Return of the SVO?
 

I was surprised about three weeks ago when, out of nowhere, this photo of a 1984 SVO appeared on the Ford media site. Why would they have one photo, and no accompanying article, for a 25-year old car?

Today, Garage419 is reporting that Ford is considering an SVO revival, with a 300-hp Ecoboost four cylinder engine mated to a six-speed transmission in a car weighing as much as 500 pounds less than a GT.

Interesting. Now is this an SVO or standard V6 replacement?

Like it or not I'm thinking by 2014 will see this line up.

Base: Turbo I4
GT: Twin Turbo V6
Boss: 5.0L V8
Shelby: Twin Turbo 5.0L V8

Both Ford and GM have mentioned that they have plans for bringing small displacement engines (mainly 4 cyl) back into a front and center position in their line-ups. I know GM stated recently that they will be bringing a 4 cyl. to the Camaro, and I believe I read that Ford was talking dual-turbo 4 cyl. engines to replace even some 8 cyl. applications. The technology is there, and now with the added pressure from rising fuel prices, more people are likely to consider a smaller engine with forced induction as a "reasonable" alternative to a big V8 or V10.
Me? I still love my V8's thank-you but.....I guess you should never say never, huh?

So are we talking similar power potential of an SRT4(ie 4 cyl turbo 3200 lbs give or take)?

An SVO would be really cool, but I think it'd be awkward in a different body style. :dunno: And a non-V8 GT is just plain wrong. :screwy:

From what I have seen forced induction turbo or blower leads to poor mileage either way. Look at the new WRX/STI or the EVO they get about the same fuel economy as 4.6 V8......... I like the idea of a 300HP 4 banger but is it really gonna be much better on gas? In my opinion a regular I4 in the base Mustang will do fine. For the most part base model Mustang owners are more interested in looks over performance.

From what I understand the EcoBoost engines are low boost. less than 5 psi. While the EVO and WRX's are pushing close to 15 psi. Also, when cruising on the highway, the turbos are essentially off.

I think I see where your are going. I saw several Mustangs get walked by a couple of SRT-4s at US41 strip a month ago. I would really like the idea if the mustang was as easy and, especially, as cheap to mod as the SRT-4 was. I wouldn't mind running thirteens and driving home on the same tank of gas.:nice:

Think about what you just said. (taking aside the fact that these cars a priced $10K above the standard mustang)

The two cars you just mentioned are both all wheel drive (enemy of mpg), they both have three, count them three differentials, the center of which is electronically controlled to adjust distribution, both have four doors, four sets of power window. In short they turn twice as many wheels (four times as many if you consider the standard open diff on the V6), they have three time the number of diffs they have to hawl around, all the computer and motors to control all that electrical stuff, two more doors. Technologically these cars make the mustang look like a model T, but use the engine tech and mate that with a mustang set up and you could have a 300 HP 3300lb rocket on your hands.

What is sad is that even with all that stuff they are lugging, the V6 mustang is still heavier. So is the weight in the engine or in the car?

BUT! FORD IF YOU ARE READING THIS, FOR ALL THAT IS SACRED AND HOLY, PLEASE DO NOT PUT AN OPEN DIFF ON THIS VEHICLE!

We will see some incremental improvements in MPG from the domestics. They have to, in order to keep the regulatory dogs off their heels. But no matter what, if you want more power, you gotta move more air and more fuel. We can maximize efficiency, but there's still no free lunch.

A physically smaller, lighter engine always helps. But I admit, I would have a hard time getting used to a screaming blown 4-banger sound coming from a Mustang. I have marched too far towards coot-dom to accept that.

To me, a Mustang GT just has to have a V8 under the hood.

But I am thinking the day is coming when it won't.

Hey...

Take it from an SVO owner that this car would be very well received. There's an abundance of die-hard SVO owners out there (http://www.svoca.com) that would gladly pay any ADM without question.

Also remember that the original SVO is/was all about handling as well. The original used Lincoln LSC components. Maybe this will be a Cobra with a hot I4; at least that's my hope.

In any event, this would be an SE (yes, I believe it will be a Special Edition) with good timing. My '86 is silver, but I'll take my 201? in black.:)

The Higher the Price at the Pump the More Accepting Attitudes are becoming for Non V-8's! I guess I will go out with a Bang! Due to Slow Car Sales and the High Cost of Doing Business as of Today I am Commuting in my Gt-500. 1 hour Drive both ways. I lost the Company Truck I had enjoyed for 9 years. I suppose I could Sell the Shelby and get something More Fuel Efficient,NOT!

KC

Stainless Steel Brakes Corporation
 

had the Mustang SVC at SEMA in 2006

http://www.ssbrakes.com/graphics/veh...4/IMG_0699.JPG
http://www.ssbrakes.com/graphics/veh...4/IMG_0704.JPG
http://www.ssbrakes.com/graphics/veh...4/IMG_0710.JPG

it would still be expensive...no way it stays under 20K

Brings up a good point. Will these EcoBoost motors be forged? If they are that will surely bring up the price a bit. Maybe not a lot since they are mainstream.

I hope it doesnt have the lima engine.:jester:

Regarding the price of a GTDi 4 cylinder Mustang, assuming the motor is a mainstream piece it shouldn't cost any more to produce than a 3.5L DOHC six equipped Mustang, and potentially wouldn't cost as much. I say this because a turbo four is typically a cheaper engine to produce than is a six even when the latter is naturally aspirated so long as production volume and tech are reasonably similar. And even if the GTDi four is question uses a forged crankshaft, the reality is that the 3.5L Duratec does too and as that is the most likely alternative for Mustang duty this doesn't work in the six pots favor. Outside of that variable a turbo four is typically a cheaper engine to produce than is a six even when the latter is naturally aspirated so long as production volume and tech are reasonably similar.

The more I think about this the more I cannot get around the fact that the SVO was the coolest, non V8 Mustang ever produced by some margin. A revived model would be loved for all the same reasons that car is, so in the great turbo four versus V6 debate I think I'm leaning back toward the GTDi 4 side.

Maybe a turbo 4 wouldn't be such a bad idea........... I think I found my new daily driver sorry guys it's a chevy.
The 2008 260HP turbo 4 SS Cobalt. Why can't Ford make a Focus like this?!? i'd buy one if they did.

Price As Tested $23,490 MPG 22 city/30 highway/26.0 average 0–60 mph 5.5 sec. Slalom 72.4 mph Quarter Mile 14.0 sec. @ 101.8 mph Skidpad 0.92g 60–0-mph Braking 117 ft.

Why won't Ford make a Focus like that? Because buyers rather have a Focus with Sync than a Focus with a turbo. Focus buyers aren't into performance. Seems like they rather have techno gadgets and MPG rather than horsepower and cornering ability. It has shown recently with the boom of Focus sales.

Now that I look closer!!:jester:

Whoa, just like KITT.

You MIGHT be surprised by that. I get calls WEEKLY from Focus owners looking for a turbo kit for their car. I have requested that our R&D department look into development of a kit.

Seeing that yanking the 4.6 V8 out of a S197 Mustang and leaving a gaping hole in the engine bay would save only 460 lbs, I'd like to know where that 500 lb weight loss is going to come from.

If they do this and stay true to the original it would be sweet. Lighter, better brakes, better handling(IRS?). That SVC Stang didn't really impress me.

personally i think the gt should have 2 models if possible V8 and TT V6 because well..there just should be lol

and topnotch, a turbo button? lol

Well i'm a buyer (that wants to buy a Ford) and I think Ford should infuse some high performance in their cars. It seems that anything outside the Mustang in Ford's lineup is dull and boring. Sync can be put in a turbo focus or fusion. As far as MPGs go the SS Cobalt has very good MPG numbers for a powerful motor, probably better than Ford's new 3.5 V6. Focus sales are up because it is a compact, trust me the focus isn't the only compact selling better than usual. The Honda Civic overtook the Toyota Camry as the best selling car in the country. It's kinda funny how when the Focus first came to the states it was admired as a fun, sporty euro car now its got a totaly different character. The original Focus was used in rally racing across the world wouldn't that mean that Focus buyers like performance.

Bring on a new SVO!

So where's the 6.2L that's announced to be out by then?

I disagree. The Turbo 4 GTs in the 1980s were anything but wrong.

Yes.

They cancelled the 6.2 as far as the Mustang goes. It will be F series and E series only.

I would buy one.
 

If the NEW turbo inline 4 SVO Mustang comes out hundreds of pounds lighter than the current GT, in the 300+ horsepower range and set up with a handling suspension, (Talk about well balanced) and not over the top BLING (no tall wings or huge nonfunctional scoops), I would buy one.

:nice:

That is provided the new body and styling changes don't miss the mark.

Me too...

But comparing the weight of say a fox body Mustang (no I don't want another) to the S197's I would really like to know exactly where all that extra weight is coming from?

I like my S197's so much I'll take them complete with all the weight, I would still like to know where it is, and where some of it could be removed/reduced...

:)

Maybe a pie chart of each, a fox body Mustang & a S197...

body/
front suspension/
front brakes/
rear suspension/
rear brakes/
rear end/
engine/
transmission/
front fenders/
hood/
bumpers/
sound deadening/
carpet & headliner/
seats/
dash & interior panels/
etc...

:dunno:

Well here's my question, is Ford ditching the EcoBoost V6 TT, or is the EcoBoost TT 4 banger just going to be another option, in addition to the TT V6 :dunno:

You guys can sense it huh? With oil companies absolutely raping us everyday, you guys can smell it in the air. The return of the "Beast Master"! Something wicked this way comes, producing 35mpg and sporting a 9in rear-end with a 6spd transmission.

The Mustangs last stand and return of the Mustang SVO! Inline DOHC 4 cylinder twin turbo targeting the Corvette ZR1! With no Gas Guzzler tax!:nice:

Lets grab some popcorn and sit back a watch Ford shock the world!

Come save us oh mighty Mustang SVO! Your time has come! :metal:

I have both cars and drive each regularly. I need to say that there's a huge difference between the two.

Compaired to the S197, the Svo is as sure-footed as the GT, but I don't think it's better, and the ride is rough. Even w/the GT lowered with the FRPP springs, it still rides better.

As for the S197; I can't see where the weight savings is coming from. Smaller engine w/rear seat delete? Who knows.

If they make another SVO, it will be very different from the original and much like the Bullitt and California Special. It will carry the name in spirit only. Keep in mind that it can be anything Ford wants it to be.

EB Six would take over most V8 duty, with mild boost the I4 would take over for normal sixes. But with a more aggressive boost/tune, the I4 could get to V8 territory.

ya supersugeknight look at a forum like focus fanatics. there are turbo focuses with almost 400whp. also look at how many people autocross and drag race those things

A S197 is longer, wider & taller than a Fox all of which means more weight.
The unibody of a S197 is about 3 times stiffer in bending & twisting than a Fox unibody which requires more steel.

In addition a S197 has far more safety equipment. Things like the latest side impact regulations which make the door beams much larger and require more metal in the sides of the unibody all add weight.

That's a bummer.

Like V10 said, the Fox platform is a smaller, more flimsy car and the S197 has more gadgets in it. I'm all for making the Muistang smaller than it currently is, and that would cut some weight.

The DOHC motors have a really hard time spooling up and making power down low. I know some Focus and Supra guys and that's their biggest complaint. They envy the low end torque that the 2.3L lima makes and wish they had that. I know the DOHCs flow better and all, but you have to zing them to make any power. They're super doggy off the line, even with the twin turbos.

Yeah, there's a ton of those guys on there. I personally know xp0s3d and his is pretty nice.

+1. Next to the S197, driving the Fox is like driving a tin can.

To me Mustang and V8 sound go hand and hand. I think the turbo four is a cool option but the V8 has to be in the lineup. If not I'd just get the new 370z or G37.

Yes, without a doubt Ford does need a competitive V8 platform. Like 5.0L and above.. However, it would be nice to have options. From the 2.3L Inline 4, to the new V6TT setups.. I think the 2.3L inline 4 engine has been seriously overlooked bad by all Mustang enthusiast. A platform and a factory block capable of producing over 1000HP is incredible for the 2.3L I4. I really can't understand why guys who race at the drag strip have ignored this powerhouse motor which really saves a weight.

You would think there should be more people into this particular motor. It sounds **** good making 1000HP.. Again I post the video.. When running a 9 sec ET, sounds very romantic to me. LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afUar...eature=related

Ford needs to mate this motor, or similar motors to the S197 platform in updated trim, and let Mustang owners decide how they will use them. I would definitely buy a 2.3L I4 S197 Mustang without a doubt.

Some wouldn't go near it. However, thats whats nice about choice. I just don't think we should all be limited to only 1 or 2 engine platforms. Variety is the spice of life! Imagine an S197 with an I4 Turbo making 600RWHP. Which can be done no problem. It would be faster than a S197 Mustang with a V8 with 600RWHP based on weight alone. Considering they had identical suspension and tire setups..

Also bpmurr, I would never even consider paying my money for a Nissan 370 or Infinity G35 over a 2.3L I4 S197 Mustang Turbo..

That motor will pound those cars easily.. Those motors in those cars could never dominate the 2.3L.

However, I am on my 6th Mustang and the only one not to be a V8. To me it goes much deeper than engine size. The V8's sound good, but I would never consider bailing out on the Mustang platform if the V8 platform was canceled, which would never happen..

Lets see

1984 GT350
1988 Mustang Saleen #635
1993 Mustang Cobra
1995 Mustang GT
1964 1/2 289 Hi-Po 4spd
2005 Mustang V6 Turbo

So as you can see I'm in it for the long haul! Call me a loyalist! LOL!

For my next fix, I am looking for a factory V6TT or I4 Turbo. Just waiting patiently.

Well said. Alot of people don't remember "big block" cars either. In comparison, the 4.6 is a toy to the 390 cid + cars back in the day.

The car will continue to evolve as needs dictate. If I end up with a 2011 GT with an I4 turbo, I hope it kicks butt.

LOL! The truth is a very painful sometimes.. To witness a small bit of truth this video is very harsh, but must be watched in order to grasp the concept. A 2.3L against a mighty 4.6L with a Procharger!

This video is even hard for me to watch.. LOL! It just goes to show, that "All Mustangs are created Equal". Do not discriminate based on the number of cylinders. Just trust that Ford knows what they are doing..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avs5Q...eature=related

As much as I've tried to forget it, I still remember the 390. Today's toy 4.6 Mustang is faster than a '60s 390 Mustang. And unlike the 60s 390, today's 4.6 toy runs for 10s of thousands of miles without any maintanence other than oil changes.

http://jalopnik.com/397811/ford-to-b...-four+cylinder

Just found this.

hmm...we'll see...and i wonder how much...

Not sure why we must wait until 2010. Ford needs to make a move quick.

We need the SVO now. Ford needs to re-tool the GT500 assembly line to start rolling off SVO's as soon as possible.

At the Ford dealership in my area, there are roughly (20) GT500's sitting on the lot. Delaying things out to 2010 could be an absolute tragedy for Ford!

So true. I was watching a Mustang special on Speed. The '69 428 CJ was rated at 370 hp. Roughly 25% more than the current 4.6, while being about 160 ci larger. The 390 was rated at 335hp. Technology sure has moved forward.

Ford has never had perfect timing. I assume that '09's are already available and that this ('09) model year is already cast in stone. I also hope they had enough sense to stop GT500 production (since there not flying off the showroom floor).

Well, I dont mean to start an argument, but the 428 cj was underrated. the real hp numbers were well over 400. They down-played it for insurance purposes.

I heard that as well. But since there's no "real" rating, I qouted factory spec.

I hope the new Mustang SVO (if there is one) works out well for Ford. I can say I'm not the least bit interested in a turbo 4-banger though.

Although I am a V8 Man, I have always admired the SVO Mustang. I preferred its styling over the GT's.
I think its a great idea, as long as its affordable and doesn't help kill-off my V8's.

I also like the idea of a TTV6, although I am still praying for a 400hp V8.

As for the Focus? Sooner or later there has to be a performance model. But, its not a priority at this stage.

Rumors of a Fusion coupe are interesting, especially if they make a performance model.

I think that this turbo 4 is of huge importance to Ford. As long as the SVO gets the same performance as the current GT and costs about the same with big fuel savings I'd say its a home run. The thing I hope is that Ford starts using this turbo 4 in their entire lineup. I think Porsche, Audi, and Subaru have proven how useful a turbo 4 or 6 can be. Personally I think forced induction smaller motors is the future of all performance cars in a couple years.

I tend to agree with the last statement.

That's where the direct injection comes in. Lots of torque down low.

A good set of gears wouldn't hurt either; maybe even a 6 speed to keep mileage up as well.

Also, modern turbos spool very quickly. Especially if we are talking only 5-10 psi. My previous Eagle talon TSi AWD (Garrett T25 [very small] Turbo) spooled to 1 Bar (14.7 psi) by 2800 rpm, that meant full torque at 2800 rpm and it held it there to nearly 5500 before dropping off. To me 2800 is definitely still low end torque. I don't know what the sterotype is based on but it is definietly wrong. My guess is that it is based on racers that us T66 or larger turbos with housings and impellers that are as big as your head, but a simple small T25 will have no problem boost 5-10 psi in the early 2000 rpm range and hit nearly 15 psi (if for choses to boost that high) before 3000 rpm. Many modded supras have been converted from twin sequential turbos to one T66, thus the stigma of
"doggy" off the line, but the stock sequentials handled that real well with the first turbo spooling low end and the second picking up for high end, it was definitely not "doggy".

Those who claim they are "V8 guys" and wouldn't like a turbocharged 4 cylinder have never driven an SVO...."I" am a V8 guy too....but I also own a couple SVO's and each car does something different for me....but I've had more people ask about the "V8" in my SVO when they heard it idle than I can remember and nearly 400RWHP and 29mpg(with your foot out of it of course) is nothing to blow off I can assure you ;).

The SVO is a far better balanced car than ANY other Fox Mustang out there...with some modifications it just can't be beat. Compared to the new GT500(I've driven both on track) the SVO feels like a nimble go cart while the GT500 felt heavy and "fluffy" to me...the GT500 took everything I threw at it but it just feels heavy and after getting out of it and back into my SVO, the SVO felt even more nimble and better handling....of course there was probably at least a 1500lb difference between the two cars.

If Ford builds an SVO then I may just be a player for one if they do it right....and it's time is here...you CAN make power out of forced induction smaller displacement engines....you can't duplicate Big Block torque but the V8 Mustang doesn't have a big block anymore anyway compared to the past.

Ford in Australia is already producing and selling V6 Turbos in their FPV family...so the technology for the V6 is already there and proven...they just need to bring it over here and then improve on it a little more.

This I can vouch for :D. Whatever Ford does, I hope they keep the "spirit" of the original. If they do, it will be a fine car.

Paul do you have any videos of your SVO? I'd love to hear how they sound.

Bout time somebody stepped up and told the truth about the SVO! LOL!
I like the part about 400RWHP and 29mpg! Thats called taking care of business! Nice job SVOPaul!
Yeah be nice if Ford would hold a dinner party and tell everyone that the new SVO is in the works!

Got any pics of the 400RWHP SVO you wouldn't mind posting for us?:grin:

I wish I had a video of the exhaust but I never did that....I recently changed the exhaust from the MAC Flowpaths on my teal car to a set of Powertones which I like much better...quieter and better sound IMO. Currently I have the turbo off my teal SVO for an upgrade(bigger) but once I get the turbo back and on I'll take a video of the car.

The red/yellow SVO made 386RWHP on a Dynojet chassis dyno....both cars have nearly identical engine combos with the difference being the turbochargers....the race car currently uses a FAST engine managment system while the teal car currently has the stock PE computer but I have an SDS stand alone engine management system for it if I decide to go that route. The injectors in the red car are a bit big I think so I am going to address that in the future. The drivetrain in my teal car was in another SVO which was the white comp prep on the cover of the Nov. '99 MM&FF and at that time it was a 2.3 and not the 2.5 it is today and with a 75 shot went 11.70 at 116mph.....it no longer uses the NOS but is now a stroker and the turbo is FAR better than what was on it at that time. Power in the teal car is an educated guess at the moment based on the numbers the red car put down and the changes I am making. Both cars aside from the race trim have nearly identical setups except the red car has 4.30 gears(which is too much really) and the teal car runs 4.10 gears.

The teal car also gets that great gas mileage with 4.10 gears and a V8 T5 tranny. :D

The race car has a single exhaust with a Borla muffler and as such does not have the same V8 tone that the teal car has with the duals but it still sounds good. At some point I'll dig that one out of the showroom and get a video of the exhaust note on that one too.

Thanks.....I got 29mpg on a trip to Florida in the teal one last time I had it on a road trip....the red one really isn't a street car and I have never measured mpg in it.

There is just one problem, the Cobalt is no a bad looking car where the Focus is BUTT ugly. A friend of mine has a G6 GT and I took it for a drive. That thing is NICE. Fit a finnish is very good, the interior feel is very HQ, and it has good Performance. Pontiac devision is getting it together FoMoCo needs to make a hot looking focus that feels very HQ.

Also, I am as non-RICER as many of you but If ford made a car that could compete with a WRX or an EVO in handling and performance but had Muscle car feel and styling they would really have something to stand up in the currant market. SVT was a affordable upgrade version of FORD, now it is more of a rich mans only club.
I would love to see a FUSION SVT and a replacement for the ZX3 SVT.

I agree, the Focus is horrendous. The Cobalt with the two circle tail lights isn't bad looking, but it would look better with the Pontiac nose.

If they made the Focus worth looking at... you can convert it to RWD, so why not AWD? The rally cars are and I believe the Volvo version of it has the option.

Ford did this WAY back in 1985 but in Europe with the Escort RS200....an unbelievable car.....The only one I have seen in person is in Las Vegas in one of the Casinos that has a car museum(can't remember the name off hand). If Ford had only kept up with this and evolved it through today I can't imagine what kind of beast we would have available!

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/EDITORIA...HAT/30514.html

Group B race cars :hail:

Very nice!! Thanks for posting the pics SVOPaul!! I love the blue one, its perfect! Nice wheels too!:metal:

So the red&yellow one is strictly your race track car?

Please do. My car came w/Supertrapps. While they sound ok, I would really like to upgrade.

Thanks for the great heads up, Moose :nice:

Sync ? :drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool::drool:: drool::drool::drool::drool:

My guess? Probably not; and you won't have cup holders either. The SVO was a purpose built automobile. Outside of A/C and an AM/FM cassette, there is nothing in the car that can be a distraction while driving.

While I'm impressed with the SVO drag cars, The car was designed to run against Porsche in trans-am style racing. I've read accounts that a Porsche team's drivers, were ordered to "take them out", because they (the SVO) were winning.

Thanks, Yes...while the red one can be driven on the street(and I have ;)) it has Kumho Race tires on it so it's not a purpose built street car like the teal one is. The red one also has no A/C and no radio.

I really like both of your cars svopaul :metal::drool:
I don't really care for the # of cylinders on a car. There are many cars with 4 and 6 cylinders that can give a V8 a run for it's money.
I would be really interested if Ford offered an SVO again. As it was posted before, they were underrated. With today's technology in forced induction and engine management (like the Mazdaspeed3) it would be a real performer, with good mileage. That is the only part of my Mustang that really sucks :bad:
I've only driven a V6 2005 S197 and while it felt better footed, it still had the "heavy nose" feel of the previous models, but not as much as my 94 GT, of course.:doh:
Even if it came with a low pressure turbo, the aftermarket would take really good care of it, no problem. Imagine a limited edition HKS Mustang Turbo four w 700hp :drool:

it would be so awesome if the SVO came back. we need a quick little gas saving mustang

I know it's off subject, but I spotted an 85' SVO for sale in my neck of the woods. It looks all stock with about 80k on it. Anyone know what kinda MPG these got from the factory? I'm thinking of buying this and using it as a summer/spring daily driver

I get about 17 city/24 Hwy.

Still would be a fun car to have!

My '86 in mildly modified form years ago netted me 31mpg on the way to Ford Carlisle....I had it in a perfect state of tune and had the injectors flow matched and balanced so that may have contributed to it. Don't expect to get great mileage though without making sure everything is up to par and you have a new fuel filter etc installed....and of course keeping your foot out of it has a BIG factor in MPG and that is often hard to do with an SVO.

I can promise you one thing....once you drive it, you'll be hooked!

Paul, you seem to know a great deal about these cars. What are the areas I should check out and what expensive repairs can I expect? I really like the car and may purchase it. How would you compare it to say a stock 87-93 5.0 LX in terms of performance, MPG, reliability? Any info you can share would be a great deal of help thanks in advance.

You could say that...LOL. SVO's are known to have some quirks if they have been sitting....oil leaks primarily but they are often caused by the installation of the wrong PCV valve....But for the most part they are fairly trouble free MOST of the time. Problem areas....Ball joints, they are not replaceable but there are options if you are not worried about originality. RH outer marker light...made of unobtanium for the most part....headlights, inner markers are repro'd and NOS LH outers are available but the RH one is VERY hard to find. The bumper cover is reproduced and "I" reproduce the headlight mounting panel, headlight adjuster plates and side spats.

Best thing I can suggest is to join the www.svoca.com forums There is A LOT of information there.....there are rules....basically keep it SVO specific so it is a targeted site for the SVO but there is little misinformation spread there so you can get good information. Also the SVO community is a good network system....often other members have helped people with hard to find parts.

Also the factory front brake calipers have Plastic pistons which WILL lock up on your during the hotter months...especially if the car has sat so get some rebuilt ones with metal pistons and at the very least flush the brake system....but the system is nearly all Lincoln Mark VII based so parts are easily available.

Comparing to a stock 87 5.0.....that's not a fair comparison because the cars are very different, once you drive one you'll understand but the car is nearly equally as fast with a quick boost pressure increase to being faster. The SVO FAR out handles the 5.0 and stops better and get's better mileage but the 5.0 has it's attributes as well....torque being one of them. The seats in the SVO which are made by Leer Seigler are FAR nicer than the 5.0 seats.

Thanks for the info Paul, I will be taking a look and drive of the SVO. I am having a Ford mechanic go with me and check out the car too. From what the owner has told me is that the car is in good running shape but keep in mind that it is 20 years old. So as long as it can be had at a fair price I may add an unexpected pony to the stable.:jester:

Good luck! Keep us posted!

Bump!

Thought you might like this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLHHi...eature=related

Lol, looks like a commercial for one of those short-lived 80s Sci-Fi TV shows.

Hey guys. I was going to start a new thread, but decided to resurrect this one. Is there any new info on the '10/'11 SVO? This pic was posted on the first or second page:

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/attach...8&d=1215129373



Did anyone notice the 9k RPM redline? I'm guessing this model won't be getting the 3.5/3.7TT because theres no way that V6 revs that high. I'm guessing were going to see a Turbo I-4 Mustang for the first time in over 20 years pretty soon!

On second look, this pic appears to be photoshopped to me :-/

Yeah that stearing wheel and the turbo button are definitely chopped. But the 8 and 9 on the tach looks real. The just released photo of the mustang dash shows it goes to 8k with a 6k redline.

Yeah, as well as the TURBO button on the stearing wheel...

Definitely a chop.....first there is too much detail for an area that is supposed to be taped over to cover it and second a Turbocharger doesn't work off a button :shame:

As I remember, the car was an upfitter's interpretation of a new SVO. So whatever Ford would do, more than likely, would be different.

Yeah, when the pic was small, before I image tagged it, the SVO in the wheel didn't look so fake and the "Turbo" button, I thought would bring up some kind of boost gauge or A/F ratio gauge in the instrument cluster. But now that the pic is blown up, its very easy to tell. Anyone know anything about the 9k RPM gauge? Or is that chopped too...because that looks pretty real.

Blowing it up it looks pretty real, but it's hard to tell.