not a SHO but...

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.

Black91SHO

SHO Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2003
Messages
285
Reaction score
20
Location
Irving, TX
I drove a leftover 17 Sport before I decided on an SHO. It was plenty quick but the SHO feels a little more snappy and solid. It has more torque than an SHO and it’s lighter, but it’s slower?? I think Ford crippled it intentionally with torque management to not beat the SHO or even a Mustang GT. It should be stupid fast with 380 lbs of torque and 4100 pounds. I was ultimately put off by the stories of heat soak, oil leaks the dealers can’t fix, lemon buybacks, etc.

My wife had a 2013 2.0 Ecoboost Fusion. It wasn’t slow but nothing like an SHO, maybe 7 seconds to 60. That’s way too much money for a 13. They really dump value. Watch out for a rough shifting transmission. That why we dumped ours. We had the trans worked on maybe 10 times at the dealer. They never could fix it. It would shudder and rattle your teeth intermittently on the 1-2 upshift. It felt like somebody kicked you in the back. It’s a common problem with 13 2.0 Fusions and they didn’t fix it till the 2015 model year.

Torque's not as valuable as HP in a straight-line race. Once you're off the line, it's mostly HP that wins the race...mostly. And with only 30 more torque and 200 less pounds, it won't make up the difference.

They're both so damn heavy. I'm really not liking the new trend of heavy cars. It's just wrong that an old Mustang or Camaro weight less than their modern retro versions. Despite technology, the weight of safety features and the desire for high beltlines and more interior room has killed performance cars. What happened to the good old days when our economy was so shot, we had toake the cars lightweight? lol
 

SM105K

Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
Joined
May 3, 2018
Messages
7,405
Reaction score
9,701
Location
Arizona
Torque's not as valuable as HP in a straight-line race. Once you're off the line, it's mostly HP that wins the race...mostly. And with only 30 more torque and 200 less pounds, it won't make up the difference.

They're both so damn heavy. I'm really not liking the new trend of heavy cars. It's just wrong that an old Mustang or Camaro weight less than their modern retro versions. Despite technology, the weight of safety features and the desire for high beltlines and more interior room has killed performance cars. What happened to the good old days when our economy was so shot, we had toake the cars lightweight? lol


Simple, Government got involved.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
107,087
Messages
1,181,312
Members
16,153
Latest member
lapochkarr

Members online

Back
Top