• The site migration is complete! Hopefully everything transferred properly from the multiple decades old software we were using before. If you notice any issues please let me know, thanks! Also, I'm still working on things like chatbox, etc so hopefully those will be working in the next week or two.

Gt vs. Sho

JESSEGOTTA GP GT

JESSEGOTTA GP GT

New member
One of the girls that my girlfriend works with just got a SHO, I think it's a 1997? It's got 46k miles on it and everything is in perfect shape. So I finally convinced her to take me for a ride so I could see how quick it was, and It was quicker than I thought, but nothing special.(neither is my GT) So I had to talk her into racing me, first was from a 35 roll, and her car took FOREVER to downshift, so I told her to try it from a 55 roll and see (thinking it had good top end power) WRONG, left her in the dust. Then we did it from a dig, and now I'm finally thinking "ok maybe this time it'll be a decent race" well, I gave her half a car head start, and again, flew by her. I thought they were suppost to be pretty quick? (she's got an intake and some kind of flowmaster type mufflers) The best part is after we got done I texted her and said "that's what happens when you drive a Ford" and she text me back saying " my CEL is on." And again, you'll never guess what I said back..... " thats seems to be a common problem with Fords" But I really honestly thought SHO's were suppost to be pretty quick?
 


Sho's are ok, the first year they were made my dad and I test drove a 5speed manual. I think they all used to be manual only until mid 90's. They have 220hp yamaha engines in them. I've raced my buddies 92 5speed in my 99 lude. Lude pulled it by 3 cars to 130mph. The auto's are slow, to much power loss through the drivetrain.
 
like you said, it's a ford lol. i vaguely remember reading a comparison article between in and the gtp in 1997, and it wasn't even fair. the gtp demolished it as far as performance went. like he said, they were yamaha engines, i'm guessing they lacked a little in torque. the intake looks like a maze too.
here's a pic of it, ignore the rice aspect to it: http://www.cardomain.com/ride/3813272
 
You know a car was never designed to go fast when the speedo is dead centre.... It should at least be 50/50 or dead centre.
 
Don't they have secondary intakes, so after a certain rpm another one opens up? oh well, I thpught it wuld be a decent race because all my other ones were just boring.
 


So it was a bubble SHO? Those had the V8's in em. But ya...it should run better than that...I mean...the transmission's were horrible but they compared them to the GTP back in '97 when it came out and the P blew it out of the water in the test...I think it was Motor Trend that did it too. But it only ran low 15's high 14's IIRC. As for the 1st gen SHO...it was lighter and basically had the same power with a high revving V6 mated to a 5-spd. Those are the ones you want to run.
 
a buddy of mine had a 98 sho with about 5k into it it ran sub 13's all day long
not sure what all he had done though

they had cam issues
 
I'd love to run the older body V6 ones, but I've only seen one in my whole 19 years on this earth. I've seen videos with them and they were pretty quick, thats why I was suprised when I ate that car alive. I was proud of the ol' GT. It's got 184k on it now.
 


The 96-99's were nothing special, just V8 3.4L DOHC. And they did have cam problems, the fix was to weld each cam to the sprocket... lol. I had a 99 and the best thing about them was the handling and sound system. Blew the GTP out of the water in those 2 categories. They do have secondaries and they open around 3400rpm's, with an intake you should be able to tell when they open. The downfall to the car is the aftermarket availability. It was like $500 for a tune, $600-1000 to fix the cams by someone on the forums. The best times I saw were like 13's out of a fully tuned and nitrous setup.

The best years were the 90-95. Some of those cars would beat up on a GTP stock vs. stock. The change in 96 came with the intake setup on the V8 motor, if they did the same setup as they did for the v6's, they would have made 60-100hp more. The downfall was the transmission so the motor was "detuned" so that the transmission reliability was not as big of an issue with a few hp less. When these cars first came out, they were ahead of their time, really paving the way for FWD sports sedans. It's probably safe to say the GTP would not even be around if it wasn't for the SHO.

I think the 2010 SHO's are running mid-12's now with intake, low 12's with a tune.
 
FoSHO99 said:
The 96-99's were nothing special, just V8 3.4L DOHC. And they did have cam problems, the fix was to weld each cam to the sprocket... lol. I had a 99 and the best thing about them was the handling and sound system. Blew the GTP out of the water in those 2 categories. They do have secondaries and they open around 3400rpm's, with an intake you should be able to tell when they open. The downfall to the car is the aftermarket availability. It was like $500 for a tune, $600-1000 to fix the cams by someone on the forums. The best times I saw were like 13's out of a fully tuned and nitrous setup.

The best years were the 90-95. Some of those cars would beat up on a GTP stock vs. stock. The change in 96 came with the intake setup on the V8 motor, if they did the same setup as they did for the v6's, they would have made 60-100hp more. The downfall was the transmission so the motor was "detuned" so that the transmission reliability was not as big of an issue with a few hp less. When these cars first came out, they were ahead of their time, really paving the way for FWD sports sedans. It's probably safe to say the GTP would not even be around if it wasn't for the SHO.

I think the 2010 SHO's are running mid-12's now with intake, low 12's with a tune.
Click to expand...

I'd hope so for almost $50,000
 


the new sho's are nice aside from being as big as a minivan lol. i love the "just because we can" cars. why build a 4 door family sedan with a twin turbo v6? the real question is, why not?
 
its funny how people bag on fords in here i know its a gm based chat and so on but lets face it gm is no better then ford they both make **** cars and decent cars
 
TorqueAutoMotiv said:
its funny how people bag on fords in here i know its a gm based chat and so on but lets face it gm is no better then ford they both make **** cars and decent cars
Click to expand...
Absolutely true Absolutely hate my GP (only b/c I have had 4 tranys) LOVED MY 96 STANG (only b/c it was hella fast)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top