14.2 -Why so slow?

[Geek SHO]

Weren't the early Gen 1's suspected to have been de-tuned by with the Y-Pipe? This kept the SHO slower than the Mustang. You can't tell me that Ford didn't know that Y-Pipe would rob power. Apparently with just a Y-Pipe, stock SHOs were walking away from Mustangs at the time.

Don't you think it could be the same thing with this new SHO? I can't see Ford allowing a Taurus to be faster than their flagship V8 Mustang out of the box. I wouldn't be surprised if there will be simple modifications to unlock some easy power from the motor. ****, removing that giant ugly engine cover probably yields a couple ponies.

As for drag times, just wait until a few actually make passes. I see it all to often at the strip where people are saying, "My car SHOULD run XX.XX . . ." but they can't get their car to match the numbers they heard from the all knowing internet. Ah, the penultimate bench racer.

The new SHO is way classier than an STi.

 

[somedude_001]

The new SHO is way classier than an STi.

so true

 

[RonPorter]

Weren't the early Gen 1's suspected to have been de-tuned by with the Y-Pipe? This kept the SHO slower than the Mustang. You can't tell me that Ford didn't know that Y-Pipe would rob power. Apparently with just a Y-Pipe, stock SHOs were walking away from Mustangs at the time.

Don't you think it could be the same thing with this new SHO? I can't see Ford allowing a Taurus to be faster than their flagship V8 Mustang out of the box. I wouldn't be surprised if there will be simple modifications to unlock some easy power from the motor. ****, removing that giant ugly engine cover probably yields a couple ponies.

As for drag times, just wait until a few actually make passes. I see it all to often at the strip where people are saying, "My car SHOULD run XX.XX . . ." but they can't get their car to match the numbers they heard from the all knowing internet. Ah, the penultimate bench racer.

The new SHO is way classier than an STi.

No. As with about every factory y-pipe, it's designed for low cost and ease of installation.

Took a lot more than a y-pipe to get an '89 SHO anywhere near a GT 5.0. In the quarter-mile, anyway. From 100-up roll, the SHO was quicker and faster.

Only enthusiasts care which car is faster, Ford will do what it takes to sell vehicles.

 

[RonPorter]

We're never going to know it's capabilities until someone here actually gets their hands on it. I'm sure with plenty of structual modification to the drivetrain lower times will easily be possible. With the torque it has it'd probably grenade the drivetrain if they did a 'neutral drop' and actually put down an impressive time.

Besides being an idiotic thing to do, a neutral drop will do nothing for it's times. With the looser converter and low torque peak, it will be in the meat of the torque curve right off idle.

 

[TimboSHO]

The new SHO is not FWD biased; the engineers said the AWD is RWD biased so it should have outsanding bite from a standstill.

Not FWD based? Didn't you see what side of the engine the belts are on? Unless there is something I don't know here, a transversely mounted engine it always FWD based........

 

[SHO Continental]

Not FWD based? Didn't you see what side of the engine the belts are on? Unless there is something I don't know here, a transversely mounted engine it always FWD based........

Biased. As in, more torque is directed toward the rear wheels than the front; upto 90% of it actually.

 

[nik97]

14.2=13.9. 13.9 is not a bad start.

 

[stephen newberg]

Only enthusiasts care which car is faster, Ford will do what it takes to sell vehicles.

Exactly.

pax, smn

 

[nothingtoseehere]

Biased. As in, more torque is directed toward the rear wheels than the front; upto 90% of it actually.

Interesting. I only heard it was based on the same setup as the S60's which are FWD biased. RWD biased is pretty sweet. Hopefully that takes care of angle gear issues with Haldex

 

[hawkeye18]

I had heard through a few sources that the 6F55 can send 90% of the torque to the ass end as well.

 

[Ian Macoomb]

I'll say it because nobody else has, do you honestly think they're going to build a sedan that's faster outta the box than their "head liner" car the mustang gt/cobras? Look at the quantity of factory cars produced that stock run 14 sec quarters...it's pretty slim, and usually it has shelby's name or a snake on it.

Um, even the V6 Camry runs a 14 second quarter. As does the Accord, the Maxima, Altima, Malibu, G35, Aura, heck even the RAV4 can run high 14 seconds.

The real competition for the new SHO is the Charger/300 and the G8:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...8_vs_2008_dodge_charger/specs_comparison.html

Why buy a Super High Output Taurus when you can buy a G8 GXP that will make it look stupid for about the same money? That's what your average car buyer will think if the ecoSHO only runs a 14.2 on paper.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

I think the entire premise of this thread is faulty.

Other than the C&D article (and the title of this thread), I haven't seen any other speculation whatsoever that the car is going to be "so slow". If anything, the consensus that I've been hearing is that it will be a sub-14 second car.

AFAIK, all of the cars out there to this point are still hand-built, and only Ford employees have been allowed to drive them. The production line is still being re-tooled for the new car, last I heard. I can see how Ford would be reluctant to release any test mules for the various publications to put through the ringer until they can do so with production vehicles.

The final weight of the vehicle will be a key factor to where the performance numbers end up. If a production car is 200lbs. lighter than the prototypes, that's going to make a difference. It's certainly going to be interesting, but until someone actually tests one at a track, I'm not going to fall for a single author's prediction that the car will be "so slow".

 

[stephen newberg]

Chris has it exactly. This is all totally premature and in the end just wheel spinning until there are real stats from a production version available. Everyone should try working on a tab bit of patience.

pax, smn

 

[RonPorter]

Why buy a Super High Output Taurus when you can buy a G8 GXP that will make it look stupid for about the same money? That's what your average car buyer will think if the ecoSHO only runs a 14.2 on paper.

Because I'll bet that, among REAL buyers who are going to plunk down real $$$ for a new car (not all the wannabe bench racers), there are very few who will pick a $40K car solely based on the stock 1/4-mile time.

 

[JSIL1]

A heavy FWD bias AWD system is not exactly ideal for 1/4 miles times. Then again, the SHO has NEVER been a 1/4 mile car. Shouldn't be hard to get the new one into the high 13's ... but on a large heavy car with a heavy FWD bias AWD system, 14.2 is not too shabby at all.

My concern so far with the new one is the failures the S60-Rs have experienced with the angle gear in the Haldex AWD system.

Please correct me if I am wrong, it was my understanding that this was only an issue on the pre-06 S60r's. I read that the 06 and 07's had revised angle gears to correct this issue. I was looking at getting a S60r for a little while.

 

[roland]

Why buy a Super High Output Taurus when you can buy a G8 GXP that will make it look stupid for about the same money? That's what your average car buyer will think if the ecoSHO only runs a 14.2 on paper.

Only makes the SHO looks stupid on the track, 99.999% of the time the SHO will make the GXP look stupid with its options and build quality, plus it's a bigger car and the AWD will be a big plus in winter. Not saying the GXP is a bad car, but its really an enthusiasts car, a poor man's BMW while the SHO is again a poor man's Jag.

 

[Brett]

stock gt 13.8-14.0, sho 14.2

SHOs cannot beat mustangs, one would think you'd all know this by now! :sun:

 

[38SHO]

No. As with about every factory y-pipe, it's designed for low cost and ease of installation.

Took a lot more than a y-pipe to get an '89 SHO anywhere near a GT 5.0. In the quarter-mile, anyway. From 100-up roll, the SHO was quicker and faster.

QUOTE]

my 93 would take out 5.0 stangs with just a borla catback and all stock..



dig, roll, whatever you want

 

[SHO1]

Because I'll bet that, among REAL buyers who are going to plunk down real $$$ for a new car (not all the wannabe bench racers), there are very few who will pick a $40K car solely based on the stock 1/4-mile time.

I'd certainly be one. Many other factors to consider.

 

[SHOracer14]

I think the entire premise of this thread is faulty.

Other than the C&D article (and the title of this thread), I haven't seen any other speculation whatsoever that the car is going to be "so slow". If anything, the consensus that I've been hearing is that it will be a sub-14 second car.

AFAIK, all of the cars out there to this point are still hand-built, and only Ford employees have been allowed to drive them. The production line is still being re-tooled for the new car, last I heard. I can see how Ford would be reluctant to release any test mules for the various publications to put through the ringer until they can do so with production vehicles.

The final weight of the vehicle will be a key factor to where the performance numbers end up. If a production car is 200lbs. lighter than the prototypes, that's going to make a difference. It's certainly going to be interesting, but until someone actually tests one at a track, I'm not going to fall for a single author's prediction that the car will be "so slow".

I totally agree. It is fun to think about and guess what the new car will run but, until a production car actually hits the track with a decent driver, nobody will know. I don't really trust magazine times anyways. Weren't some of the old mags stating 15.9's for the 1st gen cars? Even a poorly running/maintained MTX can run mid 15's and below. The new car with AWD will definately be a Hoss. No more calling 2.2 60 ft's good.