I've had mine past 8K before without a problem. I didn't run it far past that (I had a chip that removed the rev limiter as well as UDP's) but its still asking for trouble.
Your data on the SHO valvetrain is inaccurate.
Your data on the SHO transmissions is also inaccurate (although the auto coupled to the 3.2 was also weak)
The data on the 3.4L SHO is also inaccurate. They are awesome motors with a lot of potential. Their limiting factor is the loss of power due to driveline friction (automatic tranny)
Your data on the cams is accurate. The cam sprockets are attached using a well known and widely used process called swedging. However, this process was not utilized properly for unknown reasons which is causing the sprockets to walk. The remedy; weld the sprocket to the cam before it breaks free.

As much as I hate my SHO, I love it as well.

Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

You guys are right they are prone to problems, BUT if you do what my friend did you for only 4 or 5 grand your spankin 255 maxima 6 speeds!
My friend traded a set of 17" rims for a 91 sho 5 speed with a bad motor. He got a cheap 95 motor with 30,000 out of the junk yard for 300.

Here is what he did to make it rip and be the ultimate sleeper.

1) Orderered a Bullet proof tranny from the show shop. Cost around 1400.

2) Sho shop Kevlar racing clutch. Cost: 700

3) Bigger Mass Air flow Sensor and HUGE k&n cone filter cost: $200

4) Sho Shop Offroad y pipe with NO cats. Cost Used , 200

5) The exhaust is custom bent BUT it is an exact copy off the Sho Shop catback since my other friend has the Sho Shop exhaust and it was Copied from him. Cost: 400$
6) Sho Shop underdrive pulleys Cost $150

7)Sho Sho stage 1 cams cost $400 i think

8) and last but not least , the famous Sho Shop LPM (lifetime performance module), they are able to tune this compter for your exact mods, if you get more mods they reprogram it.
The car is also lowered on eibachs

For about 5,000 my frind sho Easily spanks my friend Danas modded 2002 maxima 6 speed (intake, exhaust,udp. slicks)posted a 14.1 &100

We have raced from every possible position, the tranny in the sho has been performing great and has handled the power no problem, far different than the ****ty stockk 5 speed.

Shoshop.com is the place for sho performance.

The car is acutally 300hp, but ford detined in when they threw it int he taurus

 

The 3.4L V8 SHO motor has 4 valves per cylinder which is a total of 32 valves. It makes 235 hp @ 6100 rpm and 230 ft/lb tq @ 4800 rpm. I have a lot of information on bore and stroke as well as cam duration timing, etc. I can't find as much on the Ferrari. However, I can guarantee that there are a ton of differences between each motor. Apples to oranges. I believe that the SHO motor is a 60 degree V8.

The F355 is a 90 deg. V8 3.5L motor with 11:1 compression ratio and forged pistons. It makes 380 hp @ 8250 rpm and 268 lb/ft tq @ 6000 rpm.

I dont think any domestic auto maker has a FWD transaxle capable of withstanding Ferrari-like revs. The V8 SHO is rev limited much before 8K. I don't think that Ford was looking for a Taurus with much more than 235-240 hp back in 1996 when it was introduced.


my 2 cents

Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

**Did he get a 3.2 from an automatic to do a cheapo swap? Free power.

**Ahem..cough..I wouldn't be quick to call it bullet proof, especially if it came from the SHOshop. I hope he at least got a Quaife but it doesn't sound like it at that price. The stock differential is a ticking time bomb.

**Ouch. Southbend hipo clutches-$450
Most of SHOshops clutches are made by Clutchmasters.

**Probably the Ford 80mm MAF setup that they like to sell. As many people who have had sucess with it have had bad problems with it as well. Its calibrated for a car with different injectors; it needs the EPROM (LPM) to work properly; more of a band aid to get a part that wasn't designed for the car to work on the car. After much experiementing and money lost, I am currently running a Pro-M 80mm MAF with cone filter; I will never run another MAF on this car. I love it.


**He wants cats trust me. He is losing a lot of power. The SHO needs the backpressure in the exhaust for low end torque.

**not bad
**A Questionable mod, but if it works well for him that's good then. Is he using stock valve springs or the SHOshop ones? SHOshop springs have a reputation for breaking and dropping the valve through the piston. Not a pretty site!

**easily? 3.5L 6 speed Max's are still pretty quick

**There are no upgraded transmissions parts available for the SHO except for the Quaife which it sounds like he doesn't have for $1400. Clutches and Al flywheels don't count.

**Also a good place to get ripped off and suffer really bad customer service. I take my business elsewhere and I am happier as a result.

**The SHO motor never cranked out 300hp. Urban legend.

Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

my 93 auto ate my max alive!!

SHO
custom built trans
dynomax catback
highflowcats, pro plus y-pipe
superchip
eibachs
tokicos
front stb
k&n
maf 73mm
new plugs wires ect
custom shift kit
110k miles

00 max 5spd
bone friggin stock

the secondaires were not workin n my friend was drivin the SHO, he never drove it b4.
ripped the max apart from the launch and just left me behind. with the sceondaries runnin oh man that car was blistering. gotta love rippin up second at 55mph n chirpin third at 75.

any sho parts should be bought out of Proformance plus. they are awesome.

 

ENOUGH ABOUT THE FORD SHO, THIS FORUM IS FOR THE MAX!!!
Let the ford rest in peace!
because it still was "found on road dead"!

 

Something wrong with reading about similar cars? I learn more in general from all of the lists that I am on instead of just the list pertaining to the car that I own. It makes me more informed not only about my car, but cars in general. Besides, 90% of the information posted here on the SHO is incorrect.

Snow sucks (NJ). I think that I am going to clean my spare 3.2 pistons up.

Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

Maxima's and SHO's suck

 

or Forward Only Reverse Disabled
for their horrible trannys.

 

"I don't understand why SHO is so big. I ran a couple at the track. They were slow, except when one was spraying, then he was mid 14's, which is still slow if you ask me"

Mid 14's for a sprayed SHO is pretty bad...I've seen fully bone stock (full interior, spare and air filter...no mods) run as low as 14.6 on a 94 5 speed.

The SHO was an excellent car and I miss mine terribly. I vastly preferred it to my 2k2 Altima but with a baby on the way my wife needed a sedan and she refused to drive the SHO...too powerful for her.

"ENOUGH ABOUT THE FORD SHO, THIS FORUM IS FOR THE MAX!!!"

True enough, but this particular thread is about the SHO...if you don't like it, don't click on it...its well marked.

"Let the ford rest in peace!
because it still was "found on road dead"!"

But it was also First On Race Day while the Nissan Needs Imminent Salvage So Abandon Now.

 

LOL

Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

...

 

reply to ians thread about my information being innaccurate...go to the shoforums. Many of the members on there will say for themselves that unless you baby the hell out of the valvetrain by spending 400 dollars ever 60,000 miles, your engine will fall apart.

 

I would prefer that you point me to this information instead of me looking for something that doesn't exist. I would also like to see an engine that has "fallen apart". It is recommended that the valve lash be checked and adjusted if necessary every 60K. If anyone says otherwise, they don't know what they are talking about.

How does one "baby a valvetrain?" Feed it formula and sing nursery rhymes to it? I run my "valvetrain" and the rest of the motor up to 7 grand all day long as does every single person that I know who drives an SHO. None of our engines have mysteriously fallen apart.



Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

Actually, during testing they ran those engines to well over 13,000 rpm, and the engines held, it was all the accessories that fell apart rather abruptly The fastest SHOs were early 90s with manual trannies, all the other ones were pretty slow. For the early 90s they were a very formidable car. When i was working for Ford we did see them in fairly regularly though. And for some odd reason, it seemed like the more miles a car had on it, and the more it looked like **** on the outside/inside, the better the engine ran

 

That is correct. I got my A$$ handed to me in my 89 LX by a few of those. I was like , WTF ! .. as the sedans flew past !

 

13,000 rpm testing is supposedly urban legend, but I can't falsify the claim nor can anyone find any info to back it up..

As far as early 90's SHO's being faster; that is simply not true at all..There aren't differences between early and late 90's SHO's either..

89-91=gen1
92-95=gen2
96-99=gen3

89-92 = all 5 speeds
93-95 = auto optional
96-99= auto only

I will agree that with age, the motors tend to "break in" a bit more and seem much smoother.


Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

ask anyone who owns a 96 or above SHO and see what they think of them now...everyone of them was recalled because of the cams spinning off the shaft resulting in detenation of the motor. the repair is somewhere around $2500. only reason i know is my buddy is trying to sell the thing. so i dont know for sure if that is exactly what is happening to them or what. thats what he told me. But i do know this something is making one hell of a clanking noise from underneath that hood.

 

Actually, not a single one of them has been recalled..There are rumors that Ford is supposed to make an annoucement today (no idea on what) but some have their fingers crossed. The V8 group has been fighting with Ford to get a recall and get them to pay damages but so far they haven't budged. Most people just get their sprockets welded before it happens ($500 job). What happens is that the toothed sprocket on the camshaft slips and the pistons come crashing into the valves. No detonation involved, just mass destruction. Most everyone on the V8 list is pretty happy with their cars except for the cam problem. The ones that have theirs welded aren't worrying about anything except for transmissions (stupid Ford FWD automatics). Where does your buddy live? I'd tell him to check out www.v8sho.com and join the mailing list there for any help if he wants it..

Ian
93 SHO 5 speed, royal blue
Quaife HLSD
Wilwoods
suspension and some power mods
3.2 motor being built on the side (literally next to this computer)

 

Well, i used to be a tech and worked on them all the time. Believe what you want, but I never drove a newer one that ran well, and never drove an auto tranny one that ran well either. the early 90s ones were simply faster because they had manuals, simple as that, and also because they were ugly, remember, I said the uglier it was the better it seemed to run . ford's auto trannies are almost as bad as Nissan's, and they hinder performance as much also.

And as far as motor testing.... 13,000 is the number I believe to be true. I've heard it from more than a few enthusiasts, and even from a couple of the master techs that had worked for ford for 20 years +. I have even heard numbers as high as 20,000 rpm, although I find that a little hard to believe.

 

Yeah, that's pretty easy.

 

RPM? Uh, considering F1 engined V8s rev to about 13,000 or so, makes it pretty hard to believe. 20,000 is outright funny. F1 probably spends a few hundred thousand on each motor in order(among other things) to have it rev/live at 13 grand. To rev a production/mass produced 3 liter or so V6(not the smoothest configuration) to 13,000 rpm might be "possible" but if the engine lived or was even usable after you did this, is another question.

 

Actually most formula one engines are V10s, and they rev to about 16,000 rpm (or so they claim) And I never said the engine would have lived after visiting 13,000rpm, I just said it didnt fly apart on the dyno And I agree this would be hard to believe, but it was yamaha that built it, and they have done their share of high revving engines

 

Although I respect your knowledge as a tech, I still stand behind the fact that one generation isn't necessairly any faster or stronger than the other. Dyno tests and 1/4 miletime and ET's simply don't show that at all. For awhile people used to believe that the gen1 SHO's were lighter; its true that the 89's with no ABS, no airbags, etc...are lighter than all the other generations and therefore has weight as an advantage; however all following years ranged in different weights and one model year wasn't much lighter or heavier than other. For what its worth, the powerplant itself recieved some changes in 1993. I am not sure of the exact details, but I know that the surge tanks on the intake manifold were slightly revised; port matching on the heads was slightly better and I've heard that the valves recieved a 5 angle cut as opposed to 3.

In general, I will say that the 5 speed SHO's of any generation (1 and 2) are faster from 30 mph and up than any of the automatics (generations 2 and 3). However, there are just as many of each generation putting down similar power numbers and running similar times and ET's in the 1/4 mile.

...And I still think that 13,000 rpm is an urban legend.

This is a good thread though...

Ian

 

This is what I've heard about the yamaha's revving capability...it can hit 10,000 RPM once. It can rev straight up to 8500 RPM every day w/o trouble but anything mroe than that is getting risky and bringing it to 10000 RPM is about as far as any yamaha 3.0 or 3.2 will go. The best thing to is that unlike a lot of cars that rev that high, the SHO actually is able to keep relatively good powers numbers all the way through out its rev range. However, I'd still put a VQ up against a yamaha any day. To me the VQ is superior (smoothness, power delievery, and revving capability) even without the variable intake ports. I gave the maxima some gas tonight and Im still amazed at how quickly these things rev (even with the nearly flat torque curve), and how smoothly they do it. The yamaha is great, but in my mind, its refinement (and in some ways, power delivery) is nothing in comparison to the VQ. Hence the reason why the Vq is the best V6 engine design in all automobiledom regardless of price.

 

you're comparing an engine that was built in the late 80s to an engine built in the mid-late 90s. Until the turbo 300ZX engine of the last generation model, that little yamaha motor was better than anything nissan had, by a long shot. I agree though, by today's standards, no, it isnt as good as your motors, but even up until the 4th gen maxima motor, the yamaha still would have bested anything N/A that Nissan had, and a five speed SHO can give a 4th gen maxima a good run for it's money. And BTW, I think I might take an Acura CL-S' engine before I'd take a VQ series engine

 

the 3.2 w/ 262 hp from honda is a considerably good motor, however its very peaky (typical honda powerband) and the type S's have worse problems with their trannies. I'd take a VQ over any honda motor any day. Id take it over any engine period, besides maybe the 4.4 2.8 TT by audi.

 

Cavez. Uh.. you just "claimed" the Yamaha motor will spin to 8500 rpm easy but in the next sentence you said you would rather have a VQ? I'm pretty sure a VQ couldn't safely rev that high(I HIGHLY doubt the Yamaha motor would either with any type of reliability). So the Yahama motor had 210-220 horses, reved high(as you claimed) and motor for motor, you would rather have a "lower" reving 190hp motor?

And 5.0 this. I believe C&D or R&T did a direct comparision w/ some 4-door sedans. In 1992, they compared the SHO to the Nissan VE30DE powered maxima(190 hp / 190ftlbs). The times they got were very close(I forget which was actually faster in that test) but I "think" the maxima won. This was before Nissan introduced their 190hp / 205 ftlbs 4-gen all alumninum motored maxima in 1995.

 

no...i was comparing my VQ with 222 hp vs the 3.2L yamaha. The yamaha has the capability of revving up to 8500 RPM w/o a rev limiter. Yeah reliability is reduced, but the same goes for any motor when it revs that high. Ive read off this site once before too that the VQ is capable of being revved up to 8000 RPM. So really, the yamaha and the VQ are comparable even considering the age differences and I would still take the VQ over the yamaha. But, don't get me wrong, I think the yamaha engine is still one of the best modern engines ford has ever put into any of their cars.

 

Well Honda has been reving their 4 cylinders up past 8000 rpm in their factory cars but that's not really an apples/apples comparasion.
The Yamaha sho motor was indeed sweet. I "think" I've read that Ford didn't use it in other cars because it was too expensive to manufacture. Boy, they could have used that engine in all kinds of cars if they started in 1989! Just think what the Contour could have been w/ that engine.
Honestly though. Most if not all of the "good" Ford engines are not brought here. In Europe, Cosworth powered Escort AWD, Sierra AWD rule as far as motors go. Those engines are well into the 4440hp plus range with their turbo 4 bangers.

 

If the SHO they used was an auto tranny car then I could even see a 92 maxima beating it. But if the SHO was a manual, then up until the 95 maxima there wasnt a nissan (sans 300ZX turbo) than could beat it as far as performacne goes. But even if the SHO was faster, I'm sure the maxima still won in all other categories, ergonomics, build, interior, etc.

 

The lowest 0-60 time I've seen for a VE30DE maxima in a magazine is 6.7 seconds. If this was the one test that they got that time for, I have no idea. Our VE maximas usually run about a 7.0 from what I read in the magazines. How these times compare to the auto/manual sho, I honestly have no idea.

My brother used to have a 89 manual. It was fast. Alot of torque down low.

 

yeah sho's have low end torque and good mid and upper end torque mainly because of the variable intake ports. Those make a big difference. When I drove the SHO, it was normal, like a 4th gen max up until about 3500 and then it felt almost like boost was being added. It was cool If I could find a SHO in good shape for 7,000 (like a 95) I would take it and build it up considerably. But only after I build up the soon to be two maximas.

Brad

 

 

One thing I'll say for the my stock '94 SHO. It felt more stable at 120mph than my stock 2K3 Maxima. The other night I was going at it with this late model Prelude and had to fall back at around 110-115. The car was way too floaty and unstable. He kept pullin'.

 

My old SHO (1990 MTX)hit rev limiter at 7200rpm. Damn good motor! Car was a blast to drive.

Mild SHO dyno run
Looks much better than the VQ

Quote from SHO Shop:
"Over the years, there has been a lot of speculation with the regard to the origin and capabilities of the SHO engine. Looking back at the 11 years since the engine introduction to the world, we can confirm some rumors and dispel others.

The SHO engine is not based on a Formula 1 prototype. The SHO will only rev to 12,500 rpm once and it will not last 300,000 miles. On the other hand, it is a very good design with a strong rotating assembly where the crankshaft and connecting rods are forged, and the pistons are high-quality castings. The cylinder heads feature exceptional airflow. Achieving 100 hp per liter is possible in street trim.

The engine is built, as you are probably aware of, by Yamaha of Japan. Each engine was shipped completely assembled to Atlanta, where it was installed. Among its unique features were solid cams, a dual-stage intake manifold, and a distributorless (DIS) ignition. Two versions were produced. All of the 5-speed (MTX) SHOs came wit ha 3.0L (3.5" bore with 3.15" stroke) version rated at 220 hp and 200ft.lbs of TQ at the flywheel. The Automatics (ATX) came with a 3.2L (3.62" bore with 3.15" stroke) version rated at 220 hp and 215ft.lbs. of TQ at the converter."

Mark

 

Where is this 8500 and now 8000 rpm number coming from? They are rev limited to 7200; they stop making power somewhere around 6800 rpm. Even if we had the oppurtunity to rev that high, there isn't any point. Personally I feel that the Nissan motors are strong and well made but insofar as having a motor comparable to the SHO motor regarding "new technology" the 3.5L motor with variable valve timing is the one worth making a comparison to. Yes, its 2002 now and the 3.5L Max motor is far better than the SHO motor, BUT I am making the point that the 3.5L is to the current market what the SHO motor was back when it was introduced in late 1988 as an 89 model.

Ian

 

95 5 speed posted for sale in NJ for 4500 the other day.. I'll sell you my 93 5 speed for 7 grand

Ian

 

okay,

here's my take on the sho thing. if the sho came out today, it would still be competitive, but nothing special. but, it was a totally awesome engine for it's time. i too had a chip (lpm) in my car to raise the rev limiter. car will do 8k easily, but it is kind of pointless as you are not making any power up there.

as far as POS slow shos. as typical of domestic (and especially taurus) resale. well, there is no resale. lol! so every dip **** kid gets one b/c you can find a beater for 600-1000 dollars.

well, there's a reason they are so cheap. they're shot to hell and are clinging to life itself.

here's an example. my car is a 1992 5 speed SHO. i bought the car with 62,500 miles in 1999. the car was never beaten on. bought by a 70 year old man, then a nurse's car. it never missed an oil change or a 60k service. had full service records.

i have never reved past 3k for a good 15-20 minutes til the car the engine oil warms up.

so, not to jinx myself (it is still a ford ;-), the engine is still very healthy at nearly 119K on the clock. i dynoed it a little over a month ago. here are my numbers from my car:

210.5 HP and 196.4 lbs/torque to the wheels. still had 197 HP to the wheels at 7300 rpms redline. not bad considering minimal bolt on mods (listed in my sig). goes to show you that a well maintained SHO can still throw down some power.

problem is the added 300 some odd pounds compared to similar year maximas. shos may have more power, but with the added weight, open dif, it just spins with out drag radials.

as far as modded shos. friend dynoed 255 HP to the wheels with a sho shop built n/a 3.2L . a silver state national race car dynoed 521 HP to the wheels with an 18 psi vortech blower on a built engine.

i will say this, i probably couldn't hang with a solid 2k2 maxima from launch. torque and an lsd must be nice.

that's all for now

 

two words:
3.2 and Quaife

First thing I am gonna do when mine are in is go hunting for some 3.5L Maximas. I'll probably have SHOshop stage 1 cams for added security.

Ian