Notices
Aftermarket 2005+ Mustangs Discuss the Offerings from Roush, Saleen, Steeda, Shinoda, and Others

GT350 Wish List

Old 6/13/05, 11:44 PM
  #21  
Team Mustang Source
 
crazyhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,478
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by scottie1113@June 13, 2005, 7:12 PM
I'm old enough to have been around when the GT350 first came out and Hertz offered them in black with gold stripes. A lot of them ended up on road courses over the weekend--I think the motto at the time was "drive it like you don't own it--because you don't!".

I doubt that Hertz will do this again, for obvious reasons.....
No, I am sure they won't. It sure would be great, but, ain't happening. I'd be one of the first on the phone to Hertz, asking them to sell me one.
crazyhorse is offline  
Old 6/14/05, 07:32 AM
  #22  
 
rhumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As some mentioned, I would aim the GT350's character differently than the GT500, not merely something that's less of the same. The GT500, with its big, heavy, albeit powerful, FE tall block SC 5.4 is aimed a bit more in the direction of straight line performance, as also revealed by the retention of the live axle, and that is sort of in keeping with the original GT500's of the '60's. But the GT350's tended to be very different in character, exhibiting a greater balance between straight line speed and handling/braking dynamics, more of a lean, mean road racer vs. the GT500's more powerful if brutish and less agile character. Thus, with all that in mind, I would envision a GT500 as thus:

AL block 4V 4.6, perhaps with big port Cammer heads, forged internals = 400hp @ 7Krpm
Oil cooler
A tight 6 spd MTX
Big (GT500) brakes
Uprated suspension with IRS
Big, lightweight wheels
Recaro'esque seats
More readable instruments
Varient of the GT500 nose (fog/driving lights in the upper or lower grill and the current foglight opening being brake cooling ducts)
Vented hood to relieve underhood pressure buildup and improve cooling.
GT500 rear spoiler, which actually is functional.
HIDs

I would leave the bigger, heavier 5.4 engine for a drag oriented Mach I varient, which would benefit more from the torqier character of that motor while the extra weight on the nose, and its deleterious effect on handling, would be less of a factor.

I could see the following Stang lineup:
V6 - $20k
GT - $25k
Mach I - $30k
GT350 - $35k
GT500 - $40k

A nice spread of models that appeal to all the various segments of the Mustang market, be it stylish cruiser, cheap V8 speed, flashy drag racers, serious road racers or ultimate uber-Stang.
rhumb is offline  
Old 6/15/05, 09:52 AM
  #23  
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
 
MustangFanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 10, 2004
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with Rhumb, the focus of the GT350 should be in a different direction than the GT500, not simply a lesser offering of the same theme.

The focus should be on striking the balance between straight line performance, handling prowess and retina altering braking. The flavor of the GT350 should be that of a powerful, nimble, capable performer with excellent driving dynamics and razor-like precision.

The original '60's era GT350 was powered by a high winding small block while the later GT500's used big block FE engines for motivation. In keeping with the original theme, the GT350 should offer an engine with a minimum 7,500 rpm redline. Given the high winding nature of the GT350's history, that would likely rule out the 5.4L and leave the 4.6L, or some variant, as the only logical option. Ideally the engine would also employ aluminum heads and block to keep the curb weight in check. Output should be in the 375 - 400 range with 400 being the magic number. I've struggled with my preference for 5.4L or 4.6L for the GT350 but believe that offering a 4V AL 4.6L is the right choice for the GT350, owing to the car's rich heritage as well as providing substantive differentiation in the model line-up.
MustangFanatic is offline  
Old 6/15/05, 10:15 AM
  #24  
 
rhumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree, with, well, myself and Mustang Fanatic. The character of the GT350 ought to be different, not just a lesser point on the GT500 scale. And fanatic's descriptor of a good GT350 character is, well, good. The character of the long stroke 5.4 -- lower reving with emphasis on easily accessible low-end torque -- would be a perfect fit for a drag-oriented Mach I. On the other hand, a light, snappy, revvy 4.6 4V would much better suite the GT350 and give it it's own distinctive personality.

A crazy, if interesting idea, might even be to drop some Hi-Po varient of the slightly smaller, lighter AJ motor (ala Lincolns, Jag, T-Bird) tweaked up to 350+ hp as I think this motor would be happier at 7.5K rpm, what with its shorter stroke and rigid split-block, bed-plate design. But that's just a crazy thought...
rhumb is offline  
Old 6/15/05, 10:25 AM
  #25  
Team Mustang Source
 
bpmurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: October 13, 2004
Location: MD
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I personally think the three car lineup for 2007 is fine. I don't see the need for further special editions until sales start to slide. You already have good (V6), better (GT), and best (Cobra). The focus should be more options in these cars like HID and LED lights, heated seats, etc. Power bumps down the road for each car like moving the V6 to a 250HP 3.5L to compete beter with the new Eclipse.

Now with that said I would like to see Ford focus on a upscale car on the Mustang platform. Bring back the Cougar name, put IRS in it and make it like the G35 is to the 350z.
bpmurr is offline  
Old 6/15/05, 10:41 AM
  #26  
 
rhumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The three tier Mustang lineup is fine, but I would hate to see Ford get complacent with the Stang (not that THAT would ever happen, not like they'd drag along a 1/4 century old chassis platform or anything, right? And fleshing out the lineup a bit certainly wouldn't necessarily preclude adding other features like HID's or whatever.

But with DC and, reputedly, GM having their own pony cars coming online in '08 or '09, Ford could really establish the Mustang line across a far broader market and better gird themselves against some real direct competition.

As for the Focus, I see that as a totally different car than the Stang and that any Hi-Po variants of that would take a direction more along the lines of the EVO and WRX. The greater FoMoCo parts bins are flush with the components to readily piece together a highly credible EVO/WRX STi competitor: take the upcoming Focus chassis, add in the 300hp Volvo R motor and the V40 AWD drive train, stiffen up the suspension, add some big brakes and tires, perk up the styling a bit, and add some good seats and whatnot inside. Ford would tap into a whole new market.

As for an upscale Cougar variant built on a more sophisticated IRS S197 platform, ala a G35 Coupe, sheer genius, thus I'm sure Ford management is bending over backwards trying to find some rationale NOT to do it. :bang:
rhumb is offline  
Old 6/15/05, 10:45 AM
  #27  
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
 
holderca1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by hayburner@June 13, 2005, 2:23 PM
How about an alum 5.0?? The car needs to drop some lbs. as it is . So lose the weight and balance the car.
Only problem is that the one they have is a $15k engine. It is a nice engine, perhaps if they produced more it would drive down the per unit price, but I highly doubt we will see it in any Mustang other than the Racing version for awhile.
holderca1 is offline  
Old 6/15/05, 11:38 AM
  #28  
Team Mustang Source
 
bpmurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: October 13, 2004
Location: MD
Posts: 2,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rhumb@June 15, 2005, 10:44 AM
As for an upscale Cougar variant built on a more sophisticated IRS S197 platform, ala a G35 Coupe, sheer genius, thus I'm sure Ford management is bending over backwards trying to find some rationale NOT to do it. :bang:
Yup, Ford will find a way not to do it. If they did though it could bring life back into the Mercury brand and more importantly Lincoln/Mercury dealerships. Lord knows they need it!
bpmurr is offline  
Old 6/17/05, 08:07 AM
  #29  
Cobra Member
Thread Starter
 
MustangFanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 10, 2004
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rhumb@June 15, 2005, 10:44 AM
The three tier Mustang lineup is fine, but I would hate to see Ford get complacent with the Stang (not that THAT would ever happen, not like they'd drag along a 1/4 century old chassis platform or anything, right? And fleshing out the lineup a bit certainly wouldn't necessarily preclude adding other features like HID's or whatever.

But with DC and, reputedly, GM having their own pony cars coming online in '08 or '09, Ford could really establish the Mustang line across a far broader market and better gird themselves against some real direct competition.

As for an upscale Cougar variant built on a more sophisticated IRS S197 platform, ala a G35 Coupe, sheer genius, thus I'm sure Ford management is bending over backwards trying to find some rationale NOT to do it. :bang:

The Cougar variant is a stroke of genius for sure!! Sadly, I'll agree, Ford will find SOME way to kill it even though it would definitely inject some life into Mercury, provide that division with an image car.

While a three tier Mustang line-up is great, adding an SE won't dilute sales of the other models and would expand the Mustang's appeal. The Mustang is a current run-away success but you can be sure DC, GM and others are paying attention and will try to carve out their slice of the pie. Having said that, Ford can't be complacent with the Mustang and must continue to keep the interest (and the sales figures) high. Introducing new models and upgrading the current offerings will keep the cars fresh and the interest high.

Let's just hope Ford recognizes the need and the interest to produce a GT350 similar to what has been discussed here.
MustangFanatic is offline  
Old 6/18/05, 01:24 AM
  #30  
 
codeman94's Avatar
 
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Goshen, IN
Posts: 7,890
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
2008 SVT GT350

1.) S/C 4.6L 4-Valve..(sound familiar?)

2.) Optional auto tranny

3.) GT 500 brakes

4.) GT 500 styling (painted stripes)

5.) $35,000 and a full tank of 112!
codeman94 is offline  
Old 6/18/05, 05:32 AM
  #31  
V10
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2004
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by bpmurr@June 15, 2005, 10:28 AM
I personally think the three car lineup for 2007 is fine. I don't see the need for further special editions until sales start to slide. You already have good (V6), better (GT), and best (Cobra). The focus should be more options in these cars like HID and LED lights, heated seats, etc. Power bumps down the road for each car like moving the V6 to a 250HP 3.5L to compete beter with the new Eclipse.

Now with that said I would like to see Ford focus on a upscale car on the Mustang platform. Bring back the Cougar name, put IRS in it and make it like the G35 is to the 350z.
In 2007 sales of the Mustang will be sliding.
If you look at recent Mustang sales history, the 2nd year of a new Mustang is usually the been the best sales year. For the 2007 model year Ford better have a LOT of improvements and SEs to maintain sales momentum.

Production History
1994 - 123K
1995 - 165K
1996 - 126K
1997 - 100K

1999 - 130K
2000 - 202K
2001 - 155K
2002 - 140K

EDIT ---

Ford execs apparently are thinking the same thing:

From WSJ article
To meet current demand, Ford considered investing in additional capacity to build more Mustangs than the current maximum output of 192,000 a year. Executives decided against it to avoid getting stuck with too much capacity should demand slack off after a year or two, says Stephen G. Lyons, Ford North America group vice president for market, sales and service.
V10 is offline  
Old 6/18/05, 06:16 AM
  #32  
V10
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2004
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by rhumb@June 15, 2005, 10:18 AM
A crazy, if interesting idea, might even be to drop some Hi-Po varient of the slightly smaller, lighter AJ motor (ala Lincolns, Jag, T-Bird) tweaked up to 350+ hp as I think this motor would be happier at 7.5K rpm, what with its shorter stroke and rigid split-block, bed-plate design. But that's just a crazy thought...
It is a very crazy idea.

The AJ-V8 is only 20 lb lighter than the 4.6L - 3V engine, now that the 4.6 has an aluminum block.

If you are thinking of a 4.2L AJ-V8, you are overlooking that it has the same "long" 90mm stroke that a 4.6L mod motor has.

The AJ-V8 is also a lot more expensive to manufacture and has the odd-ball Jag bell housing pattern which would require tooling a new bell housing for a manual trannie.

The 4.2L version of the AJ-V8 only puts out 294 HP / 303 lb ft on 91 octane gas. A stock 4.6L-3V Mustang GT engine is more powerful at 300 HP / 320 lb ft on 87 octane gas. Your 350 HP "tweaked" # is very optimistic because the AJ-V8's tiny 86mm bore makes getting air in the cylinders hard and emissions regs. make special tweaked versions very costly.

Next, consider that there is essentually NO aftermarket parts for the AJ-V8. Even if it was put in a Mustang SE, at production of less than 10,000 / year, there never would be a critical volume for aftermarket companies to profitably develop & produce AJ-V8 performance parts.

Then throw in the fact that the 3.9L Lima version of the AJ-V8 is ending production in Dec 06.

Don't get me wrong, the AJ-V8 is a great engine. It runs so smoothly at 6,500 RPM, it's enough to make a grown man cry. But the AJ-V8 just isn't a match for the Mustang.
V10 is offline  
Old 6/18/05, 06:17 AM
  #33  
Bullitt Member
 
Join Date: January 31, 2004
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The key word being wosh. I want mine all wheel drive with a simmilar motor that for put together not long ago they took the 4.6 mod mothor and added two more cylinders, but they shorthned the stroke. I want mine with a .020 overbore and a stroker crank. Then I want a cool looking rear seat delete, some nice body work and 305 tires all around (it is all wheel drive). Not to menchon a really nice t-56 and a good suspension set up. I am alowed to dream arent I? Btw from there I would add a twin turbo set up one turbo per a bank of cylinders. Hey before you saysomething. This is my dream so dont mess it up.
ZwerRacing is offline  
Old 6/18/05, 07:29 PM
  #34  
GT Member
 
grabbergreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by MustangFanatic+June 6, 2005, 8:33 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MustangFanatic @ June 6, 2005, 8:33 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Since it seems Ford is at least considering a GT350 at some point, anyone else here want to weigh in on what we'd like to see included in that offering. Here's my wish list:
- 5.4L 4V NA with min 375 HP[/b]


I'd have to disagree with you here. The 5.4L N/A would be a great offering for something like a Mach 1, but I think the motor is simply too truck-like to pass as a GT-350, or BOSS, for that matter. Big torque, but low engine speed. I'll pass.

Originally posted by MustangFanatic+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MustangFanatic)</div><div class='quotemain'>- 6 spd manual transmission[/b]


Absolutely!

Originally posted by MustangFanatic
- 6 spd automatic option
I guess it could help sales in the end, but I'll gladly pass. Plus, I'm not sure this thing would need a 6-AT, I think a slightly taller 5-AT would be better able to take advantage of the car's torque curve.

Originally posted by MustangFanatic
- Extensive use of aluminum and other lightweight components, target curb weight of 3,300 lbs
While I'm all for saving weight, the problem with this feature is the extra dollars in R&D, which will eventually figure into the price tag.

Originally posted by MustangFanatic
- IRS standard (sorry, as one of the IRS snobs I had to include!)
I feel Ford has done an excellent job with the current SRA setup. I'd say it would be a good idea to just use the beefy setup from the GT-500. Plus, the extra chassis reinforcement that the car would require to maintain its torsional and bending rigidity might be more than the "lightweight components" can save. All that without even mentioning how much more it would make this car cost...

Originally posted by MustangFanatic
- HID Headlights
A must!

Originally posted by MustangFanatic
- Revised front facia without splitter and possibly no fogs
I'd keep the fogs to where they are in the GT, but replacing them with the rectangular ones, similar to the 1968 GT-350 and 500.

Originally posted by MustangFanatic
- 18" wheels
Assuming the extra rotational mass doesn't mess with the handling, I might even go for 19's...

<!--QuoteBegin-MustangFanatic
@
- GT500 brakes[/quote]

A very emphatic YES!

<!--QuoteBegin-MustangFanatic

- Rear seat delete option
[/quote]

Again, it would be nice, but I'd be afraid that it would jack up the cost of the vehicle-- the designwork required to turn a 2+2 into a 2-seater isn't cheap...

As for powertrain, I'd go with the supercharged 4.6L used in the SVT "Cobra" (man, do I ever hate having to type that...). A very good question was brought up earlier-- what should the Shelby's have in common?

My answer to that would be the supercharger. It's comparatively cheap, it will help maintain a more neutral balance, and it's devastatingly-effective.
grabbergreen is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CNFLCTD
GT350
4
8/4/17 07:08 AM
HizliBullet
GT350
0
9/15/15 09:13 PM
Detroit Steel
GT350
1
9/3/15 07:50 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: GT350 Wish List


Featured Sponsors

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.