https://youtu.be/5VTRhCC3gZI
:lol:
Love it. I miss mine so much!
(Rich shared it with me in email. :) )
Not mentioned was that the SHO was one of the first, if not the first, to practically eliminate torque steer on a front wheel drive car.
Quote from: FoMoJo on July 27, 2021, 04:10:30 PM
Not mentioned was that the SHO was one of the first, if not the first, to practically eliminate torque steer on a front wheel drive car.
True! Although first and second gear could still get squirrelly..
Great video. My parents bought one of the first Taurus sedans back in '85 (not a SHO, but was first generation as was the car in the video). It really was revolutionary in '85. There was nothing like it on the road, from any automaker, at any price.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 31, 2021, 07:34:13 PM
Great video. My parents bought one of the first Taurus sedans back in '85 (not a SHO, but was first generation as was the car in the video). It really was revolutionary in '85. There was nothing like it on the road, from any automaker, at any price.
Absolutely!
Quote from: GoCougs on July 31, 2021, 07:34:13 PM
Great video. My parents bought one of the first Taurus sedans back in '85 (not a SHO, but was first generation as was the car in the video). It really was revolutionary in '85. There was nothing like it on the road, from any automaker, at any price.
How so?
Quote from: GoCougs on July 31, 2021, 07:34:13 PM
Great video. My parents bought one of the first Taurus sedans back in '85 (not a SHO, but was first generation as was the car in the video). It really was revolutionary in '85. There was nothing like it on the road, from any automaker, at any price.
My parents got a first generation Mercury Sable (equivalent car to the Taurus) and I drove it a lot my last few years of highschool and for several years afterwards. An acquaintance of mine... his parents had a same year Toyota Camry. We would argue a bit with each other about which was the better car.
Both cars had good looks for a mainstreamer brand. The Taurus/Sable was a bit bigger and felt like a more expensive car. We had to get rid of ours at 90,000 miles. Everything started breaking. His Camry lasted over 150,000 miles.
The first 75,000 miles or so of the Sable's life it was great though.
Quote from: Submariner on July 31, 2021, 09:18:21 PM
How so?
The aerodynamic look with the flush headlights and grille was really hot at the time.
Styling was a huge part - remember the competition in '86 - Chevy Celebrity and all its kissing cousins, Chrysler K-car variants, Toyota Camry, or even the Taurus predecessor - the very forgettable mini LTD. They all looked ancient in comparison. I will say the new-for '86 Honda Accord styling holds up well vs. the Taurus, and I dare say it aged better, however, it was a step down in size, power and refinement.
Engine was a also a big part. Port fuel injected, 60 deg V6 with 140 hp. The "Vulcan" was one of the first, if not THE first, mass-produced engines designed from the ground up for fuel injection. Much of the competition was not even available with a V6, and some still even used a carburetor (such as the aforementioned Accord). None had close to 140 hp.
I remember watching Robocop in the theater right when the Taurus came out. I wanted my parents to get a Taurus! It was styled so futuristic but not a caricature.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9k8KM667fgE
Quote from: GoCougs on July 31, 2021, 11:09:40 PM
Styling was a huge part - remember the competition in '86 - Chevy Celebrity and all its kissing cousins, Chrysler K-car variants, Toyota Camry, or even the Taurus predecessor - the very forgettable mini LTD. They all looked ancient in comparison. I will say the new-for '86 Honda Accord styling holds up well vs. the Taurus, and I dare say it aged better, however, it was a step down in size, power and refinement.
Engine was a also a big part. Port fuel injected, 60 deg V6 with 140 hp. The "Vulcan" was one of the first, if not THE first, mass-produced engines designed from the ground up for fuel injection. Much of the competition was not even available with a V6, and some still even used a carburetor (such as the aforementioned Accord). None had close to 140 hp.
Yup, but of course it was the gorgeous '83 Thunderbird that started it all. I see these cars (T-Bird, Cougar, Taurus, Sable, and maybe even Tempo and Topaz) as the beginning of the emergence from the malaise era. These cars were darn near world class when they came out.
Quote from: Rockraven on August 01, 2021, 07:40:07 AM
Yup, but of course it was the gorgeous '83 Thunderbird that started it all. I see these cars (T-Bird, Cougar, Taurus, Sable, and maybe even Tempo and Topaz) as the beginning of the emergence from the malaise era. These cars were darn near world class when they came out.
Taurus/Sable and Tempo/Topaz were a lot of car for the money and the Taurus/Sable were styled well (not the Tempo though :lol:). I think however Ford really screwed the pooch when it came to penny pinching. They literally designed the cars to not last past 100,000 miles. A decade or so later the Camcords, Corollas, and Civics took over as America's best selling sedans by a wide margin and never looked back. I'm not sure but that's probably also when the resale value of the U.S. domestic cars took a nosedive compared with their Toyota and Honda counterparts. Penny wise, pound foolish.
Detroit spends just as much or more time and $$ developing and building its cars as does Japan, it's just that Japan (esp. Toyota) builds a more reliable and durable product. That's what has vexxed Detroit for so long - it's not obvious.
Quote from: veeman on August 01, 2021, 09:14:12 AM
Taurus/Sable and Tempo/Topaz were a lot of car for the money and the Taurus/Sable were styled well (not the Tempo though :lol:). I think however Ford really screwed the pooch when it came to penny pinching. They literally designed the cars to not last past 100,000 miles. A decade or so later the Camcords, Corollas, and Civics took over as America's best selling sedans by a wide margin and never looked back. I'm not sure but that's probably also when the resale value of the U.S. domestic cars took a nosedive compared with their Toyota and Honda counterparts. Penny wise, pound foolish.
My family went through several Taurus, starting with an '87 wagon. We tended to get new cars every 5-6 years anyway, never racked too many miles up on them. Our wagon ended up in the hands of a regional sales rep for NAPA who sold parts to my family's business, so we still ended up seeing it on a weekly basis. He ended up putting over 250K miles on that Taurus and it never needed anything but usual maintenance (tires, brakes, fluids, belts).
Quote from: GoCougs on July 31, 2021, 07:34:13 PM
Great video. My parents bought one of the first Taurus sedans back in '85 (not a SHO, but was first generation as was the car in the video). It really was revolutionary in '85. There was nothing like it on the road, from any automaker, at any price.
This is an unexpected response from our resident Ford downer. Rather inconsistent with what was said when I shared it in a different thread a few weeks ago.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 31, 2021, 11:09:40 PM
Styling was a huge part - remember the competition in '86 - Chevy Celebrity and all its kissing cousins, Chrysler K-car variants, Toyota Camry, or even the Taurus predecessor - the very forgettable mini LTD. They all looked ancient in comparison. I will say the new-for '86 Honda Accord styling holds up well vs. the Taurus, and I dare say it aged better, however, it was a step down in size, power and refinement.
Engine was a also a big part. Port fuel injected, 60 deg V6 with 140 hp. The "Vulcan" was one of the first, if not THE first, mass-produced engines designed from the ground up for fuel injection. Much of the competition was not even available with a V6, and some still even used a carburetor (such as the aforementioned Accord). None had close to 140 hp.
I've been watching (well, I usually have it on as background noise) a lot of retro MotorWeek and that all makes sense. Chrysler was pumping out the positively ancient-looking New Yorker (not the LHS/New Yorker) until the early 90's. The Taurus does look quite futuristic against all of its mid 80's domestic competition now that I think about it.
My grandfather bought an SHO new back in 94. He died in 1996 and it went on to my grandmother, who lost her keys in 2000 when it became apparent she was suffering from dementia. It was passed down to various family members before being lost to an accident by a doped up distant relative. Too bad.
Come to think of it, my best buddy growing up had a 2nd gen taurus wagon. We always sat in the rear facing seats because...well why not?
Quote from: veeman on August 01, 2021, 09:14:12 AM
Taurus/Sable and Tempo/Topaz were a lot of car for the money and the Taurus/Sable were styled well (not the Tempo though :lol:). I think however Ford really screwed the pooch when it came to penny pinching. They literally designed the cars to not last past 100,000 miles. A decade or so later the Camcords, Corollas, and Civics took over as America's best selling sedans by a wide margin and never looked back. I'm not sure but that's probably also when the resale value of the U.S. domestic cars took a nosedive compared with their Toyota and Honda counterparts. Penny wise, pound foolish.
Unfortunately, it was the era of the penny-pinching bean counters of the NA automotive industries. Everything was driven by the bottom line and suppliers were nickeled and dimed by the big three, well, two-and-a-half NA auto manufacturers. As a result, quality suffered because the suppliers only produced the product that they were paid for. It was only in the late '90s and early 2000s that there was an awaking, but it was too late. GM and Chrysler were bankrupt and Ford had to mortgage the house, even the blue oval, in order to raise enough cash for new product with improved quality.
The general opinion of Ford dealer mechanics regarding the early SHO Taurus was "Why did they put such a good engine in such a shitty car?". :lol:
I've always wanted to put that engine in a Ranger, but CA smog laws are a bitch.
If I remember correctly, the SHO lasted quite a long time. Maybe 200k+ miles before it was totaled. My family has had a lot of infuriating experiences with Big 3 products, but the SHO was always a solid vehicle.
The only real issues with the SHO were the Ford fuel pumps, and the rod bearings could fail after 100k miles.
That's what did mine in, at 171k miles. Autobahn A6. Sho forum members offered me a short block but I couldn't afford $800 to ship it to Germany. :cry: