[Shotimes] (OT) SHO replacement

Sat, 24 Jul 2004 22:18:53 -0400

Well, what's the point of the statement then? A Hyundai can only replace a
Hyundai, a Pacer can only replace a Pacer,etc. We know it isn't what you
meant, and frankly there are a lot of cars today can offer beyond what the
SHO offered......so what? Sure, it was one of the first AMERICAN cars to
offer what it did, and is still a fine piece, but it's still dated in
certain respects.

The hundreds and hundreds of car clubs out there that involve enthusiasts of
just about any/every car made under the sun don't do it because those cars
are still the best there ever was.....they do it because they like their
vehicles for what they are.

Ron Porter

-----Original Message-----
From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net [mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]
On Behalf Of Kenneth
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 9:40 PM
To: av8r567@optonline.net; shotimes@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] (OT) SHO replacement

Boy,has this thread gotten out of hand.When I 1st posted this several weeks
ago.I made the statement"there is NO car that can replace the SHO.And there
still isn't one made today.A SHO is A SHO.....A souped up Taurus with a
kickass engine.A lexus is a lexus,a bmw is just that a bmw,all this bullshit
about mazada 6 or that crap about a nissian gxe is faster and handles
better,HA!The only car that can replace a SHO is another SHO.
Kenneth C.
'90 Red
'92 SHO-SHO

 --- On Fri 07/23, James F. Ryan III < av8r567@optonline.net > wrote:
From: James F. Ryan III [mailto: av8r567@optonline.net]
To: sho@paul-fisher.com, rbchilds@pacbell.net, shotimes@autox.team.net
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:30:58 -0400
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] (OT) SHO replacement

The Cadillac V-8-6-4 system was introduced the same year as the IBM-PC
-<br>1981, and was used for that year only.  The "computers" in cars of the
late<br>70s and early 80s weren't called OBD-I, that didn't start until
1982.  If<br>the brand new IBM-PC had 640kB of RAM and a 4.77MHz 8088 I can
only guess<br>that the "computers" in the cars at that time were 1/10 of
that.<br><br>My friend Lou's father bought a Caddy in 1981 with the V-8-6-4
and he loved<br>it.  He was so proud of it and drove it for many years
without problems.  I<br>did a search on the internet and it seems its
reliability was pot-luck and<br>the SOP was to disable the system and just
let the engine be a V-8.<br><br>It's easy to look back in hindsight, 25
years ago, and say the Cadillac<br>system was a piece of junk.  I applaud
them for their vision and the<br>engineering effort.  Who knows, if Cadillac
hadn't offered the system in<br>1981 maybe Daimler wouldn't have been
inspired.<br><br>When I did the sear!
ch, I also learned 2 other things.  1 - The V-8-6-4<br>system wasn't
designed by Cadillac it was designed by Eaton.  2 - This<br>wasn't Caddy's
first foray into this area, in the 1930's they offered a<br>similar system
on their V-16.  The system could shut off an entire bank,<br>effectively
making a straight-8, and it supposedly worked well.<br><br><br>-----
Original Message ----- <br>From: "Paul L Fisher"
<sho@paul-fisher.com><br>To: "'Ron Childs'" <rbchilds@pacbell.net>;
<shotimes@autox.team.net><br>Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 6:38
AM<br>Subject: RE: [Shotimes] (OT) SHO replacement<br><br><br>> Probably
because of the new capability of the electronics. When the V8-6-4<br>> came
out, wasn't OBD-I still the standard?<br>><br>><br>> Paul L Fisher<br>><br>>
'99 Ford Taurus SHO Toreador Red Clearcoat Metallic 66K - Kirk'ed
2/29/04<br>><br>>  - Amsoil Two-Stage Air Filter - TS-124<br>><br>> SHO Club
member http://www.shoclub.com/<br>> Check out my web site
http://www.paul-fish!
er.com/<br>> Amsoil dealer http://www.paul-fisher.com/oil.htm<br>><br>><br>>
-----Original Message-----<br>> From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
[mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]<br>> On Behalf Of Ron Childs<br>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:21 PM<br>> To: shotimes@autox.team.net<br>>
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] (OT) SHO replacement<br>><br>> In the road tests I
have seen of the new hemis, they have said the system<br>is<br>> not<br>>
even noticeable; much better than the Cadillac 8-6-4 system.<br>><br>> -Ron
Childs  '91<br>><br>> --- BOB FISHER <thunderbird88@comcast.net> wrote:<br>>
>  cadillac tried this a while back and it was a flop.i wonder if it
will<br>> flop<br>> > for chrysler too.BOB<br>> > ----- Original Message
----- <br>> > From: "bjshov8" <bjshov8@comcast.net><br>> > To:
<shotimes@autox.team.net><br>> > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:42 PM<br>>
> Subject: Re: [Shotimes] (OT) SHO replacement<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > > I
think the jury is still out on this bu!
t the Hemi has a system that<br>> drops<br>> > > out some cylinders under
light load in order to improve mileage.<br>>
_______________________________________________<br>> Shotimes mailing
list<br>> Shotimes@autox.team.net<br>>
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes<br>>
_______________________________________________<br>> Shotimes mailing
list<br>> Shotimes@autox.team.net<br>>
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes<br>___________________________
____________________<br>Shotimes mailing
list<br>Shotimes@autox.team.net<br>http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shot
imes<br>

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com
_______________________________________________
Shotimes mailing list
Shotimes@autox.team.net
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes