Fw: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus brochure

[Carl Prochilo]

YES!!!!  I love both of these features and I find them to be rare on most
cars.  One the things that pi$$ed me off to no end on the LS8 I had leased.

Cheers,
Carl Prochilo
92 Ultra Red Crimson
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>
To: "'Paul Nimz'" <niks@dlogue.net>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 1:17 PM
Subject: RE: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus brochure


> And '96 SHOs still had the rotating headrests like the earlier SHOs, IIRC
> (one of my favorite SHO features).
>
> Ron Porter
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
[mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]
> > On Behalf Of Paul Nimz
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 11:01 AM
> > To: shotimes@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus brochure
> >
> >
> > My '97 has double sun visors and a door nets.
> >
> > Paul Nimz
> > '97 TR
> > '93 EG mtx
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "James White" <greensho@crown.net>
> > To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 9:44 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus brochure
> >
> >
> > > I sorta' agree with Ron, but having had a gen I SLO wagon, which
looked
> > OK,
> > > but I liked all of the gen IIs better, and was completely revolted by
> the
> > > gen IIIs altogether. And to top it off was, no MTX, no door pockets,
and
> > no
> > > second sun visor!
> > >
> > > Wonder if anyother car ever had a double sun visor?
> > > I worked for a company for all of 2 months and had actually ordered
an
> > '87
> > > SLO 4 cyl. No 6's allowed for lowely sales folk. The form had a note,
> that
> > > if you were in mountains or even hills, a 4 cyl Taurus was not
> > recommended.
> > > The corporate bean counters then suggested a Pontiac GP.  The color
> choice
> > > was only black or white, because the other colors were clear coat and
> > extra
> > > cost.
> > >
> > > I quit these cheap as****  before the SLOOOO... came to go to work for
a
> > > small company that paid at the time $.29/mile for my own new car.
> Bought
> > a
> > > '88 SLO 3.0L wagon. After 5 years, the SLO 3.0L wagon was paid for and
I
> > had
> > > a net gain of about $1000.  Then sold the wagon, for another gain of
> > $2400,
> > > after I bought the '93 SHO, to a poor guy who thought that it had 143k
> > when
> > > it actually had 243k.  However it looked good and ran good (he had
> > somekind
> > > of tech check it out) so we were both happy as the tailights went down
> the
> > > road....
> > >
> > > Jim White - greensho@crown.net
> > > Valparaiso, Indiana
> > > '93  5 SPEED   280k few mods
> > > '95  5 SPEED   250k lots of mods
> > > "double clutch"  it's good for both you and your SHO
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>
> > > To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 5:59 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus brochure
> > >
> > >
> > > > >From a mfrs standpoint, those are not a big deal.....not enough to
> call
> > > it a
> > > > New Generation. Some of that stuff was common across the Ford line,
> > > anyway,
> > > > and not unique to the Taurus.
> > > >
> > > > FWIW, IMNSHO, etc, I still have some of my original hang-up with the
> '92
> > > > SHO. To that point, I had never kept a street-driven car for more
than
> 3
> > > > years, and I was looking to buy again in '92. When the '92 SHO came
> out,
> > I
> > > > became violently nauseated every time I saw one.....well, maybe I
> > > > exaggerate, but to me they were FUGLY. Based on that, I kept the '89
> SHO
> > > > (for a total of 10 years). I have come around to where I think that
> Gen
> > 2s
> > > > are OK, but '92s are still my personal least-favorite SHO. I
actually
> > like
> > > > the looks of the Gen 3 SHO better than the Gen 2 (although
everything
> > else
> > > > about the Gen 3 is inferior, IMNSHO).
> > > >
> > > > Ron Porter
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Carl Prochilo [mailto:gr8sho@prochilo.myserver.org]
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 5:47 PM
> > > > To: Ron Porter; 'Donald Mallinson'; shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus
brochure
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Say what?  Obviously you missed the 6 digit odometer, available
> > passenger
> > > > side airbag, new stereo.  <G>  The digital clock might have been
> > different
> > > > too.
> > > >
> > > > On a different point...  Don't know if it's just me, but sometimes I
> > feel
> > > > that the steering wheel on the 92 is too darn big in proportion to
the
> > > > interior.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Carl Prochilo
> > > > 92 Ultra Red Crimson
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>
> > > > To: "'Donald Mallinson'" <dmall@mwonline.net>;
> <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 12:06 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: [Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus
brochure
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I can see their point, though.
> > > > >
> > > > > Really, the '92 just had new sheetmetal, the interior was pretty
> much
> > a
> > > > '91
> > > > > carryover,
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Shotimes mailing list
> > > > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Shotimes mailing list
> > > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> > _______________________________________________
> > Shotimes mailing list
> > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> > _______________________________________________
> > Shotimes mailing list
> > Shotimes@autox.team.net
> > http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes