I'm pleased that your taking after me...LOL..

 

They are all based on modified versions of the Mazda 6 platform. A platform developed under Ford's approval in the first place.

Overweight compared to what? The Edge's weight is typical of vehicles in it's size and class, the GMC Acadia is overweight.



It is a polarizing, yet cohesive design. I actually think the Edge is the best of the "Red, White and Bold" designs, better than anything GM has put out in the last 10-15 years this side of the new CTS and C6, and better than anything Toyota has ever put out. Toyota must agree as they flat out copied the Edge headlight on a couple of their new concepts.

 

There, fixed it for you........... suppose the Yamaha built motors for the SHO Tauri were "built under Ford's approval" also.





Cool..............I guess it's the greatest crossover now. I concede. Wish I was in the market for such a wonderful Ford approved veheicle.




Thank you for your unbiased and very important views......have you bought one yet???

 

The SHO's 3.4L V8 was developed off of the Duratec architecture.

You said it, not me.

Nope, not currently in the market for a new vehicle.

 

News to me...............but the V6 was all Yamaha






OK then.............back to the original question:

Why does BirdbrainStyll (AKA Ranger) think the Edge is so nice thow???

Just curious is all.

 

Do you have any documentation to back this up?

the 3.4l V8 was an entire Yamaha motor. The 3.0l V6 used in the earlier SHO's were based off the Duratec block, with Yamaha heads (amongst other stuff)

This is as far as I am aware...

 

Oh really?

The Ford-Yamaha 3.4 V8 was based off of the Mondeo/Contour 2.5L Duratec V6, the Ford-Yamaha 3.0/3.2L V6 was based off of the Vulcan V6, not the Duratec.

Neither engine was entirely Yamaha, they were BOTH joint ventures.

Bore x Stroke
SHO 3.0L - 88.9 mm (3.50") x 80.01 mm (3.15")
Vulcan 3.0L - 88.9 mm (3.50") x 80.01 mm (3.15")
**Both share the same bellhousing pattern**

Duratec 2.5 - 82.4 mm (3.24") x 79.5 mm (3.13")
SHO 3.4 V8 - 82.4 mm (3.24") x 79.5 mm (3.13")
**Both share the same bellhousing pattern**

The Vulcan and Duratec bellhouse patterns are distinct from each other. The SHO 3.4 V8 block was even cast at Ford's Windsor plant and shipped to Japan for final assembly.

Sorry to burst the bubbles of any SHO fans who think Yamaha deserves all of the credit for the engines. I wonder what ever came of the Yamaha designed 5V Modular heads?

 

Check it out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_SHO_V6_engine

http://www.v8sho.com/SHO/R&T.htm A portion of the Motor Trend article is attached below.->

Ford's part:
"Take the engine, another Ford/Yamaha joint effort that's a marvel of compactness and refinement. The steel-sleeved aluminum powerplant is space efficient out of necessity because, according to product design engineer Ted L. Byers, the V-8 had to be designed to fit the Taurus' V-6-size bay without changing any sheet metal. It's based on the Duratec 2.5-liter V-6 and shares its bore (82.4 mm), stroke (79.5 mm) and bore spacing, as well as its pistons and connecting rods. For extra rigidity, a stressed aluminum oil pan bolts to the underside of a girdle that supports the crankshaft's main bearings and forms the lower part of the block "Everything from the head gaskets down is Ford," beams Byers.
Yamaha's part:
And almost, everything above that was the responsibility of Yamaha, which machines and assembles the engines in Japan. Those familiar with the original SHO's V-6 will recognize the tightly intertwined array of intake runners, each with its own double-hose-clamped rubber coupling, that dominate the engine compartment. They feed into Yamaha 4-valve-per-cylinder heads whose four chain-driven cam shafts actuate those valves in a time-honored way via aluminum bucket tappets with lash adjustment through steel shims. It's a light, simple system that shouldn't need adjustment for 100,000 miles. There are other features worthy of note: a balance shaft in the vee, driven off the timing chain; coil-on-plug ignition; a water pump on the flywheel side of the engine, belt-driven off the forward intake camshaft; and reverse-flow cooling, where the cylinder heads receive coolant first in the interest of efficiency and cleaner emissions."

 

The original V6 SHO is BASED (and I use that word loosely) on the Vulcan 3.0.

Yamaha canned the idea of using a Vulcan block immediately when the power numbers and RPM limits were revealed. The ENTIRE motor was cast and built in Japan.

It does share the bellhousing bolt pattern (since it shared Mazda based manuals already in the parts bin used in Tempos) and the bore and stroke are the same even though NONE of the internals are shared.

The urban legend that the SHO is on a Vulcan block is as bad as what "SHO" has become accepted as standing for......it ORIGINALLY was NOT Super High Output.





As far as the SHO/Volvo V8......I wish Ford would use it in their Volvo chassied vehicle (500/Taurus).

It didn't have the most stellar rep with cam sprockets basically spinning off their shafts and Ford sticking their heads in the sand about the KNOWN problem.....and a 60* V8 while compact needs a balance shaft. ( I know, just like the Ford V10)

 

When new SHO cylinder heads were shipped to dealers by Ford, the box said: "Contents Made in Japan."

Yamaha was also so marked on some of the boxes. Ford never let on originally to customers or to the mechanics and parts personnel back then that any of the SHO related parts were of Japanese origin.

Only when we saw the markings on the packaging did the truth come out.

AFAI remember, the other parts boxes for the SHO engine parts were not so marked.

Until I read the posts here...I thought only the heads were by Yamaha.

Jack...do you recall when Ford Credit could be used to buy Yamaha products?

Finance your new motorcycle thru Ford Credit was once Yamaha's tagline in their ads.

The "pitchman" in their ads was dressed in a black western outfit with gunbelt and nickeled ivory handled Colts in the holsters.

The pitchman was called: Yamahoppy!

A take off on film and TV star Hopalong Cassidy...played by actor Wm. Boyd in 100's of shows from 1935 thru 1953.

 

Bill, just from memory, Since the '89 (late '88??) intro I always knew the SHO motor was a Yamaha.

The code name for the motor was "SHOGUN" which is where "SHO" actually came from.

I did own/lease one on a RCL for 24 months.....one of the all time great cars I've ever had the pleasure of driving.

The thing was such a sleeper. Nobody expected a 4 door ugly **** Taurus to move out like that. The performance numbers are average at best for today.

I don't remember FMCC doing Yamahas......but I remember FMCC doing Hardley Abelson. Always thought that was a good way to sell the Ford trucks that would be needed to get the Harleys home after a break down.

(just kidding Harley fans....save the hateraid)

 

For BB:

http://www.epinions.com/content_217791237764



https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/5...-0-yamaha.html (post#7)

 

WOW...now that I didn't know.

Ford used that ancient Shinto warrior name for a hipo engine?

What's next...an engine named from Sanskrit?

Oh wait...India based Tata Motors might have something cookin' along the same line. I can see it now...a Jag with a Gurka engine.
If the deal goes thru...both Land Rover and Jaguar will soon be going ta ta.

It can't happen soon enough!

 

You mean, sort of like the the Fusion and Edge are BASED on the Mazda 6 platform?

Why is it that you are so quick to give Yamaha the ENTIRE credit for the SHO V6 but you give Mazda credit for the Ford Fusion platform? Am I sensing a double standard here?

The CD3 platform was modified, enlarged and reengineered by Ford and produced by Ford in Ford plants in the US and Mexico. Employing your logic, I can claim the Fusion and Edge are entirely Ford, since according to you the SHO V6 is entirely Yamaha and yet is based on the Vulcan architecture.

Bore, stroke, bore centerline, main journal diameter, etc...

Urban legend? The SHO V6 was based off of the Vulcan architecture, so I guess the means the engine has more "Ford DNA" than Yamaha.

The 3.4L V8 doesn't impress me, never did. I would rather a GDI, TiVCT Cyclone 3.5 or 3.7.

 

Very bizarre.............if you actually give it a little thought; it's pretty much the same standard. Ford goes to outside vendors a lot for their products.
(I do realize owning 30%+ of Mazda gives them that luxury)

And it goes back to my amusement at the "Buy American" mentality that you and others spout so much. (you have not been doing it so much lately)


If it makes you happy..........knock yourself out.

Again, the question was to a certain member why he thought the Edge was so nice. Was the ONLY reason because it was a Ford or does he ACTUALLY prefer it over the class leading Murano.. .......if he knew that it rode on a Japanese designed chassis (regardles of what you and I think of the % of contribution) would it change the outlook?





Again, if it makes you happy..............it actually bums me out that the standard Ford product wasn't up to the task. (even though the 3.0 has been a very durable if not high performance motor for us in our Ranger)

And even though I love the SHO motor and own Yamahas, there were years that Ford actually owned a good part of Cosworth and had many a hot DOHC head on their European motors.....always wondered why they went to a Japenese company for the tech.



The 3.5 Cyclone is proving to be a class motor.....I have no complaints in the MKZ.....(well, I could always use a tad more power )