[Sablewagon]

Looking at "the numbers", (HP, Torque, displacement, etc.) it would appear that the SHO V-6 (automatic, of course, to keep things even) and the Taurus with a Duratec are remarkably similar.
Do they peform similarly? Or is there significantly more to the SHO package than just an uber-engine?
How do either of these "cammers" stack up against the additional displacement and low-end torque of the Essex, if the Essex is in good shape?
Perhaps this subject has been broached before, but I culdn't find anything about it...

 

[Kermit]

The SHO has more options, but the Duratec has the AX4N Tranny which is the most reliable. An engine is nothing without a good tranny.

 

[Guest]

Not to mention that the V6 SHO engine was only offered in gen 1/2's. These cars are lighter than the later generations. Throw a 5 speed with them, and it makes sense why the v6 sho's are faster than the dura's.

 

[MaltaTaurus69]

And the essex is a dog in the top end, although the amount of low end torque may scare people in a race from the jump, it reaches its max torque at only 2200 rpms and max horsepower at 3800. The motore redlines at 5500 rpms, so the top end isnt that great, slowing it down dramatically. Also, the normal essex only has 140 hp, the police specification motor has 160 hp and 230 ft/lbs of torque. While, better, still no competition for the SHO.

 

[Devin]

Unless you are drag racing 10 feet.

 

[majisto]

Just get a Vulcan.

 

[Postmortem]

well last gen essex has 190hp. of course in mustang and windstar. I thought that max torque is @ 2700 rpm.

 

[93taurusSX]

Actually, the windstar models were pushing 200 hp with the dual port intake.

The Essex, even with the better breathing, still struggles around 4k I've found (many, many times...). I had plans to do the exhaust next, but yes, this engine is perfect for lunge and dive driving tactics .

I think being that the essex has its roots from a truck engine really explains why the hp and torque numbers are so lop sided for a passenger car...

 

[majisto]

The Essex is a Ford 302...

 

[NateNBeckie]

Originally posted by Majisto@May 13 2004, 04:16 PM
The Essex is a Ford 302...

The Essex is a V6 not a 302.

Actually the Essex started out in the late 60's as a 2.5 Liter and 3.0 Liter. Sometime later it was changed to 3.1 Liters. Cosworth took a few of them and played around with them. There is actually pics of the Cosworth twin-cam Essex V6 on the net somewhere. It was also used in the Capri for a while. The 3.8 is commonly called the Essex, but actually it is not. But we all know it as the Essex so the hell with what it should be.

Yes, the later Windstar 3.8 was pushing 200 HP, but it never felt that good. It had a hard time breathing at high RPMs. That motor wasn't designed to be a high revving rocket. It was meant to be the "smooth, around town" engine. Even when my grandpa had one in his old 80 something LTD, it was as smooth as can be. The 3.8 in the Mustangs is only pushing 190 HP.

-Nate

 

[qwertz9586]

http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/ar90134.htm

It's actually a clone of the Buick's 3800. But what he's saying about the 302 is that the Essex is basically the 302 less 2 cylinders.

 

[n2_space]

<---- refer to member title

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by MaltaTaurus69@May 7 2004, 09:50 AM
And the essex is a dog in the top end

Exactly, couple that with the slow 1-2 shift,

OK.. My 3.8 has a lot of high end power.. and it chirps the tires in the 1-2 shift.. It must be because I've moded it so much :rolleyes2:

 

[joe5.0]

I'd say the Duratec is the best combination of traits that matches the taurus. IMHO the SHO engines are way too high maintenance, expensive to repair, and hard to find parts for. The Vulcan is a pretty decent engine, but its low-tech and doesnt even match GM's old-tech V6's with similar displacement. All of the examples I drove did not operate very smoothly either. <_< The Duratec is powerful enough to keep ahead of traffic, but it would definitely gain a nice boost with an extra gear in the tranny. It is reliable, good on gas (mine averaged 25mpg), low maintenance, and operates smootly & quietly. I dont know why anyone buying one new wouldnt pay the extra $800 or so dollars for it.

And fwiw, the 220hp (actually closer to 210hp) Duratec in the Mazda 6 with the 5 speed manual trans is just as fast as a 220hp 5 speed SHO.

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by jtkz13@May 13 2004, 08:45 PM
the 220hp (actually closer to 210hp) Duratec in the Mazda 6 with the 5 speed manual trans is just as fast as a 220hp 5 speed SHO.

You wouldn't say?.. Umm.. DUH!!.. you can't compare the gen 1/2 SHOs to new cars.. unless you put a hundred or two thousand miles on that new vehicle.. then you can compare them.

 

[joe5.0]

Ummmm...I was referring to numbers that new/well maintained lower mileage SHO's run.

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by jtkz13@May 13 2004, 09:09 PM
Ummmm...I was referring to numbers that new/well maintained lower mileage SHO's run.

sure you were.. wait wait.. are you saying that my SHO isn't well maintained?

 

[joe5.0]

No;

Stock new Mazda 6s 5 speed manual = 15.1 @ 93mph
Stock new Gen 1/2 SHO 5 speed = 15.0 @ 93mph

Both dyno about 175-180whp bone stock and are within a couple pounds of each other.

 

[tmonster]

Duratec and Yamaha may have similar specs.... The Yamaha can take more abuse. I read that the Yamaha can hold 10k rpms no problem. Also supercharging a Yamaha can give you 400-500hp without doing to much to the engine, the Duratec can only handle about 7psi stock, and a supercharger gives it 90 hp.... Duratec is definetly the best all around motor, but if your going to be modding, the Yamaha is probably the better pick. As for the essex... low end power, immune to head gasket failures, and in my opinion probably the "worst" engine ford put together....altho 315ft lbs of tourqe out of a SC Thunderbird, brining it to 60 in 7 seconds and if I recall a 15 second quarter mile is pretty impressive....

 

[NateNBeckie]

Originally posted by tmonster@May 13 2004, 11:15 PM
Duratec and Yamaha may have similar specs.... The Yamaha can take more abuse. I read that the Yamaha can hold 10k rpms no problem.

Very true. My dad's good friend worked at the Ford testing facility and they had some fun with the Yamaha V6 engine in the later years. They took it and put it on a stand and ran it at 10,000 RPM for the equivilent of 50,000 miles. They then took it apart and it was very close to "fresh off the line" measurements.

I think the Duratec runs a very close second in durability though. It definately requires a lot less maintenance than the V6 Yamaha. The V8 would have been even better if not for the cam sprocket issue.