"Kenaft - some new kid" (kenaft)
07/29/2014 at 18:28 • Filed to: None
1
17|
"Kenaft - some new kid" (kenaft)
07/29/2014 at 18:28 • Filed to: None | 1
| 17 |
What do people think of the old SHO?
There are some on my local CL...
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
For Sweden
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 18:31 |
|
Other popular Oppositelock Questions:
Are Miatas fun cars?
Is a wagon better than a sedan?
Does anyone else hate bro trucks?
Am I the only one who prefers shifting my own gears?
Is anyone else watching Le Mans?
What is your opinion on Diesel?
EL_ULY
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 18:31 |
|
a crazy clean and low mileage one.... i'll stare at for a good while and adore
Anything else.... meh
This is leaning more toward the meh catagory
HammerheadFistpunch
> For Sweden
07/29/2014 at 18:33 |
|
ahyup
Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies
> For Sweden
07/29/2014 at 18:37 |
|
I don't hate bro trucks.
|
For Sweden
> Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies
07/29/2014 at 18:38 |
|
cool story bro truck guy
|
Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies
> For Sweden
07/29/2014 at 18:39 |
|
Don't you wish the new Miata would come with a diesel in brown with no power steering?
ShelbyRacer78-Fusion Modifier
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 18:41 |
|
What about a SHO?
Grindintosecond
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 18:43 |
|
great engine. that's about it....
NaturallyAspirated
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 19:12 |
|
Ooh, a '95 in Midnight Blue! My first "fun" car was a 95 SHO in Silver Frost. Marvelously fun sleeper cars. The 1st and 2nd gen SHOs tend to be very exciting to drive but a little more fiddly mechanically.
Do find out what he means by "minor repairs." Some of the engine parts for the older SHOs are getting hard to find. At 140k miles it's probably due for a timing belt and valve adjustment - it's pretty common for people to try to unload these cars at the 120k-140k mile mark due to the expense of the 120k service.
ffoc02
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 19:21 |
|
Love/Hate is about right. 20 year old Taurus parts are getting hard enough to come by, but S H O just brings another level of annoying. When they run well, they are amazing, but when things break it gets interesting.
I guess the best thing would be to get the car in the air and check for excess rust. That's the biggest enemy, and it's the hardest thing to come back from.
|
Kenaft - some new kid
> For Sweden
07/29/2014 at 20:57 |
|
I was just checking... and maybe looking for friends to talk to about it :'(
|
Kenaft - some new kid
> ffoc02
07/29/2014 at 20:58 |
|
Especially in this area, rust is a problem. This blue one looks surprisingly rust-free on the outside oddly...
Renescent
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 21:07 |
|
I had a 5-speed 1994 green one... loved that car to death. This one, while a great color blue, is an automatic and you need to know what 'a few minor' repairs mean.
Interesting note, the automatic has 20 more horsepower and a larger engine than the 3-pedal variety. 220-200 and 3.0 - 3.2
If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent
> Kenaft - some new kid
07/29/2014 at 21:32 |
|
I like it because of the sleeper appeal. Sure, it's not especially fast, and 220hp is kind of average for a modern family car, but at a time when the industry was recovering from a huge slump it was a big deal. In 1989 you were lucky if your mid-size had 150hp, but then here comes Ford bursting onto the scene with a freaking four-door that put down power figures to match contemporary V8 muscle cars. What did the '89 Camaro IROC have? 240hp. Mustang? 225.
|
NaturallyAspirated
> Renescent
07/30/2014 at 12:08 |
|
I've owned both stick shift and automatic SHOs, and the automatic is actually quite good, especially with a tune. Well, except for the 1993 model year, which was the first year they offered the SHO in an automatic. 94+ automatics have a beefier lubrication system and more clutches in the clutch pack compared with the tranny in the 3.8L Taurus.
The 3.2l engine has a few other "goodies" that make it a little easier to maintain than the 3.0l, for example, IIRC it's mounted closer to the front of the engine bay so you can more easily remove the intake manifold, and it's not bad to change the back plugs. It has a single serpentine belt with an automatic tensioner instead of multiple manually tensioned V-belts.
|
Renescent
> NaturallyAspirated
07/30/2014 at 18:29 |
|
Agreed, and the CPS was moved to a more friendly location as well... on the 3.0, it was an $1,800 job... in 1999.
Spartanator
> Kenaft - some new kid
08/02/2014 at 00:16 |
|
I'm a SHO enthusiast and I've had a 2010 SHO w/PP since new and a 95 SHO MTX as a weekend toy that I picked up a few years ago. My advice is to avoid the automatic. Not because it's bad, although it's not great, but because the manual transmission car is a totally different experience and worth every penny to find a manual over the automatic.
I haven't had any issues with mine, but I don't live far from a SHO boneyard in North Carolina. So any issues I have, I'm covered.