05MustangFanII

I really couldnt sit back and watch this war wage with you being so negative. SRA was to cut down the price, and flip GM the bird. we knew this since NAIAS '04 (EDITED FOR CONTENT)

Re to the Re GTO: The 400 horsepower MIGHT just be the thing that outperformes our Stang

6.0l 400 hp >>> 4.6l 300hp

05MustangFanII

Lets LOOK at SRT's line up, shall we?

Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6

It's a great little car, with the supercharged V6 and all. I wouldnt mind having one. But, IT'S NOT SELLING. No threat here.

Dodge Charger/Magnum SRT-8 & 300 SRT-8

Other than a few pounds here and there..THEY'RE ALL THE SAME (EDITED) CAR, PEOPLE!!! Just drop a H.O 5.4l V8 in the 500, dress it up a bit, and make the 300, and Magnum tremble..I'm confident the Shelby can handle the Charger

Dodge NEON Srt-4

Quick or no, when it comes down to it..IT'S A NEON. Focus, or Fusion can easily take it out witht he 3.5l and a turbo

Dodge Ram SRT-10

A formidable truck. Maybe our underdog Adrenalin will take it down a notch..hopefully.

Dodge Viper SRT-10

It's already been beaten by the almighty FORD GT

Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT-8

A performance SUV..wtf?


That's it. if you ask me, It's not a huge threat. Ford could easily just drop S/C or Turbo's 6's and 8's into the Fusion,Focus,Five Hundred, and maybe put the Maurader engine in a CV.


SRT IS OVERRATED

Language filters are there for a reason, please do not spell words that SOUND like what you are trying to convey...

1999 Black 35th GT

You are correct Zoran, it's not even an "official" concept as of yet.

Boomer

Some people may not agree with others views,
but convey them in a civil manner please.....

Carry on...

Rampant

Yeah, but they haven't. Sounds like a lot of could-be's or what-if's anyway. Also, please point out a FI 6 or 8 Ford could actually put in the FWD cars you mentioned. And no "but they could" allowed.

As for the others, Ford has no small convertible to compete against the SRT-6, so let's leave it out entirely.

The GT500 may "beat" the SRT-8 LX family in performance numbers (still not known), but certainly not in interior or ride quality. And, oh, yeah, there is no GT500 yet, so the SRT-8s are clearly surperior in sales for now.

You say a 3.5L turbo Focus could easily beat an SRT-4. Well, duh. And just how much would you expect a turbo 3.5L Focus to cost? Certianly more than $22k.
Well, that and Ford has no 3.5L yet -- let alone a turbo 3.5L.

And, it takes a $151k Ford GT to beat the $85k Viper -- so is that really an achievement?

If SRT is overrated, SVT is all but non-existent.

hi5.0

I don't see how SRT is overrated when they have 6 vehicles compared to SVT's current grand total of 0 available. Oh yeah, notice how a majority of the SRT editions are built on a RWD chassis? How many RWD vehicles are in Ford's near-future product lineup? And where's the turbo Focus? Not in America and not at a price acceptable to the US buyer. I think SVT and the corporate brass need to spend some time in the UK and Australia for some Ford high performance ideas. Maybe grab a few RWD chassis for US as well...

FinlayZJ

My only point was that SRT is spitting out vehicles left and right and Ford is sitting on their behinds.

Also, the SRT-8 Grand Cherokee runs 0-60 in 4.8 and a mid 13 second 1/4 mile and stickers for under 40K. I know it will take a perfect launch in my 06 GT and I will probable loose to their all wheel drive off the line. SUV or not, that's impressive.

I was also annoyed at Ford's stripping of all the visual aspects of the new Shelby.

Now, i'm going to go get in my 06 GT, and haul tail across town leaving 50' patches of rubber wherever I can because I love my car.

ScottyBoy302

With some SRT help, chrysler has 6 vehicles with over 400hp, most of them cheaper than the current one SVT offering. Wheres the lightning, SVT fusion, svt 500, etc.?

So SRT>SVT? Definitely.

bob

Yeah....sure they ain't, you gotta add structure as you move the rim out from the hub and tires with smaller sidewalls tend to have more structure in them as well. It could be me?? but I dont see a problem with using 18" wheels, this seems right now to be about the right area for a good compromise in appearence and peformance. getting beyond that just screams pegged bling meter with no tangible benefit other than soaking more HP in an effort to get things moving.

Course having 20" wheels also mandates having brakes which fit the wheel, which also adds weight, which nessecitates heavier shock and springs (both in weight and rate) which requires beefier components to support the increased stress and weight....ad infinitum...

In short, big wheels and brakes are the "gold nuget on a chain" in the new millenium.

1999 Black 35th GT

Technically the Ford GT is an SVT product as they had a major hand in its design. I just was not badged as an SVT (would have looked kind of wrong).

It seems that SVT is getting away from just releasing vehicle's as models only available to SVT dealers, which is really nice.

We are probably going to be getting a Shelby come fall. Hopefully the trend is then continued and we recieve the Sport Trac Adrenalin.

FinlayZJ

In the new issue of Car & Driver they swapped out 18" wheels for Porsche factory 20's on their long term Cayanne. Rim and tire for both sets weighed exactly the same. They picked up alot of skidpad grip with no real negatives other than ride quality.

Also, just because you increase rim diameter (combined weight must remain the same), does not mean you must adjust offset (assuming width is unchanged) so there is no extra force on the hub other than the force of extra grip obtained from a more aggressive tire.

If the assembly weight is unchanged, there is no need to increase rotor diameter or caliper size, leaving the brake weight the same.

Bigger wheels don't always mean more weight. There are tons of materials out there that have the weight to strength ratio that is sufficient for rims. Old school Mercedes used to have aluminum wheels that weighed nothing.

Hollywood_North GT

Looks pretty official to me.

TomServo92

I gotta agree here. It's an official concept since it's been announced for NAIAS. However, it's definitely not an official production car (yet).

mustang_sallad

okay, i didn't read this whole thread... but i think a lot of people are missing an important point. FMC is concerned with making money, NOT BRAGGING RIGHTS. Bragging rights are very important to the people who talk about cars on the internet like all of us, but how much does it actually benefit the company and how does that compare to the money they've gotta put into the car to get the bragging rights? Sure some cars, like it'll help if ford can say they've got a Mustang that's as quick as cars that cost two or three times as much. But does ford need an SVT version of every car to boost sales? I'm sure it would boost sales, it would make ford look really cool if they all these super sedans rocketing all over the place. But how do the benefits compare to the development costs? I think they could find a much more cost efficient way to improve sales of the 500, for example, than to put out an AWD, 400hp version with all the necessary upgrades.

People keep complaining why aren't we seeing this or that. And ya, there are some things that they could do better and maybe quicker. But the guy sitting at home typing on his computer can't just complain about a company that's struggling to even just not go bankrupt in the next couple years, without really understanding what kind of engineering problems would be involved in making whatever crazy performance car they wanna be able to brag about to GM or dodge forum members. Ford's got much more important things to be worrying about.

Don't look at DCX and say why can't ford do that too? DCX is in a VERY different financial situation than ford right now.

MustangFanatic

The bottom line is that SRT is currently producing performance vehicles, however flawed they may be, while SVT isn't producing anything. Right now, SVT is all promises and conjecture, let's hope Ford and SVT get back to the business of making great high performance cars very soon.

hi5.0

Ah, you got me there! When you think of it, who else within Ford could be entrusted with the development and fine tuning of the GT, given the performance targets and production deadline? Still... 6>1 I'd like to see a AWD turbocharged C1 Focus for around $26~$28k. Now that could score some serious respect points and steal sales from Subaru and Mitsubishi (There's a LOT of "them" roaming around here!) I personally don't like to see SVT concentrate solely on more "upmarket" vehicles.

1999 Black 35th GT

I agree. I would love to see a Focus again. And the FPV F6 Typhoon

TomServo92

I also remember reading somewhere that the GT project sucked up a lot of SVT resources. That's one reason there haven't been any new SVT products in the past couple of years.

bob

I'm suprised, I just checked that article and they said the wheel & tire combo weighed in at 65 lbs for 18s and 20s, pretty neat. GM did the same on their SS pick-ups (going from an 18 to a 22) and it actually hurt handling, in any event you guys can salivate and bemoan the lack of 19 or 20 inch wheels on SVT products. I find the 18 wheels to be very practical, especially when it comes to (and really hate this term) "real world" driving and trying to get from point A to point B in a crater laden and pock-marked wagon trail, otherwise known as a highway (not that this a significant hazard south of the Mason Dixon), but there are some rim and tire shreding pot-holes out there.

<!--QuoteBegin-FinlayZJ@January 6, 2006, 8:13 AM
Old school Mercedes used to have aluminum wheels that weighed nothing.

Quoted post

[/quote]

And so did Cadillac, if your refering to the MBs that used an aluminum wheel and hubcap, very light in both cases which made for an improved ride over thier steel counterparts.

97svtgoin05gt

Much of the stuff being discussed here can be attributed to a few mistakes that Ford has made combined with a few right on things DCX has done.

Ford Mistakes:

1) Virtually ignored their car products for 10 years in favor of languishing in the profits of the SUV/Truck products

2) The design of a new V-8 engine line with limited displacement capacity. We've been stuck with 281 cubic inches in cars since this point

3) Mis-management of product has put Ford in a terribly leveraged "catch up" mode where not only do we need to address the actual design of the vehicles, but their powerplants as well

All these things add up to not exactly in the best financial condition and an even worse playing field for performance projects like SVT

DCX Hits:

1) The pre-existing pushrod engine program was already in place and being used in their trucks. The 5.7 liter and 6.1 liter Hemi engines simply out muscle our 4.6 and 5.4 liter offerings even though we have small weight advantages

2) Their excellent timing on the 300/Magnum platform with RWD was something they hadn't had and desperately needed for years. They have it now and tied together with the Hemi engines offers a great way to blow out basically any other large sedan currently offered domestically

3) Their reliability is up with the assistance and parts bin of MB. I still question their reliability in the transmission arena.

4) The ability to drop the Hemi into everything from grandpas lawnmower to trucks, cars etc seems to be limitless. I honestly don't understand how they're making their CAFE numbers because the only thing I know they have going for them in the mileage arena is the Neon.

DCX is producing good profits and doing so with limited reliance on rebate and cash incentive programs. With profits, projects like SRT become reality. With red ink flowing projects like SVT become difficult if not impossible to support.

I feel SVT will be back and they'll be back with avengence. Let there be no mistake about it though, SRT is doing it and doing it well.