Cadillac or competing brand model ? Why ? Discussion, From A Caddy to A SHO! in Item Specific Cadillac Discussion; Originally Posted by 92EldoTC
why is it that in magazine articles and statistics on the internet about SHOs they always ...
why is it that in magazine articles and statistics on the internet about SHOs they always put the 92 0-60 and quarter times for the automatic version which is 0-60 in 7.6 and quarter at 15.7-15.9 (varies from magazine to magazine).
From my understanding most of the 92's came with the 5-speed, it seems logical to put the 5- speed times up instead and from what i've been reading it is 0-60 @ 6.6 and the quarter @ 15.2 @ 91 mph.
The only years they put the 5- speed times up for is the 89-91.
Maybe it has something to do with the competition from its big brother the Mustang 5.0. They didnt want it to be known that a Taurus would outrun the pride of Ford motor company.
1992 SHO's only came in 5 speeds. Once they started offering the automatic option then you would get a 3.2 liter V6 instead of the 3.0 V6 for the 5 speed. The main reason behind giving the automatics bigger displacement engines is because they put out slightly more power to make up for the drive train loss. But there was a few years that the SHO was actually faster then the Mustang
I too used to have a 90 SHO. Red exterior with the black interior (very desirable) but I had the partial leather seats not the all leather ones. And yes, like may have siad they truly could do 140 MPH and then some. all 89-92's had manual shift, from 93-95 you could choose between manual and automatic, the latter making up about 80% of the total production of SHO's. Unfortunetly, as with the regular taurses, the automatic tranny on SHO's was crap. 96-99 had a 3.4L 32 valve V8 which ONLY came with automatic and even though rated at 235hp, they couldn't touch the original 3.0L/manual trans. SHO's. It was also notoriously known for the cam sprockets seperating from the camshafts, typically around 50k mile mark. It was remieded if caught early enough by having the sprockets "pinned"
I hit an indicated 145 in my '92 although who knows about speedo error when going that fast.
And the V in that vid was mine. Boosted Yamahas are no joke...
(Just remember the V in the vid was loaded down with people and a car full of luggage on a cross country trip. The SHO had 2 people and was empty. Granted, the SHO still would've won but not by as much...)
Automobile(s): Ex:'92 ETC 4.9 Current:'91 Sedan Deville 4.9
Re: From A Caddy to A SHO!
I went to the track for the first time in my SHO.
My timeslip shows how inexperienced I am at drag racing.
I didnt have the smarts to go around the pool of water that is sprayed down before each race which I probably lost a good half second spinning.
My shifts were all perfect, never missed a gear except I could have put each gear a little closer to redline than I did.
My reaction time was an elderly .7xx.
So say .5 sec spinning tires plus .7xx equals about 1.2 seconds lost but of course a .0xx r/t is impossible so say a .2 or .3 r/t is ideal. .7xx r/t-.2 or .3 equals .4 to .5.
Adjusted lost time is now about .9xx to 1.0 seconds
My best time was 16.38. take .9 or 1.0 seconds off of that and that gives me 15.48 to 15.38 e.t.
.2xx seconds off of what a new stock 92 SHO mtx should run.
.2xx seconds off of the tested time is probably due to higher mileage (133000) and more than 3/4 tank of gas in the tank.
Those lovely secondaries still open up @ 4k and produce a good thrust with a lovely sound. I actually feel the tires fighting to pull the car to the left when the secondaries open up under full throttle.
I've gotten considerably better at driving this manual transmission car since going to the track.
Wonder if I can beat a 93-97 sts.