Nope, even 94-95's had "SVT" depending on what insurance provider you had.
It's a mistake that so many garden variety stocker 2v 4.6 LX's have "SVT" on the title.LX-Tasy said:It wasnt a mistake.They were going to make an SVT bird in 96 but dropped it.The SVT bird was produced but never circulated to the public.
sorta, here is what he said, copied right from his post.Earl said:Here's another "little known" I just remembered it....this was written by the "j" and it goes a little something like this...
"For 1998 there would be three models of the Thunderbird, the Base, Sport and the SVT. The V6 would be dropped from the line alltogether, and the base V8 would have been slightly more aniemic than the previous year's model, having a SOHC 4.6, a single exhaust, etc. It would have been comparable to the base model Crown Victoria of that year.
The sport model had a 4.6 SOHC V8, Mustang GT exhaust manifolds, true dual ehxuast, higher-flow mufflers, larger brakes all the way around to solve the warped rotor problem, and a re-worked interior (slightly new cup holders which prooved to be better than any of the previous designs. The rear end of the car was to be designed wtih sequential turn signal tail lights, and the front end was completely re-designed (new headlights, grill, bumper, etc) --That's about all I remember from what I read, I have it on my computer somewhere, I'll try to dig it up & post it....it's good stuff.
The '98 bird was not canceled until may or june of 1997. We were all done with the development of the car and even built the first wave of prototypes at Lorain Assembly Plant.
Here's what we missed out on.
They dropped the 3.8L from the T-Bird completely. There were two 4.6L engine options available for the car. The base one was a little more anemic than what the 96/97 car was. It was a single exhaust, normal taillights and directionals (you'll understand in a minute), pretty much the same 4.6L that was there is '97. But remember, this was the base car.
The Sport car was this. The engine was a modified 4.6L engine. It had different cams, different exhaust manifolds, a conical air cleaner and 80mm air meter. It was basically the Mustang induction system and exhaust manifolds. But it had different cams and a TRUE (yes I said true) dual exhaust. The engine made 230 HP (fudged higher by typical Ford standards). It came with the 11" converter an aluminum shaft and 3.55 axles. It had H rated tires and was speed limited to something like 120 MPH. The rear fascia on the car had cut outs in the bumper for the chrome tipped dual exhaust pipes. The front fascia had foglights (similar to the old S/C). The directional's on the rear were sequential like the old Cougars of the 60's. It had the same spoiler that the 97's came with. It was monochromatic paint scheme to the color of the car. Had 11.5" front rotors and aluminum dual piston calipers.
The interior was similar to the 94/95 S/C. But it had better cup holder than the '97's had.
Unfortunatly, someone decided that they needed the 4.6L engines for trucks rather than make T-Birds and in never seen production
I think I can come up with a picture or two over the next few weeks. If I do, I'll post it here.
So, thanks to some ^%$# bean counters, the best MN-12 was never produced.
I don't remember what the performance numbers were on the car, but it was slightly slower than the auto GT's in 1998 (not that we ever raced them).
They look similar to the SVO wheels, but if you look closely they are identical to 928 wheels. The wheels in your picture have 10 holes; the 928 wheels have seven.XR7 as hell said:If those wheels on that tbird look like any wheels, i would think they look like the SVO wheels that came on the turbo mustang
Look at my post, #58. That SC test mule looks like it has something like those SVO rims on that SC.tinman_72 said:They look similar to the SVO wheels, but if you look closely they are identical to 928 wheels. The wheels in your picture have 10 holes; the 928 wheels have seven.
Yup. #2 for quality in the world. Read it on BlueOvalNews. I'll try to dig it up.LiquidCougar said:As far as facts go, I heard somewhere that during the years the MN-12 was being manufactured at Lorain it was one of the top rated auto plants in the country. Perhaps someone could elaborate on this?
Cool Dude said:Why did the engineers who came up with the Tbird SC get in trouble for the SC making car of the year?