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?
Well, I love a convertible Mustang, but not this one. The pre-New Edge SN95s have no room for those of us who regularly hit out heads on items that that average person misses. And it simply does not have enough go.
The SHO, as long as the seats are in good shape structurally, would be a joy. I’d bet the dash could be fixed, and a wrecking yard should produce the missing pieces of trim. Just cleaning the basket of snakes would make me happy.
Not a Ford guy at all, but those first-gen SHOs were a big deal when they first came out. I remember reading about them in Car & Driver (I would’ve been 14 in ‘91), and making my dad stop by the Ford dealer so we could check out the black one they had on the showroom floor. This example is definitely a little tatty, but looks like I could still drive it to the store while tinkering with it.
The convertible Mustang is… a convertible Mustang. I just can’t.
The wagon yesterday was in way better condition. If you don’t care to replace all four wheel covers, what else don’t you care about?
On the other hand, I think I’ll leave that Mustang to teach a life lesson to a teenager, (which it might already have – pod filter spotted) and take the nice SHO instead. Maybe take it to be laser scanned for a game. Early SHOs are never in games. It’s only the Jellybean because Gran Turismo.
I voted SHO despite being such a beater, but really it’s a Neither day IMO
Here I was wondering if today might make it a GM>Mopar three-peat but you threw us two Fords!
My car-guy heart says SHO and swap in a maroon velour interior from a Taurus LX.
But SN95s have nowhere to go but up, I have a sensible 4-door daily driver and it’s convertible weather…
I’m a Mustang guy, but the intro pic made we slant toward the SHO. Then I saw it and read more about the condition. Admittedly, it’s not the worst I’ve seen, but it would need a bit more sorting out than I would like to put into it. The window regulator isn’t a big deal, but the upholstery would be expensive and the climate control would probably be a PITA, to say nothing about the unmentioned electrical “gremlins”.
Going with ol’ reliable today, which serves me right. What’s wrong with this thing could be made right without a ton of fuss. Serves me right….don’t second guess…go with the sure thing.
SHO and find myself a Ford Festiva.
Now we’re talkin!
I really wanted it to be the SHO but it’s in very poor condition. I’ll part out the ‘stang and manual swap a Crown Vic instead.
Kinda wanted a Both option today, but after reading the details on the Mustang, pass. SHO me the way.
This was a tough choice. I ultimately voted Mustang because an old, computer controlled car with electrical issues is asking for trouble that can be more than the car is worth.
Same. I was like, while I love an SHO, the mustang with it’s gigantic aftermarket support seems like the better choice of turd.
Voted with my heart for the SHO, mostly because my Mustang has to have 400 horsepower of maximum performance piercing the night. This is NOT Black Sunshine.
I’d give the SHO the attention it deserves, and slowly fix up the interior and other parts that need it. This will not be an expedient or inexpensive process, but I’ll certainly have a unique HiPo Sedan when I’m done. I wonder if it could outpace my Si?
For the record that would also give me three manual sedans in my driveway.
And this is what many consider the best Taurus design, compared with a growing on me more and more but still not best Mustang.
Agreed, and the right VS wrong format. If I’m gonna build Black Sunshine, it’s not gonna be a convertible.
I would not normally pick the Mustang, but the SHO has some issues, and I’m a sucker for a convertible, so Mustang it is.
I voted the SHO as I cannot stand new edge mustangs (probably due to era I went to high school and them being driven by every douche imaginable and they thought they were the coolest fastest thing around)
Don’t mean to be “that guy” but I guess I’m gonna be anyway. This is an SN-95, but not a new edge Mustang – those things were the facelifted SN-95s from 1999-2004. I cannot independently verify which model was driven by the D-bags you were referencing, but either would probably track. Likely that many were V-6 automatics which probably had a bunch of “go fast” appearance crap stuck on
Haha for some reason I thought all the sn-95s and I was mistaken and stand corrected. I didn’t know only the 99-04 are considered the new edge after the slight face lift.
Also side note sucks we can’t post gifs/images because a well ackchyually would have fit perfect from you there haha
The unmolested SHO for me. I’m always wary when I see a “modded” Mustang (even if it’s only likely cosmetic like here), esp when they change the wheels. Also, the pre-99 SN95 4.6 is fine, but if you’ve driven a 99+, you just don’t want to go back.
Edit: Ford’s leather in this era looked chintzy even when new. One of the reasons I got cloth in mine, and happily, it’s holding up just fine.
A cheap seat cover and some black gorilla tape for the top and we’re good to go.I always wanted to see what a Mustang GT is like in the snow with a good set of snow tires.Since it’s already July I’ll probably only have to wait 3-4 months to try it out.
Saw the SHO and scrolled down to vote, assuming the rag top was an auto. Then, hmm… Still picked the SHO.
Is it me or does that SHO shifter look ridiculously tall? I test drove an MT5 way back and kinda wish I bought it now.
Yes.
You’re making me choose a Ford no matter what today. Alrighty.
I’ve never been a Mustang fan, the SHO looks like it could be fun, and unique. (The headlight/taillight covers belong on an 80’s RAD era Mustang.)
You got to pick between a Ford with a blue oval and a Ford with a horsey badge.
The SHO must go on. It’s a much more interesting car to me than the Mustang. 220 HP from a NA V6 in the early 90’s was a big deal. Ford made the right call in letting Yamaha work their magic on the otherwise sound but dull Vulcan.
I’m getting a little too stiff to fold myself into a Mustang, and occasionally I carry around my geriatric parents. I love a sporty four-door, SHO nuff.
I want the Mustang convertible, but the thought of the top down and the Flowmaster constantly assaulting my eardrums is a turn off.
The 4.6 ruins the rhyme so you’d think I’d pick the SHO but it doesn’t have a ragtop so my hair can blow.
RWD and V-8, please! The lights need addressing, sure, but otherwise looks ok to me.
The Mustang has much better parts support. I don’t really want a convertible but I know it could be kept running until the heat death of the universe.
Even though it is a more unique vehicle, I don’t think the same could be said for the SHO.