Opinion on a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis LS?

Mike Schwartz · 12-29-2013, 04:52 AM

There is one near me in decent shape at a cheap price. I was wondering if was worth considering building as a Stocker. Is it Dime Rocket material?

The engine is the 4.6L SOHC V8 / AT / SEFI / 2-valve, NHRA rated at 210hp (from 190/210). The factor is 17.34, which would put it into the following classes:

NHRA
17.00 Q/SA (14.10 index) 3740lbs
18.00 R/SA (14.35) 3950

IHRA
16.00 I/FI (13.65) 3530
18.00 J/FI (14.25) 3950
16.00 I/PS (14.55) 3530

Its probably handicapped by a lack of specific performance parts, but there may be some things that could be crossed over from Mustangs and trucks.

Billy Nees · 12-30-2013, 10:16 AM

The closest that you can compare the 94 to a Mustang would be a 96 and there are some differences. I would be trying to find out those differences first. I know that the early 281 Mustangs were no killer combos but they would probably work as Pure Stockers. Talk to somebody with 281 knowledge before getting into this one too deep!

kdanner · 12-31-2013, 05:35 AM

Intake ports and the intake manifold are much worse than 96-up.

Mike Schwartz · 01-02-2014, 11:41 PM

I spent some time browsing Jeg's and it seems like a lot of the performance parts are available. Although the more I add up the prices, the less economically feasible the whole thing looks. It would be different, though.

12-29-2013, 04:52 AM	#1
Mike Schwartz Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Maryland USA Posts: 533 Likes: 129 Liked 248 Times in 89 Posts	Opinion on a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis LS? There is one near me in decent shape at a cheap price. I was wondering if was worth considering building as a Stocker. Is it Dime Rocket material? The engine is the 4.6L SOHC V8 / AT / SEFI / 2-valve, NHRA rated at 210hp (from 190/210). The factor is 17.34, which would put it into the following classes: NHRA 17.00 Q/SA (14.10 index) 3740lbs 18.00 R/SA (14.35) 3950 IHRA 16.00 I/FI (13.65) 3530 18.00 J/FI (14.25) 3950 16.00 I/PS (14.55) 3530 Its probably handicapped by a lack of specific performance parts, but there may be some things that could be crossed over from Mustangs and trucks.

12-30-2013, 10:16 AM	#2
Billy Nees VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: On a hilltop in Pa. Posts: 4,485 Likes: 3,587 Liked 7,682 Times in 1,730 Posts	Re: Opinion on a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis LS? The closest that you can compare the 94 to a Mustang would be a 96 and there are some differences. I would be trying to find out those differences first. I know that the early 281 Mustangs were no killer combos but they would probably work as Pure Stockers. Talk to somebody with 281 knowledge before getting into this one too deep! __________________ Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K

12-31-2013, 05:35 AM	#3
kdanner Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 221 Likes: 50 Liked 38 Times in 17 Posts	Re: Opinion on a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis LS? Intake ports and the intake manifold are much worse than 96-up.

01-02-2014, 11:41 PM	#4
Mike Schwartz Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Maryland USA Posts: 533 Likes: 129 Liked 248 Times in 89 Posts	Re: Opinion on a 1994 Mercury Grand Marquis LS? I spent some time browsing Jeg's and it seems like a lot of the performance parts are available. Although the more I add up the prices, the less economically feasible the whole thing looks. It would be different, though.