Is anybody getting excited about the new SHO?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jun 25, 2009 | 02:26 PM

#91

formula79

Registered User

Joined: Apr 2001

Posts: 3,698

From: USA

It is embarassing the Taurus weighs more than the BOF Crown Victoria and Grandpa Marquis. Might also weigh more than a Town car.

Jun 25, 2009 | 02:52 PM

#92

SSCamaro99_3

Registered User

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,179

From: Ballwin, MO

Quote:

Originally Posted by formula79

It is embarassing the Taurus weighs more than the BOF Crown Victoria and Grandpa Marquis. Might also weigh more than a Town car.

It probably does weigh more than a Town Car.

Jun 25, 2009 | 02:52 PM

#93

Jason Short

Registered User

Joined: Jan 1999

Posts: 3,051

From: Rochester, NY USA

Being an engineer, I am a little puzzled as to why all these new cars continue to INCREASE in weight.

Jun 25, 2009 | 02:56 PM

#94

km9v

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Oct 2004

Posts: 1,296

From: Beaumont, TX

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Short

Being an engineer, I am a little puzzled as to why all these new cars continue to INCREASE in weight.

There's your problem right there

Jun 25, 2009 | 04:46 PM

#95

Gold_Rush

Registered User

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 1,870

Quote:

Originally Posted by formula79

It is embarassing the Taurus weighs more than the BOF Crown Victoria and Grandpa Marquis. Might also weigh more than a Town car.

Crown vic doesn't have a heavy awd system or even close to half the features. That might explain some of the weight difference. Also, the crown vic would almost be considered a light-weight for its size. It's lighter than the much smaller Chrysler LX sedans/coupe and weighs about the same as the much smaller G8 gxp (and within 50lbs of the regular GT). Crown vic is also within 140bs of the much smaller camaro SS auto...our favorite 2 door sports coupe. You're right in that car's have indeed gotten heavy, but that's something almost all automakers today are guilty of.

To put things in perspective....
* Cadillac STS Awd v8 - 4,273lbs. 196.7" long, 72.6" wide, 57.6" tall
* 300c AWD - 4,280lbs. 196.8" long, 74.1" wide, 58.4" tall
* SHO AWD - 4,346lbs. 202.9" long, 76.2" wide, 60.7" tall
* S550 4matic - 4,630lbs. 205" long, 73.7" wide, 58" tall
* Audi A6 4.2 - 4,211lbs. 193.5" long, 79.2" wide, 57.4" tall

Again, this is not the old SHO or the old taurus...it's no longer a cheaply made basic mid-sized sedan. It has moved up in size, options, and class. Given the size, awd setup, tech/luxury/amenities, it's weight is reasonable imo...atleast by modern standards. The spot that the taurus used to be in is now filled by the Fusion.

Jun 25, 2009 | 08:15 PM

#96

TrackMagicWS6

Registered User

Joined: Sep 2004

Posts: 374

Its a sweet car.

Jun 25, 2009 | 09:18 PM

#97

z28 justin

Registered User

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 427

From: Perrysburg, OH

If I drop that much cash for an AWD daily I'll get one of these

Or at least this has a pedal for my left foot.

Jun 26, 2009 | 01:24 PM

#98

BigBlueCruiser

Registered User

Joined: Jul 2001

Posts: 574

From: Richmond, TX

Quote:

Yesterday we put a new 2010 Ford Taurus SHO through our battery of track tests, and guess what, it's no giant killer.

Despite all the hype surrounding Ford's new twin-turbo, all-wheel drive sport sedan, our long-term Pontiac G8 GT would put it on the trailer. The Pancho is quicker, it handles better and it has better brakes. Oh, and it's much, much, much, much cheaper. In fact, for the price of the SHO you could step up to a G8 GXP. And then it's really no contest, the SHO's doors would be officially blown off.

Ain't that the truth.