wakerider017

I am glad to hear their will be one for everyone that wants one. I am willing to wait a few months to get one at a fair price. I just cant wait!

Thanks for the info.!

<-EvilWolf->

Everyone that wants one will get one??? Excellent!!! I will offer them $100 and tell them Ford said I can have one just cause I wanted it.

Robert

So everybody who buys a top of the line Saleen, Roush or Cobra with the invevitable "dealer market adjustment" has all the mental capacity of a potato?
[/b][/quote]
Potato, yep.

Robert

Oh, Rhumb, only a Liberal weenie would complain about the lack of an IRS. SRA is for "true" patriots who believe in god, guns and white sheets.



Personally, I say we not only go back to drum brakes, but let's also go back to manual steering, wind-up windows and now that I think about it, a hand crank to start up the engine.

Who knows, Ford's reverse psychology "old-tech" approach might diminish import sales and send the Japanese and Europeans scurrying home with their tails between their legs.

rhumb

Well, you know, gotta save up my bile and vitriol lest my posts get all warm and fuzzy and stuff (save that for the GF :-)

Just hate to see things get to be a non-critical cheerleading gush-fest -- put a few sharp points up the flag pole for consideration and pot shots -- makes things more interesting IMHO.

I do think, regardless of how wonderful a car the GT500 is (and make no mistake, it IS a fine car), that Ford seems to be overcharging for it based on rumors on what they charged for past Cobras in terms of their overall content. Again, I see the GT500 as being at best a roughly equivalent step up over the S197 GT as was, say, the 2003 Cobra over the SN95 GT and thus, ought to command a similar price premium.

I know Ford is bleeding money like a severed artery and are desperate, short term, to grab and grub whatever coin they can. But I think this will haunt them in the long run and typifies the purely financial approach they take to the business, the very same one that has eroded/hindered their design and engineering prowess.

One of the Cobra's premier selling points was its bang-for-the-buck factor and Ford dilutes this by jacking the price premium in great long-term peril for the product image. This is especially true lacking such various specialized features that are practically de rigueur for world-class performance cars at the $40K level, primarily IRS but also such functional features as HIDs, stability control, truly custom seats, etc.

Instead, they've essentially created a fairly uni-dimensional strip car with good but not stellar road and track capabilities. While that awesome motor will obviously be a crusher in the straight ahead vector, I think too little focus was paid to all the balance of other elements that make for a truly world-class performance car that the S197 Cobra was promised to be. And aside from bigger holes (cylinders) and a twist to the rotor lobes (Whipple), the motor is pretty much the same thing as the 2003-4 Cobra. And the lack of an IRS ought to go far to save money -- an $8K savings off the 2003-4 Cobra if we're to believe SVT's latest statement -- and DROP the price premium relative to the 2003-4 Cobra, not raise it. And otherwise, feature for feature, the GT500 is VERY comparable to what the 2003-4 offered over the GT, suggesting a very similar price premium overall.

I am just quite amazed that, given this, the enthusiasts on this site don't make this point with Ford with more ardor, especially given that it is they themselves who will end up paying this greatly bloated price premium. Rather, most seem to be, lemming like, unquestioningly opening their wallets wide for Ford to grab out whatever they think they can get away with. And given the lack of challenge on their pricing direction, Ford will be able to get away with grabbing big fistfuls of our fellow enthusiasts hard-earned cash, so who can really blame them.

Ford marketing must be slapping themselves on their backs silly as to how easily they're pulled this one over -- offering less overall (relative to SN95 Cobras) for considerably more. A real triumph for Ford marketing and image pumping if less so for design and engineering.

Mystic_Cobra

Hey, I don't mean to bust on your numbers but, I swear my 96 invoice was around 26,800. Are you sure a 98 Cobra was only 25,700?

rhumb

I sourced all those basic numbers off the MSN site, so however accurate that is....?

And for the sake of accuracy, these numbers aren't adjusted for inflation, though I feel the basic gist of my argument is still quite valid.

Robert

Well, you know, gotta save up my bile and vitriol lest my posts get all warm and fuzzy and stuff (save that for the GF :-)

Just hate to see things get to be a non-critical cheerleading gush-fest -- put a few sharp points up the flag pole for consideration and pot shots -- makes things more interesting IMHO.

I do think, regardless of how wonderful a car the GT500 is (and make no mistake, it IS a fine car), that Ford seems to be overcharging for it based on rumors on what they charged for past Cobras in terms of their overall content. Again, I see the GT500 as being at best a roughly equivalent step up over the S197 GT as was, say, the 2003 Cobra over the SN95 GT and thus, ought to command a similar price premium.

I know Ford is bleeding money like a severed artery and are desperate, short term, to grab and grub whatever coin they can. But I think this will haunt them in the long run and typifies the purely financial approach they take to the business, the very same one that has eroded/hindered their design and engineering prowess.

One of the Cobra's premier selling points was its bang-for-the-buck factor and Ford dilutes this by jacking the price premium in great long-term peril for the product image. This is especially true lacking such various specialized features that are practically de rigueur for world-class performance cars at the $40K level, primarily IRS but also such functional features as HIDs, stability control, truly custom seats, etc.

Instead, they've essentially created a fairly uni-dimensional strip car with good but not stellar road and track capabilities. While that awesome motor will obviously be a crusher in the straight ahead vector, I think too little focus was paid to all the balance of other elements that make for a truly world-class performance car that the S197 Cobra was promised to be. And aside from bigger holes (cylinders) and a twist to the rotor lobes (Whipple), the motor is pretty much the same thing as the 2003-4 Cobra. And the lack of an IRS ought to go far to save money and DROP the price premium relative to the 2003-4 Cobra, not raise it. And otherwise, feature for feature, the GT500 is VERY comparable to what the 2003-4 offered over the GT, suggesting a very similar price premium overall.

I am just quite amazed that, given this, the enthusiasts on this site don't make this point with Ford with more ardor, especially given that it is they themselves who will end up paying this greatly bloated price premium. Rather, most seem to be, lemming like, unquestioningly opening their wallets wide for Ford to grab out whatever they think they can get away with. And given the lack of challenge on their pricing direction, Ford will be able to get away with grabbing big fistfuls of our fellow enthusiasts hard-earned cash, so who can really blame them.

Ford marketing must be slapping themselves on their backs silly as to how easily they're pulled this one over -- offering less overall (relative to SN95 Cobras) for considerably more. A real triumph for Ford marketing and image pumping if less so for design and engineering.
[/b][/quote]
Sadly, dude, your erudite missives are too high-brow for most of this crowd, the great majority of whom have voted on this site for SRA.

I'd like a more upscale Mustang, too. But Ford has looked hard at their demographic and their core competitive advantage and reasoned that the high-performance Mustangs are still - at their heart - sports cars for Middle Americans.

As to the over-pricing (I'm not convinced it's over-priced at $40K, frankly), you're right, Ford and GM are hanging on by a thread right now, and playing the heritage card (Shelby) is clearly a gimmick to get people to buy cars.

Having said that, in this particular instance it's a gimmick I embrace. I also think that this GT500 has enough technology and quality (i.e. leather interior surfaces that are otherwise only found on the most expensive exotics...you won't find that on an M3) that it is still an appealing car. And I don't believe the SRA is going to be a significant performance drawback in the twisties - most of the magazines who have tested the GT agree that this SRA is quite extraordinary in its prowess. (Have you noticed that everyone whines about it in theory, but after they drive the car they're all quite impressed.) The SRA's primary weakness will be ride quality on bumpy roads.

I just hope they've lightened the clutch effort on this new Cobra. The old one required so much work that it was endlessly annoying during stop-and-go city driving.

MrDrezzUp

I thought one of the big "pluses" of the S197 platform was that adding IRS to it would not be a "shoehorn" approach as it was with the SN95/NewEdge Cobras? Yet here we are with the "perfect platform" for SVT to wield their magic and the IRS is dumped. Go figure.

When quoting the cost of of putting IRS into the S197 it is important to realize that the $5000-$8000 number might actually be accurate when the total cost (engineering, testing, certifying etc) of implementing IRS is considered.

Having read so many good things about the 05 SLA I did not give much thought to the GT500 not having IRS. However, now that I have read some of the postings in this thread it is annoying to think that the IRS has been around in Cobra's for years and now a step back to SLA is being taken.

As has been done a few times on this site...when you break the GT500 down to what you really get...the GT500 is not exactly cutting edge. I think the best thing going for the GT500 might be the Ford GT heads?

rhumb

And why didn't it cost $5-8K to put the IRS in the 1999-2004 Cobras, a chassis never even intended for one? Were the SVT engineers and management just that much better back then...

Joes66Pony

No kidding...somehow, John Coletti and SVT were able to shoehorn a workable IRS system into a 25 year old chassis never designed for it, but their all of a sudden stymied about putting a proper IRS system into a car designed for it in the first place. :scratch:

rhumb

And now, instead of charging $5-8K LESS for the GT500, relative to the IRS equiped 2003-4 Cobra, to reflect the money saved by foregoing an IRS, they are charging some $3-5K MORE for what is otherwise a very similar component upgrade over the base Stang GT.

So are we then to logically assume then the the new 5.4 motor and stripes are $8-13K more expensive than their 2003-4 counterparts to account for this huge pricing differential? Those GT40 heads must be individually hand carved out of billet stock or something.

Robert

Please tell me you people aren't really this ignorant.

- It's a new model, they're trying to milk money there;
- It has Shelby's name on it, they're trying to milk money there;
- It has a significantly more powerful engine...upgraded suspension and braking components...wheels sourced for only 7500 cars...additional components sourced and manufactured for only 7500 cars...a full leather interior...and yes, they're also trying to milk money there;
- And finally, financially strapped Ford is desperately trying to make money whereever it can, cause guess what? Those big trucks and SUVs where it makes most of its profits are starting to take a massive sales hit as oil cliimbs towards $100 a barrel.

MrDrezzUp

When it comes to large corporations you might be surprised how much costs can flucuate between years and projects. "Creative accounting" alone can cause huge shifts in how much things "cost".

All I am trying to say is it not as simple as "It probably cost this much to put IRS in this car, therefore it MUST cost this much to put IRS into this car".

rhumb

As for ignorance, I guess that would depend on one's gullibility in falling for items 1, 2, and 4 in justifying (as opposed to explaining) the bloated price premium. I'm just trying to raise the red flag on whether these costs are justifyable, rather than being simply explainable by dint of coorporate greed.

As for item three, all that was pretty much true of the previous Cobras, which didn't seem to jack the price so outrageously in those past, similarly limited edition models.

I don't mind Ford/SVT asking for a price premium for the GT500 over the GT, just keep it in the same 35% range as in previous, similarly outfitted and upgraded Mustang supercharged Cobras. Maybe a bit less so given the supposed $5K(!) saved by dropping the IRS if HTT and company are to be believed. Rather, dropping the IRS has seemingly jacked to price $5K instead. Perhaps accounting put this figure in the add rather than subract column???

foxhtn

Well, there's no concrete price yet, just speculation, but maybe someone who has connections with the SVT line, can come on here and justify the price differential on the SRA vs. IRS issue. Maybe they put $5,000 worth of technology someplace else on the car that they can justify!

Joes66Pony

No, instead it's going to make sure Shelby get his royalty checks.

rhumb

Perhaps, but I strongly suspect the putative GT500 price far more reflects marketing and speculative forces rather than pure content and engineering costs. I just don't see any technological or engineering exotica that would explain the ~$4-5K bump over the previous Cobra, never mind the additional presumed big-money saved by foregoing the IRS.

Rather, the engineering/content upgrade over the base GT seems to be much the same scope, scale and complexity as the outgoing Cobra overall and thus, I would expect the price premium to be similarly equivalent on that basis alone.

But then the marketing and greed factor comes in...

ArkAngelx3

I hope people keep female ******* about it not having an IRS. That will just make it much easier for me to get one LOL. Tools. Get over it!

Fireball

Hello I usually just lurk in these fourms but I had to reply.

First of all, the old SRA in the fox/sn95 cars was so bad it wasn't hard to improve it with the IRS. The IRS in those cars was not that good. It had more side walk in a corner than the SRA and the wheel travel changed the toe in the oppisite direction than what is needed for performance. But the SRA had a lot of bind and the IRS didn't so it had a better ride and that's it.

The S197 has a MUCH better setup with no bind & no side walk and it rides smooth, corners very good and would take a lot of engineering (cost) to improve with an IRS. Then the only place you would see an improvement would be in mid-corner bumps. But when you have SRA with no bind and a good shock package its indifferent.