Originally Posted by cueball1
(Post 370981)
That's not the point of the Taurus though. It should be a nicely balanced affordable performance sedan if done right.
Light is getting nearly impossible to do now. How do you build a small lightweight car when a car has to have 42 air bags, integrated baby seats, electronic nannies controlling every movement and be able to hit a brick wall at 100mph and walk away. |
That's funny. I have a 95 SHO (last year of the 'fun' ones). Love the thing, but it's quite the money pit and not fun to work on. Even changing the spark plugs was a bitch.
I actually wanted to buy a miata & throw a SHO engine in it. With an old 87ish Aerostar manual bellhousing you could mount it up to a T-5 tranny( i think that's what it was). Then I got my miata and decided that was waay to much work. Still think it would be fun though. But if i was going to throw off the weight distribution like that, I might as well get an LS1 or something. |
The old SHO was a great car and the new one looks like a good performer too, but they aren't the same. They make power differently, the original came with a manual transmission, and then there is the weight factor. I like em both but I'd rather have a first gen. I wanted one as a first car but the maintenance costs scared me away, thats why most SHO owners have a driver and a parts car.
|
I had 96 Garnett and Tan SHO with said Yamaha's 3.4L V8. That car was quick, and sold it and got a 2002 Lincoln LS with a V8. The LS has a sweet sounding motor and exhaust note, nice ride, nice appointments, and unfortunately, my example was a true POS. That was my last Ford product.
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands