Good morning! I hope you’re all in the mood for some cheap thrills, because I’ve got two Ford Motor Company products that put the emphasis on horsepower and don’t cost much money. Of course, you get what you pay for, so naturally they’re not in perfect shape. But one of them could be perfect for you.
Yesterday we eschewed excitement in favor of reliable pushrod V6s and comfy red velour. I expected the Olds Cutlass Cruiser to win, but I didn’t expect it to win by a ten-to-one margin. Did you all hate the Dynasty that much, or do you just love wagons that much?
I agree that the Olds wagon is probably the better choice, but I still hate the woodgrain, and I still like the Dynasty’s interior better. It’s too bad Dodge never turned the Dynasty into a wagon, but I guess it would have cut into minivan sales. Still, it would have been interesting. Hey Bishop – wanna take that one on?
Those who weren’t around during the doldrums of the malaise era can never know what a relief it was when horsepower started creeping back into cars. No more pretending that a 140 horsepower Mustang was a fast car. No more feedback carburetors gasping for air and taking sixteen seconds to reach 60 MPH. The old-timers were scared of the fuel injection systems and computers that made this renaissance possible, but let them stick to their Holley double-pumpers if they must. The rest of us enjoyed having easy starting, better drivability, and way higher gas mileage to go with our newfound power.
The ’90s were when things started getting really interesting again. Want a FWD family sedan that could get into the 14s in the quarter mile, and only comes with a stick? Done. Feel the need to turn a set of Goodyears into a cloud of smoke with a V8, like in the old days? Piece of cake. The actual horsepower numbers of these cars may sound a little sad to younger readers, who grew up with 200 horsepower family cars, but believe me, in their day, these were really something. Let’s check them out.
1991 Ford Taurus SHO – $3,540
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0-liter DOHC V6, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Athens, GA
Odometer reading: 160,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
This is a car I know pretty well; my dad had one, and I drove it quite a few times. It remains the car I have driven the fastest, about a buck-thirty, on the Kansas Turnpike. The SHO looked like a normal Taurus, unless you knew what to look for: the subtle ground effects, the “SHO” lettering molded into the rear bumper, the directional food-processor-blade wheels. But in all the ways that mattered, this was no ordinary Taurus. It had stiffer suspension, better brakes – and that absolute jewel of an engine.
The SHO’s engine is based on the standard Taurus 3.0-liter “Vulcan” V6, but it was developed and built by Yamaha, with four camshafts, four valves per cylinder, and a stratospheric 7000 RPM redline. Its characteristic “basket of snakes” intake manifold is variable-length, switching over from the long runners to the short ones at high RPM. The whole thing is good for 220 horsepower, a massive bump over the standard Vulcan, and for the first few years it was only available with a five-speed manual. This one runs great at 160,000 miles, and the seller says it’s still a lot of fun to drive.
The SHO was special inside too, with deeply bolstered leather bucket seats, a center console to house that five-speed shifter, and power everything. This one has seen better days, though: the leather is falling apart, there are cracks in the dash, and it has some electrical gremlins that need sorting out. The automatic climate control is stuck on 75 degrees, and the driver’s window is stuck halfway down.
Things are better outside, though the paint is dull in places and some of the window trim is messed up. It’s better than a lot of inexpensive SHOs I’ve seen, though; as is all too common with cheap fast cars, the second and third owners of these cars tended to treat them rather poorly. This one has its faults, but at least it doesn’t look abused. The seller does admit it needs new front tires, though. I’m not surprised.
1998 Ford Mustang GT convertible – $3,800
Engine/drivetrain: 4.6-liter OHC V8, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Cleveland, OH
Odometer reading: 152,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
V8s and Mustangs go together like peanut butter and jelly. Sure, you could and can get other engines in your pony car, and some of them have been pretty damn good, but if you really want the Mustang experience, you want a V8. Only once in the Mustang’s 61-year history has a V8 not been offered, and that was 1974, the first year of the much-maligned Mustang II. Ford rectified that in 1975, and a V8 has been part of the Mustang recipe ever since.
Starting in 1996, the Mustang’s V8 switched from a small-block overhead-valve unit to Ford’s “Modular” overhead-cam design. In 1998, it sent 225 horsepower to the rear axle, in this case through a five-speed manual, which is uncommon for a convertible. It runs and drives “amazing” and “very tight,” according to the seller. The clutch was replaced 3,000 miles ago, and the tires are new. It has an aftermarket exhaust system on it; the seller thinks it’s a Flowmaster.
The interior is in reasonably good shape, except for the driver’s seat. You could replace it, but as common as Mustangs are, tan leather Mustang seats aren’t. If it were me, I’d just put a cover on it until I could get it to a reputable upholstery shop and have it redone. It has an upgraded stereo, which the seller says sounds great.
It has dumb dark-tinted covers on both the headlights and the taillights, both of which should be removed and thrown out immediately. It also has what look like wheels from a newer Mustang, which can stay, because they look good on there. The paint is faded unevenly, but there’s no rust on it. The seller says the top has a couple of small tears in it, but nothing bad enough to cause a leak, and the mechanism works fine.
The best reason to look at either of these cars is that they’re fun to drive. But either one should be reliable enough to actually use as transportation, at least some of the time. Parts shouldn’t be a problem, except maybe some of the SHO-specific stuff for the Taurus. The big question is, which one is more your style? The sleeper sedan, or the flashy convertible?
SN-95s wasn’t “really tight” from the day they came off the line, even before they cut the roof off.
The SHO is sad as hell inside but if you weren’t worried about replacing like for like it would be pretty easy still to go to a junkyard and pull some interior bits out of a regular Taurus for a dramatic uplift.
If the question is, “which fits my style better”, then the SHO is unquestionably the answer.
The vote is not going the way I thought it would (or should).
A buddy of mine had a SHO and it was pretty hilarious at the time.
I liked the 2nd generation’s styling better, but Mustangs have never been my thing.
A V6 Accord or Camry would dust the SHO in a straight line, and it would be interesting to put them up against each other for a race on a circuit.
SHO. Its always the SHO, unless its a fox SVT. Then, think about it for a bit…and choose SHO
The SHO easily if the interior wasn’t so sad. The Mustang isn’t amazing, either, plus I was terribly disappointed by a Cobra version of this Mustang with less than half that mileage (rattly chassis made of cooked noodle, slower than expected, seat broken in a recline just a bit too far, but with all that, it did have character) and I don’t care for convertibles, so I guess back to the SHO.
easy sho easy
I’d do the Mustang, but always love a SHO.
If I was actually going to buy it though, I’d have to really think about it. Anyone who puts smoked lenses on their headlights is…someone I don’t expect to get along with
I’d prefer an SHO but the neglect on this one is criminal
My paternal instincts had me wanting to save that SHO. It’s a car I’ve always wanted, and this one deserves to be dolled up and run through its paces one more time.
Mustang. It’s cheap and beat enough to be beat more and nfg. Drop the top, have fun, make brubby noises and cruise into the sunset. Seats are easy enough to source and those tail covers are easy to remove. Wheels are iffy but not offensively bad.
I already own a red convertible, and the SHO isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
So neither.
Manual GT ftw. They’re common and upgradable at about any level of $ you want to spend. I generally dislike the sound of FlowMasters on Mustangs, so that would have to be corrected to my taste, then a cage, harness, fire suppression, and kill switch. Maybe an old Impala hood to provide shade at Lemons races…
G2G
My wife had a 97 or 98 (can’t remember) V6 SHO. The interior was trashed, the dash was cracked so bad it looked like a puzzle, some of the electronics didn’t function, but I was surprised how well it handled and could get up and go. Fuel pump went out and that started a cascade of never ending under hood trouble, so we sold it.
I owned a green ’97 V6 Mustang convertible that was just a blast to run around in. Yes it had a bit of cowl shake, but still fun. But one with a V8 manual? That would be fantastic.
1995 was the last year for the V6 SHO. Was it the catfish Taurus design?
It was my wife’s when we got married. I only drove it occasionally, but yes, it was the catfish, so I had the year wrong.
Wife informs me I was thinking of her mother’s ’97 SHO, which we used as a loaner for some time when we were down to one car. Looked up images and sure enough, I was talking about the wrong car. The two were the same color and I just didn’t pay that much attention since I was always driving my Saab 9-3 and only got in the Taurus when I had to.
Too bad. The catfish SHO was the worst of the lot. More weight with not much more HP from the V8. You are forgiven for not bothering to remember more details.
The Taurus leather seats from this era were cracking by year 3, so this is not undue wear.
The description of the SHO problems gave me temporary PTSD. That thermostat issue will probably require a new module. The window problem might simply be the switch. If it doesn’t drip oil, then that will probably be my choice, although it will rust as soon as I cross state lines into a salt state.
I voted for the Mustang, but I’ll take both.
I’d spend more and get a better SHO.
At this price point, I’ll take the Mustang. It’s in better shape, and anything that goes wrong will be easier to fix. I’d have my local guy fix the seat, and it would be good to go.
Mustang! At first I was debating on the SHO (fo sho, man!) since I was guessing the Stang was an auto, and for the Yamaha engine…but when I saw the Mustang was also stick, it was all over. Plus V8 + convertible. I don’t like this gen’s body style as much but it will work. I’ll have a blast cruising in it. I’m “fo sho” glad I didn’t end up w/ a Taurus w/ some problems
Same: manual SHO> auto GT pony.
Given price, manual, easily available parts, V8 > SHO
Interior pieces are getting difficult to find for first gen Taurii, and electrical gremlins can take forever to sort. There’s nothing wrong with the Mustang, but my love for the SHO is such that I would take on those headaches to save it.
Admiral and understandable take, but the electrical gremlins, once they start, never end. My wife’s SHO decided it would start setting off the car alarm at random. Shop tried a couple of times to find and fix it, but finally told me they gave up. I had to set up a quick disconnect on the positive battery terminal so when it would go off in the garage or wherever I could (sort of) quickly stop it. And that was just one of the gremlins.
This decision was tougher than I thought.
Initially I was going all in with the SHO until I saw the interior pictures. I was not expecting a pristine interior but the A/C and driver’s window (regulator?) issue on top of the expected cracked seats and dash is too much for that price. Plus the need for right tires tells me this car has probably not been well maintained and it’s just a matter of time until something else breaks. I’ve owned needy old vehicles like this and it’s not funny.
The Mustang has new tires, new clutch and the powertrain overall is as solid as it can get. SN95 Mustang parts are cheap and plenty, 1st gen SHO parts are not.
So I went Mustang GT, despite not being fan of the drop top versions….
Was leaning SHO till I read the descriptions. As much as I dislike this gen Mustang, it’s the smart choice here. These aren’t quick, but they make all the right noises, and with a new clutch it sounds like you can get in this one and just drive.
I’ve owned BOTH of these cars! But my SHO was in far worse shape Still (stupidly) did a buck 30 on the Kansas Turnpike with it! Rusted to hell, lowball bid it on ebay. Ended up having to go to MN to get it. Spent more in gas for the F-150 than I did on the car. Was planning to use it as a donor for my wagon, but it got totaled. Tried to part the SHO out, but no takers, so she went to the crusher. Still have a red Mustang convertible, so my vote goes to the SHO. Now, anyone know where I can find a first gen Taurus/Sable wagon?
That’s the best generation of SHO with the best transmission choice (though be careful, that friction disc is a liiiiittle small for the torque that comes out of that engine). SHO all the way.
That being said, expect to spend some dosh sorting out the seats and dash, not to mention having a place to garage it so you can fix the window regulator/motor. Easy work, though.