2010 Taurus SHO Performance Pack VS. 91 Taurus SHO +
- Thread starter SHOspazz92
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
a+ 
shobote
SHO Member
B- Nice write up !! but some incorrect information; the 2009 300C has 359 HP, not 340, and gets just 1 MPG less than the 2010 SHO. The redesigned 300C Hemi AWD comes out in 2010 with even more power, and an extra gear, likley beating the mpg in the 2010 SHO.
shobote, I think we're both wrong. I checked Chrysler's website, which says the 2009 300C makes 360 hp. I was going off of data provided by Edmunds.com when I wrote the article. Thanks for bring this up though, I've already corrected the article.
John Neff
John Neff
DDakRT
New Member
Nice article John, pretty much how I feel about the new car without having driven it yet. If you're going to make changes though, the original Yamaha sedans were in the mid 6 0-60. 
I thought the new Hemi made more than 360hp... :/ Must be tuned differently for different cars in their lineup. It does have 390lb/ft of torque though, that part is pretty sweet.
I thought the new Hemi made more than 360hp... :/ Must be tuned differently for different cars in their lineup. It does have 390lb/ft of torque though, that part is pretty sweet.
hawkeye18
Sorta cares
I like the riff on the wheels. I hadn't even thought of that, and it would be a nice, cheap (compared to making a manual, anyway) way of making it more "right".
The Pontiac is a living dead car, and the Chrysler has a shit interior, shit build quality, and shit options, and it comes from a company that went bankrupt because it made shit cars. All IMHO, of course. Except the pontiac; it really is dead.
The Pontiac is a living dead car, and the Chrysler has a shit interior, shit build quality, and shit options, and it comes from a company that went bankrupt because it made shit cars. All IMHO, of course. Except the pontiac; it really is dead.
DDakRT
New Member
Have you sat in a new 300 after the interior update a couple years back? They're not fancy but the quality is there; those cars are very solidly built and are very comfortable. The only option the 300 doesn't have is the massaging seats, otherwise it's got everything the SHO does and some that the SHO doesn't.
Last edited:
DJSHO91
SHO Member
John,
I loved the write-up! Especially as an owner of a 91', I felt a connection with your pros and cons for the new SHO. Knowing how much our cars are a conglomeration of mixed parts that still create a strong connection for the driver, the seamless, buttoned-down nature of the 2010 model flies in the face of the Gen 1 SHOs. Everything feels in control, there's no edge to it. But the real single point that burns me the most is when you open the hood. The original SHOs(V6 and V8) were about the engine. It was a point of pride when you open the hood and "sho" that "jewel in the box", just like showing a beautiful piece of jewelry to that special someone. What would they think if it came with a plastic cover? Even if it did have an emblem!
DJ
I loved the write-up! Especially as an owner of a 91', I felt a connection with your pros and cons for the new SHO. Knowing how much our cars are a conglomeration of mixed parts that still create a strong connection for the driver, the seamless, buttoned-down nature of the 2010 model flies in the face of the Gen 1 SHOs. Everything feels in control, there's no edge to it. But the real single point that burns me the most is when you open the hood. The original SHOs(V6 and V8) were about the engine. It was a point of pride when you open the hood and "sho" that "jewel in the box", just like showing a beautiful piece of jewelry to that special someone. What would they think if it came with a plastic cover? Even if it did have an emblem!
DJ
Huntervf
Bored now
I drove the 2010 SHO back to back with a 2009 Chrysler 300 at the proving grounds. Loved the Chrysler's soundtrack but found the SHO's interior to be much more welcome.
John, when am I buffing out your plus?
John, when am I buffing out your plus?
DJSHO91
SHO Member
typhoon5000
Ferd Enganear
Nice write up John. I see you must have seen my comment about the gen 2 model years correction, as it's corrected in the article now .
.
DDakRT
New Member
Blah. I just checked out a new SHO at the local Ford dealer, the interior is a disappointment. I absolutely love the design, the high centre console and twin "hood" on the dash are great, ditto the switchgears. However, the materials are pretty bad... The centre console plastic flex and squeek when pressed, the leather on the door panels feel more like cardboard than leather, the armrest on the door isn't leather but rather it's a chunk of molded rubber, the glovebox was built with the same precision engineering as the Dodge Caliber's interior.
The interior is full of the soft touch materials, but soft touch stuff doesn't make a great intreior IMHO. I honestly find it lacking especially after reading the praises from other people. It's not any better than the 300C's interior, and FAR behind even my 2005 TL...
thebigjimsho
LSA = YUM
That was my beef with the MKS I sat in and made that point in another thread earlier. I was hoping the SHO would be different. Nice to look at, just don't touch...
Similar threads
