[Shotimes] RE: Gen I vs. Gen II

[Steve Tatro]

Oh, Lord.

The first time I had the pleasure of driving my '93 over to my parents'
house (6 years ago), my sister (14 years old at the time) came out to take a
look.  Although it was parked right next to my dad's '95, the first thing
she said was "Is that a Taurus?  Cool!"  Next thing out of her mouth was
"What does S-H-O mean?" as she walked around the back of the car.  I
explained it was indeed almost Taurus body but with a high output Yamaha
engine.  Oddly enough, her next comment was "Well, it's a lot better than
that white one you had", referring to the white/mocha '90 SHO I had just
traded in.  Even though she had seen that car for a couple of years, she
didn't realize it was anything special.  She was, to say the least, enamored
at the styling, the spoiler, the aggressive positioning of the fog lights,
etc. of the '93.

So, since my 20-year old sister is fully capable of deciphering the font
used to create "SHO" on the Gen2 and you apparently have difficulty, I'll
assume there's something wrong with you ;^).

Later,

Steve

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Ryan" <av8r567@optonline.net>
To: "Steve Tatro" <stevetatro@att.net>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 9:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Shotimes] RE: Gen I vs. Gen II


> This argument can go on forever.
>
>
> > Gen1:  15" basketweaves instead of 14" wheel covers (although the
> > basketweaves were available on the SLO).  Obviously '91 had the
> > non-directional slicers available (did they even have "SHO" on the
> > centercaps?)
>
> No the '91s did not come with those UGLY center caps.
>
>
>
> > Gen2:  16" directional slicers with "SHO" on every centercap,
> distinguishing
> > it from a SLO very easily.
> > Advantage:  Gen2, since there was no sharing of wheels between SHO and
SLO
> > and it provided more visible "SHO" markings.
>
> Well that's if you can read what the letters spell.  FWIW, I think the
ugly,
> horizontal-line font that Ford chose makes it very difficult to read S H
O,
> especially if it's upside-down or vertical.
>
> Advantage: Neither.  No one is going to look that close.
>
>
>
> > Gen1:  Aggressive front clip with fog lights.
> > Gen2:  Aggressive front clip with fog lights.
> > Advantage: None.
>
> Mmmmm....
> Regular Grand Prix vs GTP nose - aggressive.
> Mustang LX vs Mustang GT nose - aggressive.
> Gen2 SLO vs Gen2 SHO nose - different but not aggressive.  You Gen2 owners
> are biased because you look at it everyday.  The average person is not
going
> to notice the subtle  difference.
>
> When I drive my '91+ and I pass another Gen1, I always get the obligatory
> wave, headlight flash, or horn honk.  When I pass a Gen2 I get nothing
> because it's usually driven by some "fart" who doesn't even know what
> they're driving.
>
>
>
> > Gen1:  Plastic door cladding with "Taurus SHO" on each side.
> > Gen2:  Plastic door cladding with "SHO" on each side.
> > Advantage:  Gen2, as the Gen1 clearly has "Taurus" visible 2 more times
> from
> > the outside of the car (which is not a good thing)
>
> Gen1:  Easy to read "Taurus SHO"
> Gen2:  See previous comment about ugly, hard to read font.  You Gen2
owners
> are biased because you look at it everyday and you know what it says.  The
> average person will ignore it if they can't read it.  IMO, it looks like a
> bunch of deep scratches.
>
> Advantage:  Gen1 on legibility alone.  What's wrong with it being known as
a
> Taurus?!?!?  What kind of confusion will ensue when the average person
sees
> "Taurus" on the trunklid of your Gen2 but no where else on the car?  How
> would you explain that to a non-enthusiast?
>
>
>
> > Gen1:  Aggressive rear bumper cover with "SHO" clearly visible.
> > Gen2:  Aggressive rear bumper cover with "SHO" clearly visible.
> > Advantage:  None.
>
> Gen1:  Aggressive rear bumper cover with "SHO" clearly visible and
LEGIBLE.
> Gen2:  More of that ugly, hard to read font in an even larger size.  Now
it
> just looks like some really big scratches.
>
> Advantage:  Clearly Gen1
>
>
>
> > Gen1:  Turn-down exhaust tips that can't be seen due to the aggressive
> rear
> > bumper cover.
> > Gen2:  Straight exhaust tips that can clearly be seen due to the
> redesigned
> > bumper cover.
> > Advantage:  Gen2, purely from a visibility standpoint.
>
> Fine, I'll give you that one.
>
>
>
> > Gen1:  No spoiler, rear decklid exactly same as SLO (exception being
'91+)
> > Gen2  Spoiler standard (except '92), clearly differentiating it from the
> > SLO.
> > Advantage:  Gen2.
>
> Subtle difference.  Actually, the design of the Gen2 decklid has a little
> bit of a spoiler-look even without the SHO spoiler.
>
>
>
> > Gen1:  Third brake light mounted on the rear dash, exactly the same as
the
> > SLO.
> > Gen2:  Third brake light mounted on the spoiler; none needed on the rear
> > dash (except '92).
> > Advantage:  Gen2.
>
> Who gives a flying F?  Again, the average person is not going to notice
the
> difference.
>
>
>
> > Clearly any Gen2 SHO differs more from the same year SLO than did the
> > Gen1's.  Although I've owned both, I can more easily spot a Gen2 SHO a
> mile
> > away.  Gen1's always make me take another look, at which point I ponder
> "was
> > mine that ugly?" ;^)
>
> Well, to each his own.  I will tell you this though, back in 1989 I was in
> college and working part-time at a gas station.  The first Taurus SHO I
ever
> saw was a black '89 and I immediately noticed that it looked different
from
> the never ending stream of SLOs that came in to get gas.  When I walked up
> to the driver side and said, "How may I help you?", I saw the manual trans
> shifter.  This encounter did not make me want an SHO, but I did recognize
> the car as something different.  I graduated two years later and after
> considering and test-driving many other cars, I decided on my oxford white
> with mocha interior '91 Plus.
>
> I've never been a fan of dark color cars, and in the case of the Gen1 SHOs
> the dark color hides the lower body cladding.  But, my bright white '91
SHO
> certainly showcases all of the exterior cues that make the SHO look
> different than the SLO.  So, in that case "I" am biased because of the
color
> of my car.
>
>
> James F. Ryan III
> '91 Plus - white/mocha
> formerly of Wayne, NJ
> living in Long Beach, CA for the next month