Got a chance to drive the 2010 pre production SHO last night. She’s no sleeper. The turbo whine down after letting up off the accelerator is really cool. Got back in my 99 SHO with 161,000 while thinking about my three college bound kids, rubbed the dash board and said, don’t worry old girl, we still have a 114,000 to go.
@MelindaCattle[7]: When you say "she's no sleeper", are you meaning that this car it NOT a sleeper in that it is NOT an unexpectedly fast, plane looking sedan?
Or do you mean that the powertrain isn't sleepy in that it really comes alive when you stomp on it.
I imagine it'd pull pretty hard, but please clarify.
The naivete and profound ignorance of both the writers and readers is what keeps this site fun. Turbocharged Volvos have had perfectly flat torque curves (typically from 1500 or 1800 rpm to 4500 or 5000 rpm) for many years. Obviously, boost (and all the other usual stuff) is electronically managed to achieve that. In such engines, the HP "curve" is also a straight but impressively steep line. This torque curve shape is anything but ridiculous, and is now pretty old tech. Kudos to Ford for at least getting this Volvo tech into the Ford brand. Wikipedia has a good summary of some of the Volvo engines. Frinstance:
" The B524T2-R has VVT and is turbocharged and intercooled.
Output is 300 hp (220 kW) at 5500 rpm with 295 ft·lbf (400 N m) of torque at 1950-5250 rpm with the 6 speed M66AWD (Ford/Getrag) manual transmission.
Output is reduced to 300 hp (220 kW) at 6000 rpm with 258ft.lb (350 N m) of torque between 1850 and 6000 rpm with the 5 speed AW51AWD Aisin Warner automatic transmission (2004-2005). "
If you take the 2.4 liter Volvo S60 engine, enlarge it by about 50%, and then substantially detune it, you have the Ford engine. Correcting for displacement, the Volvo's 295 lb-ft torque would go to 430 lb-ft.
Even with its mild tuning, I'd pay twice as much for this Ford as I would for that staggeringly bad looking BMW with the patently idiotic hatch. How far downhill they have gone since the days of the 1600 -- from the lean car that essentially invented the sport sedan concept, to bloated, blubbery, whales.
These comments make me want to puke, It's a nice car don't get me wrong, but if you think it will compete with the Charger SRT8 or Pontiac G8 GXP I think you will be disappointed. Look at the height of it, AWD, and the hideous backend. I'll pass
In light of the financiapocalypse, we regret to inform you that barf bags are no longer complimentary. You may obtain one from your attendant at a bargain price of $9.99.
So a company comes out with a leather-lined, AWD, with 350hp and a torque curve that makes baby Jesus weep with joy and about every 5th comment weeps about the lack of a clutch or the fact that this piece has four doors. Guys, get serious, it's cars like these that allow us to sneak some fun in under the "four-door, slush box" rules that our partners often saddle us with. This thing is a huge win, and I say bring it on, flappy paddles and four doors and all.
this makes perfect sense. electroniucally limited boost = flat torque curve @whtever PSI this is pushing (probably 15psi/1bar with an temporary overboost of a few more PSI)
sure you could probably boost it more but you'd end up shreding the tranny, popping intercooler ducting and maybe even snapping a crankshaft if the overheating doesn't melt the piston rings first.
which is why i say...chip it, hold the wastegate a little longer, and eat your wheaties, this will be a lot of fun.
lets see if i can use it in context. i drove my new SHO down sunset blvd last night, and i glimpsed a financial analyst snorting coke of a shredded tranny
It looks too much like a Tiburon to really distinguish itself. I thought Hyundai was starting to make some progress with this new Genesis line, but from a design perspective this is just another crappy looking Hyundai.
Queue the Jalopnik GM fanboi crowd with the "it's still no GXP" shtick.
The SHO is an AWD car for northern climates, that can run with an Audi S6. The first time that GXP hits a rain slick road and gets torqued up, it's likely to break loose.
If they set the suspension up with as much care as the Challenger SRT8 got, this car will be both easy to ride in over midwestern "we need Obama stimulus money on these damn highways" roads AND be able to post some killer skidpad numbers.
The CTS-V may push the testosterone button, but this car takes it to the Audi crowd - hard.
@Ash78: I thought the very same thing. All I could think was how easily you can add power to a boosted Audi or Volkswagen engine. Shit, my old 4-banger needed a new supercharger pulley to give it the same power as the V6. The new ones, it takes, what, a computer chip? I can't WAIT until the tuners get their hands on this.
Also: am I the only one who has a suspicion that Ford has a G8 GXP / RS6 competitor hiding somewhere, waiting to be released until after we've all had our collective cargasms and afterglow cigarette?
The question is how will it hold up, and how overbuilt is it?
I'm doubting it is too much overbuilt, as the cost of eco-boost over similar engines with less tech was quite high. Therefore, I don't think it is like a Duramax or Cummins that comes with 360 hp, 650 ft-lbs but is capable of 500 hp and 1000 ft-lbs with little modification. That is why it is a $7-8K dollar option against the gas engine, it is overbuilt.
"If Ford can warranty an engine with these specs, assuming a buyer might redline it at every stoplight for 3 years or 36k miles, then it should be burly enough to withstand occasional spirited driving at higher forced output"
Otherwise I'd be a little surprised if Ford optimally tuned the Ecoboost right out of the gate, leaving them very little room for tweaks in the next generation.
@Deartháir: How to tune a new SHO to add more power:
1. Open hood 2. Stare blankly at all the plastic covers for 20 minutes 3. Close hood 4. Head to Autozone and buy a bunch of stick-on scoops and go-fast stickers 5. apply
@Deartháir: Agreed. This thing can almost certainly be bumped to 400+ hp without touching anything other than the ECU.
Roush was able to build some badass turbo cars for Trans-Am and IMSA GTO in the '80s...I'd bet they're already well underway on developing a package for the SHO. And considering "The Cat in the Hat's" American flag-waving tendencies, they're probably targeting some pretty big (German) fish.
03/27/09
03/27/09
Keep her on the road. I find far too many late model SHOs in the yard. :(
On a sidenote, did the torque throw you back in your seat and did it snarl like an angry beast?
03/27/09
Or do you mean that the powertrain isn't sleepy in that it really comes alive when you stomp on it.
I imagine it'd pull pretty hard, but please clarify.
02/13/09
" The B524T2-R has VVT and is turbocharged and intercooled.
Output is 300 hp (220 kW) at 5500 rpm with 295 ft·lbf (400 N m) of torque at 1950-5250 rpm with the 6 speed M66AWD (Ford/Getrag) manual transmission.
Output is reduced to 300 hp (220 kW) at 6000 rpm with 258ft.lb (350 N m) of torque between 1850 and 6000 rpm with the 5 speed AW51AWD Aisin Warner automatic transmission (2004-2005). "
If you take the 2.4 liter Volvo S60 engine, enlarge it by about 50%, and then substantially detune it, you have the Ford engine. Correcting for displacement, the Volvo's 295 lb-ft torque would go to 430 lb-ft.
Even with its mild tuning, I'd pay twice as much for this Ford as I would for that staggeringly bad looking BMW with the patently idiotic hatch. How far downhill they have gone since the days of the 1600 -- from the lean car that essentially invented the sport sedan concept, to bloated, blubbery, whales.
02/25/09
How many engineering degrees do you have? Cause I have one. And ten years working in the auto industry.
02/12/09
I've been waiting for the day I'd have 350lb/ft of torque at 1500rpm again in something that wasn't diesel
02/12/09
02/25/09
02/11/09
I think Hyundai needs to update their manufacturer logo, it reminds me too much of a honda knock off
02/11/09
02/11/09
02/11/09
In light of the financiapocalypse, we regret to inform you that barf bags are no longer complimentary. You may obtain one from your attendant at a bargain price of $9.99.
We apologize for any inconvenience.
Thank you for surfing Jalopnik.
02/11/09
It is a torque mesa.
And while gobs of power is nice - very nice - how's the mileage?
02/11/09
You probably look at a Lamborghini, and say, "Well yes, but it's so hard to parallel-park..."
/kidding
02/11/09
02/11/09
02/11/09
sure you could probably boost it more but you'd end up shreding the tranny, popping intercooler ducting and maybe even snapping a crankshaft if the overheating doesn't melt the piston rings first.
which is why i say...chip it, hold the wastegate a little longer, and eat your wheaties, this will be a lot of fun.
02/11/09
lets see if i can use it in context.
i drove my new SHO down sunset blvd last night, and i glimpsed a financial analyst snorting coke of a shredded tranny
02/11/09
02/11/09
The SHO is an AWD car for northern climates, that can run with an Audi S6. The first time that GXP hits a rain slick road and gets torqued up, it's likely to break loose.
If they set the suspension up with as much care as the Challenger SRT8 got, this car will be both easy to ride in over midwestern "we need Obama stimulus money on these damn highways" roads AND be able to post some killer skidpad numbers.
The CTS-V may push the testosterone button, but this car takes it to the Audi crowd - hard.
02/11/09
I'm not sure about that. One of the things I seem to recall about most reviews of the Challenger was that it didn't exactly handle all that well.
I agree with your sentiments, but I suspect that might not have been the best car to choose for a comparison.
02/11/09
02/11/09
Very impressive. And you know what else? It screams "detuned for marketing purposes"
That engine will probably reliably do something well north of 400 lb-ft.
02/11/09
Also: am I the only one who has a suspicion that Ford has a G8 GXP / RS6 competitor hiding somewhere, waiting to be released until after we've all had our collective cargasms and afterglow cigarette?
02/11/09
The question is how will it hold up, and how overbuilt is it?
I'm doubting it is too much overbuilt, as the cost of eco-boost over similar engines with less tech was quite high. Therefore, I don't think it is like a Duramax or Cummins that comes with 360 hp, 650 ft-lbs but is capable of 500 hp and 1000 ft-lbs with little modification. That is why it is a $7-8K dollar option against the gas engine, it is overbuilt.
02/11/09
"If Ford can warranty an engine with these specs, assuming a buyer might redline it at every stoplight for 3 years or 36k miles, then it should be burly enough to withstand occasional spirited driving at higher forced output"
Otherwise I'd be a little surprised if Ford optimally tuned the Ecoboost right out of the gate, leaving them very little room for tweaks in the next generation.
02/11/09
1. Open hood
2. Stare blankly at all the plastic covers for 20 minutes
3. Close hood
4. Head to Autozone and buy a bunch of stick-on scoops and go-fast stickers
5. apply
02/11/09
02/11/09
Roush was able to build some badass turbo cars for Trans-Am and IMSA GTO in the '80s...I'd bet they're already well underway on developing a package for the SHO. And considering "The Cat in the Hat's" American flag-waving tendencies, they're probably targeting some pretty big (German) fish.
02/11/09
02/11/09