New Taurus SHO

[oddlycalm]

As an owner of the original 1989 SHO I was curious what Ford's new version is like. What I discovered was that while it's a reasonably nice car that was both much larger, more opulent and more expensive (in relative terms) than the original. A good bit of the charm of the original was the understated design and simple elegance. The 3.0L V6 had 220hp and got great fuel economy while doing it. We did numerous trips through Nevada too and from the family in Arizona and we got 21mpg with the cruise control set on 105mph all day long. I paid $14,200 for it new out the door. Sticker was around $16,700 best as I can recall.

Ford's new version weighs 4375lbs., has all wheel drive, an automatic, every feature you can think of. It's a foot longer, half of that in the wheelbase. The 3.5L dual turbo V6 puts out 365hp and fuel economy is slightly lower on both city and hwy than the original. With the performance option, heated seats, the good audio system and candy metallic paint the price out the door is north of $41,000 which is getting into BMW 335 territory.

Taken on it's own this seems like a pretty nice large car. Compared to the original SHO it's a big heavy car with a lot of power at a tall price.

oc

http://www.automobilemag.com/new_and_future_cars/2010/0902_2010_ford_taurus_sho/photo_00.html

[Indy]

What are they smoking in their design office? Gaudy, fussy, and cluttered is not a good look.

[nrc]

Our old SVT Contour was more in the idiom of the Taurus SHO than this new battle cruiser. Nice car, but 40k, 4000lbs and no real stick make it a non-factor here.

Sadly, both the new Mazda 6 and the improved Fusion both also fall out of the running due to the lack of a standard gearbox with a V6.

[WickerBill]

Can you really compare different eras in cars?

The original SHO was almost a flight of fancy -- Yamaha engine, manual gearbox, etc. This one retains the name but is going for a different market; the first SHO market simply doesn't exist like it did in 1989.

It's just a repurposing of a name. The new SHO is a great, great car (you really should go drive one, everyone); but so is the new Taurus. Neither one have much to do with the originals, IMO.

[opinionated ow]

I'm glad you guys have the same issues trying to find manual cars. Car companies have got it into their heads that North Americans, Australians and New Zealanders are too useless and fat to handle a manual gearbox. Apparently us antipodeans are only capable of turning the steering wheel.

A few years ago my father and I were talking to the Citroen distributor for Australia. My number might be a little wrong here but I think he said that in the preceding year Citroen had made 1,000,000 cars and less than 10% were automatics. At that time you could hardly buy a manual Citroen in Australia and I think now the only one you can buy is the sporty C3.

I want to know why they think we're incapable of handling a manual! I hate autos with a passion :flame:

[stroker]

I won't bother comparing the cars. I will, however, point a finger at Detroit in general as they have a philosophical blind spot the size of Texas. How, after more than 35 years since the first gas "crisis" they can continue to try and exclusively peddle overweight and overpriced Stratoloungers just stumps me. I'm sure they'd argue "That's what sells..." but it seems to me like they get caught zigging every time the market zags.

[datachicane]

You have fine taste, OC. I recently sold the '91 SHO I've had for the last decade. The new one has gobs of power, but at 4000lb it should. Heck, I thought the 2nd generation was too heavy and soft, let alone the 3rd. My wife, who absolutely refused to drive sticks, was sold when she realized she could pull away from a dead stop in 3rd or hit 90 in 2nd- shifting was pretty much optional for her :gomer:. Went like stink and got 25-27 mpg on the freeway (not at 105, though)...

I drove a bare-bones fleet special rental Fusion in LA a couple of months back, and I was honestly surprised how nicely finished it was. Power was more than adequate- I actually had to pop the hood to make certain that it didn't have the V6. That car with a decent stick would go a long ways towards filling that SHO jones, but Ford's decided that's not a car I want, along with Focus wagons, Pumas, Fiestas, and Kas.

[WickerBill]

I think Ford's on the right track, or getting there. The Fusion and Taurus are really, really good cars; the new Fiesta is going to also be a great small car. Coming next year, I think.

You can say it's a Detroit thing, but have you seen the Honda Civic? It's bigger than the Accord was a few years ago. It's an industry thing.


I just wish the Taurus and Fiesta, which are new cars, weren't recycling old names. I hated GM re-using "Impala" and "Malibu" and others, and now Ford's doing it. They were doing all "E" names for their SUVs and I thought they were doing all "F" names for their cars, until they recycled "Taurus".

[SteveH]

I will, however, point a finger at Detroit in general as they have a philosophical blind spot the size of Texas. How, after more than 35 years since the first gas "crisis" they can continue to try and exclusively peddle overweight and overpriced Stratoloungers just stumps me. I'm sure they'd argue "That's what sells..." but it seems to me like they get caught zigging every time the market zags.

Well, it is what sells. How many people who have a 4X4 or SUV actually use it off road? Or a full size pick up truck that never leaves the city? Hummers? :shakehead Consumers are stupid. Can't really blame the automakers when idiots purchase crap that they have no use for other than it helps them be 'cool'

[Sean Malone]

"Ford's new version weighs 4375lbs...".

That is only 117lbs lighter than my 4 door, 4 wheel drive, V8 powered pickup truck.

My first question would be to potential BMW 335 buyers...would you consider a new Ford Taurus SHO?'

[Sean Malone]

Well, it is what sells. How many people who have a 4X4 or SUV actually use it off road? Or a full size pick up truck that never leaves the city? Hummers? :shakehead Consumers are stupid. Can't really blame the automakers when idiots purchase crap that they have no use for other than it helps them be 'cool'

Don't forget that many of those owners simply consider those beasts as people haulers and will immediately site safety as justification, which you can hardly blame. A co-worker of mine recently bought a large GM SUV for his 20 year old daughter simple because "bigger is safer".

[nrc]

I just wish the Taurus and Fiesta, which are new cars, weren't recycling old names. I hated GM re-using "Impala" and "Malibu" and others, and now Ford's doing it. They were doing all "E" names for their SUVs and I thought they were doing all "F" names for their cars, until they recycled "Taurus".

The Fiesta makes sense because... well, it's the Fiesta. Same car, same name as in Europe. Mulally wants to build equity in global brands. The Taurus name came back because he thought it was stupid to have thrown away that brand name to begin with. Maybe he never drove one of the rental specials they sold toward the end when they were putting all their money and effort into SUVs.

Ford seems to have a good plan to globalize their line-up with their European platforms forming the heart of the small and mid-size segment. The Fiesta will be the first test of how those platforms make the translation to America, followed by the Focus and Mondeo.

You're right, though. The Taurus is a different car in a different market segment than the original. More like a much more sophisticated Crown Vic than a Taurus.

[oddlycalm]

It's just a repurposing of a name. The new SHO is a great, great car (you really should go drive one, everyone); but so is the new Taurus. Neither one have much to do with the originals, IMO.
I can accept that, though I think it's a bad marketing decision. I don't doubt it drives very well and is a very nice car but there are two things I can't figure out. First is how they made it 400-500lbs. heavier than the LaCrosse AWD, Acura TL AWD, BMW 5 AWD, Audi A6 AWD, etc. To put it in perspective that's three 150lb. anvils. :confused:

The other is price. It may be a real nice car but regardless of the badge it's a $40,000 Ford. Part of the charm of the original SHO is that it stacked up well to a BMW 3 series for half the money, a compelling bargain. This is larger car but maybe not as large a bargain as the original.

oc

[rosawendel]

I'm in agreement with most here: it's a nice car, but 40k with no stick is a high price to pay, and i'm to understand that dealers are getting sticker and up for it. you're into bimmer and S-4 country with that sticker price, may as well go there.

on a side note, was the original formally pronounced "show"? i always thought it was called the S-H-O for "super high output".

[datachicane]

on a side note, was the original formally pronounced "show"? i always thought it was called the S-H-O for "super high output".

I always thought S-H-O was correct.

[extramundane]

I always thought S-H-O was correct.

It was, for the original. Some of the SHO fanboys blew a gasket when the new "Show" commercials started running.

In other questionable Ford news, the new platform Ranger will go on sale next year in damn near every country in the world....except the USA (http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091109/ANA03/311099919/1128&AssignSessionID=373367133572200).

[stroker]

Well, it is what sells. How many people who have a 4X4 or SUV actually use it off road? Or a full size pick up truck that never leaves the city? Hummers? :shakehead Consumers are stupid. Can't really blame the automakers when idiots purchase crap that they have no use for other than it helps them be 'cool'

So what's the 2009 version of the Geo Metro/Suzuki Swift? Or were they dropped because there's no demand for light fuel-efficient cars anymore?

[cameraman]

To put it in perspective that's three 150lb. anvils. :confused:

oc

Or one corn-fed American passenger...

[JohnHKart]

I think Ford's on the right track, or getting there. The Fusion and Taurus are really, really good cars; the new Fiesta is going to also be a great small car. Coming next year, I think.

.


And the USA bound- one world Euro Focus too!

[datachicane]

Lots of Ford love in here. I'm down to just one (if I don't count the Mazda :gomer: ), and it's in pieces...

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_2Yptu8g36aI/SNnHI1ullII/AAAAAAAAAP8/I2x2QhrYHaA/s800/Dcp_2565.jpg

[jcollins28]

The original SHO was something else. That car left a huge impression on me when one smoked me on the 57 fwy one late night while I was in my Mustang GT. Anyone remember the SHOgun? A local shop around here made that car and Jay Leno bought one. It was a SHO motor shoe horned in the back of a Ford Festiva.

[opinionated ow]

The original SHO was something else. That car left a huge impression on me when one smoked me on the 57 fwy one late night while I was in my Mustang GT. Anyone remember the SHOgun? A local shop around here made that car and Jay Leno bought one. It was a SHO motor shoe horned in the back of a Ford Festiva.

Shogun?
http://www.mitsubishi-cars.co.uk/images/newshogun/features/shogun-LWB-diamond.jpg

[WickerBill]

Lots of Ford love in here.

I wondered when I'd get called on it. Have to admit I'm completely rooting for them to succeed, so I'm probably trying too hard to see the good stuff.

[Ankf00]

FMC just reported almost $1B revenue. Only of the big 3 run half-properly. Go Ford.

[datachicane]

The original SHO was something else. That car left a huge impression on me when one smoked me on the 57 fwy one late night while I was in my Mustang GT. Anyone remember the SHOgun? A local shop around here made that car and Jay Leno bought one. It was a SHO motor shoe horned in the back of a Ford Festiva.

I remember those well. Stock SHO engine, transaxle, and front suspension wedged in the back seat of a Festiva, fuel cell in the front, stock SHO brakes and wheels all around. There was one for sale in Stumptown back in the mid-90s, but the wife wouldn't let me within blocks of it. Would look great parked in my dream garage next to an R5 Turbo (just down the aisle from the Stratos and RS200 :cool: ).

[JohnHKart]

Mullaly rocks! My Escort is the best car I've ever had. I miss my 56 Ford.

[chop456]

I still want an S-Max with a diesel.

http://z.about.com/d/cars/1/7/s/l/ford_smax.jpg

[Indy]

^^^ That's a diesel? Why can't I have that? Damn, I would buy that.

[chop456]

^^^ That's a diesel? Why can't I have that?

Because it's loud, makes huge clouds of black smoke and won't start if it's below 72 degrees.

You don't know anything, stupid American.

[Hard Driver]

I wish they really did it right. As the owner of a 2000 Audi S4, I certainly like the idea of a twin turbo V6 and AWD in a performance sedan.

However, the problem with the new SHO is that basically, it is still not a true performance machine. It is just an optioned out Taurus with a big engine. But they did not really do the performance 100% right.

First, the brakes are too small and can not handle performance braking, they are the same size rotors as the stock family sedan with better pads. Come on guys, for $40,000 you should get some nice Brembos or something.

Second, the AWD system is not a performance based system. The Haldex system is set to 55% front 45% rear initial torque split, which is fine but not exactly designed for sporting balance. For example, the new Audi S4 quattro is set to a 40/60 front rear torque split.

Third, that much weight is hard to stop and turn, no matter how big the engine. So for real sporting pretenses, it needs to go on a diet.

I will be replacing my Audi someday and thought about the Taurus, but it just does not really match up to a 2010 Audi S4.

[oddlycalm]

I will be replacing my Audi someday and thought about the Taurus, but it just does not really match up to a 2010 Audi S4.
I agree with your comments on how it stacks up as a true performance car overall, though the original SHO didn't have true performance brakes either, but this car is the size and weight of an A6 rather than an S4 and in terms of performance hardware that's a better comparison as well. An S6 is similar size and weight but it's a 465hp V10 monster with serious brakes and chassis. It's a good size and performance match for the A6 4.2 but it's $30,000 less money than an A6 4.2 and you give up the nice leathers and wood and AWD refinement.

In reality the target market is not the Audi, BMW, or Benz large panzers, it's the Buick Lacrosse AWD and Cadillac CTS AWD, etc. The SHO is heavier but the MPG is similar and it may be a better overall package.

I too wish Ford success. The efficient 3.5 V6 with dual small turbo (quick spool up), turbos with modern lube and cooling, the radar based adaptive cruise, the easy fill capless filler neck, and good dash layout are nice features. I just don't see sedans the size and weight of main battle tanks as game changers.

oc