|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 709
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 709 |
Originally posted by SonofSHO:
Thanks for the replies, but the thread has gone astray.
I was not trying to elicit a comparison of the SHO and SVT so much as an SVT and a 2.5 MTX SE. I was just expecting more from the SVT than a few more reves and less bottom end. It seems like 25-30 hp should register in the butt dyno.
BTW, when I replace the clutch in my SHO at 134K miles it was the original small clutch. It was never replaced under the recall. SHOs are not drag cars. Drive em normal and the clutch will last as long as anything.
not true at all, there were major problems with clutches on that car for a lot of people. My brothers [censored] the bed at 25k and ford [censored] him over on it
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
Originally posted by TJSwoboda:
Don't get an automatic Zetec. 
Yeah, reliability and good gas mileage sucks!!!! (Just talking about the zetec, though cd4e is ok too if treated rite) Really you could have said a bunch of cars not just auto zetec. STupiddd commments.
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,838
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,838 |
Originally posted by JasonJ:
yeah, they E1 (1998.5-2000) = 200 hp. the E0 (1998) =195
Despite the fact that the '98.5 SVT is considered an E1 , only '99 & '00 SVTs had 200 hp  .
~~~~~~~ Phil
Black & Tan 2000 SVT Contour #2137 of 2150
35,000 miles & counting !
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by SonofSHO:
The SVT was a little dissapointing. It was butter smooth and wound willingly to the rev limiter, but it did not have much torque anywhere and needed to be wrung out to feel like it was moving.......... the torqueir SE felt much stronger, although was done by 6.5K RPM. It just seemed ike the SVT would HAVE to be kept buzzing in normal driving, which could get old.
That is what you should feel.
Due to its more agressive cam profile, the SVT motor gives up some torque below 5000 rpm to be able to make more above it. The SE has a fatter torque curve for around town driving. The SVT is also a little heavier than the SE and will feel slower than the SE until it's wound up above 5000 rpm.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 109
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 109 |
Originally posted by SonofSHO:
I was not trying to elicit a comparison of the SHO and SVT so much as an SVT and a 2.5 MTX SE. I was just expecting more from the SVT than a few more reves and less bottom end. It seems like 25-30 hp should register in the butt dyno.
The torque figures are virtually the same for the SVT and the SE engines. Torque is what you feel first when you punch it, so yes, what you are experiencing when comparing the two is consistent with the numbers. The SVT ultimately does outrun the SE in both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, but you have to rev the SVT engine to get there.
Lee K
98 SVT Contour, silver (sold after 7 years and 100K miles)
03 Lancer Evolution, red
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 63
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 63 |
OK, thanks. I see why the 3.0 liter block is a popular mod.
Merry Christmas!
Carl
2000 Black CSVT #415
89 SHO (RIP)
75 280z
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693 |
I suspect that the SVT has a few cobwebs in the engine and needs to have a good blowing out along with a decarbon and some injector cleaning.
From my experience, when an SVT is running right, it's performance is very close to the SHO. In fact it will outrun a poorly maintained SHO.
You should feel very comfortable in an SVT in a very short time.
Jim Johnson
98 SVT
03 Escape Limited
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100 |
I concur with Jim.. A properly maintained SHo will outrun the SVT, but not enough to "BLOW IT AWAY"...
Take your run of the mill SHO on the streets, and you'll fare "avg" in a number of encounters.. Not to say you will win more than you lose, but you will be avg, or above.. as long as you can launch your SVT anywhere better than average.
Ray
'99 CSVT - Silver #222/276
In a constant state of blow-off euphoria.
Originally posted by Kremitthefrog:
I like to wear dresses and use binoculars to watch grandmas across the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 807
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 807 |
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Yeah, reliability and good gas mileage sucks!!!! (Just talking about the zetec, though cd4e is ok too if treated rite) Really you could have said a bunch of cars not just auto zetec. STupiddd commments.
Okay, I'll expand my comment: Don't get any four banger with an automatic. 
--T.J.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
Originally posted by TJSwoboda:
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Yeah, reliability and good gas mileage sucks!!!! (Just talking about the zetec, though cd4e is ok too if treated rite) Really you could have said a bunch of cars not just auto zetec. STupiddd commments.
Okay, I'll expand my comment: Don't get any four banger with an automatic.
--T.J.
How bout this... don't get anything with an automatic (unless it's a helluva car that only comes with auto). 
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
