GTP Cool Wall: Ford Taurus SHO
- Thread starter TheBook
- 63 comments
- 7,111 views
I must agree becuase the Taurus got bigger and becuase it became sport luxury cruiser it lost a little performance through the generations but it was still pretty quick. But look at the new SHO its a full size compared to the gen 1-3 which were midsizes and it goes 0-60 5.5 s and its about 1000 lbs heavier and only has 130hp extra also only a slush box but its all wheel drive
- 3,131
- GTP_GTPrologue5
- None
There's a Taurus ad at the bottom of this page for me. 
I can't wait to look back at this thread and see TaurusSHO the only one for Sub-Zero. Fun irony.
I can't wait to look back at this thread and see TaurusSHO the only one for Sub-Zero. Fun irony.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,280
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
- 7,313
- Land of the smelly onion
Voted cool.
0-60 in 7.5 was a decent time for an affordable luxury barge back in '96.
235hp was a healthy amount for the time too, thats 20hp more than the '96 Mustang GT made from a 4.6L. My guess is more power could have been made but it was kept low to save the tranny.
0-60 in 7.5 was a decent time for an affordable luxury barge back in '96.
235hp was a healthy amount for the time too, thats 20hp more than the '96 Mustang GT made from a 4.6L. My guess is more power could have been made but it was kept low to save the tranny.
- 3,008
- You're crazy if you think
- I can afford either of these.
Voted Meh. Never likes those Taurus's but it's got a V8
- 40,823
"Huge engine."
Not only are you complaining about Hp/L, the most useless measurement ever conceived, but you are whining about it for an engine that isn't even particularly inefficient. Looking over Wikipedia, I don't see any comparable engine in a mainstream car from the time period that actually had a notably better Hp/L measurement. Nissan didn't make one (300ZX doesn't count). Honda didn't make one (except for the NSX). BMW didn't make one (except for the M3). Mercedes didn't make one. Chrysler did make one, but they regularly exploded. Toyota did make one, but you could only get it in Lexii and Supras.
Now, keeping in mind that I might have missed something, can you tell me what engine was available in your typical sedan that utterly wipes the floor with this one?
Last edited:
- 3,131
- GTP_GTPrologue5
- None
Probably confused when hearing V8. It seems Europeans (no offense to anyone) have an assumption of giant V8's in America, so it's common to put V8 with big. The reason it was 3.4L is because it was (I believe) 2 Yamaha 1.7L's welded together. That's actually reasonable for a 4-cyl. these days. I mean Camaro SS's roll with 6.2L V8's, you split that and you have a 3.1L I4.
A little big, you know? This has kind of turned into a pointless rant on my part though.
And no offense to any Europeans.
A little big, you know? This has kind of turned into a pointless rant on my part though.
And no offense to any Europeans.
- 24,627
- Anoka, MN
Seriously Uncool, the first two gens may have have been rather bland, but the SHO versions added a little insanity to it(kind of like car versions of the Typhoon/Syclone). This gen however they ruined the Taurus and it takes more than a V8 to fix it.
- 5,768
- Anoka, MN
"Did you see that jellybean go!?!"
"See what go where? All I see is bland Taurus."
End scene.
"See what go where? All I see is bland Taurus."
End scene.
- 40,823
Popular opinion has been that it was the Duratec 25 out of the Mondeo/Contour and Cougar with two extra cylinders. The two engines have the same bore and stroke, among other things.
- 731
- Great Britain
"Huge engine."
Not only are you whining about Hp/L, the most useless measurement ever conceived, but you are whining about it for an engine that isn't even particularly inefficient. Looking over Wikipedia, I don't see any comparable engine in a mainstream car from the time period that actually had a notably better Hp/L measurement. Nissan didn't make one (300ZX doesn't count). Honda didn't make one (except for the NSX). BMW didn't make one (except for the European M3). Mercedes didn't make one. Chrysler did make one, but they regularly exploded. Toyota did make one, but you could only get it in Lexii and Supras.
Now, keeping in mind that I might have missed something, can you tell me what engine was available in your typical sedan that utterly wipes the floor with this one?
2000 Audi S4 - 250 - 2.7 litre V6 (smaller engine)
1998 BMW M3 - 240 - 3.2 litre straight six (slightly smaller engine)
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution V - 276 - 2.0 litre (smaller engine)
Subaru Impreza WRX STI -280 - 2.0 litre (smaller engine)
...and to compare it to what can be done with an almost equivalent engine...
Lotus Carlton - 377 - 3.6 litre straight six
that makes the Taurus's 235 from a 3.4 V8 look rather terrible.
(I realise that the Evo and Scoobie weren't officialy sold outside of Japan at the time, but that doesn't make their stats any less relevant.)
- 23,800
- Philippines
To echo Toronado:
Turbos.
And the M3 was a high-revving, high-strung, limited-production engine. In a car that cost much more than the Taurus.
The V8 in the Taurus SHO was pretty special for its time. It's only now that 3.5 liter engines in comparable midsized sedans have eclipsed its power.
Remember, we're talking about a family car with an engine that had pretty high output for its time. And it's a V8. Nobody makes small capacity V8s, anymore.
-
It all could have been so special... more special than the previous V6 SHOs. But then they saddled it with an automatic... and a jellybean shape... just not appealing.
The only appealing part of the package is the engine... which is more appealing in this package:
Still... gets at least a cool for the exhaust note... if nothing else.
Turbos.
And the M3 was a high-revving, high-strung, limited-production engine. In a car that cost much more than the Taurus.
The V8 in the Taurus SHO was pretty special for its time. It's only now that 3.5 liter engines in comparable midsized sedans have eclipsed its power.
Remember, we're talking about a family car with an engine that had pretty high output for its time. And it's a V8. Nobody makes small capacity V8s, anymore.
-
It all could have been so special... more special than the previous V6 SHOs. But then they saddled it with an automatic... and a jellybean shape... just not appealing.
The only appealing part of the package is the engine... which is more appealing in this package:
Still... gets at least a cool for the exhaust note... if nothing else.
- 15,855
- QLD, Australia
- Small_Fryz
Sub-Zero
"TaurusSHO"
Wow thats a big surprise!
I voted uncool for reasons that don't need to be explained because 70% of people already understand.
"TaurusSHO"
Wow thats a big surprise!
I voted uncool for reasons that don't need to be explained because 70% of people already understand.
The car just looks awful, and there's no getting around that.
It's very easy to be disappointed in this car. First, you see that terrible, bland, jellybean body that represents everything that went wrong with car design in the mid 90s and it's as if something has just died in your soul. You kind of perk up when you hear it's a SHO, and even better, it's got a V8...! But then you hear the numbers and find out it's front wheel drive and has an automatic transmission.
It's not even worth the effort to me, but at least they tried, however little it was. Uncool, bordering on Seriously Uncool.
It's very easy to be disappointed in this car. First, you see that terrible, bland, jellybean body that represents everything that went wrong with car design in the mid 90s and it's as if something has just died in your soul. You kind of perk up when you hear it's a SHO, and even better, it's got a V8...! But then you hear the numbers and find out it's front wheel drive and has an automatic transmission.
It's not even worth the effort to me, but at least they tried, however little it was. Uncool, bordering on Seriously Uncool.
theres a guy on shoforum that has taken a 4th gen Taurus(which Ford decided not to do the SHO treatment too) and swaped in either the 6 from a 1st or 2nd gen or the 8th from a 3rd gen( im pretty sure that it was the 8 but im not positive). I thought the car in the video was that car but if you look at my post edit. I checked the video description and its not that car its just a normal Taurus with the stock Duratec
The Vanishing Boy
Premium
- 9,000
- Quezon City, Philippines & Las Vegas, NV
- GTP_VanishingBoy
- Vanishing Boy
SERIOUSLY UN-COOL-> A car that evolved backwards. Its nothing more than a "hype-badge" instead of a "sports sedan" that the first two generation SHO's delivered. On this era, I'd pick the SVT Contour instead. 
SuperShouden
(Banned)
- 7,542
- SuperShouden
Although the engine is awesome, the looks of the car, are not. It's like putting a supermodel is the most hideous outfit you can find. Uncool.
- 4,579
- Houston, TX
- astrosdude91
Looks like the only sub zero vote this car could get was from itself!
- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
the power of a V6, the thirst of a V8. Seriously Uncool
- 4,579
- Houston, TX
- astrosdude91
The Vanishing Boy
Premium
- 9,000
- Quezon City, Philippines & Las Vegas, NV
- GTP_VanishingBoy
- Vanishing Boy
-> I've always wondered on why PD always included this car since GT2 and not the other 'more superior' bretherens? 
