2013 Taurus SHO

Robot said:
@Thaywood

The SHO doesn't have a center diff. It uses torque vectoring which is like continuously variable between all of the wheels. It would be interesting to see how that works in the snow.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't have a center diff, but factory specs for the '12 SHO are 55/45 F/R torque split under normal conditions with extra power going rear when needed. I want to know if the split is more rear biased on the '13 model.
 
This car is not marketed toward people like us. It's marketed toward the sprout eating Birkenstock wearing, don't care about anything unless it affects me types. Watch this vid and you'll see what I mean.

2013 Ford Taurus Technology - YouTube

I really don't think they care anymore. I thought they learned their lesson about fwd. Fwd pickups are on the horizon just you wait and see.
 
The problem is they target to too diverse of a customer base. There needs to be more specialization with fewer units in each specific group or they need to push the idea that certain drivers need to drive certain types of cars period. There is no bread and butter Porsche or Ferrari. I never liked the idea of having a vehicle lineup that has cheap versions of the expensive loaded variants. There never was a 4 cyl Town Car because those buyers wanted V8s. Sadly, that demographic has all but gone the way of the dinosaurs. Now we have ex hippies running our country that want cars with non toxic paint and exaust with floormats made from hemp and room for grandma's oxygen tank.
 
I've been driving a 11 SHO for the past 8 months. Have about 16,500 mile on it. The car is a blast to drive. It has a good balance of everything except for the brakes; brakes should be better. I believe the 13 has far superior brakes.
As for the front/rear ratio; I bet its the same as all others or it would be printed somewhere like the brake upgrades. Doubt they would keep that a 'secret'.
And there is torque steer, but it's not so noticeable. Unless your taking a hard turn from a stop. But as humans we have muscles, brains and control enough to handle this.
I drive alot of highway and use a lot of interchanges allowing for hard acceleration around tight ramps merging into traffic. Believe me the car hauls ass and does not have enough torque steer to concern one with. The weight of the car and its height is what should concern you, not power distibution. Drive the car within its means in real world situations and it can't be beat - well, obviously there are better cars out there.
Luckily for me my SHO is a company car as I could never afford one. And having said that do I think the car is worth $45-46k with all the options? Sometimes yes and sometimes no. But I would never buy one brand new.
 
Robot said:
This car is not marketed toward people like us. It's marketed toward the sprout eating Birkenstock wearing, don't care about anything unless it affects me types. Watch this vid and you'll see what I mean.

2013 Ford Taurus Technology - YouTube.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this. Even though the SHO is AWD, unless I can find some specs that say otherwise, it's still a primarily FWD car. Thus, not for me. Soccer moms will love it, I'm sure:D

Robot said:
I really don't think they care anymore. I thought they learned their lesson about fwd. Fwd pickups are on the horizon just you wait and see.
Click to expand...

Apparently not. It's funny that back in the 80's and 90's Cadillac was spewing out crappy FWD cars with reasonably powerful V-8's that torque steered like sunovabiches wile Lincoln was building the RWD Town Car and Mark series (and RWD Connies up to '88). At that time, Ford had more RWD cars than GM or Chrysler. Now it's the other way around. Caddy is mostly RWD, Chrysler has the 300, Charger, and Challenger, Chevy has the Vette and Camaro, and poor ol' Ford's got nuthin' but the 'Stang (they do have the Falcon in Australia, but they're apparently too stupid to realize that Americans will buy a RWD V-8 powered 4-door sedan). Maybe some day they'll wake up and smell the tire smoke. As for the FWD pickups, believe it or not, Ford did actually propose to change the F-Series to a transverse engine, FWD platform. This was back in the late 90's I think. I remember seeing a sidebar article about it in one of the major car mags. Thank God they came to their senses. But with the way Ford seems to be head over heels in love with sideways engines driving the wrong wheels, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the F-Series, Expedition, Navigator, and Mustang don't all go wrong-wheel-drive in the next few years:rolleyes:
 
I remember my GPA telling me about a buddy that worked R&D for chevy and when they dyno'd engines, they upper managment would tell them to a hp number from a lower rpm. This way the young guys they were trying to sell this hot cars too could get insured. The LS 6 454 made over 600hp on the dyno. They rated it at 450hp. That was what it made around 3000rpm.
 
philly0420 said:
On a engine dyno, a stock boss 302 made 372 hp @ 6800 rpm. This was in a old hot rod mag article where the ran chevys 302DZ against the Boss 302.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that one bit. Those were very high-revving engines that made most of their power in the upper RMP range. They had to rev high to make any power with those Cleveland heads with those sewer-pipe sized ports!

philly0420 said:
I remember my GPA telling me about a buddy that worked R&D for chevy and when they dyno'd engines, they upper managment would tell them to a hp number from a lower rpm. This way the young guys they were trying to sell this hot cars too could get insured. The LS 6 454 made over 600hp on the dyno. They rated it at 450hp. That was what it made around 3000rpm.
Click to expand...

Again, I don't doubt that a bit either:)
 
0e19e330c54c164cd63ccfc6b325a153.jpg
 
thaywood said:
Apparently not. It's funny that back in the 80's and 90's Cadillac was spewing out crappy FWD cars with reasonably powerful V-8's that torque steered like sunovabiches wile Lincoln was building the RWD Town Car and Mark series (and RWD Connies up to '88). At that time, Ford had more RWD cars than GM or Chrysler. Now it's the other way around. Caddy is mostly RWD, Chrysler has the 300, Charger, and Challenger, Chevy has the Vette and Camaro, and poor ol' Ford's got nuthin' but the 'Stang (they do have the Falcon in Australia, but they're apparently too stupid to realize that Americans will buy a RWD V-8 powered 4-door sedan). Maybe some day they'll wake up and smell the tire smoke. As for the FWD pickups, believe it or not, Ford did actually propose to change the F-Series to a transverse engine, FWD platform. This was back in the late 90's I think. I remember seeing a sidebar article about it in one of the major car mags. Thank God they came to their senses. But with the way Ford seems to be head over heels in love with sideways engines driving the wrong wheels, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the F-Series, Expedition, Navigator, and Mustang don't all go wrong-wheel-drive in the next few years:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this.

Ford needs to bring back the mark VIII and the LS. I think these two vehicles really show that Lincoln can make a sporty rwd V8 powered car that isnt made for a 60 year old.

Whenever i take my car to my local ford dealer, i get lost of stares. Service managers even come out to take a look. When i went up there last year apparently it was the first one they have seen with an intake and aftermarket exhaust. And i do keep it in very good condition. Most marks or LS's i see around here are beat up.

Im pretty sure they will say the same with most of the marks on here.
 
BlackLS06 said:
Whenever i take my car to my local ford dealer, i get lost of stares. Service managers even come out to take a look. When i went up there last year apparently it was the first one they have seen with an intake and aftermarket exhaust. And i do keep it in very good condition. Most marks or LS's i see around here are beat up.

Im pretty sure they will say the same with most of the marks on here.
Click to expand...

yep. the alignment shop is always pretty excited when i bring in the mark. caused a bit of a stir last time i was there.
 
philly0420 said:
I remember my GPA telling me about a buddy that worked R&D for chevy and when they dyno'd engines, they upper managment would tell them to a hp number from a lower rpm. This way the young guys they were trying to sell this hot cars too could get insured. The LS 6 454 made over 600hp on the dyno. They rated it at 450hp. That was what it made around 3000rpm.
Click to expand...

Not so sure about 600 hp out of a stock ls6 454..maybe a tad over 500, the ls7 454 crate motor that never made it into any production car from that era maybe made close to 600 hp on the dyno with headers and no exhaust..but that's also because of its 12.5:1 compression, bigger cam, and LS7 intake..I think one of the most underrated producion big blocks from that era was either the Corvette 427 L88 or ZL1..rated at 430 really closer to 550+.
 
chris2523 said:
yep. the alignment shop is always pretty excited when i bring in the mark. caused a bit of a stir last time i was there.
Click to expand...

Gotta love a well kept lincoln.

Sure newer cars might be much fancier but theres a certain nostalgia these cars carry and marks have an even older school feel.

If i spend too much time on this side of the forum i may just buy one :eek:.

keVIIIn said:
Not so sure about 600 hp out of a stock ls6 454..maybe a tad over 500, the ls7 454 crate motor that never made it into any production car from that era maybe made close to 600 hp on the dyno with headers and no exhaust..but that's also because of its 12.5:1 compression, bigger cam, and LS7 intake..I think one of the most underrated producion big blocks from that era was either the Corvette 427 L88 or ZL1..rated at 430 really closer to 550+.
Click to expand...

All of those chevy engines are beasts. The original block in my 72 chevelle which has never been rebuilt can still manage to squeal the tires. Only things that have been changed are the carb, distributor cap plugs and wires. Even with factory ac it does that lol. Has some lifter tick too. They dont make engines like that anymore.
 
philly0420 said:
I remember my GPA telling me about a buddy that worked R&D for chevy and when they dyno'd engines, they upper managment would tell them to a hp number from a lower rpm. This way the young guys they were trying to sell this hot cars too could get insured. The LS 6 454 made over 600hp on the dyno. They rated it at 450hp. That was what it made around 3000rpm.
Click to expand...

This is by far the best argument for the horsepower ratings. I was a salesman at Colonial Ford for a while and I sold 3 1990 SHOs. One of the selling points I would discuss was the fact the Yamaha engine was bench tested to 11,000 rpm but limited to 7200 due to the acessory drive limitations. Years later I ran into a guy up in Michigan in an SHO club. He was telling me about the work they were doing to get higher rpms. The underdrive pullys were used and his had to idle at 1200 to charge. He could run it to 8900 rpm and I believe he was saying something like 340 hp but the torque was lower though.
 
340? :lol: not without a LOT of work done to it... and maybe nitrous. or turbo.
stock they dyno around 200.
 
BlackLS06 said:
Gotta love a well kept lincoln.

Sure newer cars might be much fancier but theres a certain nostalgia these cars carry and marks have an even older school feel.

If i spend too much time on this side of the forum i may just buy one :eek:.
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised how many random compliments I get for the mark..I was just at the chevy dealer recently with my friend who was dropping off his 02 Z28 to have some maintenance done, and one of the salesman saw me pull up in the mark viii and park..he came out and was walking around it checking it out and went up to me saying how he always liked the marks and asked me how fast it was..knowing what was under the hood, he said how in their heyday they were always able to surprise alot of mustangs, which I could see being true with their weak SOHC 4.6 of the time. Eitherway I love em, not your typical mustang/camaro thay everyone else has.
 
A very small portion of the population would buy a rwd v8 sedan. take police cars out of the equation and the v6 charger probably outsells the hemi 3:1.

The gto sold like hotcakes didn't it? I think I heard once "oh I like the gto but won't get it because its a 2 door."
 
vr4 said:
A very small portion of the population would buy a rwd v8 sedan. take police cars out of the equation and the v6 charger probably outsells the hemi 3:1.
Click to expand...

The Falcon has a base 195Kw (260hp+/-) 4.0L DOHC Inline-6 engine. There is also a turbocharged version of that 6 that makes around 365hp or so (or there used to be in the XR-6, I haven't been to the Ford of Australia site in a while). And personally, I love inline-sixes. Screw a V-Sick engine. Inlines are inherently smooth and naturally balanced. BMW and Ford of Australia are the only two car companies in the world who still make an inline-6 engine as far as I know (Volvo used to, but I don't think they do now). A much larger portion of the population would buy the 6 cylinder base version. There's also a Falcon station wagon. And the Territory RWD/4WD CUV that's based on the Falcon (CUV because it is a car-based crossover). The 5.0L FPV GT Boss 335 (335Kw or 450hp) would appeal to the same crowd that buys the CTS-V, and Chrysler SRT-8's. And unlike the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger, the Falcon can be had with either a 6-speed manual or 6-speed automatic transmission. The 6-cylinder Falcon would be purchased by the same 3:1 ratio that buys V-6 Chargers and 300's. The Territory could conceivably replace the Flexploder imitation SUV and appeal to a much broader customer base due to its more capable RWD platform (it would have to be restyled a little, though. It's rather "plain" looking). Of course this is all just a pipe dream on my part. I'd love to see the Falcon reborn here in the 'States. But it'll never happen (at least not in its current form...maybe a wrong-wheel-drive travesty) as long as the bean counters are running Ford.

vr4 said:
The gto sold like hotcakes didn't it? I think I heard once "oh I like the gto but won't get it because its a 2 door."
Click to expand...

This is true. However, another deciding factor was that a lot of people said it looked like an inflated Sunfire. The styling was bland and uninspiring. However, the G8 did indeed sell like hotcakes. And it was a fantastic car! Too bad it's not around anymore. R.I.P. Pontiac:(
 
keVIIIn said:
Not so sure about 600 hp out of a stock ls6 454..maybe a tad over 500, the ls7 454 crate motor that never made it into any production car from that era maybe made close to 600 hp on the dyno with headers and no exhaust..but that's also because of its 12.5:1 compression, bigger cam, and LS7 intake..I think one of the most underrated producion big blocks from that era was either the Corvette 427 L88 or ZL1..rated at 430 really closer to 550+.
Click to expand...

We are in luck. He has been emailing me trying to buy my 1940 ford convertible. He said the ls6 made just under 550hp on the engine dyno. When they added long tubes they had laying around they gained 74hp.
 
chris2523 said:
340? :lol: not without a LOT of work done to it... and maybe nitrous. or turbo.
stock they dyno around 200.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, there were mods like bigger injectors, fuel pump, etc... kinda reminded me of the old 5.0 days using some of the same tricks. I know his big tach was right up there near 9000 though.

This is the way to make more horsepower!

F1 Engine Break In (ending is crazy!) - YouTube
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 449 (members: 0, guests: 449)
Back
Top