[Shotimes] RE: New Ford shooting brake with SHO intake?

[Ron Porter]

?????

You are reading too much into things....they are probably better off without
Yates, whose monthly oral diarrhea has been dropping off my C&D column
reading for awhile.

Anyway.....haven't you ever read John Phillips stuff before? He has ALWAYS
written that way!! He has been my least-favorite C&D writer for awhile
(although Brock was coming up fast on that list).

The engine is the Miller Cycle that Mazda had out maybe 10 years ago (???) I
never saw the underhood of one of those, so can't say if it looked the same.

I take his comment about "more HP than torque" as a backhanded criticism of
an engine that has no torque....looking at the rated HP versus the
acceleration times proves this.

Anyway, the whole test is tongue-in-cheek, as it's obvious that he doesn't
care for the car much. Look at the names in Counterpoint...similar but
tweaked from their real names (and obviously not their comments!!)

Also read through the whole spec sheet...with the tornado and fuel magnets,
among other things). 

This thing is probably an entire put-on of a test of a design mule or some
kind of future show car.

Actually, if it is a put-on, it is a return to the C&D of old!!

Ron Porter

-----Original Message-----
From: Donald Mallinson [mailto:dmall@mwonline.net] 
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 11:26 AM
To: SHOtimes; 'v8sho'; SHO Tech
Subject: New Ford shooting brake with SHO intake?

Car & Driver magazine is wigging out since the firing of Brock Yates.  
The June issue has the most odd writing style I have ever seen.  I was 
reading it late last night on the throne and kept looking at the cover 
to be sure I didn't have the April Fools edition.

but it was the JUne edition.  Check out page 121 for the road test of 
the Ford Futura Sprint GT/A wagon. 

A four door (two on the drivers side with the rear being suicide style) 
and only ONE on the right and a huge single rear door.  NO rear seat, 
and a bench option (with console and floor shift manual) that is 
supposed to sit three across.

But most wierd is the car has a narrow angle V6 with a SHO intake!  The 
intake is virtually identical to the SHO with GT/A where SHO would be.  
Odd that none of the writers mention this.  The writing by John Phillips 
reads very odd.  In fact I had to wonder if someone had slipped me a 
mickey in a drink at the cruise in earlier in the evening and I was 
halucinating!     Read the article, you will see why I felt this way.  
As usual they hated the car, but the writing was way off base.  Car 
looks cool, but has that "car show" dream car feel about it, but they 
write like it is going on sale in the US.  245 hp and they seem to be 
surprised that a small engine would have more HP than torque...well 
virtually every non-power adder small engine is more  HP than torque.

WHAT is this car?  is it for real?  Is C& D pulling our legs, or have 
they gone off the deep end without Brock to be the "deep" end for them?

Don Mallinson