The Mustang SVO the History, options, & WHY it was a Sales Failure
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ต.ค. 2024
- The SVO Mustang was one of Fords most ambitious attempts at capturing market share of the European Sports Car market. It failed pretty miserably. The car itself was hailed by the automotive press as a "Drivers Car" and seen as competent competition to BMW, Audi, and Porsche so what went wrong? I think I answer this question after taking a look at the car itself. Let me know your thoughts in comments below.
For more Ford related content Subscribe here: www.youtube.co...
Find me on Facebook @ / rallynorthamericateamd...
Twitter @ / racertci
Or Instagram which I rarely check. / tonysfordsandmustangs
Thanks for watching and a HUGE thank you to my subscribers. It's nice when someone appreciates your work!
I had a 86 SVO back in the day. Bought it used with 60k miles on it. Absolutely loved the car. All that power and 28 MPG on the highway. Sold it years later with 140k miles for $4k. Only paid $1800. For it. Mine was loaded with leather and sunroof.
I was in high school when these were in production. I loved the look of the SVO but the price was outrageous. That, and a GT with the 302 would eat it alive on the street for a lot less money.
I can tell ya for sure that at 18 psi I was just able to outrun a GT. I couldn’t keep up with the GNX though.
I remember those days well, and agree with your conclusions. I bought a new 1986 Mustang GT and the SVO never really entered my mind. The price and lack of a V8 killed it for what I wanted. The one thing about the SVO that I really did like was the cool hood. In fact, I currently have a black 1990 LX 5.0 in my garage with a replacement SVO styled hood!
Thank you for watching and thanks for sharing!
The lack of a V8 in any US American performance car is a turn-off!
The term "muscle car" and "V8 engine" go hand in hand!
Go overseas and ask people what they think about when "American Cars" are mentioned…
*Big V8s* and *Muscle Cars* are what people think about in general.
It’s part of American 🇺🇸 Car Culture!
Drove several of these back in the day. They were fun cars. Great car. Wrong time…Gt was cheaper and faster. As you said..16k vs 10.5k was a big difference. Great Review Tony. I really enjoyed the SVO. Wish Ford had reused the name for the S550 Ecoboost Performance pack…
Totally agree! Thanks for watching!
Yes, gt was cheaper, but not faster. Gt would beat me off the line, but I'd soon pass them.
I agree. The s550 ecoboost is a solid car. People clown on it, but don’t sleep on the four cylinder turbo, very easy to mod and very torquey.
I owned one new back in the day. The GT was just a little less expensive. Not 5000 less as people say as most GTs weren’t stripped down with no options. The SVOs didn’t have many options to increase the price. Just leather as far as I remember.
@@IcelanderUSer . The svo was way more expensive. 17k. 5k more expensive. Bigger tires, better brakes and suspension etc. When sales didn't reach expectations, price dropped. You could get one for 15 to 16k
I had an 86 svo back in high school. My dad knew the dealer, so he had the wastegate adjusted to make 18 psi. Man, it was nice. Excellent handling and braking with a torquey turbo to boot. I loved that car.
I have always loved these cars as well but have yet to find the right one at the right price. Thanks for sharing!
I had a red 86 for 28 years. I would love to have another one. The one I had never boosted over 9 psi.
@@johncande1 wow. Just 12-15 psi would really open your eyes.
@@jasonbyassee7541 I looked up that Holly ECU an boy did the price open my eyes. I almost choked.
dirty secret - Mercury put a turbo on the 2.3 back in 78/9 Capri .... those were available readily during the time the SVO came out - and because of depreciation ... cheap as hell. I picked one up for 2K in 1985
all the suspension stuff bolted right in. nice fun ride - a sleeper that served me well until 2000
The earlier turbos not only lacked performance and electronic controls, but were mounted on the exhaust side of the engine. When the heat of the turbo cooked the catalytic converter mounted too close to the turbo, the pieces of the CC went straight into the turbo.
I got an 86 SVO off a dude on craigslist in 2020 for my first car. I love the way old heads get all nostalgic when they see it. Considering how few of them where made I find it crazy how many people got fond memories of one a friend had or they test-drove 20 years before I was even born. To me it speaks volumes of the unspoken legacy this car has.
Congrats, that's a pretty special first car. Yes there were very few produced but it was always understood that the car could become a collector car someday, even when they were new. While they have appreciated in value lately (The last 5 years or so) it was a long run to get there. Many of them have changed hands several times over the years. So a lot of people who were around in the 80's know this car. Plus they were featured on Car Magazines often back then. (magazines were internet of the day) I feel I might need to explain the importance of a magazines in the 80's to a young buck.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Thanks for the insight Tony. Its funny that you mention the magazines because I recently became aware of the articles and ads that where common in the day and paid out the ass for a few of them on eBay last week. I'm happy with my purchases but it still hurts paying twenty bucks for something y'all paid a dime for. Granted 37 years is a long time to keep a piece of paper. My best score was a old ad that has a picture of the entire SVO team standing behind a Silver Metallic SVO with a bunch of fun testimonials from the popular car reviewers below it.
Always liked the SVO. Never owned one, but I did have an 87 Turbo Coupe. Hope to get another some day.
Same here. I test drove a couple of used SVO's back in the mid eighties but didn't pull the trigger. I ended up with a Buick Grand National which I drove for year and then sold for what I paid for it. I looking for a Turbo Coupe currently.
You are spot on. I loved the test drive of the SVO but the GT had that grunt and the bigger price tag totally took it out of consideration for me. Drove that GT for 185,000 spirited and trouble free miles! One of the best cars that I have ever owned.
Thanks for watching Frank!
Like my big brother always told me. You don't know how to drive a turbo b****
Great information. I think you are right on. Wrong car for what they tried to do, i believe if they would of started with cougars or the Thunderbirds it could of worked well. Thats my thoughts.
They did with the Thunderbird turbo coupe in 83
I love when you do these with the vintage commercials 😁👍
Glad you like them! I actually enjoy seeing them again. Especially the ones from the 80's.
I have a beautiful 86 SVO I love and have had it since 2019. Had it shipped to Cali from Streetside Classics Atlanta. So much fun compared with the 3 5.0 lx fox body’s Ive owned in my 37 years on this earth.
I just picked up an 86 SVO as well. It is fun to drive.
The origins of the Ecoboost... Funny how we are still basically in the same position today as back then. Great info!
The difference now is the Ecoboost is positioned as the price leader not the top of the line performance car.
I had an 86 SVO back in the day. I absolutely loved that car. When I first got it I think I had it sideways more often than I had it straight. I think the SVO was highly underrated.
This OHC 2.3 4 banger engine was made in Brazil 🇧🇷 and export to USA 🇺🇸 we used them in our Brazilian made F-100 and Ford Mavericks, the original “ ECOBOOST”
I've heard that the block (and head?) castings came from Brazil, which is why the engine fasteners are metric. Were the turbo engines also assembled there?
I had an 84' and if I won the lottery, I would buy a 85 or 85 1/2 before I bought ANY other car! It was amazing to drive, so much fun! Koni struts and shocks, Hurst shifting, turbo, super light and insanely comfortable. I LOVED that car!
Very nice!
Great info as always Tony.. Love your videos.......thanks!
Thank you Randi! It's appreciated!
Nice history lesson. Friend of ours has an SVO mustang that's in pretty good shape he bought last summer. He has several cars that he takes to shows., he's restoring the interior seats.
Very cool! I have been looking for one as well but have to find the right one.
Fantastic video!
Thank you very much!
I still own my 85 SVO and plan to give it to my daughter some day. Thanks for taking the time to make this video, I think you represented what the public sentiment was at the time accurately. I guess I was born a hot rodder.. I also saw the HP potential of the rugged 2.3 back in the 80's. Back then, I owned a 76' Capri which I turbocharged. The car ran an 11.8 E.T. back in the day and against anything else of that era it would absolutely dominate pretty much anything on the street. In those days. Even a well modified 5.0 Mustang was no match. When I read other peoples comments on the SVO's lack of power, I wonder if they knew how easy it was back in the day, to adjust boost pressure and replace an exhaust system, maybe fiddle with fuel pressure? Those simple mods will put the SVO or any of the 80's injected turbo Fords into a different category.
Thank you for watching and for sharing your experience. I'm glad to hear there are people that appreciate these cars and I have ran into quite a few in the last year. After making this video I purchased an 86 SVO and owned for roughly a year. I got it to the point of being a reliable driver and that was my goal. I sold just last week. I have learned a ton about these cars over that year. They are easy to work on and I have seen quite a few people get serious horsepower out of the 2.3 Turbo. That wasn't the direction I was headed in but a tip of the hat to those that do.
I remember this time frame very well...I was out of school in the mid 80s, entering the fulltime workforce and buying my first new car. I was a pony car fanatic and shopping the classic Mustang vs Camaro decision point. Although the SVO was a technology marvel it had two BIG problems to a potential buyer at the time...a turbo four vs. a V8 and an outrageous price tag. That was it in a nutshell...the people who could afford it weren't interested in a Mustang, and the ones who couldn't were looking for better V8 horsepower and straight line performance driven by the recent resurgence of the of the pony car wars in the 80s. Unique and interesting cars and definitely a collector at this point given the low production count, but oh my, they were a sales flop back in the day. Funny thing though, at the time the SVO was failing, the Buick GN was selling like crazy with a turbo V6. That shows that a turbo could be sold successfully at the time, but only IF the price point AND performance were equal to or better than the performance V8s. The same was true for the forthcoming Thunderbird with that same SVO motor, aimed at a different customer and honestly a better price point in that late 80s market. It is interesting to look back and although the HP numbers were low compared to today, all were relative and we were then living though the beginning of a second round of muscle car/HP wars that honestly continue to this day. I still love V8, rear wheel drive pony cars, and my current ride has a 455 HP motor...a far cry from the 80s and their ~200 HP motors. Great content my friend, especially the videos around this era! It really brings back the memories in that truly was a magical time as the malaise of the 70s was gone and fun was back in the automotive world.
Thank you very much for sharing. I ended buying 3 Buick Grand Nationals an 84, 86, & 87 and it was all about the striaght line speed. I drove them for a while and sold all of them for slightly more than I paid.
The SVO was pretty great, just costly.
In 1985 I purchased a heavily used 1982 Mustang GT and couldn't have been happier getting the jump on SVOs at the stop lights.
As for the SVO's superior handling/braking, those advantages were rarely realized during straight line racing on the street.
I loved my '82 GT, wish I still had it.
Great content, thank you.
Thank you for sharing and watching!
@@TonysFordsandMustangs My pleasure Sir, the nostalgia your videos invoke are fantastic.
I miss the days of $1.35 Premium and no traffic cameras! 😉
I have a 86 SVO and used to also own a 1992 SSP car. When that 2.3 engine and intercooler got cold winter air (and some octane booster), the SVO was just as fast as the 5.0.
@@mchristr Oh, I absolutely believe you, throw a single turn or stop between points A and B and the SVO would be there first.
Back when I was modifying my 82 GT there were no dual exhaust trans supports or even many speed parts due to the emissions regulations my State had back then. With custom exhaust, a mild Cam and heavily modified set of Windsor heads my little GT was a totally obnoxiously loud blast to drive. Ahhh, to be 25 years old and driving a new-ish Mustang GT, life was good. I remember my friends and I laughing that gasoline costs over $1 per gallon!
Yeah, those were the days.
So your saying the better handling attributes doesn’t matter when there’s no turning.
Had a 1988 t-bird turbo and absolutely loved it. Traded it in for a new stang in 2001 and been kicking myself in the a$$ ever since. I'm not disapointed that i bought the new stang,i'm just disapointed i didn't keep my turbo coupe. This time i bought a new 22 california special without a trade in. They didn't get my 01 newedge. It sits right by my new one in the garage and they both look bad a$$ in my opinion. Thanks for another good one Tony!
Thank you Daryl!
Price, price, price. I was car shopping back then for my first new car and remember seeing these inside the showroom looking amazing, (they were always red) but seeing the big numbers on the windshield showing the price made them seem like some exotic import. No way I was going to spend that much on a car with smaller engine. Which is clearly how many thought back then.
That makes sense
Still have my '84 SVO, silver, cloth seats,100% stock, right down to the original AM/FM stereo and cassette player. The bi-plane spoiler has no droop, still looks new👍 I have several modern Saab turbo cars, but the SVO came out at a time where turbo lag was still an issue. It's really cool when you accerate quickly, the turbo spools up and then you feel that power like you were thrown out by a slingshot!😁
Thanks for sharing your experience!
I’ve seen but a few of these cars. It’s funny to see how the sales of SVOs vs. basically the S550 ecoboosts stack up. Right car, wrong time as though it seems
I was a teenager when the SVO came out. I never owned one, but always admired from afar. Ford was ahead of their time with the SVO.
A very naughty Jackie Stewart speeding in a built-up area with a 30 mph limit! Thanks for another great video, Tony.
Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for watching!
I remember going through the Chesapeake Bay bridge tunnel with my brother in a turbo coupe doing a buck 30
The time just wasn’t right- now-days the mustang Ecoboost lives in similar spirit but is not a special package. Ford could re-vamp the SVO name and make something great with the 2.3 Ecoboost, id be in line for it because I like my ecoboost Mustang🙂
Appreciate all the videos, enjoy the old commercials as well.
Glad you like them and thanks watching!
I truly don’t understand why your channel doesn’t have more subscribers. You present videos very well they’re not drawn out. I don’t know either way I enjoy your videos, my friend.
Thank you so much :) I have only been actively posting video for the last couple of years. I needed something do once I sold my company and if you can't tell I enjoy being around cars.
I miss my 84 SVO. Great car!
Bought an 86 burgandy svo new. Still driving it. 74k miles.
Thought I saw an SVO in the garage in your recent video. I ordered and bought an 85 1/2 ... great car, but about 5 years too late. Won a lot of SCCA autocross running ESP with that car. The 5.0 had already begun its comeback and there was no turning back for most. I loved that it was unique and was one of 439. Sold it to someone in Asheville NC many years ago.
Thanks for sharing! I am just starting to find my way around this car. Learning new things can be challenging but is a lot fun.
I ordered an 86 SVO with the rare comp prep option toward the end of production . I got it from a dealership my dad and I had worked for previously for $14, 985..... not bad for all that tech I thought. Well when I picked it up part of the back leather seat was missing, the car had scratches in the paint and the oil pressure gauge wasn't hooked up. Needless to say I was very disappointed and after one year of trying to finally get the rest of that rear seat I sold it. That comp prep option helped me sell it as I was also competing with some dealers that still had new ones with big discounts.
Ford did a disservice to a lot of the faithful back in the 80's and my SVO Mustang was the last time I had a new anything from FoMOCo
P.S. long before this I had 3 Shelby GT 350's, 1 GT 500 and after this I went out and got a 69 boss 302 so I guess you could say I never gave up on Ford ,just the new ones.
Thanks for sharing. I never understood and still don't know how Ford priced these cars. They had to have packed in some serious profit. The 87 T-Bird Turbo Coupe had the same engine, advanced dampening, way more options, was larger car and was still cheaper three years later. Thanks for watching!
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Another reason my SVO didn't stay too long besides all the QC problems was right after I got it I went to see Jackie Stewart at the local L/ Mercury dealer and pointed out my new SVO parked across the street and the first thing he say's to me is you should see what the 87 GT's are going to be a lot better in every way....well that did it, although for a little while in 88 I did look at the Turbo CoupeTbird but it just was too big for me and with the 69 Boss 302 in the garage I was happy staying old school.
Great videos on all things Ford by the way !
@@gray7863 Understood and thank you for the kind words!
I assumed the Comp Prep option gave you cloth interior since every other option (a/c, p/d/l, radio, etc) was deleted.
@@mchristr I added leather and that was a mistake in the long run
I bought a 1984 Mustang SVO in Medium Canyon Red with a leather interior. The 84 SVO was the most expensive sticker priced Mustang ever built at that time. if I remember correctly the car was just shy a $16,000. I will say the car was a blast to drive and handled excellent. However the car was plagued with issues. The gear shift broke of on me, the car would die all of the sudden while on the highway with no warning. I remember pushing the car to a gas station while my girlfriend steered it for over 3 miles so it wouldn't be sitting on the side of the road. Then the turbo started to go out on it. If the car sat for a bit, it would smoke like crazy at start up. I finally had enough of the issues, took it to a Chevy dealer a bought a 1985 Black Camaro Z/28 and never thought about buying a Mustang again. I look back and think if I had bought a Mustang GT, maybe I wouldn't have such a negative attitude on the Mustang. Ford lost out as I had also bought a 1987 Red Trans Am, 1988 Black IROC-Z and a 1991 Black Z/28. My 85 Z/28 was totaled when a car ran a red light and hit it. Only car of those that ever broke was the 87 Trans Am, it actually twisted one of the axles in half. Which is weird as it had a 5.0 TPI and the 88 and 91 Camaros had the 350 TPI and zero issues with them. Wish I had hung onto the 91 Z/28, she was a quick car. Not a single Mustang GT ever beat it.
Thanks for sharing. Many of us develop a brand loyalty because of bad experiences with a competing brand. I had a run of bad Chevy's early in my life and I never went back. I made out well with AMC & Mopar but landed on Ford because the other two basically stop making cars that interest me.
The later SVOs had water-cooled turbos which helped bearing life. The stalling was probably the TFI module, which was notorious for getting hot and failing to send the spark signal. Before I bought my SVO in 1992 I considered ordering a new Camaro with the 1LE package. I found the SVO for $6K so went that direction.
@@mchristr What year of the SVO Mustang did you get?
Very Cool video. I actually own a 1B medium Charcoal metallic 1985 SVO, 1 of 194 with cloth interior. It is a 351w swapped car nowadays. But it’s still a awesome car in my opinion. Thanks for sharing the history of these cars
Very cool! Thanks you for watching it is appreciated!
@@TonysFordsandMustangs you’re welcome 👍🏻👊🏻✌🏻
I had a 85 SVO, i loved the car! I remember laying crushed ice on top of the intercooler,.it (seemed to make a difference) lol. I would love to buy another one.
Very cool! At some point I will sell this one. There is some work to do to get it squared away and I will want to drive it somewhere way too far away from home but after that it will be looking for a new home.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs maybe I will run into some money in the near future.
Great video well done. I had never seen those SVO commercials before. I also didnt know about the differences between modell years. Great info. The SVO had alot of competition it moved up a class from a GT IMO with the focus on handling and braking. Seems Ford took aim at the Porsche 944 and 928, 300 ZX Turbo, Supra and Corvette. Ford should have carried over the 16" wheels, rear discs, 3.73 gears and Komis to the '87 GT!
Glad you liked it! Thanks for watching!
I miss my SVO.. Had an 86!!!!
I'm working on a 86 right now. It's fun car!
In 1984 I was looking at a mustang gt and svo side by side at citrus motors in Covina California. I bought the gt for $9,950 because it had a 302 v-8 , more horsepower and many aftermarket parts available. The svo was too much money for the horsepower return at that time for me. Now I know that Lima four banger had so much potential with enough cash, but the v-8 had more bang for the buck. The svo was more sexy though, love to find a clean one now.
I think that's what a majority of buyers were thinking back then as well.
My dad had a 1988 mustang LX. I have a lot of fond memories of that car from when I was a kid. It’d be cool to see a video on later fox body cars at some point. Great content! 👍🏻
Thanks for watching and I will get there at some point.
SVOs were faster IF driven properly. The problem was that most salesmen and some journalists drove the SVO like they did the V8. Had to keep it on boost. Different technique. Read my comment to "Boyd..." below for full info.
I had a chance to buy a svo 85 but I was to busy partying, but I had a 84 Capri turbo rs with the tops and still do at the time good luck finding another one
I found an SVO about a month ago. So they are out there.
Agree with everything. I have always thought a mustang should be powered by a v8 and loud. Thats why it became my first love. I'm glad i came across your channel, its very informative. I love the old commercial, have you driven a Ford lately? Just everyday since my 1st car (90 GT) in 1998. Great jingle. May the Mustang always be powered by a v8!
Thanks for watching! I actually just bought an SVO. :) I wanted to check these cars out. I have a 70 Mustang Mach 1 and a 22 Mach 1 as well but both of those cars are squared away and I needed something to work on. We shall see how it goes.
Great video...always had a soft spot for this car. But after graduating college in 1984 and needing a new car, I went for the GT instead for the reasons you mentioned...cheaper and quicker. Minor nitpick about the shock setup. The 84 SVO had four shocks with slapper bars, same as that on the 82/83 GT's. They switched to the six shock system mid year or possibly for 1985. Personally, I thought the slappers looked really cool hanging off the rear axle. Kind of the old school way to keep the leaf springs from winding up when launching hard.
Thanks for sharing! I will get a few things wrong here and there it's happens when you are a one man show trying to crank out a video a week. Plus trust me there is A LOT of conflicting information on the web. Thanks for watching!
WOW! I had no idea the SVO was more expensive than a GT. I was in High School at that time (Class of 86) and thought the SVO's were kind of cool at turbo charging was really gaining traction. But I assumed the SVO was a step down from the GT which if you were a Ford guy, in the 80's, you wanted a GT with a 5.0 and a 5 speed. I drove a 69 GTO so the 5.0 crowd as they were affectionately known as, were just another race on Saturday night cruising or on Wednesday nights at the local track. But there were tons of them prowling the streets, often in groups, to make the nights exciting.
Thank you for you comment and for sharing your experience. The SVO was marketed as a sports car and it would out handle a GT. In a straight line the GT was the quicker car.
I notice that early shift knob looks nothing like my '85.5 knob--but exactly like my '85 ASC/McLaren Coupe knob.
At the ford dealer with my older brother in 1986 he walked in to buy a mustang GT I saw the Sv0 and fell in love with it I begged him to buy it he said, are you crazy I’m not paying $6000 more for a 4 cylinder. I told him youare getting a much better looking more advanced handling car he could care less.
It was ahead of its time, and everybody on the streets called it the SVslow
😢
I think that was a common story back then. Thanks for sharing and for watching!
Love to hear the history of the ecoboost engine.
Thanks for watching!
Cost and not much in the way of speed parts for the svo and what speed parts were available were not cheap.
The 302 had mountains of aftermarket parts. And was a known reliable engine...some of us saw the svo engine as little more than a warmed over Pinto engine.
Not true..but that was the perception at the time..i eventually drove an svo and it was actually a very nice car! Handling was nice,quick and fun to drive..my cousin bought it and really woke it up with cylinder head work,homemade camshaft voo doo,injectors etc he dynoed it and she bagged 316hp
Thanks for watching and for sharing your experience.
I swapped a 88 Turbocoupe drivetrain and engine into my 88 Mustang coupe including T5, 8.8 rear, and suspension.
Very nice! The Turbo Coupe setup with a manual transmission in my opinion is a better setup than the SVO's .
I owned one of the last productions of the 86 SVO. It only had a single rear spoiler due lack of parts. I bought it to Autocross. Its was ok. The Chrysler Conquest crushed it in Autocross so i sold it in 1992 for a 1988 Conquest. I did get 14.2 at the drag strip on a cool night out of it
A 14.2 stock??
@@bmacster1985 Yes other than flowmaster mufflers and a K&N air filter. Nice cool evening and great traction helped. Capital Raceway, Crofton, Maryland
My opinion back in the day we looked at it and said where is a mustang? They talked about that European styling. Over those decades a lot of ass in like the mustang but they sure sold enough of them over the decades.
I have a soft spot for Foxes. The SVO is my dream one. But, 85 1/2, with 84 headlights. A Mercury Capri version of the SVO would have been perfect, for my tastes.
I owned an 86 for the last year. Fun car and easy to work on. Thanks for watching!
A lot to say. Video coming in time. I had one in 1984. Was involved w/SVO as a target buyer.
I would like to see it. Thanks for watching!
I bought a new GT in 85 for the obvious reasons everyone agrees upon. I loved that car….for a year. That’s when a new 86 with FI humiliated my Holley 600.
FI was still rather primitive but it worked well enough to piss me off. I was gonna slap a B&M low profile blower on it but accidentally traded my Gold Wing for a cammed and piped GS1100. 😳
Suddenly all cars seemed crippled and crawling so the GT was traded for a winter 4WD. The biggest FI shocker for me was redline. My 85 GT was 5800. The 86 injected model was 4000. 😮
The svo was FI from the beginning in 84. Not some primitive or troublesome version either.
@@IcelanderUSer
Thank you so much for educating me on your sophisticated 4-banger. I think it was obvious I was joining the conversation about the V8 GT. Like so many others, I had zero interest in the svo, which is why it sold so few and is worth a few extra bucks in primo condition today. My reference to “primitive” was “in comparison to” the continuous improvement during the following 35 years. In that context it was quite primitive (as was the svo FI) but still embarrassed my Holley 600.
They should have marketed it as a performance specialist car. The limited production exclusivity would bring in more buyers over time. The problem basically is they gave up too early and wanted to sell too many a year.
Thorough and interesting. I think you can see Ford's attempt at something similar when they ended up with the Probe later in the decade. People were not ready (nor should they be, if you ask me) for a FWD non-V8 Mustang, so they ended up opting for a different model. (Which was a great car - loved my '90 turbo GT.)
I think they try to attach too much to the Mustang cachet. Just build a different car and give it a different name. I'm looking at you, "Mustang" Mach-E.
The Probe was almost all Mazda and the thought the Ford was going to rebadge it and call it a Mustang is horrific. They were not bad cars but the name was almost a big mistake.
I'd have to agree with your points about the sales failure. The 302 was faster and was a V8, which is the engine an enthusiast would want. And seeing you said how much more the SVO costed makes me say that Ford was going too far and the Mustang wasn't the right car to do so with.
My first brand new car was an 1986 Mustang LX with the GT options. Paid $10,250 for it and the cheaper insurance. While waiting for my ordered car to come I still shopped around and saw a black 86 SVO in a showroom. It had been marked down to 14,000. It looked nice inside, not gonna lie, but we all felt the 4 banger was close to topping out while the 302 was barely huffing and had potential to hotrod. Using a blow dryer, I took the 5.0 emblems off and stop light raced for days! That extra $4 grand SVO seemed like a silly thing to waste money on. IROCs and TAs learned to avoid me
On the back, I modded the mustang emblem and added letters from a swap meet to say, Must be a 302
That was common decision back then apparently. Thanks for watching!
I believe Monogram made a 1/24 model kit of the SVO Mustang... I wouldn't mind finding one to build someday...
I know you are correct. The search begins. Best of luck!
In 85, I was a new grad and could barely afford my GT, but I knew the SVO was the better car.
I agree with your point of the price being a huge drawback. A few other points, The 2.3 needed a DOHC 16 valve and a balance shaft. Smoothing out that 2.3 would have been huge as many people still equated the turbo 4 to the '79 - 82 2.3. And lastly were the little details like the Bi Wing rear spoiler that flapped like a drunk pigeon at anything over 100 mph. this in a car that could easily do 140 mph. As demonstrated by the Silver SVO at the 5:30 mark, someone backyard engineered a pair of braces to cure this.
I enjoy mine however it is a single wing Bi-wing delete car. I think Ford was too early to 4 cylinder turbo table with this car and it priced way to high at the time. Thanks for watching and your comments it is appreciated.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs Don't overlook that part of the reason the SVO was priced so high was the Recaro seats. Recaro charged Ford over $1000 for the seats. Let me rephrase that, over $1000 PER SEAT. Personally I think Ford was right on time with the SVO, but it was marketing it as a more refined Mustang, and even with all the engineering and refinement in the car, the 2.3 was it's Achilles Heal due to it's coarseness. Mitsubishi, had a turbo 4, Porsche had a turbo 4. Saab. Even Lotus. But DOHC and 4V per cylinder were where it was at with most adding balance shafts to keep comparable smoothness to inline 6s and V8s.
Side story, I almost bought an '84 SVO but it was gone the day I got back to the dealership. I met the guy that bought it a few years later when we both started working for the same company. He still had the SVO and I had a Merkur XR4Ti at the time. The SVO had more grunt over all and more grip, but the Merkur got better mpg while being almost as fast and was far better at being tossed around with it's IRS and lighter weight.
I had both, an 88 GT and an 86 SVO. The SVO was much more upscale in feel and design, braked and handled better but unfortunatly had essentially an on /off switch for a throttle, slow down low and then all of a sudden lots of power which made it VERY difficult and tricky to drive fast, especially anything but a straight line and in the wet. On the other hand, the GTs powerband was very linear, way easier to modulate and control. It had both good power down low, up high and everywhere in between and at full boogie felt like you were aiming a missile. Both great cars, but after having both Id still take the SVO any day.
Thanks for sharing! I have heard this when researching the video but didn't want to too deep and not having driven one in 40 years I couldn't remember.
I had too had an svo back in the mid 80s and don’t remember ever having anything tricky. If you wanted instant turbo boost you’d just bring the car to 3000 plus rpm’s and off you’d go. The acceleration from 20 to 100 was simply amazing.
These came out when I was in college and weren’t in my budget. Only recall talking to one guy who had one. It was at a gas station. He was blue collar guy. I asked how he liked it. He didn’t, but not because it was a piece of junk but because it needed premium gas and the NCTs cost more than he wanted to pay. Furthermore he said he was upside down enough on his loan to have to keep it for a fair spell longer until it was paid off. I think that the price might have been a bit deceptive as it obviously appealed to a guy working and living pay check to pay check. Whereas at least the impression of a more expensive Porsche was that anyone who could afford to buy one also could afford to maintain them. Then again, that’s pure speculation on my part. I thought they were neat cars and wouldn’t have minded having one, especially the 205 horsepower version. Then again, at the time I could afford the occasional Cooper Cobra but not Goodyear NCTs. I always wondered if the 2.3 turbo in the T-Birds was too little motor to be fun. Apparently it was sufficient for most due to the numbers and with a five speed. Great summary of the SVO.
Thanks for sharing your opinion and for watching! It is appreciated!
Strange comment as the svo didn’t require premium. You had a switch remember?
#1 It is NOT an Emergency Brake!!! (All cars and trucks) It is a parking brake! I won a court case over this as a mechanic in the early 80's in Michigan.
I get it. I have to go with what Ford called it in their literature. That said I have used the parking brake in an emergency.
I liked the SVO but I decided to buy the GT instead because it offered T-Tops and yes it was a V-8, sorry T-Top need to come back. Can you do a show why they have disappeared?
Possibly. I''ll to research it and see if it's something people would watch. Stay tuned.
I had an 86 and multiple 5.0s and surprise, surprise, the 2.3Twas under 50 pounds different than a 5.0 V8, fully dressed.
My brother was a career car salesman for ford. He always said it's too expensive and BMW choosing them over him
I've had an 86 (Jalapeno Red) since 1992 and have constantly updated the car as better parts became available. I have no desire to keep it stock as cars are made to be driven. If Ford had continued production into 1987 the SVO may have gotten the better looking 87-93 aero front end and possibly a 16-valve engine (there was a test engine installed in a T-Bird). It would have been expensive but a much improved car. Incidentally, Kranefuss is pronounced Cran' uh fuss and the engines were originally produced at the Ly' muh (like the bean) Ohio plant.
Thanks for the info and for sharing your story.
In my 82 GT that had a pretty hyped up following my brother onto the Georgetown parkway and SVO he attacked the Corvette and kicked his ass and I couldn't keep up with either stupid pinto 308. What was that rear end. 7.5?
The SVO failed because there was a GT sitting right next to it in the showroom.
You could get the same performance from the SVO as you could get from the GT, but you had to wring its neck to get it.
Maybe a comment how the svo out handled corvettes
One problem with the 85 and newer SVOs was the old school front and rear bumpers. The 85 and 86 GTs got new bumpers front and rear including side moldings which made the 85 and 86 svo look somewhat dated, even with the unique front end. When the 87 gt was announced it really made the 86 svo look outdated, even though the svo had originated the 87 look. The thick gasket around the 86 headlamp looked prototypeish compared to the new front end of the LX and GT. I got a leftover 86 SVO in 87 as dealers were trying to unload them without much luck. And yes, the new GTs were more expensive by 87. My memories of the car when I first got it was one of quality with a thick leather wrapped steering wheel and shifter. Fat Goodyear tires and 5 lug, 16 inch rims. Porsche like rims too. Rear spoilers. Even the sound was exciting. The overall quality impression was superior to the 86 GT or LX. People who never owned one back in the day are so called experts on how shitty they are. Mind you, I haven’t driven one since 1989 when I sold mine before college. So perhaps today one might feel janky. But back in the day they were fun to drive. Acceleration from 20 to 120 was insane. Regarding that fuel switch: selecting premium meant you could easily utilize the waste gate of the turbo whereas selecting “unleaded” or non premium would keep the boost at say 10psi all the way through the rpm range without over boosting. I found the premium selection unusable. Would love to hear what other owners did when using the premium switch. I hope my comments made sense. I have very fond memories of the svo.
Thanks for sharing!
Am I a humble opinion the SVO 2.3 Turbo should have gone into the 83 to 86 Ford Thunderbirds all along and its evolution should have increased with horsepower through 87/ 88 run of the Thunderbird Turbo coupe ....plus it could have been a performer option for the All new '86 Taurus / Sable.
The engine wasn’t balanced and shook the car at idle. Car magazine reviews often stated that. Engineers considered using a V6 initially but went with the old little 4 cylinder from decades prior.
No they did not.
@@TOTA_777
Did not what?
@@MustangsTrainsMowers SVO considering a 6. At the time, SVO (Ford's racing division, proper) was involved in F1, Indycar (CART at the time), NASCAR, IMSA, WRC, and NHRA. Might be leaving a couple out. The pinnacle of their innovation and technology was their IMSA GTP Mustang - LIGHTYEARS ahead of its time. THAT was the SVO Mustang's "big brother". It was the inspiration for what they did for the production car. They'd done V8s. The issue was weight. Really had little to do with economy as is repeatedly and erroneously represented. Want proof? Look where and how they put that engine. Then, they created the most advanced electronics in the entire world at the time and combined it with the most advanced intercooled turbo system running the most boost at the time as well. It was one exotic package. You see, the SVO Mustang wasn't built for the Mustang market AT ALL. And, BTW, it was NOT slower than the V8. In fact, at about 75-80 MPH, it RAN away from the GT. Now, for half a year, the GT WAS faster. In '84 and '85, SVOs had 175 HP. GTs had 175 from '83 through '84. In '85, the V8 jumped to 210 HP. But, a 205 HP SVO was released as an 851/2 model and it was a dead heat. In '86, the GT moved away from the 4-barrel Holley to EFI. HP was 200. The SVOs move from 205 to 200 HP in '86 was 100% marketing. There were zero changes to that drivetrain from '851/2 to '86. Ford dealers had NO IDEA what to do with SVO prospects. I know. I was one. SVO prospects were looking at 944 Turbos, RX-7s, 300ZXs, and Supra Turbos. Mustang GTs and Camaros weren't on the list. I drove few cars from that general era that were as much fun as the SVO: 928S4, 911, and a just a few years later, the 3rd gen RX7, and the E36 M3. Oh well. I could go on for a week. The SVO is one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented cars ever.
All four cylinders have vibration issues unless a balance shaft is installed. The SVOs had two small engine shock absorbers that went from the k-member to the engine for NVH.
I just never liked the look of the front end compared to the GT. It looked bloated to me, even though it was cool. However, the Turbo Coupe hut the mark design wise using the SVo's borrowed look; it was balanced and properly aggressive looking in its bigger shell.
Ford wanted too much money for it and not enough performance. The fact that you couldn't buy this car in any other bodystyle probably hurt its chances too (unlike the SVO, the GT could be had in convertible form as well).
Donald Petersen passed away this past April 24, 2024.
Totally agree. They priced it too high. Should have have been same price as a GT.
The funny thing is the Eco-boost is now the price leader. Thanks for watching!
Easy answer, 5.0 was cheaper and faster and sounded like a muscle car. As opposed to a 4 cylinder that was offered in Tempos
SVO shouldve had the V8 standard. it wouldve lowered the price, but make it premium over the GT for the handling and brake upgrades. That wouldve made it an early Rousch edition.
Ford should have put the Yamaha Taurus SHO V6 in it.
Ford screwed up when they used a 4-cyl. engine. Maybe Buick was paying attention when they turbo-charged their 3.8L engine in the Grand National.
I wonder how the SVO would react to dropping in a modern Exo-Boost 4-cylinder engine
That has happened and it's quicker than the modern cars because it's much lighter.
You got it. The 84 SVO didn't run that good. If it ran like a Grand National or faster than the 5.0, Ford probably would of sold more. The 5.0 is more fun to drive and was much cheaper.
I actually really like the SVO's and I looked at them a couple of years after they came out. They were still expensive in the used market. I ended up buying a used Grand National, driving it for a year, and selling it for more than I paid for it.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs The Grand National was a great, comfortable, fun car. The Type T was fun too. I like the stick in the SVO, but would rather drive the Turbo FI Regals or a 5.0 with a stick.
@@mike6845 Back then I was only looking at going fast in a striaght line. Over the years my taste in cars has changed and I prefer something that can carve corners and see use on a track. The GN would have been awful at a track event. However getting there would have been a nice comfortable ride. I like SVO but the price for one back then was WAY too high.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs I hear you. If I wanted a track car, rather have a 911 Turbo or some other exotic. Most american cars at the time handled poorly including the Mustang. The Corvette probably being the best of the American track cars of the time.
price killed it
I agree and still don't understand why it priced so high.
@@TonysFordsandMustangs I know I loved this car and the T-Bird
I loved the concept and styling of the SVO. The performance execution lacks something to be desired. For 6,000 more dollars than the GT, one didn't get 6,000 dollars worth of performance.
Now SVO is are much less in the collectors market than a comparable GT. :)
@@TonysFordsandMustangs - I think it was a mistake for Ford to rename SVO to SVT. The former, Special Vehicle Operations, sounded like engineers at work to bring performances. The latter, Special Vehicle Team, sounds like a racing team. I think now they just call it "ford performance."
@@mindeloman The entire "team" name kind of swept through the corporate world back then.
Had these people driven one they most certainly wouldn’t have said that. The turbo, 5 speed trans, fat tires and rims all made the svo a kick in the ass to drive. The only people talking about poor performance and high price are those who never actually drive one new or even had the money to buy one new. Contrary to most, GTs were priced very close to the svo when optioned accordingly.
Is this the same engine in the Turbo coupe T-Bird?
87 & 88 pretty much
Yes. It shares the larger VAM and injectors with the 85.5-86 SVOs. The 87-88 Turbo Coupe computers are a little bit faster and used to be a popular swap.
What's under the car cover behind you?
That's my 70 Mach 1. I have a couple of videos with that car on the channel. It will be another next week but it's not the focus.
That's what I thought. I have a '70 sportsroof 302/c4/8" car.
@@Templar50401 Very cool!
If Ford had sold the 10.000 Mustang SVOs it would have been qualified for International Group A touring car racing and would have allowed a Mustang into the BTCC
If it were that important to them they could have lowered the price. I mean they sold the Turbo Coupes for less money and offered a lot more options on those cars. So it should have been possible.
I think it failed because the front grill enhancments made it look more like an Escort than a Mustang.
If Ford had install a cam that allowed the engine to peak @ 5500 rpm. It would have been more fun to drive. Yes the car was fast but running out of air @ 4500 rpm, sucked.
That's true and I'm dealing with that now with mine :)
I had an 89 Sunbird GT turbo with a 165 hp 2.0 sohc. It was a lot of fun shifting @ 6,000 rpm.@@TonysFordsandMustangs
All they had to do is bump the power up around around 250HP or so and it would of sold better?
250 HP back then was a ton. It was just priced too high for the market. It was 35% higher than a GT and that's big ask.
Yes it was price too high!@@TonysFordsandMustangs
Great cars but honestly electrical system aint the greatest on turbo 4 cyl fox cars including the tbird turbocoupe, id recommended you rewire it with proper gauge wiring especially for the switches for the headlights and what not...i had an 88 turbocoupe and id take that anyday over an svo
Imagine had it was the YB engine.
Why did the SVO flop ? Easy - the 5.0 Mustang GT was much cheaper and faster not to mention easier to modify at the time.
I never understood why they never gave the Mustang a finished biplane spoiler like the XR4Ti. All the SVOs had a crappy textured black wing.
To be honest I love the car but always disliked the Biplane Spoiler. It reminded me of the double and triple wiper blades of the same time period. Thanks for watching!
My big brother always said. They should have made an s h o wagon. Would have kicked Volvo's ass