# a\_ahmed?

**URL:** <https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-ahmed/108990>\
**Category:** SON240sx Off Topic\
**Created:** [August 28, 2007, 10:17pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-ahmed/108990 "2007-08-28T22:17:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 108

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GetARide](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@GetARide](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/GetARide)\
**Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:20pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-ahmed/108990/108 "2007-08-29T21:20:02Z")

</div>

I just finished reading all this, and one thing that got me scratching my head is Hurricanes post on specs of a old broken ass s13’s vs a newer Ford Taurus.

After doing some quick googling, these results are for a 1991 Ford Taurus SHO with a yamaha engine, not Duratec.

> [@Cool Your Power Supply](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/cool-your-power-supply/13847/16):
>
> Interesting… the 240 is better in both categories you claim it to be bested in by the Taurus.
> 
> [http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/SHOpage.htm](http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/SHOpage.htm)  
> **_Taurus_**
> 
> Braking distance, 60 to 0 mph 168ft.  
> Lateral acceleration, 200 ft skidpad .81g
> 
> **_240SX_**
> 
> Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 125 ft  
> Road Holding Index: .88 g
> 
> Any more lies or mis truths you care to have publicly proven wrong?

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-ahmed/108990)._