SVO Mustang Commerical

[crackerjacks74]

Are you fucking high there's no comparison between a probe and an svo wikiepedia that shit homes

[regjess9199]

I own an 1986 SVO Competition Prep I have been in a Probe there is no comparison in the two.

[regjess9199]

Probe Ya there is a car NOT!!! I think the Pinto sounds better even with a exploding gas tank!!!!!

[scooterdude1945]

ahh the good ole days when no ricers said they had =4823=49823=489123=4923 horse power in there civics lol an american four cylnder is the the only inline four that can produce 750 hp

[Servicemember80]

@scooterdude1945 Time marches on - Check out the 7.6@180 full body door slammer S2000 =) Turbo Inline RWD 4cyl 

[meatpie45]

i want one of these sooooooo bad ='( ive already got a 1994 gt and 1996 mystic cobar so i wanna add one of these to my collection

[408Mustangs]

@everwink First off, no shit they made a Cobra in 93, they made a Cobra R, too. I was using the SN95 Cobras as a example, dumbass. And look up the numbers, when the SVO was first relased it put down better numbers in all categorys compared to the 5.0. A stock 5.0 is a fucking dog, there's no getting around that.

[408Mustangs]

@everwink Well they could have also offered a N/A 5.0, too. I mean look, starting in 95 they made both a GT and a Cobra, yea of course the Cobra was a bit more but there's always someone willing to spend a bit more...

[andrestnt]

this car never had the respect it deserved. it was the better performer and the better look. the price was its weakness, when the 5.0L was upgraded and was cheaper.

[JMMoosey]

I think the SVO Mustang has too much of an European look. That is probably why the SVO was not that big of a hit. European design for a car that has a distinctively American nameplate. But still a nicer car than those POS Mustang II's from the mid to late 1970s. Most Mustang II's are off the road anyways, as most of them rusted out. And all the Mustang II's were just dressed up Pintos.

[408Mustangs]

SVO should have boosted the 5.0, not the little 2.3L. Still a nice car for what it was.

[norwood1026]

The Probe was a better motor at least the V-6 was. The 2.3 is an old pinto engine. I would of liked to see a turbo V-8 instead of a forced fed four.

[lindaleparkrolo]

@norwood1026 That's your opinion and you know what they say about those :P

[xsonz2]

@norwood1026 The heavy iron 5.0s made mustangs drive unfavorably. Its all about power to weight ratio, this was the closest 50/50 bias mustang ever built. Besides, if you wanted a fast V8 foxbody get a fuckin boss. This could outrun the GTs at the time.

[norwood1026]

@xsonz2 In a straight line they were much faster then the SVO, but the SVO did handle better stop better then the 5.0 or the GT Agreed the 5.0 fastback could dust the GT because it was several 100 pounds lighter.

[xsonz2]

@norwood1026 depends on the year. Early foxbody gts where underpowered, and at one point the figures between the SVO and the base GT where so close ford actually changed the specs, without changing either cars performance. Soon enough however, various upgrades got the 5.0 back on top.

[norwood1026]

@xsonz2 I can't remember the excat year 90+ was the 225 hp version I believe.

[norwood1026]

@xsonz2 On a road course yes but not in a straight line. 

[FireMario87]

@norwood1026 I like to know which of the 2 V6 motors your talking about.

Fords pinto 2.3 and 2.5 inline 4 engines are bullet proof reliable motors. The 3.0 liter vulcan V6 is a good motor, but the mazda built 2.5 is no where near as reliable as Fords 2.3, turbocharged or not.

[norwood1026]

@FireMario87

Yes they were tough but not better then the Probe engine I LOVE Ford cars but it was't a better engine.

[norwood1026]

@FireMario87 Reliable yes not the mazda enegine had counterbalance shafts that made the engine much smoother the the entire RPM band then the Ford 2.3.

[lindaleparkrolo]

@norwood1026 why are u arguing with everyone lol go watch a probe video

[dkorda]

@norwood1026 Just love the DIVE in the front end when they slam on the brakes. Wow wish I had one of these! NOT!!!

[norwood1026]

This car was ahead of it's time but Mustang people didn't care about hnadling they cared more about straight line speed. I have to wonder why Ford didn't carry over the better brakes, Etc on the V-8. I remember a time when the Probe GT Turbo was going to replace the V-8 People wrote in & it was never a done deal.

[lindaleparkrolo]

@norwood1026 Who wants a probe motor in a mustang LOL I'll stick with my 2.3 turbo

[wuano1989]

@norwood1026 I don't know Why The 1989 Mustang G.T didn't Have all around disc

and air shock all around do you know How Safe That car Will Be !! OMG!

[65ShelbyClone]

You don't have a higher resolution version of this, do you?

[lindaleparkrolo]

theres someone on here with a better resolution

[kblackav8or]

The SVO was a pretty cool car but I am not sure I want the guys in the commercial working on my car..

[xsonz2]

@kblackav8or agreed

[wuano1989]

This Is A badd Ass commercial About SVO

That is Why FUCK CHEVY,DODGE

[AceVenturaXii]

Didn't really like the SVO, but its a great post anyway. I have an '86, but this is still great.

[cheanamean]

That is awesome, nice post!

[lindaleparkrolo]

thanks

[454sskilla]

does anyone know how much hp one of these push out?

[lindaleparkrolo]

84-85 pushed 175hp. 85.5 pushed 205hp. 86 pushed 200hp.

[xsonz2]

@lindaleparkrolo Alot of people would argue this "downgrade" engine was superior to the V8 avaliable. Certainly is different, and this was back when 200 horsepower was AALLLOOTTA power. They built the Vulcan 3.0 V6, producing 140 and they thought they built the messiah motor.

[392mopar]

Great add, where did you find it? Thanks for posting it.

[lindaleparkrolo]

i forget where i found it but I've seen this commercial on two other web sites

[repcrese]

Cool Commerical! Thanks for posting this.

[lindaleparkrolo]

no problem man