Welcome back to Shitbox Showdown! I trust you are all well on this fine Thursday morning. Today, I’ve got two cars guaranteed to provide weekend fun – after you spend a few weekends putting them right. But first, let’s see how our “P.O.S. Blowout” went yesterday:
Wow, that Nitro couldn’t even beat out a PowerShift Fiesta. That’s saying something. And yes, I’m perfectly aware that there were better options available in this particular used car sale. And if I were actually shopping for one, those would be my choice. But for entertainment value, I think I chose correctly.
Today’s choices are both from the post-malaise late 1980s and early 1990s, when horsepower started to creep back under hoods, and American automakers discovered that there was such a thing as “handling.” Even better, manual transmissions were still de rigeur for performance cars. Both of these cars have seen better days, it’s true, but either one could still provide some cheap thrills, if you’re willing to turn a wrench or two. Let’s check them out.
1991 Ford Taurus SHO – $1,990
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter dual overhead cam V6, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Eugene, OR
Odometer reading: 45,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yes, but has been sitting, and power steering is out
Take one run-of-the-mill midsized sedan, add a high-revving engine from a company that knows a thing or two about the upper rev ranges, back it with a manual gearbox, cram it full of luxury options, and what do you get? Well, if you ask Ford, you get a BMW competitor. That might have been a bit of a stretch, but the first-generation Ford Taurus SHO was a hell of a car. Not a refined car, but it was fast (for the late ’80s), great-handling (for a Taurus), and flew so far under the radar it was practically invisible. Only a trained eye could spot the subtle differences between this and a rental-spec Taurus – until you opened the hood and saw this:
The SHO’s Yamaha-built four-cam V6, with its sinuous variable-length intake runners, is still an impressive sight today, even covered in dust and gunk from storage like this one. This engine puts out 220 horsepower, and redlines at 7,000 RPM. If you’ve never experienced one of these cars, you’re missing out. Plenty of cars are outright faster, or better handling, but the fun factor of a manual SHO is off the charts. It’s more exciting to drive than any Taurus has a right to be.
This SHO has very few miles on it, but it has been sitting for a long time, it sounds like. It runs and drives, but the power steering is kaput, and we all know how much needs to be done to a car after it comes out of long-term storage. Belts, hoses, tires, fuel, and all fluids will need to be changed. The paint and interior are also a little tired, but that just adds to the stealth factor. Refurbish it back to 100% mechanically, leave it scruffy, and go have some fun.
It’s too bad the original wheels are absent, though. And personally I’d prefer something other than refrigerator-white. But there weren’t too many SHOs to begin with, and a lot of them are gone now, so if you want one, beggars can’t be choosers when it comes to color.
1989 Chevrolet Camaro RS – $2,900
Engine/drivetrain: 5.0 liter overhead valve V8, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Silverton, OR
Odometer reading: 98,000 miles
Runs/drives? Runs great!
Yeah, yeah. I know. Go ahead; make the mullet jokes and the Dead Milkmen references. Get it all out of your system. I don’t care. I unabashedly love the third-generation Camaro. I’ve never owned one, but I’ve driven a couple, and I’m aware of all the faults and shortcomings. They rattle and squeak and they ride like ox-carts and build quality is only a suggestion. But they also handle better than you’d expect, and they make cool V8 noises – as long as you get one with a V8. And really, why wouldn’t you?
This Camaro has the least-powerful V8 available in 1989, a simple throttle-body fuel injected 305 making 170 horsepower. It’s mated to a five-speed manual, the enthusiast’s choice, but a bit rare for a Camaro. Automatics aren’t really a sin in these cars; they fit their “mash the gas and cackle maniacally” character, but the discerning F-body connoisseur demands a clutch pedal. This car is said to run and drive well.
That’s a good thing, because cosmetically, it needs some help. The seller says it’s “in the middle of restoration,” but to me it just looks worn-out. These cars are all cheap flimsy plastic inside anyway, and with the abuse they too often see, it doesn’t hold up. The seller says it comes with everything needed to fix it up, though.
Outside, it’s, well, an old Camaro. Spots of primer and Bondo are almost expected. The seller says the only real rust is in the rear hatch, and they’re including a replacement for that. With a little know-how, you could whip this thing into shape in no time. Or leave it looking as-is, and embrace the stereotypes.
Having a second “fun” car can take a lot of pressure off your daily driver. It’s hard to find one car that can get you to work reliably and economically, and also be fun to tinker with on the weekends. So why try? Get a second car. Make it something cheap, manual, and out-of-the-ordinary. Like one of these, for instance. Which one would find a home in your garage?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
Y’all been knew I’m going Camaro and driving it up from the Bahamas for some Def Leppard t shirts
I’d like to know how y’all are fixing to drive up from the Bahamas. Just sayin’.
All proceeds go to get their lead singer out of jail
I have to imagine a manual 3rd gen F body changes gear like an ancient set of railway points. Slowly and very creakily. And having owned one before, I know what utter badly packaged boats they are. I do love them but my Coors lite good old blue collar boy days are long behind me, so I’m going to go with the SHO (which I suspect is a spectacular engine and not much else…).
Ehh – the Taurus it was built around wasn’t bad, particularly for an 80’s American car. I did a lot of basic mechanic work for a lot of people in college (I had an equipped tool box, jack and jack stands). The Japanese cars were the best to work on, probably followed by Ford. GM were the worst. Compare the undercarriage of a Taurus to an early W-body GM and the difference is clear. Ford’s interior trim was FAR better as well.
I did brake jobs and oil changes. Changed out a few shocks and sway bar end links. Window regulators, lock actuators. Radio and speaker installs. Coolant changes and thermostats. Starters, alternators, belts.
That Camero looks *chef’s kiss* perfect for all manner of Florida man hijinks.
I checked the Camaro to see if it has T-tops, then I voted for it after confirming it has them. T-tops are awesome 🙂
That’s what the new ones are missing: T-TOPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That’s why people like the Camaro, but the new ones don’t have them, so they flopped.
That Camaro is in the middle of restoration the way the Parthenon is in the middle of restoration. I have a Yamaha keyboard and guitar that I like OK, so I’ll take the Ford, SHO ‘nuff.
Is that car the ugliest?
SHO Nuff!
Is the interior the rattiest?
SHO Nuff!
Is that car the shittiest mofo low down around this town?
SHO Nuff!
When I say, “Who’s the mastah?” You say, “Sho Nuff.”
RIP, Julius Carry, the Shogun of Harlem
I would totally take the SHO over the Camaro, but I couldn’t not make the joke. That’s maybe the most “if you know, you know” film I’ve ever seen
SHO, please – with a caveat.
The Camaro isn’t really in the competition here.
The Taurus is more interesting and I actually like the wheels. Give it a tasteful vinyl wrap – a metallic green would be good – and go hoon.
The caveat: this car is described as “has been sitting in a barn for a while” and yet the description says there is a lien on the title. Either that’s a mistake or there is some hinkiness afoot, but it would need to be resolved.
If the title issue became a morass, the Camaro would get the default vote, but I would be planning an engine swap ASAP and changing the wrap color to… something else.
Maybe that’s WHY it’s been sitting in a barn for a long time. Hiding from the repo man. Definitely needs to be checked out at least.
Such a tough choice. Both are calling out to me. I have done a 1995 SHO before. Wrapping one up to redline is super fun. The shifter was aweful though and felt just like a Ford Tempo or a Ford Ranger….very long and vague. As much fun as they are, if I want to be done and driving it in a few weekends, I have to go with the Camaro.
had a 1990 SHO with a 5spd, loaded, fun car. Since I have catfish Camaro, I would get another Taurus.
45K miles and an interior worn to shit like that? I call BS on that mileage, do these odometers roll over at 100K? It looks more like 250K miles on this worn out ford.
Camaro for me, much easier and cheaper to find parts.
If I wanted a fun car and had $3,000 to spend, I would get a second job and start looking when my budget was closer to $10,000. Both of these cars are going to break constantly, particularly if you intend to drive them hard (which you will, because that is the entire purpose of buying a car like one of these). Cars like these seem like a good idea, but they aren’t.
With that said, I would take the SHO. It is a far more interesting vehicle than the Camaro. A car can’t be fun to drive if it is broken, but a car can still be interesting if it is broken. I’ll take the more interesting yard ornament.
I’m going to take the recommendation of the license plate of a Ford Taurus SHO I once saw 20 years ago.
That SHO had a license plate that said “FO SHO”.
SHO NUFF if that one’s taken.
I’m going to be honest, neither one of the choices today did much for me. I’ll go with the SHO though, it looks like there’s still a little potential left in that one, and I couldn’t tell you the last time I saw that generation of Taurus, let alone a SHO. I know it would be more work but I think I’d enjoy the end product more than the Camaro.
I feel like the SHO is going to be more work because of the fact it has been sitting so long. However, I find it much more compelling and interesting. After yesterday, I’m back to liking cars, so SHO it is.
The SHO must go on. If I were in the market for a peak mullet era Camaro, I’d be looking for an IROC with the 350 V8. You’re not getting one in this price range however. Between these cars I see the SHO as a more interesting and worthwhile project.
Just throw in a lighter and more powerful LS.
SHO me the money!! Boy it looks tired for 45k but could be brough back easier than the Camaro
I’m a no-SHO. Not because these were bad cars — on the contrary, they were speedy, handled well and were generally neat pieces — but because I suspect finding parts/service for that Yamaha engine would be a chancy proposition today.
The Camaro, on the other hand, has a SBC. You can still get parts for those at AutoZone. Or throw in another one if that engine ever goes “Urp”. For other parts, I’m pretty certain the boneyards still have lots o’ Camaros sitting around.
It’s a “lesser of two mehs” choice.
My brother used to have one back in 2007. It was impossible to find parts for the engine back then, and that is what got it sent to the crusher.
Exactly. My reasoning for also choosing the Camaro.
The SHO is an amazing find … which makes me suspicious about why it’s been sitting for so long. Also, the idea of a SBC, a five-speed and rear drive is just too appealing to pass up. We’ll take the Camaro and grow out our hair.
I had a mullet in the 80’s, and they’re making a comeback!
Camaro for me!
Did you mean comb back?
I would not kick either of these out of my garage, but the Camaro has t-tops that supposedly don’t leak and a V8. I am of a certain age where these were what the cool rich kids drove when I was in school, so I have always liked them. Camaro for me.
Ford, SHO me what you got.
SHO’nuff!
There is no way in hell the interior of that SHO has only ween 45,000 miles. That said, I’ll take the Taurus. WAY cooler car unless you’re into mullets and Enuff Z’Nuff
I’ll add this about the Camaro:
“170HP” and ““mash the gas and cackle maniacally” are at odds with each other.
““170HP” and ““mash the gas and cackle maniacally” are at odds with each other.”
That’s what meth is for.
I’m biased, I daily drove a ’94 5 speed SHO for several years. LOVED that car, but it did not fit modern (2005) rear facing car seats. Sadly had to let it go. These are absolute gems.
Well shit. FORD. Never thought would be saying that. These were fun and hauled ass for 1991.
Mullet mobile is way too common and roached.
Effortless speed in these back in the day.