Taurus SHO vs. 3.8 Litre Ford engine?
Andy Michalski
Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
Andy M.
amic...@shrike.depaul.edu
Rashid Chowdhury
The SHO has a Japanese Yamaha engine in it. The whole engine is different
from the Ford made 3.0 and 3.8 liter engines. I don't believe that their
parts are interchangeable.
Andy Michalski <amic...@shrike.depaul.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.GSO.3.95.970501...@shrike.depaul.edu>...
RTT
Rashid Chowdhury wrote:
>
> The SHO has a Japanese Yamaha engine in it. The whole engine is different
> from the Ford made 3.0 and 3.8 liter engines. I don't believe that their
> parts are interchangeable.
>
> >
> > Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with
> a
> > 3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference
> between
> > the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
> > what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
> > bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
> > Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
There is a police version of the 3.8. I have been interested in the
same thing for my 94 Taurus. You should be able to order the police
dual exhaust. Don't know what the cost is, but it will not be cheap
since you would likely need new exhaust manifolds (if not headers)
and new cats.
Does anyone know what else comes on the police version? Is there a
different throttle body?
Someone posted once that the Windstar 200hp 3.8 throttle body intake
will bolt on to the engine, but is too tall to fit under the hood.
(can't picture my wife driving a station wagon with a hood scoop 8-)
You can always change the cam. I know the 3.8 breaths very well and
have heard of a few people suping them up.
Lastly, a friend of mine has an old Taurus wagon with a stock 5-spd
manual tranny! I would love to drop one of them in to my Taurus if
the tranny ever blows.
--
=======================================================================
\_____ \______ \______ | "Don't be kind to animals - EAT THEM!"
\__ \__ \__ \__ | R. Thomson - ch...@tiny.mitre.org
\_____ \__ \__ |
\__ \__ \__ \__ | My opinions do not represent
\__ \__ \__ \__ | the position of my employer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to US Code Title 47, Ch.5, Sub-ch.II, Sect.227(a)(2)(B), a
computer/modem meet the definition of a telephone fax machine. Pursuant
to Sect.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited
advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual
monetary loss or $500, whichever is greater, for each violation. Any
unsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a fee
in the amount of $500US per occurance. E-mailing denotes acceptance of
these terms.
=======================================================================
Scott Chan
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.970501...@shrike.depaul.edu>, Andy
Michalski <amic...@shrike.depaul.edu> writes:
|>
|> Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
|> 3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
|> the SHO and the regular engine.
|>
common are the hood support struts. [and I've eliminated them on my SHO!].
Not even the battery or windshield washer fluid bottle are the same. The
SHO has a 3.0 or 3.2l V6 (or 3.4 V8 on '96-96 cars) DOHC, 4-valve build by
Yamaha; the Ford 3.8 is a V6 with pushrod valve train.
--
Scott C
'91 Taurus SHO track & commute car
'90 Sable SLO commuter.
Mark Kovalsky
RTT wrote:
>
> Rashid Chowdhury wrote:
> >
> > The SHO has a Japanese Yamaha engine in it. The whole engine is different
> > from the Ford made 3.0 and 3.8 liter engines. I don't believe that their
> > parts are interchangeable.
> >
> > Andy Michalski <amic...@shrike.depaul.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > a
> > > 3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference
> > between
> > > what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
> > > bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
> > > Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
>
> There is a police version of the 3.8. I have been interested in the
> same thing for my 94 Taurus. You should be able to order the police
> dual exhaust. Don't know what the cost is, but it will not be cheap
> since you would likely need new exhaust manifolds (if not headers)
> and new cats.
>
> Does anyone know what else comes on the police version? Is there a
> different throttle body?
The Taurus police 3.8L engine is the same engine as used in the
Continental.
This is true for the 1991 and newer.
This engine had an "open" combustion chamber. The regular 3.8L had a
"swirl"
head. The open chamber engine was rated at 155 HP, while the regular
engine
was rated at 155 HP. Torque was also up a little, but I don't remember
the
numbers. Neither engine had headers, both used cast iron manifolds and I
think
the same catalyst.
The police package also had a 3.37 final drive ratio, while other 3.8L
Taurus
had a 3.19. The police package had dual exhaust and the same suspension
and tires as the SHO, but on steel wheels with the small hubcaps.
I had a '91 Taurus police once. It was LOADS of fun! It was ice box
white. I would wear dark glasses and EVERYBODY got out of my way!
--
Mark
----------------------------
'30 Ford Model "A" Tudor
'94 Ford Club Wagon 7.3L Diesel with Hypermax Turbo
'97 Ford Taurus SHO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are my own.
Geoff Wakefield
Andy Michalski wrote:
>
> Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
> 3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
> the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
> what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
> bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
> Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
>
> amic...@shrike.depaul.edu
The SHO V-6 (produced until the '96 model year) made 220 hp from 3.0
liters and redlined at 7,000 rpm. The 3.8 made 155, redline at about
4,800 rpm. The two engines are completely different, the SHO having
DOHC heads designed by Yamaha. Yamaha also builds the engine. The 3.8
is typical Detroit iron, pushrods, designed for low-end power, decendent
of much earlier designs, etc.
There are no parts interchangeable between the engines. If you are
looking for more power, the latest version of the 3.8 (available in the
'97 Windstar) makes 200 hp. I believe Ford went with a roller cam
shaft, which allows more aggressive valve timing, reworked heads for
better breathing, and multiport fuel injection. Try getting one from a
wrecked Windstar and pop it in.
E. William Lawrence III
Andy Michalski wrote:
>
> Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
> 3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
> the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
> what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
> bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
> Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
>
> Andy M.
> amic...@shrike.depaul.edu
The differences are too numerous to mention, the sho motor has four
valves per cylinder, I believe two injectors per cylinder, and several
more G's on acceleration. not to mention alot less visible engine
compartment. I believe that they both share excessive torque steer
though. That pull to the right when you accelerate is much worse on an
sho, I have had a couple almost pull me into the ditch.
Bill.
Mark Marchie
>
> Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
>3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
>the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
>what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
>bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
>Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
>
>Andy M.
>amic...@shrike.depaul.edu
>
The 3.8 is a venerable, dependable, "family car" engine. It's got
decent torque but isn't that exciting. The SHO has a $5000 engine
purchased in-whole from Yamaha. It's a high performance, high
revving, racy, exciting engine. Even though it's smaller (3.2L), step
on the pedal and you will know the SHO is the performance engine.
Mark Marchie
ma...@REMOVE.marchie.agn.net
Highland, MI USA
'86 Honda Accord LXi
'90 Acura Integra LS
'93 Geo Prizm LSi
Non Spammers, simply remove the REMOVE from the above when replying
Greg Allen
SHO 3.0L and 3.2L engines are totaly different from the standard ford
3.8L. The SHO has a Yamaha engine with tuned port induction, DOHC and
Dual Exaust, producing 220 HP. SHO also sports a 5 speed or a 4nx
transmission automatic found in the Lincoln Continental to handle the
HP and touque, special handling package, 16" z rated tires, 4 wheel
disks brakes and ABS, spoiler, front end, and hood (to hide the
plumbing). My wife's SHO will dust a stock Mustang GT.
I don't believe any of this stuff is interchangable with a stock
Sable/Taurus. Keep in mind that if you make horsepower, you still have
to get it to the ground without breaking anything , and if you build a
car that will go, you have to stop it as well.
If you desire additional information, check out
http://www.hvs.tis.net/~pvteve/sho.html for SHO and
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5092 for T-Bird SC
3.8 with an attitude
Also there is a Sable AIV (?) Aluminum body 300hp.
Perhaps you can find something on this bad boy.
Thanks
Greg Allen
G_...@compuserve.com
{It's a FORD or FORGET IT!!!!!!!!!!}
Greg Allen
See reply in rec.autos.sport.tech
RTT
E. William Lawrence III wrote:
<snip>
> compartment. I believe that they both share excessive torque steer
> though. That pull to the right when you accelerate is much worse on an
> sho, I have had a couple almost pull me into the ditch.
That's funny. My 94 Tarus with the 3.8 has NO torque steer. My 93
Civic will pull slightly though (the un-equal length half shafts are
VERY un-equal).
Tim Kalafut
Arch Stanton <ar...@usa.net> wrote:
> Greg Allen wrote:
> >
> > plumbing). My wife's SHO will dust a stock Mustang GT.
>
> What year is your wife's SHO and what year(s) Mustang GTs is this
> vehicle dusting? What modifications does your wife's SHO have to it to
> enable it to "dust" Mustang GTs? Are you talking about "dusting" in a
> 1/4 mile drag race or perhaps on mountain twisties?
My brother has an 89 SHO. I have a 94GT. Both are stock. While we have
never raced, the GT would take it off the line, but somewhere around 70
mph the SHO would walk away. It makes more peak horsepower, and has a
higher redline. The SHO also has a higher ultimate top speed. The first
version of the SHO really is a fast car. It is also the best long-distance
car I have ever ridden in, getting 30 mpg and over 450 miles on a tank of
gas.
Even Ford says that the SHO pulls harder than the GT at freeway speeds and
above.
--
Tim
Arch Stanton
Greg Allen wrote:
>
> SHO 3.0L and 3.2L engines are totaly different from the standard ford
> 3.8L. The SHO has a Yamaha engine with tuned port induction, DOHC and
> Dual Exaust, producing 220 HP. SHO also sports a 5 speed or a 4nx
> transmission automatic found in the Lincoln Continental to handle the
> HP and touque, special handling package, 16" z rated tires, 4 wheel
> disks brakes and ABS, spoiler, front end, and hood (to hide the
What year is your wife's SHO and what year(s) Mustang GTs is this
vehicle dusting? What modifications does your wife's SHO have to it to
enable it to "dust" Mustang GTs? Are you talking about "dusting" in a
1/4 mile drag race or perhaps on mountain twisties?
>
> I don't believe any of this stuff is interchangable with a stock
> Sable/Taurus. Keep in mind that if you make horsepower, you still have
> to get it to the ground without breaking anything , and if you build a
> car that will go, you have to stop it as well.
>
> If you desire additional information, check out
> http://www.hvs.tis.net/~pvteve/sho.html for SHO and
> http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5092 for T-Bird SC
> 3.8 with an attitude
>
> Also there is a Sable AIV (?) Aluminum body 300hp.
> Perhaps you can find something on this bad boy.
>
> Thanks
>
> Greg Allen
> G_...@compuserve.com
> {It's a FORD or FORGET IT!!!!!!!!!!}
>
E. William Lawrence III
Geoff Wakefield wrote:
>
> Andy Michalski wrote:
> >
> > Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
> > 3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
> > the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
> > what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
> > bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
> > Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
> >
> > Andy M.
> > amic...@shrike.depaul.edu
>
> liters and redlined at 7,000 rpm. The 3.8 made 155, redline at about
> 4,800 rpm. The two engines are completely different, the SHO having
> DOHC heads designed by Yamaha. Yamaha also builds the engine. The 3.8
> is typical Detroit iron, pushrods, designed for low-end power, decendent
> of much earlier designs, etc.
>
> There are no parts interchangeable between the engines. If you are
> looking for more power, the latest version of the 3.8 (available in the
> '97 Windstar) makes 200 hp. I believe Ford went with a roller cam
> shaft, which allows more aggressive valve timing, reworked heads for
> better breathing, and multiport fuel injection. Try getting one from a
> wrecked Windstar and pop it in.
I cannot even begin to explain why there is no way on earth this would
ever work!!!!!! (for less than about about 2 or three thou.) Ever Hear
of OBD II? Maybe the designers built an engine for a new car that would
pop out of a van, go back in emissions standards time to the middle ages,
and fire up without any trouble (?)
Then again maybe......
Eric Jacobsen
>On Thu, 1 May 1997 00:24:01 -0500, Andy Michalski
><amic...@shrike.depaul.edu> wrote:
>> Here's a quick question. I recently purchased a 1992 Merc. Sable with a
>>3.8 litre Ford engine in it. Does anyone know what the difference between
>>the SHO and the regular engine. I know that the SHO has dual exhaust but
>>what other performance parts are on the SHO? Is it possible/feasible to
>>bolt on some extra power on my car? (and I'm not talking about a $4000
>>Paxton super charger!) Any advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
>>
>>Andy M.
>>amic...@shrike.depaul.edu
The stock SHO exhaust is not a true dual, but a 2-1-2 system. Also, as
others have pointed out, through 1995 the SHO motor was a Yamaha 24V
3.0L (3.2L for the automatics) 220hp V6, a radically different engine
than those plugged into the vanilla Taurii. This engine was originally
developed for a 2-seat mid-engine car that Ford was developing to
compete with the Corvette. The car got cancelled, but, much to the
delight of many of us, the engine found a home in the SHO.
I have a 1995 5-spd SHO, and, yes, I can confirm that it will, in
fact, dust stock Mustang GTs. A buddy has a 95 GT, and I have run
across several others who have graciously provided the experimental
data to consistently confirm this fact. It is truly amazing what a
stock SHO can do.
Eric Jacobsen, Minister of Algorithms, EF Data Corp.
http://www.primenet.com/~ericj
Edward Kim
Eric Jacobsen (er...@primenet.com.nospam) wrote:
: I have a 1995 5-spd SHO, and, yes, I can confirm that it will, in
: fact, dust stock Mustang GTs. A buddy has a 95 GT, and I have run
: across several others who have graciously provided the experimental
: data to consistently confirm this fact. It is truly amazing what a
: stock SHO can do.
I highly doubt this. My father has a '93 5-speed SHO and it will NOT beat
any stock Mustang GT. Maybe an automatic convertible GT, but in no way a
5-speed coupe. It might have a chance on the highway. It does seem to
have some upper-RPM power. But stoplight-to-stoplight, forget about it!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+Edward Kim +
+Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 +
+uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!+
+1996 Mustang GT White/Black interior 5-speed +
+SVO 3.55s, SVO subframes, K&N w/o air intake silencer +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gary Henderson
>> SHO 3.0L and 3.2L engines are totaly different from the standard ford
>> 3.8L. The SHO has a Yamaha engine with tuned port induction, DOHC and
>> Dual Exaust, producing 220 HP. SHO also sports a 5 speed or a 4nx
>> transmission automatic found in the Lincoln Continental to handle the
>> HP and touque, special handling package, 16" z rated tires, 4 wheel
>> disks brakes and ABS, spoiler, front end, and hood (to hide the
>> plumbing). My wife's SHO will dust a stock Mustang GT.
>
>What year is your wife's SHO and what year(s) Mustang GTs is this
>vehicle dusting? What modifications does your wife's SHO have to it to
>enable it to "dust" Mustang GTs? Are you talking about "dusting" in a
>1/4 mile drag race or perhaps on mountain twisties?
>
>>
I have been in a 5 speed SHO Tuaras. They will not beat a GT, not the
older ones, and not the newer ones. Maybe a god running 5 speed SHO
will beat a bad running auto GT, but definately not a 5 speed.
Megan Jones
gt7...@acmex.gatech.edu (Edward Kim) wrote:
>I highly doubt this. My father has a '93 5-speed SHO and it will NOT beat
>any stock Mustang GT. Maybe an automatic convertible GT, but in no way a
>5-speed coupe. It might have a chance on the highway. It does seem to
>have some upper-RPM power. But stoplight-to-stoplight, forget about it!
wouldn't put a large wager on it (it *is* close), my 89 SHO would take
9 of 10 stoplight to wherever-you-want races.
Where does your father shift? 6500 seems to be the best. If I were
you, I wouldn't assume victory over *any* five-speed SHO. I have
enough experience to know that I can almost always drive away smiling
from any SHO to stock Mustang encounter. The losses can often be
attributed to my own mistakes- bogging, missed shifts, etc.
Cheers-
Mark
89 SHO
**************************************************************
Mark Blacknell SWATS-Atlanta, GA
"Everything has been said before, but since nobody
listens we have to keep going back and beginning
all over again"- Andre Gide
Blac...@mindspring.com Tel:404.657.7833
http://www.mindspring.com/~blacknll Fax:404.657.7835
**************************************************************
keller (Michael Keller)
Arch Stanton wrote:
>
> Greg Allen wrote:
>> -all kinds of stuff snipped-
> My wife's SHO will dust a stock Mustang GT.
>
> What year is your wife's SHO and what year(s) Mustang GTs is this
> vehicle dusting? What modifications does your wife's SHO have to it to enable it to "dust" Mustang GTs? Are you talking about "dusting" in a
> 1/4 mile drag race or perhaps on mountain twisties?
>
> >
>>more stuff snipped-
---
My wife's '89 SHO with 155,000 miles on it will easily walk away from
stock late model Mustangs (non Cobra/tuner) on the expressway. The SHO's
were not intended to be drag racers or canyon carvers but more of an
open road car, so a 'stang will win on the drag strip and through the
twisties...most of the time. From about 70 up to 140 the car just pulls
hard, right where the Mustangs start to soften. I'm not gloating, but it
is the way it is. I have to back pedal at 110 just to keep my buddies
stock 93 LX 5.0 within a couple of car lengths of my rear bumper. Its
not just his car, many a 5.0 victim were tagged on the WNY expressways.
Just recently we added a Walker Dynomax cat-back system. It pulls
slightly better with much more noise than the stocker. No takers on the
x-ways though....hmmm maybe its the exhaust.
-Mike.
James Driscoll Jr
keller (Michael Keller) wrote:
> Arch Stanton wrote:
> >
> > Greg Allen wrote:
Blah Blah
mine's faster than yours...
96 Chevy Camaro Z28 5.7 4 spd auto
Cheaper and faster than all fords....
oooooohhhh
--
James Driscoll Jr
http://www.driscolltire.com
mailto:spac...@myself.com
Stephen French
l
>
> Blah Blah
> mine's faster than yours...
> 96 Chevy Camaro Z28 5.7 4 spd auto
> Cheaper and faster than all fords....
> oooooohhhh
> --
> James Driscoll Jr
> http://www.driscolltire.com
> mailto:spac...@myself.com
>
You hit the "CHEAPER" thing right on the nose Jimmy.
Dane Basch
In <336b8d46...@news.superlink.net>, ga...@superlink.net (Gary Henderson) writes:
>
>
>>> SHO 3.0L and 3.2L engines are totaly different from the standard ford
>>> 3.8L. The SHO has a Yamaha engine with tuned port induction, DOHC and
>>> Dual Exaust, producing 220 HP. SHO also sports a 5 speed or a 4nx
>>> transmission automatic found in the Lincoln Continental to handle the
>>> HP and touque, special handling package, 16" z rated tires, 4 wheel
>>> disks brakes and ABS, spoiler, front end, and hood (to hide the
>>> plumbing). My wife's SHO will dust a stock Mustang GT.
>>
>>What year is your wife's SHO and what year(s) Mustang GTs is this
>>vehicle dusting? What modifications does your wife's SHO have to it to
>>enable it to "dust" Mustang GTs? Are you talking about "dusting" in a
>>1/4 mile drag race or perhaps on mountain twisties?
>>
>>>
>I have been in a 5 speed SHO Tuaras. They will not beat a GT, not the
>older ones, and not the newer ones. Maybe a god running 5 speed SHO
>will beat a bad running auto GT, but definately not a 5 speed.
I beg to differ, sir. My stock 94 SHO Auto has beaten Mustangs before, and with
a few mods done (exhaust, intake), I can beat both auto and 5 speed mustangs,
along with older camerobirds and current V6 camarobirds. This car is very fast,
quite stable, comfortable, and will hall ass with 4 FULL SIZED adults in it.
Don't get me wrong. I love mustangs, and will own one very soon. A 98 Cobra,
most likely. However, I ask you: can your Mustang do all that? Have you driven
an SHO lately (not 96-97s; they are crap)?
****************************************************
Dane Basch
E-Mail to: dane_...@mindspring.com
Words I live by:
If your not part of the solution, your part of the
problem. Quit being part of the f***ing problem!!
--John McLean, Die Hard
Diplomacy is the act of saying "Nice Doggie" while
looking for a rock." --Unknown
Hockey is life. The rest is just offseason.
Life-long Boston Bruins fan, and hope soon to be
an Atlanta Hockey fan (again) someday.
****************************************************
Gary Henderson
>I beg to differ, sir.
'Sir'! Wow, I like that:)
My stock 94 SHO Auto has beaten Mustangs before, and with
>a few mods done (exhaust, intake), I can beat both auto and 5 speed mustangs,
>along with older camerobirds and current V6 camarobirds. This car is very fast,
>quite stable, comfortable, and will hall ass with 4 FULL SIZED adults in it.
Whats quicker the 3.0 5 speed or the 3.2 auto? All I can say is I was
in a '92 SHO 5 speed, and it was decently quick. but not that
impressive. Good for a 4 door though, don't get me wrong.
>Don't get me wrong. I love mustangs, and will own one very soon. A 98 Cobra,
>most likely. However, I ask you: can your Mustang do all that? Have you driven
>an SHO lately (not 96-97s; they are crap)?
>****************************************************
I don't have a Mustang. I have a '94 Formula LT1. I used to have a
'91 Cougar XR7 (5.0 HO) that was decently quick. I'd guess 16.0 in
the 1/4 mile, and that was a nice big comfortable car....I haven't
been in any newer SHOs and I doubt I would be impressed anyways....