silvrsvt Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Personally I'd like see the following: More Aggressive looking Front and Rear Fascias Body Colored Grill (the car needs a little bit more differentiation from the Current Taurus) Light colored (stone?) Interior Anyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMSA-XJR9 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 How about a diet of ~300-500lbs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Call it Esss, H, Ohhh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Personally I'd like see the following: More Aggressive looking Front and Rear Fascias Body Colored Grill (the car needs a little bit more differentiation from the Current Taurus) Light colored (stone?) Interior Anyone else? +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Call it Esss, H, Ohhh! This. A coupe version would be pretty cool too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 1. Allow the SHO performance package to be ordered along with rapid spec 402A. 2. Lose about 200 to 300 lbs of weight. 3. Lose about $2,000 to $3,000 off the base SHO price. 4. Educate buyers to what SHO actually stands for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 4. Educate buyers to what SHO actually stands for. Like you should have to take a class or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Like you should have to take a class or something? Super High Output Yuppies overpaying for the car should know it's roots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenCaylor Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 1. Better brakes for the performance package. 2. Make the moonroof a stand alone option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carson Lomax Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Things I'd change: Added/more aggressive rocker extensions and lower body molding. Different seats with more aggressive bolstering. Make the brown Miko suede inserts available for the "popular" colors. Integrated boost gauge. My biggest disappointment when I ordered my SHO was that I couldn't get the brown Miko Suede with the Candy red metallic or the steel blue paint. It's only available with the Cinnamon and Pearl White Tri-coat (maybe black too, can't remember). While it wasn't a deal breaker it doesn't make any sense to me why marketing would make one of the SHO exclusive interior enhancements available with some of the most "unpopular" colors. The seats I thought were fine in the SEL I drove but when you look back at the Gen 1 and 2 SHO's, more aggressively bolstered seats were almost a trademark of the car. I would have liked to have seen something similar with the 2010. I think the front fascia is fine and the LED light tubes have grown on me but I would have liked to see some tasteful (no Pontiac style) rocker extensions from the front wheel wells to the rear. Maybe Ford will offer something aftermarket but again, if the you look at the Gen 1 and 2 cars, they had similar detailing that set them apart. A boost gauge would be a "nice to have" although it would probably need to be something added on to the A-pillar or the like. BTW, my SHO is scheduled to be built October 5th so I would think I'd have it by the end of next month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
97svtgoin05gt Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Lose weight and lose cost. I love this car but theres no denying that north of 40K for a Ford, even the top of the line one is nutty expensive. A fully loaded SHO shouldn't be more than 40K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 (edited) I agree with the more aggressive styling previously mentioned. I also agree with having the performance package more availible. I still haven't seen it here in Canada on build and price yet. Speaking of a weight-loss plan; I don't know if that's possible now but if you can, go for it. Perhaps a more intrusive sound in the cabin for the enthusiatists. I don't know about a D4 sized coupe where there isn't plans for a CD3 coupe (I'd love to have that) so I can't see the justification. 'Ess H Oh': I'm with you on that because I remember 'show' as a slang name. Finally, I'd love to see a Manual. Edited September 14, 2009 by Hugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Lose weight and lose cost. I love this car but theres no denying that north of 40K for a Ford, even the top of the line one is nutty expensive. A fully loaded SHO shouldn't be more than 40K. Says who - and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 14, 2009 Author Share Posted September 14, 2009 Says who - and why? Also adjusted for inflation, the 2010 SHO costs just about the same as a 1990 SHO. I think people are just having sticker shock...its not the 1990's anymore and Ford isn't in the business to make a 15K Taurus any more. Yet people have no problem blowing 50K on a F-150...which to me is farking stupid. As for the weight, doesn't bother me, that will be corrected on the next gen Taurus... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 14, 2009 Author Share Posted September 14, 2009 Yuppies overpaying for the car should know it's roots. This pretty comical...if I remember right, you had an older SHO and the only reason you got one was it had a stupid discount on it (7K or so)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 The car is crying for a manual gearbox option. But that'll never, EVER happen. As the old saying goes, "wish in one hand . . ." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 weight.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Everyone complains about the pricing of this vehicle, yet hasn't given one reason why this vehicle should cost less. Have any of you shopped cars in the 38-45K price range before? Do you know what that type of money gets you in that price range? - Performance Pkg availability across the board - Better seats - Paddle shifter reconfigured + on one side - on the other and a bit more robust - Better brakes - Moonroof delete - Weight reduction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 weight distribution closer to 50/50.........and bring out a de-contented version for those bleating about price.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 [*]Light colored (stone?) Interior I definitely agree with that one, or at least make the interior appearance package thing (the one with the lighter brown suede inserts) avaialable on all colors. Call it Esss, H, Ohhh! +1 1. Allow the SHO performance package to be ordered along with rapid spec 402A. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 This pretty comical...if I remember right, you had an older SHO and the only reason you got one was it had a stupid discount on it (7K or so)... The main reason I bought it was because it was faster than a Mustang, and looked better too. The big discount was just a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 I can't get over the comments that the car is too expensive? It has 365HP, AWD, HID, Leather, Sync. An XLT-150 has a 35K sticker, my 7 year old Explorer had a 38K sticker. A Fusion equipped nice is 28K. The days of $20K full size cars are over. New Cars are expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 Do we know if the rear seats fold down 50/50? thats my biggest gripe with the MKS ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 15, 2009 Author Share Posted September 15, 2009 Do we know if the rear seats fold down 50/50? thats my biggest gripe with the MKS ? Rear seatbacks fold down on the cushion in a 60/40 split making the large trunk even more versatile http://www.autoguide.com/manufacturer/ford...drive-1145.html I do have to say I do miss my Mustang Seats not being able to fold down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 Do we know if the rear seats fold down 50/50? thats my biggest gripe with the MKS ? You want 50/50 instead of 60/40? Talk about picky! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.