Stealth vs SHO

Well, after about 2 months of taunting and smack talk, a friend of mines friend who owns a 91 SHO finally decides he and his car are ready to go. He was always telling me that since his car and my car have similar stats he thinks he would win. My answer was usually "yeah just take the grocerys out of the back first"
91 SHO manual, high miles, exhaust, K&N. Rated at 220hp?
94 Stealth R/T manual, exhaust, K&N, short throw. Rated at 222hp
So we go out to the country, and I really wanted to get this on tape since the guy is a major ass. Both of us have a passenger. We line up and one of the spectator drops his arms and we are off. I instantly put him at my rear bumper, redline at 7000, shift, and continue pulling from that point, he gains no ground. 110, he seems to have given up by this point, at least 3 cars behind from my rear view perspective. But I continue 120, 130, 140 and shut down with him long gone. I meet him back in town and he said his car wasnt running good today, I said when does it ever run good? Its a ford. :iceslolan He wants to run them again in the spring, he said he might rebuild the engine. I said ok we will race again in the spring if I can video it. He says fine and we go our seperate ways. I havent told him that by the next time we race, I will have twin turbos, awaiting install in my living room :evillol:
Thanks for reading.

if he hasn't performed valvetrain service regularly like he should it really makes that engine suffer.

if you look around on the internet, those sho's are pretty badass w/ rebuilt engines and such, good luck w/ ur swap and good kill, hope you can get him next time!!

What kind of engine does the SHO have and what engine do Stealth's have?

his stealth would have a 3.0 liter DOHC 222hp 6cylinder...the sho has a 3.0liter 182 CI engine rated at 220hp also DOHC. A good race but the stealth with the same stats will take it all day...

^^ and that's cuz the stealth has 2hp more? that doesn't hardly seem fair, yes its a ford but isn't it a yamaha motor??? the stats are identical until you get to the weight of them, even the gasmileage on both is comparable
the sho weighs 200lbs less
therefore, it is entirely a driver's race

well, imo the sho is pretty beat to shit, sounds bad, looks worse. I hope he rebuilds it and I can race him with ~100hp more that would be fun :)

^^ and that's cuz the stealth has 2hp more? that doesn't hardly seem fair, yes its a ford but isn't it a yamaha motor??? the stats are identical until you get to the weight of them, even the gasmileage on both is comparable
the sho weighs 200lbs less
therefore, it is entirely a driver's race

you got it

i'd rather have the SHO. that yamaha motor is supposed to bulletproof and they're said to make more than 220 hp from yamaha but ford tuned them down because they were making better numbers than the mustangs.

^ I'd believe it. Remember that video posted a little while ago of the guy with the SHO with minor boltons beating the mustang?

Good kill, the two generally run even quarter mile times stock, but Ford isn't anywhere near as reliable as Mitsu in the long run which is probly why you killed him so bad. Good luck on the conversion, too much work for too little gain in my opinion (other than insurance costs).

the SHO engine was detuned to last 60k without a valvetrain rebuild and to run on regular gas without detonating horribly. Remember, it was designed in 1988, electronic engine controls had a long way to go back then. It had nothing to do with it being as fast as the mustang, it cost about $10000 more than a GT.

The 91 SHO had the 3.0. If it wouldve been the newer SHO, they come out with a 3.4 V8.


Nice kill.

that 3.4L version wasn't any better than the one with the 3.0L. while it did make a little more hp and tq they put it in a car that was like 250 lbs heavier than the previous generation and ugly as sin to top it off, not to mention you couldn't get the 3.4L version wit a manual tranny.

Huh?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the Gen I and Gen II SHO's came with a 3.2L (If it was an MTX) or a 3.4L (If it was an ATX), and Gen III had the 3.9?

(Maybe it was ATX=3.2 and MTX=3.0.. cant remember)

in Gen II Manual SHO's had 3.0's and Automatic SHO's had 3.2's. Both were the same Yamaha V6, but the 3.2 was stroked out a little and was rated at the same hp, but more torque.

Gen III had 3.4 V8's.

The largest engine in a Taurus was the 3.8 Essex Pushrod Available in the GL and LX from '89-'95. It was never rated at more than 150 hp.

nice kill zeiss

in Gen II Manual SHO's had 3.0's and Automatic SHO's had 3.2's. Both were the same Yamaha V6, but the 3.2 was stroked out a little and was rated at the same hp, but more torque.

Gen III had 3.4 V8's.

The largest engine in a Taurus was the 3.8 Essex Pushrod Available in the GL and LX from '89-'95. It was never rated at more than 150 hp.
thats funny cuz my 3.0l carburated L taurus was rated at 150hp. it didn't really MOVE tho...just kinda scooted

No taurus was ever carburated. They were all MPFI.

weird, somewhere said carburated, but it looks like ur right, and it was only 140hp darn but on an SFI sohc V6