[Shotimes] 93 sho limited edition
Epperly
epperly1@optonline.net
Wed, 28 May 2003 21:31:36 -0400
Ron you hit the nail on the head. If the car doesn't sell a large volume in
the first year Ford doesn't follow through with it. It seems as they wrote
it off rather than spend dollars to improve what was a good idea. They have
killed a few cars models in a short time due to lack of interest or vision
on Fords part.
Ken.
> I am a realist, and an analytical sort of person (probably why I ended up
in
> IT!!). I have been a SHO enthusiast for over 14 years, but I have never
felt
> that the SHO was more than what it is. It was a very good automobile in
> 1989. I did not progress, and the car market passed it by within a few
> years. Doesn't mean that it still isn't fun, but it is anything BUT the
only
> game in town.
>
> Ron Porter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Prochilo [mailto:gr8sho@prochilo.myserver.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 8:08 PM
> To: shotimes@autox.team.net; Ron Porter
> Subject: Re: [Shotimes] 93 sho limited edition
>
>
> I'm sure Ford would be flattered to see a comparison between the SHO and
the
> 911, but that is really comparing apples and oranges IMO although I
> understand the point you are trying to make. A potential Porsche buyer
> probably wouldn't even read CR in the first place, and even if they did
> wouldn't care. That marque has an established reputation and people will
> make buy decisions based on that alone, oil-fed tensioner problems or not.
> Porsche's core business is building and selling performance sports cars.
> The Ford Taurus is a mass market car, but the SHO version isn't. The
> literature uses words like "world class" and "world's finest". Good stuff
> except for some nasty gremlins.
> On the SHO, the final clutch design wasn't really established until the 93
> MY and the brakes weren't fixed until the 94 MY. Don't have to be a
rocket
> scientist to figure out that they finally succumbed to the the warranty
> pressures and decided to fix those items, which in reality could have and
> should have been introduced sooner. I know it's easy for me to sit here
and
> Monday morning quarterback, but this isn't really high tech stuff we're
> talking about and having to wait 6 years to get these changes seems a bit
on
> the long side to me.
> In the meantime the word is out that the SHO, while having a bad-ass
motor,
> will be trouble down the road in a few areas and I'm sure that people take
> those things into consideration when having to spend $23 to $24K roughly
> with discount and tax and tags applied to drive out the door.
>
> Carl P.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Porter" <ronporter@prodigy.net>
> To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 5:21 PM
> Subject: RE: [Shotimes] 93 sho limited edition
>
>
> > Your comment about Ford keeping the SHO off the consumers s**t list is
not
> > reasonable, IMHO. Yeah, they knew the clutch was weak from Day 1 (one of
> my
> > good buddy's was on the Prod. Dev. Team at the time), but a
> > limited-production car is going to have some growing pains. Ford has had
> > problems with brakes on many cars over the years, but they probably
> weren't
> > prepared for the SHO issues. All in all, they got things pretty well
> squared
> > away by '94-'95.
> >
> > By comparison, it took Porsche 20 model years to get the cam tensioner
> > problem worked out on the 911. It wasn't until the '84 Carrera that they
> > "finally" developed oil-fed tensioners (versus the 3-4 iterations of
> > mechanical tensioners). I have not heard of Porsche ever replacing an
> engine
> > for anyone when the tensioners failed at the 40K+ mark. Nor do I hear
> > whining on the list about how Porsche screwed up, or about how they have
> > filed a lawsuit. Basically people fix the problem with new tensioners
and
> > move on down the road.
> >
> > Ron Porter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
[mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]
> > On Behalf Of Carl Prochilo
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 3:06 PM
> > To: shotimes@autox.team.net; dmall@mwonline.net
> > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] 93 sho limited edition
> >
> >
> > Comments below.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>
> > To: <shotimes-admin@autox.team.net>
> > Cc: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 10:05 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Shotimes] 93 sho limited edition
> >
> >
> > > There is a page on the club web site that details the SHO
> > > Plus more than anywhere else. Production numbers, projected
> > > color distribution (an educated guess) and more.
> > >
> > > http://www.shoclub.com go to the SHO History section.
> > >
> > > The Plus is worth a little more to some SHO people (like me)
> > > than a regular '91, and Ron is right, a four door sedan with
> > > FWD won't ever be a true high dollar collectible, but
> > > people still buy and sell Edsel's when the Ford and Mercury
> > > versions were much better, and there will be people that buy
> > > and sell SHO's long after I and a lot of others are gone
> > > from the earth.
> >
> > Thanks for the pointer.
> > 2500 copies of that flavor SHO is still a fairly small number, so
> > by any standard that is the most "limited" type of SHO you
> > could get. And I do like this car too.
> >
> > It was interesting to read that brochure. Was there any
> > equivalent consumer level literature published for that car?
> >
> > When I look at the 92 brochure and the SHO is just one
> > of the trim levels of the Taurus, it really made me think that
> > the program manager for the Taurus missed a great chance
> > to enhance the image of that product line. I bet I would have
> > loved to have been a project manager on the team for the early
> > SHO years and probably less interested in the later years. I
> > can only imagine that the car fell out of favor with management
> > when the sales for the car didn't materialize the way they
> > probably thought it would.
> >
> > If Ford had only done a better job to keep the SHO out
> > of the the consumer reports sh!t list, and had done a good
> > job designing a solid clutch and proper brakes at the
> > beginning of the program instead of waiting until years later,
> > I bet things would have turned out differently.
> >
> > > The main thing is that cars make a VERY bad "investment".
> > > So if by "collectible" you mean investment, then no, the SHO
> > > and 95+% of all cars made world-wide are not collectible.
> > >
> > > If by "collectible" you mean there is a market for the cars
> > > and people still like to own them, drive them and look at
> > > them, then yes, the SHO is a sure fire collectible long into
> > > the future. Go to any car show or cruise-in and look at the
> > > variety of old and average cars that people love to look at.
> > > Anything nice, interesting and well maintained is a
> > > collectible. Some people collect salt and pepper shakers.
> > > I could care less about them, but they are collectible.
> >
> > If you have any experience selling on EBAY, you will know
> > that people will buy just about anything and pay a rediculous
> > amount of money to get stuff that really makes me wonder.
> >
> > > One thing the world of collectible "stuff" has taught me is
> > > that you can't guess what someone will pay big bucks for in
> > > the future. Comic books? lunch boxes? 2 door sedan ex
> > > race cars? The SHO? maybe, but don't bet the farm on it.
> > >
> > > Keep and maintain your SHO because you like driving it, not
> > > because you want to make money off it...
> >
> > Profit has never been a consideration I bet for most of us here.
> > Just the fun factor, and for some of us, the practicality of toting
> > around a small child.
> >
> > Carl P.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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