1992 SC vs 1992 SHO

Status
Not open for further replies.
Great cars!

I have one of each 92 tbird 5speed and a 94 sho 5speed. Two totally different cars. I think trying to see which one is better is an issue that can never be resolved on a board about sc's. same thing goes if this was a sho board. I love the look of both my cars, speed goes to my tbird but that has a lot to do with the amount of modifications done to it. The sho by any means is a slouch. either is the sc. Both these cars are NOT fast sports cars! but both can be made to be! $$'s is all it takes. I hope to have my sc at around 300rwhp and my sho at 320-350 FWHP by next summer. (sc sooner as long as I can finish putting it back together!) I will have the sc for the off the line killer and my sho for a hwy beast and all around daily driver. Two supercharged beauties when they are done!

Right now if I was to say which is faster stock......I couldn't I don't remember my tbird when it was stock!:D

Cheers,
Eric
 
well i own a 95 5 speed sho and a 91 auto sc and i know stock vs stock the super coupe will get the sho off the line but the sho will walk the sc down.sho has way more top end.sho doesn't really hit it's power till 3500 rpms.i have a chip in mine now and it opens the secondary runners at 3000 rpms.but i'm just speaking stock vs stock.sc are quick off line.but sho's have more top end.i've beat 5 speed 5.0's off line with my auto sc(and left it in overdrive when i did it)so i know they are quick from stop.handling i would say the sho is better in that class too.i never liked the way the sc handled till i put the eibach springs and tokico shocks on.now it does good.braking once again i give it to the sho.sho stops on a dime.sc stops ok.but on my sho now i have the 96+ rotors and ceramic pads and now it gives my change back on that dime.but maitance wise and parts cost the sc wins.parts and labor for sho's are crazy.and u can work on the sc.sho leaves u scratching ur head.i usually have a friend of mine up at the ford dealership do my sho work on the side at a reasonable rate
 
POWERTRAIN
Transverse front-engine/front-wheel drive
ENGINE
3.0 liter DOHC V6
Horsepower: 220 hp @ 6200 RPM
Torque: 200 lb-ft @ 4800 RPM
DRIVE TRAIN
Final drive ratio is 3.74
5-speed overdrive transmission
GearRatio
Max Speed
@ 7000 RPM
1st
3.21
44
2nd
2.09
67
3rd
1.38
101
4th
1.02
137
5th
0.74
143 @ 5350

WHEELS & TIRES
Rim width: 6 inches
Tires: P215/60Rx16 94V
BRAKES
Four-wheel disc
ABS
DIMENSIONS &
CAPACITIES
Curb weight 3380 lbs.
Wheelbase 106 in.
Length 192 in.
Fuel tank 18.4 gals.
Oil (with filter change) 5.0 qts.
FUEL
EPA 18 city / 26 highway
92 Octane recommended
PERFORMANCE
From R&T:
0 to 60 mph.6.6 seconds
1/4 mile 15.2 seconds @ 92.5 mph
Lateral acceleration, 200 ft skidpad .81g
Braking distance, 60 to 0 mph168 ft. but usually when dyno stock sho put out like 230-240 horsepower they were underrated for some reason.and the 96+ sho's were all auto.99 sho specs were 235 hp and 230 tq 0-60 in 7.5 and 1/4 mile was 15.7 they weren't as fast as the 95 V6 and they weren't put together by yamaha they were a ford engine with yamaha heads put together by ford.V6 sho the engine was assembled by yamaha.and the V8's have problems with their cam shafts breaking
 
Not that impressive lol ok .dude. Your motor is a 3.8 liter V6 compaird to a 3.0 liter. You ever have a Blower on your motor and still dont make as much horsepower as a SHO motor. Ya more torque but I mean come on. That just doesnt seem right. And ya my friend ran that 14.8 like I said when it was bone stock. Either way I never really meant to fight with you people but I guess I brought it on myself. Anyway I bet you cant run 12's and still get over 30 mph! :D And this motor was never intended to go into a family sedan. It was meant for the SHOGUN, which would prolly eat 80 % of your supercoupes
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with the idea that they are both fast, the difference being whether we're talking off the line or top end. I have seen 140+ with my 5-speed 93, so I imagiine a 94-95 would easily hit the same with 15 more hp. As for the SHO, what is the top end? How heavy is the sho compared to a SC?
As for me, the single biggest issue I can't avoid is FWD. I come from the days of sliding the rear end around. Spinning the front wheels is sorta "weird" ain't it? Torque steer sucks. If I had the chance to go back to 1995 and choose between the SHO and the SC, the SC would still have come home with me. I just tried to buy another one off ebay, came up $100 short. I will own one from every year someday, why... because then I can drive a different SC each day of the week. Heaven got's nothing on that!
 
I am not saying the SC is better than a SHO. Like I said, I really like both.
But I just neded to address a couple of issues.

Your motor is a 3.8 liter V6 compaird to a 3.0 liter. You ever have a Blower on your motor and still dont make as much horsepower as a SHO motor. Ya more torque but I mean come on.
I have to laugh! LOL!
I guess we forgot about 94 -95 SC's! More power. 230hp/330tq.
Engine:
It's a whopping ,astronomical .8 litre's more(whoopdie doo) and almost 700lbs. more in weight. Does that even the playing feild yet?
Hmmmm, BTW, I wonder what our cars could do with secondaries.
Ya, more torque....?
Yeah, like big deal right? Who needs torque?


And ya my friend ran that 14.8 like I said when it was bone stock. Either way I never really meant to fight with you people but I guess I brought it on myself.
We also have members that have broken the 14's stock with factory freak cars, one of which I believe ran a 14.6. No one is fighting. I jut get tired of opinions being prophessed as fact. It's an opinion. Driver skill is the determinig factor.

Anyway I bet you cant run 12's and still get over 30 mph!
Well, you'd be getting low 100's I think. 101, 102, somewhere in there depending on the time.
I'll have to assume you mean MPG???!
Well, How many 400- hp cars do? (crank) 300's (wheels)

It was meant for the SHOGUN, which would prolly eat 80 % of your supercoupes
In other words, your whole goal of this thread was to say that there are faster cars than SC's! Are we going to talk about SHOGUN's now? How about vettes, viper's, countach's, 308, 355's...etc, etc. Yes there are faster cars then SC's, just not necessarily SHO's.
We can sit here all year and talk about how my friend has this car,,, and my friend has that. My daddy can beat up your daddy!!! My sneakers are better than your sneakers.....BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

What it comes down to is personal preference. If the SHO and the SC put out the same HP/TQ numbers, weights, you can be guaranteed someone is going to lose because of their driving skills. With that said.....All we can do is rely on stats for this argument, which if memory serves me, they are to damn close be considered the deciding factor. SO...I guess it all comes back to the driver.
 
Last edited:
now why the hell are u gonna come on a SUPER COUPE forum and start talking ***** about the SC's.

why dont u go to a SHO forum and have a field day there.

if u aint here to talk about SC's then why the hell should anybody care?
 
dittos

Yes, this is an SC forum and if he wants to run us down, he can do it on the SHO forum or at the track, LOL!

Super91coupe
 
I'm not trying to run any body down I was just wondering what your thoughts were about this subject. And to the person who said oh only .8 bigger. For one thing that really isnt the big deal. The big deal is that you have a POWER ADDER! Ya slap a POWER ADDER on a sho and run 10 psi of boost or whatever it is and see how much more faster it still is then the stock Supercoupe. Not saying I dont like them.. I am the ford person more then anyone I know, but still a sho would take a supercoupe sorry
 
your an idiot....not becuase of what you are saying.....but where you are saying it and how you are saying it....shos are faster, shos are faster....next thing your gonna talk about is HP per liter.....you must be a domestic ricer
 
ok!!!

Ok!!! we got it. You are a SHO person and we are Super Coupe people. To each his own. Power is not everything, though it is a lot. Styling and apeal go along way on which car a person might like. 2 door or 4 door. Family car or sport coupe. So the SHO might have more horse power and the SC might get you at of the hole and the SHO might be better on top end. All cars are not created equal. What about the new Grand Prix's with 260 hp or the Mustang Cobra's with almost 400 and the Vette? Do you just keep adding cars to the equation till you find the top dog of all? The SHO is what it is and the SC is what it is. depending on year and mods, one could probably beat the other on any given day. So can we get over it now? With kids, the SC is a little small, so when I get another car I'd like to have a performance sedan and maybe I'll look at a SHO then. My friend had a SC and now has a Impala SS and he misses the SC, but likes his SS just fine. In fact he said it had more torque than the SC. So like I said, to each his own and if you think you're car is better that's fine. If we think are cars are better, that's fine too.

Anything else???

Super91coupe
 
Black92SC said:
your an idiot....not becuase of what you are saying.....but where you are saying it and how you are saying it....shos are faster, shos are faster....next thing your gonna talk about is HP per liter.....you must be a domestic ricer

ok now no name calling kids
 
I cannot believe I just sat here and read this entire thread....it must be past my bedtime. Nah, forget it. I think I'll go onto the SHO board and start talking smack right now! Oh wait a minute, I forgot. I grew up. I had better go to bed instead....
 
Superchargedv6,
I understand what you are saying, but there are a ton of factors being left out.

The SHO engine is designed to run naturally aspirated where the SC engine isn't. To say you could just slap a blower on a SHO is an unfair comaprison as the SC engine couldn't function properly without the blower.

Figure a 3.8 in a Mustang runs somewhere in the vicinity of 190 hp. If you put an SC or turbo on it, you would be generating far more than the xtra 20 HP that the SC engine produces.
190+20= 210hp
I would have a hard time explaining the hardcore details but it's not the same. If you spent some time undoing the bottlenecks that FORD put in place we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
I hope that someone a little more articulate with their words can explain why we aren't talking apples and oranges. Even for my own benefit.

I know what I need to say, I just can't explain it. Maybe if you haven't been flamed to bad, you could open a new thread asking for an explantaion as to what the difference is between a naturally aspirated engine being blown, and a blown engine that's not designed to run N/A.


Later
Skip
 
This skip guy seems to be the only understandable person that reacted to this thread ... ya I was only playin around kinda ... I love fords and think they are the best basicly.. I'm more into the older ones but still there are quite a few new ones that kick major ***
 
quit trying to change the subject and take a hike...
this is a SC forum not a SHO forum.

nobody wanna hear what you gotta say anymore..
 
Is he done?

Hey you SCers, is that SHO guy ready to take his ball and go home yet?

Hey I was just wondering, on your posts, what in the h*** is that a picture of? Cause it kinda looks like a go cart experiment gone terribly wrong.

Oh, I think what Skip was trying to say is that Ford put so many obsticles on the SCs to keep the true raw power to a minimum. If not for that, like he said, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It would be a way mute point.

Like I said earlier, to each his own.

super91coupe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top