf" wheels).
    Thanks Guys.
    I have a stock 1994 rear end and a racing rear end from a 1999. (the 1999 could be an aftermarket rear end which could be anything)

    I will look into this further.

  9. #9
    Senior Member CraigS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Blacksburg, Va
    Posts
    4,707
    Post Thanks / Like
    Search here and on the other forum. This comes up every three months or so and gets a lot of info in the threads.
    FFR MkII, 408W, Tremec TKO 500, 2015 IRS, DA QA1s, Forte front bar, APE hardtop.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    31
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by michael everson View Post
    Yes the front dress is different. But if you use the engine as is, it won't be an issue.
    Mike
    what is diff about the front dress?
    was thinking about a 33 HR build using a 94/95 as a donor car.
    are the heads, intake the same?
    Kevin

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like
    i converted my 1994 rear end to the North Race Cars axles.

    What rear gears do you guys suggest?

    I also have a 1997 5.0L ford explorer rear end. Anything it might be useful for? gears?

  12. #12
    Senior Member stack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Macedon, NY
    Posts
    320
    Post Thanks / Like
    the T5 and bell housing is also different. about 3/4 inch longer if i remember right

    stack
    FFR MKI Roadster FFR2202K Built in 2000 sold
    FFR Hot Rod #39 under construction

  13. #13
    Senior Member CraigS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Blacksburg, Va
    Posts
    4,707
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes, 94-95 302s and trans and bellhousing were different. The front dress was squashed to be thinner and the bellhousing is longer as is the trans input shaft. In an FFR this moves the trans rearward so the driveshaft needs to be shorter. Tcs, rear gear depends on engine output. 355 is very common for 302s. As engine size increases, 331 or 327 can be better. 5th gear ratio also plays a role. Standard T5 5th is .6x so that is pretty dang tall so what most of your driving will be comes into effect too.
    FFR MkII, 408W, Tremec TKO 500, 2015 IRS, DA QA1s, Forte front bar, APE hardtop.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CraigS View Post
    Yes, 94-95 302s and trans and bellhousing were different. The front dress was squashed to be thinner and the bellhousing is longer as is the trans input shaft. In an FFR this moves the trans rearward so the driveshaft needs to be shorter. Tcs, rear gear depends on engine output. 355 is very common for 302s. As engine size increases, 331 or 327 can be better. 5th gear ratio also plays a role. Standard T5 5th is .6x so that is pretty dang tall so what most of your driving will be comes into effect too.
    thanks.
    I have a stock 1995 mustang rear end so i am not sure of the gears?
    My transmission came from a spares package included with a 1999 mustang race car that i purchased. Could be any year T5. How can i tell?
    Attached Images Attached Images

  15. #15
    No quarter JNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by tcsracing1 View Post
    thanks.
    I have a stock 1995 mustang rear end so i am not sure of the gears?
    My transmission came from a spares package included with a 1999 mustang race car that i purchased. Could be any year T5. How can i tell?
    You do realize that a 4.6 mod motor is not compatible with a T5, right?

    EDIT: Just noticed that those pics are of a T45, so never mind...

    Also, I think that the inner foot box walls are different between the sbf and 4.6 FFR kits.
    Last edited by JNC; 03-01-2017 at 09:17 PM. Reason: duh
    2010 FFR Mk4 - 306 EFI, T5Z mid-shift, IRS 3:31 Truetrac, 15" staggered wheels, manual steering & brakes and heated seats

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by JNC View Post
    You do realize that a 4.6 mod motor is not compatible with a T5, right?

    EDIT: Just noticed that those pics are of a T45, so never mind...

    Also, I think that the inner foot box walls are different between the sbf and 4.6 FFR kits.
    i am using a MKIII kit for 1987-1993 mustang.
    However, my rear end, brakes, spindles, pedal box and steering rack are 1995 mustang.
    My engine is 1997 explorer.

    the transmission is from a 1999 4.6 race car. Thanks for pointing out what it is. Hopefully i can use it without too much trouble.

  17. #17
    No quarter JNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by tcsracing1 View Post
    i am using a MKIII kit for 1987-1993 mustang.
    However, my rear end, brakes, spindles, pedal box and steering rack are 1995 mustang.
    My engine is 1997 explorer.

    the transmission is from a 1999 4.6 race car. Thanks for pointing out what it is. Hopefully i can use it without too much trouble.
    Thought you were going to use a 4.6 cobra motor for some reason...

    Anyway, the bolt patterns are different between 4.6 and sbf bell housings, so the T45 ain't gonna work on your exploder motor.
    Last edited by JNC; 03-02-2017 at 10:58 PM. Reason: sp
    2010 FFR Mk4 - 306 EFI, T5Z mid-shift, IRS 3:31 Truetrac, 15" staggered wheels, manual steering & brakes and heated seats

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Stewart Transport

Visit our community sponsor