Mr Marco

1997, that was the year that Yamaha did the head only on a 3.4ltr Ford V-8. The cam shaft was a hollow tube with the chain gear swedged/splined on the cam. After about 30-70K the cam would slip and engine would mash itself to pieces. Since they only built about 20,000 3G SHOs Ford didn't want to do a recall for the issue and Yamaha washed it's hands of any wrong doing, many of them were Found On Road Dead. Unlike the the Yamaha-developed 3.0L V6 with 5-speed manual transmission in the 2G, the V-8 3G came with a slush box.

I had the cams taken out and pinned before any issues arose, however that experience and my parents busted t-bird was enough to turn me off to the big blue oval.

ucf_bronco

iTrader: (1)

I was just adding fuel to the fire...don't really care to see them. Like I said in another thread your trolling makes anything you say hard to believe, including when you say you're done trolling and it was only meant for a select few.

Brock79

I will post some pics tonight or tomorrow, I forgot I had a dentist appointment at 6 pm yesterday. It was already dark by the time I got home.

Brock79

Those late 90's ones were shit, I remember a lot of people were excited to see a V8 SHO, but it was tiny 3.8 or 3.9 liters and the car itself was shit. It didn't do any justice to the SHO name and I think that why it took ford 10 years to release that nameplate again

docboy

OP, still waiting for a pic that shows both your TL and SHO

Brock79

I tried posting pics, it said images to large need to resize and I still couldn't get them small enough. I did get one pic up on a different thread of my TL, I had to cut part of it out to make it fit.

docboy

Use your phone and upload it to Photobucket. Easy to do, free, and photobucket has no image size limits or restrictions.

fsttyms1

Why? just because you didnt like the answers he gave or that they didnt meet up with they way you think they should? All of his answers were logical answers. It looked as though you just didnt like them because they didnt have the Acura come in first. All you were doing was trying to bait him in a fanboy type of manner.


I will say having driven both in the snow the TL SH-AWD has the far better awd system. For normal driving though no one would complain about either one, especially when ultimately traction comes down to the tires.

C8N

One of the reasons why I like AZ, especially on the 4G sub-forum, is that many of us are car enthusiasts and not simply Acura fanboys. Sure we may have some bias but that is simply due to preference and it is expected.

Brock79

Ok let me work on setting that up, I'm not really computer savoy, so I might have to wait till this weekend.

LaCostaRacer

There were no baits and I'm not a acura fanboy. Above is a small sampling of some of the posts in this thread and it was derailing even before my first post. I don't even own a SH-AWD, so I have nothing to lose in this discussion. My issue with Brock's answers are they don't really answer the questions people set forth in an objective manner.

Paraphrased questions and answers:

1. How's the AWD? Answer: don't really know haven't tried it much since the girlfriend actually drives the car mostly. I did notice the TL slides more though on wet roads.

2. Couldn't the tires be a factor for the TL's traction issues? Answer: the tires are OEM (no answer as two how many miles are on them and what they are though)

What would a discerning person do with answers like that? You ask about AWD and get an answer that is more based on tires and traction. I searched for answers and posted videos of things. That evidence simply shows that SHO is not as capable as the AWD TL for AWD performance. I'm sure the SHO is quicker than a TL but I'm not so sure that it's faster at top speed.

Much of the thread has nothing to do with AWD and could apply to a FWD TL as well. There have been a few people trying to get back to comparing AWD.

Anyway- it will be interesting where this thread goes. I'm losing interest until there are pictures of both cars together. The latest answer about the difficulty in posting photos jives with some of the other answers I have seen.

Brock79

I actually listed the miles on the tires more than once, also you won't find any post that says my GF drives the car. Now your just making shit up to justify your non stop questions. I answered all of your questions and if you actually read my answers and not skim through them or half ass read them, you would see my answers are perfectly suitable. Just by your above post I can see you only took the info you wanted to use and made up other parts.

Brock79

As for the pictures I said this weekend they will be up. Now this is where I need the GIRLFRIENDs help, since I'm working from 6pm to 6 am and she's on an opposite schedule you will have to wait until this weekend. Until then go read the entire thread and get your story straight.

LaCostaRacer

^ Brock I'm done with this story. Enjoy the SHO.

Brock79

I you, but you will be back.

acupower

Here are some stats:

Ford Taurus SHO: 0-60mph 5.1s Quarter Mile 13.5s
Acura TL: 0-60 5.2s Quarter Mile 13.7s

Ford Taurus SHO: Curb Weight: 4350lb Power: 365hp
Acura TL: Curb Weight: 3889lb Power: 305hp

Ford Taurus SHO: Power to weight: 0.08391 hp/lb
Acura TL: Power to weight: 0.07843 hp/lb

Notice how the extra 60hp of the SHO only translate to 6.5% increase in the power to weight ratio, 1ms better 0-60, and 2ms better quarter mile?

Which brings me to another point. Why the hell are we even talking about 0-60 and quarter mile stats? These cars are AWD vehicles created to handle great in all-weather conditions and carry 5 passengers in comfort. Both do that exceptionally well (although the TL has better interior as many have mentioned and a better torque vectoring AWD system).

So you bought an AWD car that you don't even drive in the snow. Instead all you are doing here is bragging about its slightly better 0-60 performance. But wait, there are a ton of other cars in the SHO's price range that could outperform it in both a straight line and in the curves. Sounds to me that you've made the wrong purchase.

C8N

4G TL does not do this very well. That middle hump is rather uncomfortable.

acupower

Yup, I stand corrected on that. The same goes for the SHO though. It has a hump in the middle of the back seat too.

So I would adjust my statement to "Carry 4 passengers in comfort."

C8N

Yes... TL does this very well and I wholeheartedly agree

princelybug

iTrader: (16)

Please list these vehicles. (Just for my information)

ABDomega

I'm sensing this thread begin to spiral.

HeartTLs

iTrader: (5)

TeamAcura

I wanna see those sexy vettes Brock has stored!!!

Brock79

I have yet to see a TL run that 1/4 mile time, but the performance numbers do matter when you're spending that kind of money and you want the best of both worlds. What other AWD is out there for 40 grand that is gonna beat a SHO in performance. Also I guessed you also missed the part about the 09 Vette I own, that fills the performance void very well. I compared the TL and SHO as to how I drive them and the weather I drive them in. Everyone drives their cars differently than the next person. So what works for me might not work for you and that's fine. I listed some comparisons between the two that I have personally experienced and yet some members like yourself seem to come up with a "you should have bought something else" or the "SHO is ugly and I don't like it". I bought the two cars and I own the two of them and have based my response off of this, not what you think or what someone else thinks. Does the SHO offer more for the money than the TL? Yes it does IMO, it rides a little softer as well and has what I feel are more luxurious features. Now if you have only been in a pre 2013 SHO than there is a difference and the 2010-12 lacked refinment in the cabin. I like both cars and they're unique to themselves and how they behave but at the end of the day I feel the SHO is a better all around car from how I drive them and what I do with them. The SHO does have a hump in the rear seat but not as pronounced as the TL. Does either affect me? No I don't sit in the backseat so I really could give a rats ass. If you have ny questions as to why I feel a certain way about the cars, feel free to ask. But don't ask stupid questions like "which one would you drive in a foot of snow?" Because who the hell is out driving in a foot of snow?

acupower

fyi:
Golf R DSG: MSRP 35-40k, 0-60 4.9s
Subaru WRX STI: MSRP 35k, 0-60 4.8s
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo: MSRP 40k, 0-60 4.5s
BMW M235i: MSRP 43k, 0-60 4.4s
BMW 335i: MSRP 43k, 0-60 5.0s
Volvo S60 T6 R-design AWD: MSRP: 43k, 0-60 5.1s

I am sure there are other cars that I have missed. Bottom line is 0-60 performance specs are useless. But if I only cared about acceleration and handling, I'd buy any of the cars I've listed above instead of the SHO.

acupower

Do more research. I've just listed a number of cars in that price range or cheaper that have much better performance figures and definitely better handling. Oh, and they are also AWD.

I never said the SHO is ugly. Looks are subjective and I wouldn't argue there. I simply stated that many members commented that they prefer the TL's interior.

I don't recall asking you that question.

andrewcjduong

Dunno why you guys continuously try and argue with Brock. I'm sure all of us on this forum would disagree with everything he has said but at the end of the day, it's his own opinion and opinions are like assholes, they're full of our own shit. I'm a brand whore, just like I'd never buy an American car or any american brand, just like how I love BMW and Mercedes and I'd spend $300 on a Burberry button up.

Brocks not going to give in by saying his SHO sucks. You might as well give up and move on.

TeamAcura

The Golf and M235i are not AWD.

HeartTLs

iTrader: (5)

I remember the new golf r bring awd?

acupower

The Golf R is AWD. Both beemers in my list aren't AWD but they still outperform the SHO. The 335xi is AWD but I did not list it because it is quite a bit heavier than the 335i and I don't think it's faster than the SHO.

Brock79

all of the comments you quoted were not aimed at you nor did I say you said them, I should have been a little clearer on that. As for the cars you have mentioned as AWD, they're not even close to being in the same class as the TL or SHO. They are all small cars and the BMW's listed above IMO shouldn't even be compared to a TL or SHO. Those cars are tiny and even fully loaded aren't as refined. I mean the cupholders slid in and out of the dash. By the way the EVO and STI/WRX aren't even options for me, I looked at them and you need to be a small guy to drive them, I'm 6'3" and 240 and I can't fit into either of those two cars. So your comparisons have failed based on the cars you picked alone even if I could fit into the other cars they're not even close to the same level.

Brock79

Thank you for your confidence in my Opinion. I would like to know why you don't own a BMW or Benz?

Brock79

This comment pretty much sums up your failure to produce anything relative to this thread, you tried with various AWD cars that don't fit the bill, you also threw in a 2 door and now you have no idea about the 335 performance but you added it in.

Brock79

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._r_first_test/


These test results don't back up your golf R claim. I ca keep going since it seem you're pulling numbers out of your ass

Brock79

By the way I guess most people have missed the title of this thread to begin with.

andrewcjduong

If I could afford one I would. Before purchasing my TL, I went through a whole list of BMW 535i's and 335i's. After pricing everything out, I would be looking at an 08 model with over 120,000km and it would be roughly the same amount I purchased my TL SH-AWD for which I probably wouldn't have really concerned me but then I'd have to add maintenance and when it gets to the higher KM vehicles, maintenance is not something I'd want to deal with in a BMW (or could afford.) My next car would honestly probably be a Lexus. Maintenance is ideal in that car and you can't really go wrong with Toyota/Lexus.

Enough of my friends own BMW's and AMG benzes so I'll just borrow theirs for weekends when they go out of now

Oh. I also didn't want to own a previous generation vehicle while spending over 20k for a car. The E60/E9X series were being phased out in the BMW's and the F series were new while the TL UA8/UA9 were still being sold.

Brock79

I looked at the 3 and 5 series, but the 3 was so small it was out of the question. I also couldn't see spending 40 grand on a 2011 5 series with 40k miles, I was also surprised by the tightness of the rear seat on those as well. While it was larger and doable it just seemed small for the size of the car. I'm not really a fan of MB myself, didn't even look at them.

sockpuppet

I don't know why, but I've patiently waded through this thread, notwithstanding there's really nothing to be gained by anybody from it. This entire question really just comes down to preference. OP prefer's the SHO. Good for him. He's not wrong. Others, myself included, prefer the TL. In that, I'm not wrong. For my climate, I think it's a better way to go, as the AWD is, in my view superior. And, as far as looks go, the TL is far more intruiging...again, in my view.

I did test drive a SHO; was presented with a really good deal on a demo model (my brother-in-law works for a sister dealership). When I drove it home, my wife saw it in the driveway and asked if someone's grandfather was visiting (she said something similar about the Charger I also tested). That's how she saw the car. Her opinion; and you guessed it, she's not wrong.

I'm really at a loss as to how this has gone on for, what, 5 pages?

But...

This, right here...pure trollery. In the same way OP shouldn't be expected to "prove" he owns the cars he has (how did we even start down that road), he certainly can't expect others to prove to him that his choice was not the best one (an impossible task), and then dismiss and diminish the viewpoints of others when they fail to convince him.

This thread is exhausting.

acupower

I listed Golf R DSG (re-read my post). Golf R DSG is the new R model that comes with a double clutch gearbox. And yes, it does the quarter mile in 4.9s as I originally posted:

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/01/14/2...-detroit-2014/


So I am not the one pulling numbers out of my ass. You are the one not doing your own research.

acupower

So to sum everything up. The SHO is a perfect car for someone who doesn't care about buying a car with the best interior in its class and price range nor the best AWD system, nor the best performance. But instead the SHO is for someone who is satisfied with a slightly sub-par car in all other respects BUT cabin/seat size.

And you know what, that makes sense to me. If none of the better cars fit you since you are a heavier than average person buying a SHO makes sense. And of course, that is purely a personal preference that will definitely not be shared with the majority of other people.