I am hoping to buy an old Taurus SHO because I like sporty American cars. I want one with the five speed manual. The SHO was produced for about ten years, and I was wondering which years were the best. Do I want one from '88-'95 (the classic SHO) or from '96-'99 (the new, overhauled SHO). Do I want a V-6 or a V-8? Performance is similarly excelent during both eras. Which is cooler? Which is safer? Which is more reliable? Does anyone know?
The '96-'99 is a V8 and comes auto only. You want the "classic".
I've driven one, and they are *not* very refined cars by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, the shifter is way balky, the engine is too powerful for the front tires to handle, it under- steers like mad, etc. If you want a "sporty" car, a Camaro or Mustang is a better choice (although not for a family.)
My vauge memory says that the earlier cars were the more perfered ones. But I think that was because they came with manual transmissions and were compared well with the competition at the time. The later ones might very well be the better SHOs if an AT is ok for you.
The 96-99 SHO's were only made with the automatic transmission. The ones before that were available with a 5-speed manual and aren't that hard to find. They're both nice and are wolves in sheeps clothing, or something like that. I would assume the newer ones are safer as I think they came with ABS and airbags and the usual assortment. As for reliability, that's a crapshoot. I had a 2000 Taurus (non-SHO) that was pretty reliable. I would stay away from the real early ones and get something no older than a '95.
And so it panned out that the following script was sculpted by none other than Dr F:
These cars are notoriously unreliable, but I don't know whether that distinction is deserved or not.
V8 is definitely the way to go, of course, but you shouldn't really ask such a question here because you'll never receive an unbiased answer. :}
SHOs score pretty high on the stealth scale, except for the "SHO" proudly engraved in the rear bumper. Not sure whether the average donut muncher would pay too much attention to that, though. Otoh any enthusiast or semi-enthusiast worth his salt can easily tell a SHO version from a common joe Taurus. To the less informed, it might well look like "just another Taurus" for all I know.
As for tranny choice, it seems to be pretty mixed: I've seen 'em with both MT and AT.
Finding a first gen SHO is really great shape is not hard. Have fun when it comes time to buy parts. Modding one would even be harder. IMHO, the 2nd gen SHO would be a better deal in the long run.
All SHO's have 4 wheel disc brakes, the '92 had drives side air bag and ABS, the '94 had driver and passenger airbags and ABS...
The automatic cars had softer suspensions, softer sidewall lower performance/speed rated tires, and of course slush boxes... These changes were made to soften the harsh ride of the SHO so it would appeal to more buyers, that was the first step in the direction of total destruction of the SHO.
The 3.0 liter V-6 SHO's flat walks away from 5.0 liter mustangs! If you don't believe it, it's just because you haven't tried it yet!
| SHOs score pretty high on the stealth scale, except for the "SHO" | proudly engraved in the rear bumper. Not sure whether the average | donut muncher would pay too much attention to that, though.
And so it panned out that the following script was sculpted by none other than Toastmaster:
But is it any less reliable than a "regular" Taurus, mewonders?
Doncha mean "don't come with the MANUAL"? Usually it's the manual that's not offered with the larger engine.
For the most part, yes[*], although it depends how good the AT is.
[*] it is true that one can never have too much power *within the limits of traction*. But what use is the minimal power regained by using a no-TC tranny if that falls mostly outside those limits? And based on the stats of many V8 cars that I've noted, the performance difference between the TC and no-TC versions seems, well, minimal at best. And even with some buzzbox cars these days, the difference appears to be ever shrinking.
Generally, yes. But you never know, an AT isn't so bad in the city and all... :} and with a REAL engine, I'd take a decent AT over a MT with horrid (e.g. overly stiff) clutch pedal engagement any day of the week ending in Y.
A real engine, if coupled with a real tranny, requires a real clutch which requires real assistance - that's my take on it anyway. Working out is fabuloso and all, but not while driving, please...
Yeah, I just read the C&D review. They seem to love it and hate it at the same time. I generally don't pay too much attention to that beastie, much as the Monaro is a nice car and all, simply because it isn't going to be available in this country anyway. Aiui about
20k of them will be made for the U.S. market in the first production year?
Also, the discontinuation of the F body will quite possibly raise the used market prices of that car too.
And so it panned out that the following script was sculpted by none other than Toastmaster:
Based solely upon the SHO's reputation, I'd say that's an insult to the fair game of craps, wherein the statistical disadvantage to the player is quite low should he stick primarily to Pass and Come (or their inverse) bets. Iow craps is a pretty even stevens kinda gamble. :} From what I've heard, SHO reliability is questionable across the board, period, but that's only a rumour, a reputation.
And so it panned out that the following script was sculpted by none other than dizzy:
Yeah, I'd forgotten about the FWD aspect. Actually, I think that's the main "flaw" with my MX6 (though FWD is quite ok to drive generally), but you can't have everything, especially at used first gen. MX6 prices.
Well, I notice them like sore thumbs every time, but then, I'm not "most people". What matters is how "stealthy" the car is versus the typical donut munchin' tax collector.
And so it panned out that the following script was sculpted by none other than Aardwolf:
Strewth, I think you're in the market for a Commodore, mate...
Btw, $20k can barely buy a burger and fries in Oz. :} I think at current exchange rates, the base Commodores should check in at about $20 million or so, after dealer discounts... ;}
Funny, my girlfriend said she'd drive a clutch if there was a trigger on the shifter. I don't see how that can possibly be easier... now you have to do two things with your right hand and sync that with your right foot while your left foot sits idle. She cites something about synchronizing the effort between clutching and shifting, but the two feet synchronized are probably more important.
In any event, if I even remotely thought she was serious, I'd probably design something to do a hydraulic booster system on my Probe and let her try to drive it with a trigger clutch. Electronic servo motor controlled by a microcontroller to push the fluid, and for an input, use an old slot car controller style variable resistor... I can't see where it would be all that difficult... except maybe finding the electric booster and motor circuit. Need a pressure control valve to ensure that it's not over-pressurized, and the original clutch system could be left intact. Hell, that could be programmed so that hitting the trigger will push the clutch in, and letting the trigger out rapidly (or even popping it) could release the clutch slowly... and have a little switch somewhere that popping the trigger would effectively pop the clutch.
This could also happen with a cable clutch if you can find something electrical that's strong enough to pull the cable gradually at different speeds.... but that's less likely...
VW had a car that was an automatic manual... i.e. it would push the clutch in and shift gears for you.. but it was a full manual system and could be overridden and shifted like any old 5-speed gearbox. They did that for gas mileage considerations. Technology's out there somewhere...
Depends how you're wired I guess, I'd find coordination much easier with a more HOTAS-like arrangement (shift-handle trigger). The clutch pedal could then be fixed in place and used as a nice footrest.
I've seen a '70s MG modified with a similar setup, by a group of university engineering students. I was kind of impressed with the real-world usefulness of that particular project.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.