Picked this up today... thought it'd be a lot more fun for the Hershey run than the Saturn, and it'll hold a lot more too...
Does anyone see the uniqueness of this car?

Not really West. This is a fairly common vehicle here in Lancaster County.

The Amish are into stereo?

#1. Taurus SHO wheel covers were "warm" silver, not body color (however this is a correct color for a 1992-1995 SHO, Hunter Green).

#2. The rear view mirrors on the SHO were not body color either (as they were on the standard Taurus), they were black.

#3. This car appears to be missing the SHO rear spoiler and diffuser.

#4 The "24V DOHC" badges are correct for the SHO, however the placement appears to be a little too low on the fender.

#5. A Hunter Green SHO should have a tan interior. This car appears to have black seats.

Oh Yeah, #6. There were no Taurus SHO wagons made in the entire run of the car, except for one specially built one-off by Ford for Car & Driver magazine. It was white.

Not really in keeping with AACA principles, is it?

You'll just have to SHO us.....

Dave pretty much knows more about this than I do. Ford didn't build any of these, but there are a few that have been built by their owners. It is complete with the SHO engine and five-speed manual gearbox. Now that's "zoom-zoom-zoom."
I don't care for the monotone wheels. Must get that changed.

How about some nickname ideas. ???
It'ssssss.... SHO-time!

SHOgon

and from the south.... sho-nuf!!!

... or, Sho-thang!
I was thinking more on the line of "Fabulous Trashwagon."

West, are you a SHO..Off?

Are you SHO, you want to buy that thing???

Wayne

This must be the poster car for the Chrome Industy. (Demonstrates the need for CHROME) Looks kind of like
the fad in cheap rods where they paint over all the
chrome and think it's "slick". I bet it has a boom can
on the end of the tail pipe.
Best thing I can say for it that it got a young person (West)
interested in our hobby, but is a 1992 really an antique
car now?
Remember Chrome & Wide Whitewalls do wonders for any vehicle!

It's gotta be a lot more fun and a lot more comfortable than the Saturn.

Paul
This is what got me interested in the hobby. My dad bought this in 1956 for $300, drove it around Europe (even pulled a brand-new Morgan around that had broken down), then shipped it to Philadelphia and proceeded to drive it to Minneapolis. Not a bad car for $300... oh, yeah, shipping was about $150, so that took a little bit of the smell off the rose.
Little too much chrome, though, don't you think?

Welcome to the vintage '92 Taurus station wagon club, West! We still have ours--stock specs, though (not all hot-rodded-up like yours). Quite a comfortable and stylish car, in my opinion.

From one our wintertime Florida trips, February 2006:



Besides, wagons are "in" these days--just look at the Sept. '08 HMN Classic Car (ahem, especially the Pinto Squire on page 20)...

I forgot to mention...
To further the discussion as to what got me involved in the hobby, this car is the basis for my e-mail address, StelvioGT @ yahoo
Ettore Bugatti used the 60-hairpin turn pass, Stelvio (the second highest in the Alps), to test drive his cars. He so named the Bugatti cabriolet body style on the Type 57 chassis, Stelvio. This one is a 1934 model (early), which has the fold-down windshield.

Oh how I lusted after a SHO wagon after seeing that one in C&D. My friend had an SHO whose body rotted away in the winter salt but with a strong driveline. I seriously considered doing such a swap. That fantasy is probably why I now drive Der Übervagon.

Put some stock 16" SHO fanblade wheels on and have fun. The drivetrain should be bulletproof, they're surprisingly fast and refined, and no police officer will ever believe that the green suburbanite family truckster was actually the car his radar saw going 120 MPH. The stereo equipment should allow you to recoup a good deal of the purchase price.

If you don't want it, let me know where it is so I can buy it for myself.

Nice Bug West! Can we see more photos? If it is an early Type 57 guess it still has the mechanical brakes and solid mount engine. Folding windsheild is a very rare feature. Personally a Type 37A or Brescia are on the top of my Bugatti wish list.

You're right. The folding windshield is rare. The serial number of this car is 180, so it is very early.

West,
Now that's an automobile!! What would your Dad say if he saw you in a station Wagon (without 3 Kids). I've seen you in a Packard and read all you articles about real cars them hear you lusting after a SCHO. Kind of like the accomplished horseman who chose to ride a donkey. It's still transportation
but not very classic.

Had a Sable wagon (green) several years ago before moving to an SUV. Actually a pretty decent vehicle. Very handy and better MPGs. Where you are West you don't need a SUV - go with the wagon. Decent ride and should fill that need for a lot less purchase and gas expense.

But more important what's up with the Packard lately?

Paul
The Taurus SHO was one of the highest-rated cars of the early '90s. I drove them when they were new, and found them extremely fun to drive. You are obviously from the camp that can't stand their looks. It's one of those type of cars that you either like or don't. The second generation was a lot better looking than the first (the third generation was a flop in almost everyone's opinion).
My father knows I have two kids (at least I think he does), plus a dog that often rides inside a kennel, so I think that easily adds up to "three".
Also, I have a pop-up camper that I need to tow. I think I could easily hook up a trailer hitch to the Packard, but I think my dad would frown more about that then the Taurus.
I'm not "lusting" for the SHO. It's a neat car that will be a lot of fun to drive. I save my lusting for women, Packards and Bugattis, in that order.

OK, with kids and dogs I have to admit the Taurus SW
is utilitarian. In fact I owned a 91 Sable SW for about
a month a few years ago and sold it to a painter who used it as a truck for painting supplies.
It's just hard to adjust to thinking of a 1991 anything as collectable. Time changes perspectives, but more slowly as we age.
Enjoy your SHO and in 10 years it will be elibible to go on
some of the AACA Tours.

West, Is there really $10,000 worth of stereo crap in the car? How about a photo, bet it's street value is @$100.00. An AM radio that gets English speaking channels is all you need.

Paul
I think you're finally figuring out why I purchased this. You initially thought I bought it as a "collectible." My Saturn has 258,600 miles on it and is extremely uncomfortable to drive more than 50 miles at a time. Unfortunately, it runs so well that I don't think that I could ever justifiably replace it, except that my back cannot put up with it anymore.
I don't mind driving "nothing" cars for utilitarian purposes as long as the a/c and radio work. In fact, I prefer it. I can't justify paying extra money just so that my ride "looks" better.

Bob
I think you are right about the current value of the "crap" in the back. As far as an AM radio being all I need: that may be all YOU need, but I need FM and either a CD or tape player as well. You're the one locked into Pre-WWI, not me.

TWO!!!!!!!! WWII! The one with the BIG Bang ..TWO of them.

Replace the stereo with a vintage am/fm/cass so, you can listen to Madonna, Prince and Michael Jackson, so, it feels like good 'ol '92 again! LOL!

To paraphrase Tom Wolfe, sometimes you shouldn't "go back."

West, I think you were looking for this info--I finally got around to pulling the owner's manual out of our '92, and here's what it says:

Vehicle ----- Loaded Trailer max weight

3.0L SHO ----- 1,000 lbs.

3.0L ----- 2,000 lbs.

3.8L ----- 2,000 lbs.

Have fun!

Thanks, Steve
Not good news if I want to pull the pop-up with it.

What that car needs now is a nice set of WWW tires and perhaps trippe lights up front.

SHO-fer driven by West P.

We sold our '94 Taurus wagon last November. We sure are going to miss having it at Hershey this year. We love our PT but it does not have as much space for hauling parts if our friend Rodger Woodrum is riding in the back seat. Guess we will have to buy the big stuff before he shows up.

Dave Moon has pretty much convinced me that while it would be better for towing than a sedan, having the 3.0 engine from the SHO, with lower torque rating, would pretty much nullify using this to tow the pop-up, even though my pop-up only weights about 1,500 pounds. Unless I want to be replacing clutches all the time.

West, I can't imagine a 1500 lb trailer doing damage to anything, as long as you're not pulling in severe mountains for long periods of time.

Wayne

The problem with towing with an SHO engine is that it was tuned for horespower at high rpms. It's torque rating is respectable @ 200 or 210 ft-lbs. (depending on year), but it doesn't reach peak torque until almost 5 grand ( SHO specs ). Normal Taurus motors reach peak torque in a typical 2000-2200 rpm range. Trying to gain/keep up momentum with the SHO would require shifting and slipping the clutch at rpms that would not be conducive to a long life.

SHOs are a ball to drive, but hauling weight is not their forte.

I don't consider 1500 much weight, Dave. The wind resistance of a pull-behind trailer is the downfall of most power trains, as long as you're not talking about serious weight.

Concerning the shifting, if the SHO is an overdrive, go down a gear. That's what I do with my pickup, kick back to direct!

Again, just a personal opinion.

Wayne

Wayne
I'm pretty sure that Dave is correct. This car finds its home at around 5,000rpm. Got home Tuesday night. More photos:

Find a detailer or at least a vacuum!

I'm a driver, not a show-er. Besides, wouldn't you rather I commence work on the pedal car?

Michael says he wants those electronics that you want to get rid of.....$500.00 right??

Wayne

Best offer I've had so far!!! And Bob (1937hd45 ) said it was only worth $100. Already it's worth five times that!
For some reason, the system is missing the balancer, so I can't go "thump, thump, thump" down the road and at the stop lights. It'll still blow your ear drums though, if someone actually tries to turn the volume up on it.

Wait a minute, no one mentioned anything about missing components??

Sounds like a used car salesman's line. "The engine runs so quiet, you'd think there wasn't one there!"

Wayne

I meant "equalizer," but couldn't think of it at the time.

Oh, ok. so it will thump, thump, thump, you just new a new equalizer to direct the power!

Should work good in the back of my '56!

Wayne

Am I starting to hear a bidding war between Mike and Wayne?

You probably mean Bob(want 1937). Didn't know if it was for sale or not, actually.

Wayne

I didn't say it was for sale: I was just noticing a bidding war in the Burgess household for something that I've got. If the bidding gets real spirited and I start getting $$ in my eyes, I just may throw the whole car in on the deal.