Inside Line G37 vs Taurus SHO

[roland]

and the comparisons to luxury cars continue.......certainly an interesting choice :/

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=151726?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..1.*

not surprisingly, the SHO has inferior performance!

I did like this though:

You should've seen the look on the guy's face in the Dale Earnhardt Signature Edition Monte Carlo when we went around him on the outside while merging onto the freeway.

SHO Shock

edit: now with video!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuri5zIqbTw&feature=related

 

[shobote]

Should be Maxima versus SHO. The G is much smaller and cannot take 4 full size adults anywhere comfortably while The SHO can haul your foursome and everyones golf bags bags anywhere. plus a big cooler. I tried and cannot sit comfortably in the drivers seat of the G, as my left shoulder is pushed against the door sill no matter how the seat is positioned. The G also had the performance package versus the standard SHO. The SHO should not win on any type of track event versus the #1 rated, much smaller and lighter RWD sport sedan that has been refined and improved over many years.

 

[Huntervf]

Definitely one of the harsher reviews I've seen on the car, can't argue with that. Perhaps the performance package makes a bigger difference than people think after all.

 

[FOMOCOTOSHO]

That's a horrible test comparison. The more applicable Infiniti model to compare with would have been the M45x which starts @ about $55k.
If they truly wanted to compare the G37 then they should have got the standard SHO w/ the performance package and would have realized it would not have totaled $46k because you can't get all those fancy options with the PP.
I think this is just a poor comparison that wasn't fare to the SHO.

 

[animex2]

Definitely one of the harsher reviews I've seen on the car, can't argue with that. Perhaps the performance package makes a bigger difference than people think after all.

Thats what I figured, If I was going to be spending damn near 40k on a car, I wouldnt cheap out on the last few grand and not get the performance package.

 

[DDakRT]

Thats what I figured, If I was going to be spending damn near 40k on a car, I wouldnt cheap out on the last few grand and not get the performance package.

I'm sure the tires will be the biggest thing that improves performance, with the suspension the same and just a brake pad change, I think the PP will do less than we are hoping.

Yes the size of the 2 cars are in different categories, but I think their point was to compare the SHO to the top similar prize luxury sports sedan right now. The M isn't a sports sedan, and isn't that the MK whatevers' territory instead?

This review really isn't all that different to the others that were published before, it just took things further and more in depth because they actually track tested it instead of driving around public roads.

 

[SHOspazz92]

Having driven a PP SHO and a Normal SHO, There is a difference. The biggest difference I noticed was of course the acceleration. The gearing in the PP SHO really does make a difference. As far as everything else? Meh. The PP was slightly more responsive in the corners, Just enough to notice anyways. The "Upgraded" Brakes are kind of a Joke in my opinion. You can't tell the difference really because they just changed the pads and in real world driving your mever going to get the brakes hot to tell the difference. I never once thought when I was driving the PP SHO that "This is like the Cobra R to the Cobra!", If you get my drift.

-Sam

 

[thebigjimsho]

Thats what I figured, If I was going to be spending damn near 40k on a car, I wouldnt cheap out on the last few grand and not get the performance package.

But the Performance Package is cheaper. I want it all...

 

[38SHO]

do u guys think Ford is dropping the ball by giving all these expensive, low performance models to the magazines for testing?

its the Super high output, so every test has to include some sort of performance shoot-out... wouldn't you want to come with all your guns to the battle? another thing the price, when u give them the full option, real expensive one.. it makes it look worse, why not the cheaper performance version.......

a faster, cheaper, better handling(even if slightly) car would make the SHO look a lot better in magazine articles, atleast thats what all the people complain about...

 

[Huntervf]

I think you're definitely on to something there. I like the new SHO, but I'm mystified as to why there's even a separate performance package to begin with. This is after all supposed to be the performance model, and yeah, I'd expect Ford to be touting their performance package cars for all these performance tests. Why they aren't...

Get rid of the radar sensing stuff and reverse cameras, go with the performance package and stay under $40k. That was car I drove, and it had plenty of luxury for me.

 

[SHO1]

Would make to much sense. The one they had here a couple weeks ago did have the perf. pkg. w/o the gps and radar stuff, but a 3mile or so drive wasn't enough to tell the diff between other Taurus models if I'd driven them too or anything else for that matter.

 

[Vnuk1]

but a 3mile or so drive wasn't enough to tell the diff between other Taurus models if I'd driven them too or anything else for that matter.

I would have beat the **** out of it for that 3 miles though!

 

[SHO1]

If I was driving solo I would have too, but of course there was passengers, one of which was a Ford rep telling ya what route you have to follow. Not to mention 95% of the route was under 40 flippin mph's. :banghd:

 

[Vnuk1]

If I was driving solo I would have too, but of course there was passengers, one of which was a Ford rep telling ya what route you have to follow. Not to mention 95% of the route was under 40 flippin mph's. :banghd:

Should have told him to "Talk to the hand" and then proceeded make very fast and big circles in the parking lot.

 

[buff30SHO]

I think you're definitely on to something there. I like the new SHO, but I'm mystified as to why there's even a separate performance package to begin with. This is after all supposed to be the performance model, and yeah, I'd expect Ford to be touting their performance package cars for all these performance tests. Why they aren't...

Get rid of the radar sensing stuff and reverse cameras, go with the performance package and stay under $40k. That was car I drove, and it had plenty of luxury for me.

Yes, definitely on to something. I've been reading about the 2010 SHO since Ford let it be known they were going to produce the car. I have a '92 black SHO that I bought new. It has over 183,000 miles and I thought I might never see another one.

I will soon have a 2010 on tentative order. If I don't like the car I won't have to buy it. It will be the base 400A with the 12S performance package and that's it. It will come in well below 40K. I don't need any of the radar stuff, reverse camera, heated/cooled seats, 12 speaker sound system, or any of the 401A or 402A options. When it's cold, put on more clothes and start the heater, when it's hot take off some clothes and put on the AC. Simple common sense.

I look at it as a car designed for performance and it will probably be plenty nice without any of the extra gadgets that won't use or do anything for me except cost money to buy and replace when they don't work.

I'm not too worried about the brakes. I won't be racing the car. I never smoked the brakes on my '92 and it's been up and down Pikes Peak a couple of times. The rotors were warped one time. I love the 5 speed manual. I have only owned cars with manual trans, but I have to go the way of the times with the automatic paddle shifter. That's the only way right now and I'm not going to wait around for a manual that may never come along. I'm simply realistic. I suppose I'll garage the old '92 and bring her out when I feel like using a clutch again.

I can't wait to drive the 2010 in about a month and a half.

 

[SHOspazz92]

If I was driving solo I would have too, but of course there was passengers, one of which was a Ford rep telling ya what route you have to follow. Not to mention 95% of the route was under 40 flippin mph's. :banghd:

I have a Combined 300+ Miles in SHO's. The only other person in the car was Me, Myself and I.

-Sam

 

[All-Or-Nothing]

Finally read the article and I can't understand why Ford didn't provide the SHO with the Performance Pack.

Seems as if they had a PP model it would have been a pretty even match.

 

[38SHO]

just the gear ratio change is notable performance increase, I don't see how it possibly can't be....

I'm with hunter on this one... I still don't get why they have a performance option and its just not the standard SHO.... all the stuff that makes it a performance SHO costs no more to make then what they already put on it....

I could see having a gear ratio option, for the people who want to save more gas... but lets get serious here... this car is for performance... if your going to sell yourself short to gain maybe another mpg or two... and its that much of an issue to you... then WTF are you buying an expensive twin turbo car in the first place? people who moan about a couple mpg in a car like this are so damn ironic... if u cared that much about money then why not save 20 grand instantly and just buy a cheaper, more fuel effecient car?

a car like this, is meant to be enjoyed

 

[Markus]

I'm sure the tires will be the biggest thing that improves performance, with the suspension the same and just a brake pad change, I think the PP will do less than we are hoping.

Yes the size of the 2 cars are in different categories, but I think their point was to compare the SHO to the top similar prize luxury sports sedan right now. The M isn't a sports sedan, and isn't that the MK whatevers' territory instead?

The SHO is not a sports sedan either. It's just a big and powerful cruiser. My M35X handles noticeably better than the PP SHO that I drove. The M35X brakes don't fade much either, even on the track.