@BLACKLACDTSThe SHO is my dads car, if you search SHO Camaro one of the top videos that comes up is him vs a new Camaro SS... he was handing it to him all day. We spoke to him, and the guy was trying to figure out why we were faster in a Taurus. I believe he had the same simple bolt ons too... air intake, exhaust, tune.
@Pooz30 im not taking anything from the new sho they run very good but the 13.0 runs i have seen it run is not enuff to beat a new camaro with those mods. a stock new camaro ss runs 13.0 and i have even seen them run 12.80s bone stock and 12.40s with the mods you said so i would give that to a bad driver in the ss and the sho awd winning it. the camaro with those mods should trap at least 112mph.
@BLACKLACDTS well, I'd have to see it to believe it, I have not seen a stock SS get any better than a mid to low 13 second pass, in person or on youtube. With the stock wheels the SHO would be high 12's with this setup and that's a fact. These wheels are significantly heavier than stock. This exact setup with stock wheels has ran 12.8 on other cars. Keeping in mind that this is a 6 cylinder 4 door sedan. The fastest guy out there has ran 12.3 and I believe he has gotten a 12.2 out of it.
@Pooz30 i know for a fact my friends brandons camaro ss runs 12.40 @ 115mph with cai,tune,exhaust on street tires. look around on youtubre a lil there is a few videos of stock camatros runnin 12.70s and 80s.
@BLACKLACDTS it's also funny that you have to plead your case as to why you feel the Camaro is faster (it's not) than a Taurus when in reality the Camaro should be getting compared to the MUCH faster Mustang. Technically this race should be versus an Impala, but we all know what would happen there.
@Pooz30 i am not pleading any case it is what it is. i hope you dont think a stock sho is faster then a stock impala ss because its not. oh and maybe you should throw the pontiac g8 gt in there to compare the sho but we know what would happen there. the thing is how much the sho cost thats why there is like none of them on the road it had horrible sales. like i said i do like them i like them alot but dont get out of place. there is alot of fast 4 door cars out now. evo,sti,cts-v,srt8's ect..
@BLACKLACDTS sorry, the Camaro weighs about 3,900lbs and the SHO is 4,500lbs... and bone stock I sure hope the Camaro beats it, V8 sports car vs a 6cylinder 4 door sedan. Not comparing apples to apples and the SHO will still only be 1 maybe 2 tenths slower.
The V6 Mustang is just as fast as the SS and the GT is way faster. GM has some catching up to do, period.
@BLACKLACDTS You realize this is the older camaro, not the new one right? Its a mid 13 second car...which is what the SHO is stock.
My friends 00 LS1 trans am ran 13.60s bone stock, and 13.30s with some exhaust work done. Nothing a stock SHO can't handle (13.60s) and with a tune beat easily . There are 12 second SHOs right here on youtube going 12.7xs all day long with just a tune/catback/K&N filter. BTW, the SHO weighs ALOT more.
@testy462 we were actually talkin about the other video of it racing a new camaro ss with intake,exhaust and tune and only ran a mid 13 or sumthin. i have never seen a stock sho run better then a 13.90 and i have seen ls1 cars run 13.30s bone stock. for those sho's runnin 12.7s find a ls3 camaro with the same mods and tell me what it runs. i like the new sho alot ecspecially the awd but i also know there spot on the food chain. on the street its a different story then the track.
@BLACKLACDTS well.. I'm not sure you do know it's spot on the food chain.. it's a 4door sedan and you're trying to compensate for it's performance against a Camaro... these cars shouldn't even be in the same league... Unfortunately for the Camaro, they are.
And as for in the street... this car is even more impressive. Makes peak power at 1,500 rpm. so any gear and speed any rpm it's ready to go. It will take down cars that are faster because it's instantly making full power. The SHO is no joke.
@Pooz30 i would give the sho the advantage on the street thats what i meant due to awd. i know all about heavy awd performance vehicals look at my video. 5200lbs,low 13s on 20" rims
@BLACKLACDTS I don't think your taking into account the fact that the SHO is a twin turbo either, and how easy that makes it to upgrade.
You can literally have a SHO that in sound, exterior looks, MPG, driveablity, basically every single way just like it was as stock running high/mid 12s with just a tune and CAI.
No cam to make it lumpy, no pulling the motor apart, no voiding the warrenty, etc etc. And go sit in one and tell me its not nicer than a G8 or anything GM makes.
@testy462 ONCE AGAIN I LIKE THE NEW SHO if you think the sho interior is nicer then any gm thats your opinion i dont think it is. the new cts-v is incredible inside. i know a local 2010 camaro ss with a cai,tune and straight piped that goes 12.40s all day! i have no reason to lie! i know what the sho is capable off my only issue is the price of the car. where are you guys from with ths ho? if your close we can set up a race with the ss and see what happens.
@BLACKLACDTS I'm sure the CTS-V, with a 65,000 dollar MSRP, has a comparable interior to the SHO... which is exactly the point.
How can you argue that the SHO isn't worth the extra 10K over the camaro simply because it comes in a few tenths slower in the 1/4 mile, even though with a simple 500 dollar mod it outruns it?
Your comparing a 4 door luxury mobile with AWD and way more options, room, etc etc to a two door sport car with all that entails, and it still comes close in the 1/4.
@BLACKLACDTS If its fair to compare it this way, then its fair to compare the CTSv to the new 2011 5.0L boss... the boss will spank its ass in the 1/4 stock vs stock, but to say the CTS-V is a ripoff because its thousands more would be completely ignoring the good parts about the V (like being factory FI, interior, ride, etc etc etc).
If your objective (instead of a GM fanboy) you can see how a 4 door V6 car running door to door with the 2 door V8 is dammed impressive, even if it takes a tune
2010 camaro ss specs-3900 lbs,13.0 1/4, 0-60 4.7. $31k
maybe this will help you understand where im comin from. LIKE I SAID I LIKE THE SHO but not worth the money imo. there is a at least 3 4 door vehicals i would prefer over the SHO
@BLACKLACDTS SS doesn't run 13 flat... I'm sorry but I have not seen it.
The SHO is just shy of 4400lbs
You want to play the compare a Camaro game the way you just did? Well then compare it to a Mustang. I'm done with this SHO Camaro comparison you are trying to make like they are in the same class... and the SHO is far from overpriced. If you consider the sedans it's up against at the cost, features, quality and performance... I think you need to go to a Ford dealer and take one for a drive.
@Pooz30 The SHO is sure as hell more comfortable, bigger inside, a world and a half nicer inside, more interior room for driver, sure as hell more interior room for the passengers, four door, and freaking AWD.
Having one with just a tune spanking a brand new GM powerhouse LS3 is an accomplishment in my book. I don't see how the other guy can possibly be arguing that the camaro is better lol.
@BLACKLACDTS Another thing, after thinking about it a bit, but have you PRICED a new camaro?
Comparing MSRP, brand new, your off your rocker if you think the SHO is that much more. Sure, you can buy a bare (BARE) bones camaro with zero options for the 31,000~ range, but if you put literally any options on it at all (ala, on chevy's website the "2SS" package) the price instantly jumps to 38,000. Add in a automatic transmission or a set of non standard wheels and your at SHO range.
@Pooz30 when you run into a guy that can drive a new ss they run good. look around on youtube you will see plenty run 13.0 and even better..if you dont think paying $40+k for a taurus isnt over priced your nutz.so once you do the cai,tune and exhaust and run high 12s whats next that wont void the warranty? for $40k you can get a new sti or evo that bone stock will plain out run the sho with much less motor and 1 less turbo. we could do this all day. its a nice car just enjoy it.
@Pooz30 Actually the SHO competes against and out performs sedans that cost much much more like the Audi A6 and BMW. I own one and the quality, options, and power rival 60-80K luxury sedans.
@BLACKLACDTS Not to argue for the sake of it, but livernois has SHOs going 12.80s with nothing more than a handheld tuner. I'd say thats dammed impressive, and on par with a new camaro with a tuner.
The only reason we are not running 12's is that the wheels weight significantly more than stock... don't remember the exact #... but we weighed them, and it was a pretty big difference.
@BLACKLACDTS I'm in the Toronto Canada area... but if you want to challenge me with a Camaro I will race you with my Mustang since those cars a classed together. Oh and by the way, a new GT is already a 12 second car stock. Maybe the SS is a better match for a V6 Stang
Now you're comparing a Lancer? Talk about overpriced.
Just do yourself a favour and sit in one of these.
@BLACKLACDTS And the SHO, by definintion, is already loaded up...thats what it is, the loaded up version of the T. The above 38,000 price doesn't include navi, etc etc etc etc. Add in all that and its very possible to acutally match the prices!
IMO you, along with alot of others, are letting the name "Taurus" get in the way of an open mind. IMO Ford shouldn't have named it that, as the mid 90s cars have the stigma of a crappy family car. This ain't your daddy's SHO. Go sit in one.
@testy462 sorry bro but the taurus was not a crappy family car back in the 90s, they were the number1 selling four door sedan, and i still see a HUGE number of them riding around on the streets. but in all honesty i wished ford never made the new taurus, raptor and explorer instead i wish ford would have made a new Fairlane or Torino, but we still have this shitty mustang! what a joke it is.
What dont you like about the new mustang? 412 HP, fastest production mustang built to date (other than the current GT500). Even the new V6 is faster than anything built from 1964 to today other than a handful of specialty cars lol, not to mention handling etc etc.
I wasn't trying to insult the previous Ts, but they were not exactly luxury powerhouses back in the 90s. Todays T competes with much more expensive cars and does it well
@testy462 the (5.0) needs a bigger bore, the mustang shares the same platform with the explorer and taurus, all three are just straight ugly this is why im holding off for the new mustang in 2014, the (5.0) actually makes 432hp. i miss my 5.4 in my F150 i feel as if the 5.0 truck motor just doesnt pull like my old 5.4 did, it would be nice to see the new 5.8 in the F150 not the 5.0. i never liked the taurus the old one and the new one,
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI The mustang is not on the same platform as the explorer or taurus, Its a DC2 which nothing but the mustang uses.
I think you need to recheck your numbers on the 60s cars. There wasn't a single one of em running better than 14s until you get to big block status (stock). Its a pretty common misconception though.
@testy462 NOPE!!! 351 Mach1s were laying down high 13s 428CJ and SCJ mustangs were low 13s and high 12s my uncle has a real 428SCJ Mach1 12.94 he still has his time slips. even 390s were mid 13s, 427, 290 and 428s are big blocks not small blocks, when your talking about 14 second cars yes there is many of them but this is also documented for cars using no traction control and very steep gearing. my dads 67 Fairlane ran low 13s 390 675 holley and 3:90.1 rear
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI I think your getting misled on "stock" vs "this is what I ran".
Sure, thrown on a set of slicks, maybe some exhaust, and a few tweaks here and there and they go 13s... but it wasn't doing that on bias ply tires that came with the car and stock everything else.
My fathers current 351W mach 1 runs alot better than stock, and it still got walked on by my 00GT on boltons/cams only (low 13 second car).
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI One last thing, I am curious as to why you think the 5.0L needs a bigger bore? The power levels they are making are astronomical, if you take into consideration the way they read power levels then and now (old horsepower numbers are lower in current scale) its the most powerful N/A motor ford has ever produced, and the torqueist small block (is that a word?). Guys are going low 10s on just a blower and tires, pretty impressive.
@testy462 the new 5.0 is not fords most powerful engine ever produced. your talking about guys using forced induction to go below 10s THAT IS NOT IMPRESSIVE in any matter, it is still just a 305ci engine with 4 cams and huge heads (more expensive). imagine if Ford put the 6.2 in the mustang (as it was intended for in the first place) the 5.0 would not in hells chance touch the 6.2 nor would the GM 6.2, the 5.0 DOHC could have been avoided if ford would rectify the issue with tiny bores,
@testy462 i hope you werent saying the mustang V6 was faster than 390, 427 Fairlanes and 428cj and Mach1 mustangs? hell even the S code 390 Mach1 was faster than the 5.0 JK
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI I guess what I am saying is that the 90s T is viewed now as a boring family sedan, and it has the stigma of most 90s cars (most 90s cars were crap). The new T is an awsome machine, espcially the SHO.
Hell, bone stock the new SHO will outrun anything from the 60's that didn't have a big block in it, and beat most of the big block cars if you put a tune on it. Amazing what they are doing with a 4 door V6 lol.
@testy462 i know what your saying, but as for outrunning 60s Ford muscle, maybe 2BBL V8 mustangs and fairlanes, hell even the 69 Mach1 with 351 4bbl layed down mid 13s, 428s low 13s high 12s 427 Fairlanes were known from the factory to put down low 12s and high 11s but 427 Fairlanes werent really street friendly. Galaxies still hold titles that neither GM or Chrysler broke yet! in factory stock,
(Super Cobra Jet) 428/335: 0-60 in 5.7 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.9 sec @ 103mph.
(Boss 429) 429/375: 0-60 in 6.8 sec, 1/4 mile in 14.0 sec @ 103mph
Most of them were in the low 14s/high 13s depending on model.
And not to argue for the sake of it, but GM has vette's going 10.90s stock now lol, not ot mention the odd GT500 making a 12.20 pass. Technology is finally beating the ecoterrorists/.
@testy462 why would you bring up the BOSS429 Mustang? every one should know that was a seriously detuned engine to make it legal for nascar! Do you know what a 428 SCJ was? 428SCJ 4:30.1 Mach1s were documented to run 12.86s flat 13.00 4:11.1 were very low 13s and 428CJ with 3:90.1 were mid-low 13s 390 Scodes were mid 13s 351s were high 13s and 14.00s flat again my uncle has an original mach1
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI my brother had a 69 351 mach1 til about a year ago and it was completely 100% concourse original including firestone wide oval tires and he best quarter mile it would do was a 15.6. With slicks it would have been mid to low 14s. And I'm currently restoring a numbers matching 428 cobra jet 69 mach with a 4 speed and 3.90 gear so ill let you know what that one will run. It's also 100% original with stock 2.25 inch exhaust and 6 inch wide oval tires.
@cockygt1213 nice, a 69 428cj with 3.90 runs high 13s use a lsd rear your looking at mid 13s, you probably have mid eye rear springs if i were you i would use standard 5 count springs with 620lbs fronts and use a better tire your looking at 13.00-13.15 times.
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI To be fair alot of it had to do with the tires, as bias ply suck and a set of good slicks would have you in the low 13s with ease However, there are 2012 5.0s going low 12s on just slicks, and GT500's in the 11s with the paper filter in place on a set of slicks
My father owns a 69 mach 1 351W with a host of common mods (cam, intake, carb, ingnition, etc) and he was pretty shocked to see my 440~ HP 00GT walk by him too, but its hard to beat the tech.
never never never mess with a car with turbos.
autocrossstar17 6 days ago
keep up the good work Ford!
TheSl2vue 1 week ago
those cars are old news.
clos19851 2 weeks ago
Lost to a taurus???, let's send them more bail out funds lol.
ZImpresive 3 weeks ago 8
Ford piss on chevy
jawaskidoss 3 weeks ago 5
sounded like a v6 camaro
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTSThe SHO is my dads car, if you search SHO Camaro one of the top videos that comes up is him vs a new Camaro SS... he was handing it to him all day. We spoke to him, and the guy was trying to figure out why we were faster in a Taurus. I believe he had the same simple bolt ons too... air intake, exhaust, tune.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@Pooz30 im not taking anything from the new sho they run very good but the 13.0 runs i have seen it run is not enuff to beat a new camaro with those mods. a stock new camaro ss runs 13.0 and i have even seen them run 12.80s bone stock and 12.40s with the mods you said so i would give that to a bad driver in the ss and the sho awd winning it. the camaro with those mods should trap at least 112mph.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS well, I'd have to see it to believe it, I have not seen a stock SS get any better than a mid to low 13 second pass, in person or on youtube. With the stock wheels the SHO would be high 12's with this setup and that's a fact. These wheels are significantly heavier than stock. This exact setup with stock wheels has ran 12.8 on other cars. Keeping in mind that this is a 6 cylinder 4 door sedan. The fastest guy out there has ran 12.3 and I believe he has gotten a 12.2 out of it.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@Pooz30 i know for a fact my friends brandons camaro ss runs 12.40 @ 115mph with cai,tune,exhaust on street tires. look around on youtubre a lil there is a few videos of stock camatros runnin 12.70s and 80s.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS it's also funny that you have to plead your case as to why you feel the Camaro is faster (it's not) than a Taurus when in reality the Camaro should be getting compared to the MUCH faster Mustang. Technically this race should be versus an Impala, but we all know what would happen there.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@Pooz30 i am not pleading any case it is what it is. i hope you dont think a stock sho is faster then a stock impala ss because its not. oh and maybe you should throw the pontiac g8 gt in there to compare the sho but we know what would happen there. the thing is how much the sho cost thats why there is like none of them on the road it had horrible sales. like i said i do like them i like them alot but dont get out of place. there is alot of fast 4 door cars out now. evo,sti,cts-v,srt8's ect..
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@Pooz30 all its gonna take is a guy that can drive the ss and the taurus will see tailights from a stock car that weighs just as much as the sho.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS sorry, the Camaro weighs about 3,900lbs and the SHO is 4,500lbs... and bone stock I sure hope the Camaro beats it, V8 sports car vs a 6cylinder 4 door sedan. Not comparing apples to apples and the SHO will still only be 1 maybe 2 tenths slower.
The V6 Mustang is just as fast as the SS and the GT is way faster. GM has some catching up to do, period.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS You realize this is the older camaro, not the new one right? Its a mid 13 second car...which is what the SHO is stock.
My friends 00 LS1 trans am ran 13.60s bone stock, and 13.30s with some exhaust work done. Nothing a stock SHO can't handle (13.60s) and with a tune beat easily . There are 12 second SHOs right here on youtube going 12.7xs all day long with just a tune/catback/K&N filter. BTW, the SHO weighs ALOT more.
testy462 1 month ago
@testy462 we were actually talkin about the other video of it racing a new camaro ss with intake,exhaust and tune and only ran a mid 13 or sumthin. i have never seen a stock sho run better then a 13.90 and i have seen ls1 cars run 13.30s bone stock. for those sho's runnin 12.7s find a ls3 camaro with the same mods and tell me what it runs. i like the new sho alot ecspecially the awd but i also know there spot on the food chain. on the street its a different story then the track.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS well.. I'm not sure you do know it's spot on the food chain.. it's a 4door sedan and you're trying to compensate for it's performance against a Camaro... these cars shouldn't even be in the same league... Unfortunately for the Camaro, they are.
And as for in the street... this car is even more impressive. Makes peak power at 1,500 rpm. so any gear and speed any rpm it's ready to go. It will take down cars that are faster because it's instantly making full power. The SHO is no joke.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@Pooz30 i would give the sho the advantage on the street thats what i meant due to awd. i know all about heavy awd performance vehicals look at my video. 5200lbs,low 13s on 20" rims
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS I don't think your taking into account the fact that the SHO is a twin turbo either, and how easy that makes it to upgrade.
You can literally have a SHO that in sound, exterior looks, MPG, driveablity, basically every single way just like it was as stock running high/mid 12s with just a tune and CAI.
No cam to make it lumpy, no pulling the motor apart, no voiding the warrenty, etc etc. And go sit in one and tell me its not nicer than a G8 or anything GM makes.
testy462 1 month ago
@testy462 ONCE AGAIN I LIKE THE NEW SHO if you think the sho interior is nicer then any gm thats your opinion i dont think it is. the new cts-v is incredible inside. i know a local 2010 camaro ss with a cai,tune and straight piped that goes 12.40s all day! i have no reason to lie! i know what the sho is capable off my only issue is the price of the car. where are you guys from with ths ho? if your close we can set up a race with the ss and see what happens.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS I'm sure the CTS-V, with a 65,000 dollar MSRP, has a comparable interior to the SHO... which is exactly the point.
How can you argue that the SHO isn't worth the extra 10K over the camaro simply because it comes in a few tenths slower in the 1/4 mile, even though with a simple 500 dollar mod it outruns it?
Your comparing a 4 door luxury mobile with AWD and way more options, room, etc etc to a two door sport car with all that entails, and it still comes close in the 1/4.
testy462 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS If its fair to compare it this way, then its fair to compare the CTSv to the new 2011 5.0L boss... the boss will spank its ass in the 1/4 stock vs stock, but to say the CTS-V is a ripoff because its thousands more would be completely ignoring the good parts about the V (like being factory FI, interior, ride, etc etc etc).
If your objective (instead of a GM fanboy) you can see how a 4 door V6 car running door to door with the 2 door V8 is dammed impressive, even if it takes a tune
testy462 1 month ago
@testy462 I like your style my dude!
Pooz30 1 month ago
@Pooz30 2010 SHO specs- 4300lbs,13.7 1/4 mile, 5.2 0-60. SHO is $40k
2010 camaro ss specs-3900 lbs,13.0 1/4, 0-60 4.7. $31k
maybe this will help you understand where im comin from. LIKE I SAID I LIKE THE SHO but not worth the money imo. there is a at least 3 4 door vehicals i would prefer over the SHO
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS SS doesn't run 13 flat... I'm sorry but I have not seen it.
The SHO is just shy of 4400lbs
You want to play the compare a Camaro game the way you just did? Well then compare it to a Mustang. I'm done with this SHO Camaro comparison you are trying to make like they are in the same class... and the SHO is far from overpriced. If you consider the sedans it's up against at the cost, features, quality and performance... I think you need to go to a Ford dealer and take one for a drive.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@Pooz30 The SHO is sure as hell more comfortable, bigger inside, a world and a half nicer inside, more interior room for driver, sure as hell more interior room for the passengers, four door, and freaking AWD.
Having one with just a tune spanking a brand new GM powerhouse LS3 is an accomplishment in my book. I don't see how the other guy can possibly be arguing that the camaro is better lol.
testy462 1 month ago
@testy462 your crazy. because the powerhouse camaro is $10k less and with a good driver will not lose to even a tuned sho. im over this already,.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS Another thing, after thinking about it a bit, but have you PRICED a new camaro?
Comparing MSRP, brand new, your off your rocker if you think the SHO is that much more. Sure, you can buy a bare (BARE) bones camaro with zero options for the 31,000~ range, but if you put literally any options on it at all (ala, on chevy's website the "2SS" package) the price instantly jumps to 38,000. Add in a automatic transmission or a set of non standard wheels and your at SHO range.
testy462 1 month ago
@Pooz30 when you run into a guy that can drive a new ss they run good. look around on youtube you will see plenty run 13.0 and even better..if you dont think paying $40+k for a taurus isnt over priced your nutz.so once you do the cai,tune and exhaust and run high 12s whats next that wont void the warranty? for $40k you can get a new sti or evo that bone stock will plain out run the sho with much less motor and 1 less turbo. we could do this all day. its a nice car just enjoy it.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@Pooz30 Actually the SHO competes against and out performs sedans that cost much much more like the Audi A6 and BMW. I own one and the quality, options, and power rival 60-80K luxury sedans.
MrPaulford8 1 week ago
@BLACKLACDTS Not to argue for the sake of it, but livernois has SHOs going 12.80s with nothing more than a handheld tuner. I'd say thats dammed impressive, and on par with a new camaro with a tuner.
testy462 1 month ago
@testy462 this car has a Livernois tune on it.
The only reason we are not running 12's is that the wheels weight significantly more than stock... don't remember the exact #... but we weighed them, and it was a pretty big difference.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@testy462 if i owned a new camaro ss with a tuner that ran 12.8 i would take it back.
BLACKLACDTS 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS I'm in the Toronto Canada area... but if you want to challenge me with a Camaro I will race you with my Mustang since those cars a classed together. Oh and by the way, a new GT is already a 12 second car stock. Maybe the SS is a better match for a V6 Stang
Now you're comparing a Lancer? Talk about overpriced.
Just do yourself a favour and sit in one of these.
Pooz30 1 month ago
@BLACKLACDTS And the SHO, by definintion, is already loaded up...thats what it is, the loaded up version of the T. The above 38,000 price doesn't include navi, etc etc etc etc. Add in all that and its very possible to acutally match the prices!
IMO you, along with alot of others, are letting the name "Taurus" get in the way of an open mind. IMO Ford shouldn't have named it that, as the mid 90s cars have the stigma of a crappy family car. This ain't your daddy's SHO. Go sit in one.
testy462 1 month ago
@testy462 sorry bro but the taurus was not a crappy family car back in the 90s, they were the number1 selling four door sedan, and i still see a HUGE number of them riding around on the streets. but in all honesty i wished ford never made the new taurus, raptor and explorer instead i wish ford would have made a new Fairlane or Torino, but we still have this shitty mustang! what a joke it is.
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI Do what?
What dont you like about the new mustang? 412 HP, fastest production mustang built to date (other than the current GT500). Even the new V6 is faster than anything built from 1964 to today other than a handful of specialty cars lol, not to mention handling etc etc.
I wasn't trying to insult the previous Ts, but they were not exactly luxury powerhouses back in the 90s. Todays T competes with much more expensive cars and does it well
testy462 4 weeks ago
@testy462 the (5.0) needs a bigger bore, the mustang shares the same platform with the explorer and taurus, all three are just straight ugly this is why im holding off for the new mustang in 2014, the (5.0) actually makes 432hp. i miss my 5.4 in my F150 i feel as if the 5.0 truck motor just doesnt pull like my old 5.4 did, it would be nice to see the new 5.8 in the F150 not the 5.0. i never liked the taurus the old one and the new one,
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI The mustang is not on the same platform as the explorer or taurus, Its a DC2 which nothing but the mustang uses.
I think you need to recheck your numbers on the 60s cars. There wasn't a single one of em running better than 14s until you get to big block status (stock). Its a pretty common misconception though.
testy462 4 weeks ago
@testy462 NOPE!!! 351 Mach1s were laying down high 13s 428CJ and SCJ mustangs were low 13s and high 12s my uncle has a real 428SCJ Mach1 12.94 he still has his time slips. even 390s were mid 13s, 427, 290 and 428s are big blocks not small blocks, when your talking about 14 second cars yes there is many of them but this is also documented for cars using no traction control and very steep gearing. my dads 67 Fairlane ran low 13s 390 675 holley and 3:90.1 rear
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI I think your getting misled on "stock" vs "this is what I ran".
Sure, thrown on a set of slicks, maybe some exhaust, and a few tweaks here and there and they go 13s... but it wasn't doing that on bias ply tires that came with the car and stock everything else.
My fathers current 351W mach 1 runs alot better than stock, and it still got walked on by my 00GT on boltons/cams only (low 13 second car).
testy462 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI One last thing, I am curious as to why you think the 5.0L needs a bigger bore? The power levels they are making are astronomical, if you take into consideration the way they read power levels then and now (old horsepower numbers are lower in current scale) its the most powerful N/A motor ford has ever produced, and the torqueist small block (is that a word?). Guys are going low 10s on just a blower and tires, pretty impressive.
testy462 4 weeks ago
@testy462 the new 5.0 is not fords most powerful engine ever produced. your talking about guys using forced induction to go below 10s THAT IS NOT IMPRESSIVE in any matter, it is still just a 305ci engine with 4 cams and huge heads (more expensive). imagine if Ford put the 6.2 in the mustang (as it was intended for in the first place) the 5.0 would not in hells chance touch the 6.2 nor would the GM 6.2, the 5.0 DOHC could have been avoided if ford would rectify the issue with tiny bores,
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@testy462 i hope you werent saying the mustang V6 was faster than 390, 427 Fairlanes and 428cj and Mach1 mustangs? hell even the S code 390 Mach1 was faster than the 5.0 JK
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI I guess what I am saying is that the 90s T is viewed now as a boring family sedan, and it has the stigma of most 90s cars (most 90s cars were crap). The new T is an awsome machine, espcially the SHO.
Hell, bone stock the new SHO will outrun anything from the 60's that didn't have a big block in it, and beat most of the big block cars if you put a tune on it. Amazing what they are doing with a 4 door V6 lol.
testy462 4 weeks ago
@testy462 i know what your saying, but as for outrunning 60s Ford muscle, maybe 2BBL V8 mustangs and fairlanes, hell even the 69 Mach1 with 351 4bbl layed down mid 13s, 428s low 13s high 12s 427 Fairlanes were known from the factory to put down low 12s and high 11s but 427 Fairlanes werent really street friendly. Galaxies still hold titles that neither GM or Chrysler broke yet! in factory stock,
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI From xxxMusclecarclubcom:
(Super Cobra Jet) 428/335: 0-60 in 5.7 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.9 sec @ 103mph.
(Boss 429) 429/375: 0-60 in 6.8 sec, 1/4 mile in 14.0 sec @ 103mph
Most of them were in the low 14s/high 13s depending on model.
And not to argue for the sake of it, but GM has vette's going 10.90s stock now lol, not ot mention the odd GT500 making a 12.20 pass. Technology is finally beating the ecoterrorists/.
testy462 4 weeks ago
@testy462 why would you bring up the BOSS429 Mustang? every one should know that was a seriously detuned engine to make it legal for nascar! Do you know what a 428 SCJ was? 428SCJ 4:30.1 Mach1s were documented to run 12.86s flat 13.00 4:11.1 were very low 13s and 428CJ with 3:90.1 were mid-low 13s 390 Scodes were mid 13s 351s were high 13s and 14.00s flat again my uncle has an original mach1
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 4 weeks ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI my brother had a 69 351 mach1 til about a year ago and it was completely 100% concourse original including firestone wide oval tires and he best quarter mile it would do was a 15.6. With slicks it would have been mid to low 14s. And I'm currently restoring a numbers matching 428 cobra jet 69 mach with a 4 speed and 3.90 gear so ill let you know what that one will run. It's also 100% original with stock 2.25 inch exhaust and 6 inch wide oval tires.
cockygt1213 1 week ago
@cockygt1213 nice, a 69 428cj with 3.90 runs high 13s use a lsd rear your looking at mid 13s, you probably have mid eye rear springs if i were you i would use standard 5 count springs with 620lbs fronts and use a better tire your looking at 13.00-13.15 times.
1962Galaxie514ciMPFI 1 week ago
@1962Galaxie514ciMPFI To be fair alot of it had to do with the tires, as bias ply suck and a set of good slicks would have you in the low 13s with ease However, there are 2012 5.0s going low 12s on just slicks, and GT500's in the 11s with the paper filter in place on a set of slicks
My father owns a 69 mach 1 351W with a host of common mods (cam, intake, carb, ingnition, etc) and he was pretty shocked to see my 440~ HP 00GT walk by him too, but its hard to beat the tech.
testy462 4 weeks ago
What was your time? Gotta love those grocery getters.
MrPaulford8 2 months ago
wow that was awesome!!! is there anything on the engine?
schmid195 2 months ago