SVT Lightning, Taurus SHO, Mark VII LSC

[Chad1987]

The Marauder is my first Ford love, but I've recently been having a love affair with the SVT Lightning, 1st and 2nd gen Taurus SHO and the Mark VII LSC Lincolns.

The Lightning is just an epic badass truck, whether it's in the 351 form or the supercharged 5.4 form. The early model followed the 454SS, but it was better balanced and just as quick and I believe much rarer. Neither of these are vehicles I'm considering getting (right now anyways), as I'd have to sell the Marauder to make space for it, but I just wanted to show them some love. Has anyone owned a Lightning?

The Taurus SHO is a possible replacement for my daily driver '91 LeSabre. I like the idea of a fairly large front wheel drive sedan for tearing through the snow, but the SHO is a lot of fun to drive, with one of the hottest V6's available in the early '90s, attached to a reliable, modestly priced sedan. A good one can be had for less than $4000. Are the Yamaha-tuned engines pretty reliable? The last thing I'd want is a money pit daily driver.

And the Mark VII LSC would be a possible replacement for the '91 LeSabre, but it's going to have a much nicer, more comfortable interior than either that or the SHO and have the wonderful, old school HO 5.0 (with that AOD that I hate so much), it's the best looking of the two with sharp handling and smooth ride provided by the air suspension. But, it's RWD, so naturally not as good in the snow as the SHO or LeSabre. But, what if I put a real good set of snow tires on it?

Let me know your thoughts! Who's owned a SHO, Lightning or Mark VII?

[STEPS]

I had a 2004 lightning loved that pickup

[mossiehorn]

snow tires and some brains are all you need. The boss lady drives her Town Car in all kinds of snow with no problems.

[MrBluGruv]

Are the Yamaha-tuned engines pretty reliable? The last thing I'd want is a money pit daily driver.


I don't remember which generation it was of the SHO, but I remember reading about some sort of cam problem with one of those motors. It could become a big deal if not properly addressed, iirc.

You'd probably bring up results quickly enough doing a google search for something like "SHO cam welding" or something like that, just to be sure.

[lji372]

Passed one up last year and am still kicking myself :lol: NOT (funny that is!)

[LOWBUCKMM]

I don't remember which generation it was of the SHO, but I remember reading about some sort of cam problem with one of those motors. It could become a big deal if not properly addressed, iirc.

You'd probably bring up results quickly enough doing a google search for something like "SHO cam welding" or something like that, just to be sure.

It's the late 90's SHO with the v8 in them that have the cam problems. The stock cams are to soft and around 100k the lobes start to round out.

The early 90's SHO are great cars. Just as long as some routine work have been done to them they are very reliable cars. I had a 92 with 153k and the friend drove it till almost 190k with very little problems. And then even come with 5speeds if that's you're cup o tea.

[Blk Mamba]

I've been looking for either a Saleen Harley Davidson, or a Rousch Nitemare, both are rare but I can wait till I find the right one. The wife has been after me to buy a truck ever since I bought her a Super crew Lariat a year and a half ago, so I might as well get what I want. The local dealer has 3 black SHO's on the lot, 2 new, and 1 the service managers demo, they are a little rich for my blood though.

[gdsqdcr]

89-95 SHO's are pretty solid. There was a ford branded as a SHO from 96-98, but it was a SHO - no Yamaha motor, just Yamaha parts.

The 89-95 did have some failure points, like all cars do. From what I recall, drove them 15 years, rod bearings. Replace them with clevites(?) now. When they fail, new motor time. Crank position sensor should be part of your 60K service along with your water pump. They sit right below the water pump and if they get wet, they fail. Weak differential when you are doing mulitiple burnouts.

I think the cars are a lot of fun to drive. They are a sleeper ... No one expects a Taurus to pull low 14 quarter miles. And when you drop it in second, go go go you will!

Check out shoforum.com. Just like us, they have some stupid people, but the majority over there is pretty awesome.

[RoyLPita]

I had a 1987 LSC. I would have kept it longer if it didn't rust from the top down.

[Bigdogjim]

First gen Lightning are gas hogs, 2nd gen had issues with the S/C till '03-'04..

[L.Mark]

Have a '92 LSC Deep Jewel Green and it's awesome in the snow. Give it the right amount of gas and you don't even have to use the steering wheel. As for the ride and 5.0 HO..nothing better than a 302 IMO with the air ride. If I had the money I'd transplant the new 5L into the Marauder. My Mom bought an identical '92 in white. Hers only has 103,000. She loves it. Only downfall is the extra electronics like the trip computer(which isn't needed) and the moonroof gasket. Had mine since '97. Second owner and bought her from the original lot with a mere 62,000 miles. Now has 175,000 and still kicking like a big dog, growl and rumble all. Love these cars.:D:D:DIf you want more umf try to get the '88-89's. Heard they have alittle more in them. I believe Ford did some bad MoJo on the 90-92s.

[71cyclone]

mark VII LSC 1987 / Great car, I mis- it Champagne metallic , Sun Roof ,phone , sound system, loaded . Im lookin for another one...

[Chad1987]

Is the AOD a bad transmission? I've driven a few Mark VII LSCs and always hated how long it took the AOD to downshift. It seemed like it was really holding the acceleration back.

The toughest thing about the Mark VII is the driver's seat. They're a very comfy seat, but they're all torn up now...

[99SVT]

RWD is bad in the snow??? I've never owned a vehicle that doesn't have RWD. Just get winter tires, and you'll be fine.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/03/18/uba8u4e4.jpg

Sent from my LT15a using Tapatalk 2

[L.Mark]

The '90-92 seats aren't as bad because they aren't as contured. The pre 90s seat had a rather big side bolster that you nearly had to jump over not to tear up. The later ones were almost flat. I prefer the early ones which is why I replaced the original ones and added seats out of an '88. They keep you in place MUCH better...and look better since they even had the extra leg bolster in the front that was adjustable.

[2,4shofast]

The only real weak link with the SHO's are the transmissions and clutch when you beat on them. If you just drive it to drive it you will have no problems. Other than that as long as you do the required maintenance they are a ton of fun:beer:

[CBT]

This is one badass picture. :beer:


RWD is bad in the snow??? I've never owned a vehicle that doesn't have RWD. Just get winter tires, and you'll be fine.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/03/18/uba8u4e4.jpg

Sent from my LT15a using Tapatalk 2

[MMcactusflower]

Before I got the DTR, I had a '93 Gen I Lightning with 4200 miles on it when I bought it from the original owner. It was darn near perfect. I loved that truck. The 4:11 factory rear gear was fine because of the four speed auto trans...but, the driver's seat would not go back far enough for me...it would almost hit the rear panel and was still not really back enough. Never had any issues with the "Red Rascal" other than that seat business...I did change the tires to General UHPs since the factory Firestone Firehawks were still on it and I thought better of driving them the age they were.
Like a lot of us in our past lives...I wish I had it back...but then, I would not have the DTR now.

[L.Mark]

This is one badass picture. :beer:

Yes, but is he moving or stuck???;)

[HiHoSilver]

I really love the LSC MKVIII kinda just got turned on to them

[L.Mark]

Really any of the cars on the Mark VII platform are nice cars. Mark VII, Cougar, Thunderbird. Had two XR-7's, an '88 & '87. Wish I still had the '88.:shake: My Dad has an '87 Anniversary Edition. Talk about a smooth ride and even without the HO decent performance. Not a Mark though.

[Chad1987]

Before I got the DTR, I had a '93 Gen I Lightning with 4200 miles on it when I bought it from the original owner. It was darn near perfect. I loved that truck. The 4:11 factory rear gear was fine because of the four speed auto trans...but, the driver's seat would not go back far enough for me...it would almost hit the rear panel and was still not really back enough. Never had any issues with the "Red Rascal" other than that seat business...I did change the tires to General UHPs since the factory Firestone Firehawks were still on it and I thought better of driving them the age they were.
Like a lot of us in our past lives...I wish I had it back...but then, I would not have the DTR now.

Was the Lightning or the Marauder the better handling vehicle? I'd have to imagine that the Lightning rode stiffer.

[99SVT]

Yes, but is he moving or stuck???;)

Here's a moving picture from today. Haven't been stuck in the mach 1 yet.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/03/22/hydu5yty.jpg

Sent from my LT15a using Tapatalk 2

[L.Mark]

That's cause she's RWD...oh yeah, gigidy, gigidy...:banana:

[efi4eye]

My personal opinions:

SHO - cool engine, with plenty of HP and can be had cheap. It's an old Taurus though. That's a big enough negative to me.

Mark VII - great drivetrain, cheap to maintain and repair the running gear and mechanicals. Classy car. Hard to find one that doesn't need upholstery work though, or doesn't have electrical issues.

Lightning - Very cool trucks, especially the Gen IIs. Proven drivetrains and large enthusiast community. Just don't expect to get anything close to decent gas mileage in an older or newer one

[L.Mark]

With the LSC at best you'll get 17-18mpg city. With a mix I usually got @22mpg. Would be better if not if not for knee deep in th epedal.

[L.Mark]

cheap to maintain and repair the running gear and mechanicals.

Air ride is not cheap to repair depending on what is wrong. Air shock @ $70-80. Compressor @ $600-700. Multiple sylinoids and relays, height sensors at all four wheels etc... Of course they do have kits that can remedy all that for @$400-500. I'm considering that, but my AR as of right now is full out functioning. Only had to replace (legitimately) a pass air bag.

[99SVT]

The biggest maintenance bane of the Mark VII and VIII is the air ride. Once they get on in age and mileage they turn into a major money pit. I still do like them, nice ride, very comfortable seats and V8 power.

I had a 93 Mark and an 87 Tbird turbo coupe. Nice, fun cars to drive, but by the time I got them they needed more in repairs than they they were worth to me.

I had a 96 Tbird lx as well, it was low mileage, only 3 years old at the time and served me well for 7 years as a dd. One of the most reliable cars I've owned.

Sent from my LT15a using Tapatalk 2

[L.Mark]

I gues it just depends on what you are willing to tolerate in maintainence on any car. Everybody has their limits. The good thing about the Mark VII's air ride(not sure if it holds true with the VIIIs) is it was designed for that car by Goodyear.

[Chad1987]

Is the Mark VIII a much better Mark than the VII? I mean in terms of reliability.

I'd say that the VII has a better looking exterior, with it's rigid formal lines, compared to the VIII's melted soap profile, but the VIII has a nicer interior, better performance and a better transmission.

Do they still have that major issue with the headlamps and the transmission pan not being deep enough?

[L.Mark]

I agree that the VII after all this time is classier and just plain sharper. Not being biased, cause I very nearly traded in my VII. But now when I see them they don't hold my attention as the VIIs do. I'm not familiar with any of the issue s regarding the VIIIs. All I know is when you take away all the electrical bigs that the cars has which I think stems from the era considering most of the electronics dated back to 84 and was just carried thru they are solid cars compared to the VIIIs...my opinion. Even now I wouldn't trade even steven for a comparable VIII which is faster, better interior and better ride and performance.

[efi4eye]

As far as the air ride is concerned, I would junk it as soon as it gave me issues and go with standard shocks and struts.

BTW, I have a friend with an '87 LSC with full Griggs suspension ($12K+ worth), big brakes, BBS RKs, and an EFI 408 and 6-speed going into it. Unfortunately it's been in process for about 6 years. When it's done it will be supremely badass though!

[L.Mark]

That's my game plan too, only it hasn't given me any problems to speak of(knock on wood). An air shock and a height sensor is about all. My moms '92 has only a dryer replaced.