auto.du-reviews.com

What most people don’t know about the Ford-Yamaha relationship is that Yamaha basically took Ford’s 3.0 V6 and re-engineered it to the twin-cam setup, among other and mostly minor differences.

@F41Driver I have seen one done by a member of the SHO club. Its a white wagon with a everything possible transplanted from an sho…including the engine and transmission…im not totaly sure on that one though, it may be an auto. He named it thumper…you could prolly find a pic of it on tcca.com or The SHO club of america website

@BeeABaw They eventualy did introduce that engine just in a different form. With the 1996 and on models ford introduced the duratec V6 as the premium model engine. The difference between those two engines is that the SHO engine was built by yamaha and the duratec is made by mazda. They essentialy have the same power and torque except the SHO gets there quicker. The SHO model got a V8 but it was a faulty engine design and as a result the SHO model was discontinued after the 1999 model year

I had a silver 89 and i loved it… It cornered as flat as a Ferrari just like the one in the video. The downside to the 2nd gens is that Ford mismatched front and rear swaybars by throwing on whatever they had available, so you either got a great handling car or a really bad handling one. They can be made fast. aftermarket parts are expensive and hard to come by now. Big bore butterfly’s and cams, and heads are very expensive. I’m not evern sure if Shoshop is still even in business or not.

In ’91 I was torn between this & the SC Tbird. Wound up getting a ’89 SC. But I always liked Yamahas’ 3 litre. Very impressive.

@rriggi129
Considering that the AMG Hammer was over $120,000, which is a HUGE price difference, the Hammer was in a completely different league and was obviously not fighting for the same buyers as the $20,000 SHO. Its like comparing a Ferrari 458 Italia to a 2011 Mustang GT 5.0

@91Taurus

220BHP was not a big deal..

The 1987 300E AMG HAMMER was a HUGE deal with its 6.0 V8…

@BeeABaw Actually, in 1989, the SHO engine WAS that powerful. To put it into perspective, an 89 SHO made more horsepower than a base model Porsche 911.

@91Taurus they just looked better then the others an they seam to have more power then the others i have had a 89 a 93 an a 97 sho an the 93 was the best looking an fastest

@Richierich1285
Why do you say that? I own both a 1991 SHO MTX and 1995 SHO MTX and I like the ’91 better

@91Taurus the second gen sho was a better car then all of the other shos

@BeeABaw well i dont see buying the tops of the line model with out getting the extra power to go along with it would u but a top of the line mustang with a v6 in it no i wouldnt

I got a really clean ’93 that I keep because I like the car. But if you want something more than a maginally fast street car, better pass on the SHO. There’ is nothing you can do to them to make them fast without throwing a shitload of money at them.

i just find it hilarious when the guy says ” it was the best american sedan to hit the street in years ” i mean jeeze cars made from the mid 70s to 2000 were so boring and ugly. dont get me wrong i i think the taurus sho is an alright car even tho i hate fwd with decent power in a large car.

I have this cars engine for my autos class since it looked like the best choice and the engine looks awesome for a 1989 engine haha

With an SHO engine in every Taurus the base price would have skyrocketed from about $13,000 in ’89 to over $20,000, and Ford would have lost money on every single one, since that was way out of the average american family’s price range
2) When you say “a bigger engine thats not really that powerfull in the first place.” you’re not thinking about the fact that this was 1989. A Nissan 300ZX Turbo was making 205hp so 220hp in a 4door sedan was a huge deal!
3) Look up the meaning of a “Halo Car”

@BeeABaw There are so many things wrong with what you said I’l need more than one comment
1) The regular Taurus was a “bread and butter” family car for people who need to get to work and back, and could care less about performance so it would not have been cost-effective to include an expensive high-performance engine which was shipped from Japan in every Taurus. Keep in mind that the Ford Made over 350,000 Taurus’ in 1989 and only about 15,000 of those were SHO models

why dident ford just use the Sho’s engine standard for every model taurus and when you get the sho package it get u a extra sporty look and better handling and a manual. but if you get a regular taurus it would have the same sporty engine but a softer ride. cus really your spending extra what 5-8k for a bigger engine thats not really that powerfull in the first place.

Impressive performance! For a high performance engine, though, I would’ve expected more torque than it does. I would’ve thought 220bhp and perhaps 300lbs-ft of torque would’ve sent the car flying

wait… it began life as a 3.0? As in the vulcan 3.0? the 150 horse overhead valve that was the Tauruses maiden engine?

Wow.

@JoZuko
Practice makes perfect!

4 years ago, I got my ’89 to sixty in 6 seconds. (Thank you, in-dash stopwatch! lol)

Sometimes, I get lazy and I don’t want to drive my cars that have manual transmissions. Having said that, a properly driven, but neglected manual transmission will FAR outlast even an automatic transmission that has received half way decent care. That’s all I care about. As we all know The SHO autobox is not a durable machine and was originally built for the punk ass Tempo. Thanks for your input.

not everyone wants a manual

@MTXSHO9732vV8SHO not everyone wants a manual