I guess you had to be there, but from 1989-1995, the Ford Taurus SHO, while not a big seller, was America's first legitimate "sports sedan" and was subsequently a veddy big deal. Especially amongst us car wonks. My only experience with one was with a 1993 that I found while quite quick, I also found stiff and creaky. While I thought such things odd on a "family car", I did find it a whole lot more sorted out than my Chevrolet Lumina Z34 I had at the time. Ford never offered a two-door Taurus for sale otherwise I honestly think I may have jumped on one.
Coupe lover me sort of salivated at the thought of the next generation SHO due for 1997 that was rumored to have a Yamaha built, transverse mounted V-8 (!) with a block supplied by Cosworth driving the front wheels. Could this be a four-door that I would be caught dead in?
Err, no. Taurus SHO "II", technically "III", was based on the awful "jellybean" Taurus Ford introduced in the fall of 1995 as a 1996. Funny, I don't like actual jellybeans and I find automobile designs based on them equally unappetizing. "Too swoopy" as my son would say. Not that I ever thought the 1986-1995 Taurus' handsome by any means but the 1996-1999's took a questionable design and left it overnight in the deep fryer. I held my breath for the SHO coming in 1997 that maybe, just maybe would cure all the sins of the '96. Not unlike what an '89 SHO's dress up kit did for an '86.
No such luck and no trunk lid spoiler, body cladding or trick V-8 engine could save a 1996 vintage Taurus from the ugly car hall of shame. Our 109,000-miles young subject here is for sale up here for a shockingly reasonable $4,697. That's saying a lot in this crazy used car market too. Why so cheap?
The 1997-1999 Taurus SHO had more problems than just being homely and awkward looking. For starters, that Yamaha V-8 displaced only 3.4 liters and made all of 235-horsepower and 230 foot-pounds of torque. The V-6 it replaced made 220-horsepower and 200 foot/pounds; the 3.2-liter V-6 offered on SHO's with an automatic ('93-'95 only) made 220-hp and 215 ft-lbs. Ford built a larger DOHC V-8 they stuffed in Mustangs and the Lincoln Continental Mark VII but it was a 90-degree design and was too wide to put in these things. The Yamaha V-8 was banked at 60-degrees so it was narrowly enought to fit. If snuggly.
To make matters worse, 1997-1999 SHO's were only available with automatics. In a 3,500-ish pound sedan, roughly three hundred pounds more than the old SHO, you don't have to be a mathematician, physicist or automobile enthusiast to surmise that V-8 powered SHO's didn't have much more go than the V-6's SHO's. Oh, but wait. There's more.
On approximately 1,200 of roughly 20,000 engines built, around 50,000 miles or so, cam shafts "walked" off or out their chains and the valves all slammed together leading to engine failure. Warranty fixes didn't always stay fixed either. So, not only is she ugly, but she's also got a really bad temperament.
Since so few of the Yamaha V-8's were built, that means there's a scarcity of parts for them these days. I've had a handful of "unique" automobiles over the years and there's nothing quite like the chill of old car you have trouble getting parts for. I love how the poster of the ad writes that this car is the "perfect first car for someone". Yeah. More like perfect first car from hell.
Ford did an about face with the much cleaner although far less distinctive Taurus they introduced, sans an SHO model, for 2000. Seemed like someone upstairs insisted on an adult being in the room when the styling was done. 2000-2007 Taurus' are terrific "first cars" and I whole heartedly recommend them as such. Second or thirtieth cars too. They're spacious, comfortable, efficient and when you're done with it just take it to the junkyard. Or make a planter out of them.
Ford brought back the SHO for 2010. Read what I had to say about them here.
No comments:
Post a Comment