[Shotimes] 10 observations from the 1986 Taurus brochure

[Paul Nimz]

So does my early '97.

Paul Nimz
'97 TR
'93 EG mtx


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>
To: "'Paul Nimz'" <niks@dlogue.net>; <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 12:17 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