[Shotimes] Hold it a minute.....was: Re: SHO replacement

[James F. Ryan III]

> ^^ The SHO was/is a conservatively styled car. Until the debut of the gen
3,
> that is. The design is a basic box-shaped car with lines added to it. Very
> few, I may add. The skirts have a weak effect, some can't tell a SHO apart
> from a Taurus. Aero? What's so aero about a gen 1?! The headlights and
side
> mirrors? :) I think Mustangs, Capri's, Thunderbirds, Mark 7s, etc were as,
> if not MORE, aero than the Taurus. Nothing big there. Just a basic Ford
> lineup design.

Yeah but in 1986, when the Taurus debuted, what was the competition
offering?

Dodge had the Omni, the Aries, and the Diplomat - all very boxy and not a
hint of aero.  Even the Daytona was boxy.

Chevy had the Citation, the Celebrity, and the Caprice - all very boxy and
not a hint of aero.  The Camaro was boxy, but the Vette, the Fiero, and the
Trans Am were aero.

The Japanese companies were also producing very boxy designs.

The German cars of the mid-80s were marginally aero.

Ford had the Escort and LTD - marginally aero.  The Crown Vic - a big box.
The Taurus and T-bird were pure aero, like nothing we had seen before.  It's
alot more than the headlights and mirrors.  How about the grille (or lack
there of in the Taurus), the fully integrated bumper covers, the flush
aircraft-style doors, the flush mounted glass - windshield, side windows,
and rear window, the flush mounted door handles, the shallow cowl area, and
the sharply raked windshield and rear window, etc.