Sign In Join 



To Fix Up or Trade Up, That is the Question

536 messages,  Last post on Jul 24, 2009 at 9:12 AM

You are in the Maintenance & Repair Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright

What is this discussion about? Car Safety, Tires, Wheels, Auto Body, Brakes, Engine, Interior, Paint, Transmission, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Buying Insurance, Coupe, Convertible, Hatchback, Truck, Sedan, Wagon, SUV, Van


Messages Page 51 of 55
1
...
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#493 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [Mr_Shiftright] by maryh3
May 05, 2009 (7:51 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 05, 2009 6:51 am)

I am weighing my options especially with the fact that they are almost giving away new cars right now, especially American ones. Fantastic deals on something like a Malibu right now. My teen aged sons however want the SHO.
#494 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [maryh3] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
May 05, 2009 (8:01 am)
Reply

Replying to: maryh3 (May 05, 2009 7:51 am)

I'm a big fan of giving teenagers old cars to bang around. In that case, patching it up with used parts might not be a bad idea. With this wrinkle, you are turning my head on this one.
#495 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [maryh3] by euphonium
May 05, 2009 (9:02 am)
Reply

Replying to: maryh3 (May 05, 2009 6:33 am)

Please reread post #485 as your experience confirms it.
#496 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [Mr_Shiftright] by jipster
May 05, 2009 (10:09 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 05, 2009 8:01 am)

I'm a big fan of giving teenagers old cars to bang around
 
Me too. But, a fast car and a teenager together? Hope it is a mature and responsible teenager.
#497 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [jipster] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
May 05, 2009 (10:50 am)
Reply

Replying to: jipster (May 05, 2009 10:09 am)

Well a '95 SHO is no faster than most cars these days. It's not like a real zoom-zoom car, like a Mustang or EVO or some such. It's probably 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. That's about 2.5 seconds faster than a Prius, and it's an automatic besides. It's bizarre to say a 7.5 second car is dangerous but a 9.5 second car is "safe".
#498 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [Mr_Shiftright] by maryh3
May 05, 2009 (11:34 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 05, 2009 10:50 am)

I agree completely and as one of the posters above already pointed out that in 89, the SHO was very powerful compared to other cars, but since those days a plain old V-6 Honda surpasses it as do many other cars. I checked the safety ratings for it in the past. It had a 4 star crash rating, dual airbags, good handling and this one ain't going to roll like lots of the SUV's many parents buy for their teens -- not bad.
 
Car does have nice torque at at all speeds but if a kid is going to go fast, all cars can and will go fast. All parents have to constantly warn their kids about speed and safety. Showing them articles in the newspaper about teenaged car accidents and deaths does get them listening for a short while. Some cars will cost you more to insure with a teenaged driver, than the cars is worth. There are no right or wrong answers on this issue. Everything is a trade off.
 
I do like the power/torque of the SHO but the transmission is clunky by today's standards.
#499 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [Mr_Shiftright] by srs_49
May 06, 2009 (3:51 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 05, 2009 10:50 am)

Well a '95 SHO is no faster than most cars these days. It's not like a real zoom-zoom car, like a Mustang or EVO or some such. It's probably 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. That's about 2.5 seconds faster than a Prius, and it's an automatic besides. It's bizarre to say a 7.5 second car is dangerous but a 9.5 second car is "safe"
 
Geech, Shifty - 7.5 sec to 60 is slow??? That's as fast as my '69 Z-28 ran. Of course that is not what it was set up for, as the engine really didn't start to run until 4,000 rpm, so 0-60 and quarter miles times were not a quick as a lot of the other big-block muscle cars.
 
But, there is a big difference, IMO, especially for an inexperienced driver, between a 7.5 sec 0-60 car and a 10 sec one. That's not to say that one is dangerous and the other is not, but it's a lot easier to get into trouble by "punching" the throttle at the wrong time (into a curve, in the rain, etc) with the former than with the latter.
#500 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [srs_49] by jipster
May 06, 2009 (5:08 am)
Reply

Replying to: srs_49 (May 06, 2009 3:51 am)

But, there is a big difference, IMO, especially for an inexperienced driver, between a 7.5 sec 0-60 car and a 10 sec one. That's not to say that one is dangerous and the other is not, but it's a lot easier to get into trouble by "punching" the throttle at the wrong time (into a curve, in the rain, etc) with the former than with the latter.
 
Exactly. But, the SHO is quite a bit faster than shifty indicated. The first generation ran 0-60mph in 6.6 seconds (quite a bit faster than a Honda Accord). And while not a sports car, it is a high performance car. To a teenage or younger driver it is all about perception. He is given a "fast" car, therefore there is implicate permission to go fast... and I doubt the handling characteristics of the car equals that of it's acceleration/speed.
#501 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [jipster] by Mr_Shiftright HOST
May 06, 2009 (8:04 am)
Reply

Replying to: jipster (May 06, 2009 5:08 am)

You're thinking of the first ones...by 1995 the SHO was porkier and pokier, I believe, for whatever reason.
 
I actually had my Scion xA TIMED at 0-60 in 8.5 seconds---that's with a 1.5L engine and me getting off a really good launch and a clutch dump...nonetheless, to gain 1 second on an SHO for all the complexity of it seems like no big deal in this day and age.
 
For a teenager, driving a slow car is way more of an education than driving a fast car. I'd buy him/her the slowest car I could possibly find, as long as it had air bags.
 
Yeah. 7.5 is not a fast car anymore. There are mini vans out there that would mop up many a 60s muscle car.
 
Even 6.6 isn't very fast. Many new pocket rockets can do that. There are cars in dealers' showrooms right now that are in the 4s & 5s---quite a few of them. A 15 year old Mazda RX TT is faster than 6.6.
 
#502 of 536
Re: 1995 Taurus SHO Body Damaged [Mr_Shiftright] by srs_49
May 06, 2009 (9:00 am)
Reply

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 06, 2009 8:04 am)

For a teenager, driving a slow car is way more of an education than driving a fast car. I'd buy him/her the slowest car I could possibly find, as long as it had air bags
 
Yep. Maybe one of the early 70's Scamps with the slant 6. Or a 78 Ford Fairmont with the straight 6. No danger of any speed related issues there . Of course, they don't have the airbags

Messages Page 51 of 55
1
...
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement