crazyhorse

I just wondered how it handles. I have only test driven one on highways and straight streets.

Actually it is an apples to improved apples comparison. This is the new Cobra. Is it better than the last? That is what we are really comparing. IF you want a handling car, buy something else. I like the total package for the dollar the SVT has to offer.

There are cars out there that will out handle the Mustangs and run with them on the street/strip. We all have the ability to choose from any of those. I choose the fastest factory Mustang ever. You guys can choose the EVO/STI/350Z/G35/BMW/c6 or whatever you like. The best way to teach Ford a lesson is to not buy their cars.

People, like me, are going to buy the Mustang anyway. It is about more than the shape of the hood or the design of the suspension. The car has history, style, enough performance and a sort of brotherhood that the other cars don't have (Corvettes excluded of course). THis will be my third mustang. I'll smile each time I start it up and not even think about that .03g or hood that could have been.

JeffreyDJ

Well, you'd expect the new Cobra to out handle in all situations, and it will. However, I think his point is Ford has a chance to hit a homerun, so they better.

I'll be buying a new Mustang once the Mach is paid off. Right, the chances of it being a SVT version aren't look great.

max2000jp

Don't take offense to this, but your mentality is the reason why the Big 3 is hurting. You will buy a Mustang no matter what. The Big 3 builds cars that are "good enough", instead of building some revolutionary. There are exceptions, such as the C6 and SRT8 of course. SVT is in trouble if this is the best they can do. SVT should start looking for engineers from GM's Performance Division.

I won't buy a GT500. I am perfectly happy with my GT and the GT500 doesn't do anything well enough for me to move up to one.

TomServo92

How can you make a statement like this since:

1) You've never driven a GT500

and

2) You've seen absolutely no performance tests on it?

IMO, it doesn't seem very intelligent to make blanket statement like the one you've made based on assumptions. I'm withholding my judgement until I see some concrete test numbers, road tests reviews, and (if possible) my own driving impressions.

crazyhorse

I'm not offended by that. And, don't get me wrong, I completely understand what you mean. I have always been disappointed by the build quality of the cars. I bought a used 528i in 1999 instead of a new Cobra (it was actually a 1998 Cobra leftover). I drove both and was impressed by the overall car of the BMW. It didn't take long for me to wish I had the V8 Mustang in spite of its poor quality. There is just something intangible about them that I am enamored with.

The biggest knock on the Corvettes is quality of material used on/in the car. The Camaros are no different. They always outperformed the Mustang, yet the 'stang still outsold the Camaro. IT isn't just about track numbers and technology. It is about driving experience and driver satisfaction (and ultimately - Sales).

I am in a position to buy anything that is about $50k or less (if I could go 65, it'd be the Z06). No one except Corvette is offering the American V8 that I want. There are a lot of nice cars available in that range.

What got me (Us) on this tangent is that I am tired of the car being judged before we even know what we are getting and HTT is having his head called for before we even see what he can do with the top Mustang. I think he did a pretty good job with the Mustang GT. Coletti (and I am a fan) had well documented problems in his reign -the 1999 Cobra power problems, the multiple Ford GT problems.

Just because the car does not have IRS and the cool hood,etc., does not mean it won't be a darn nice car. Let's give it a chance. If it doesn't live up to the hype, then we buy the C6 (I haven't ruled that out, BTW) or a hopped up 350Z or whatever we desire.

Are we (Me) anxious about the release or what. I am going to Detroit to see for myself.

Evil_Capri

Well . . I wouldn't call them 'blanket statements' since by most accounts one can assume some sense of performance figures given the numbers on the GT500 (of which have been confirmed) and compared to '05-06's that have S/C'ers.

The one I saw in person this past fall at a local drag strip here in Cincinnati was great looking, but I too will withhold some judgement until I drive one.

1 COBRA

The passion is alive and that's why some of us are critical. Good attitude and honesty from Ford would have made a world of a difference.

Had Ford been candid, up front, and explained to its SVT following the changes, issues, and reasons why, we would have nodded, bent over, and thank them for it all in one motion. Loyalty is not a one way street.

Those who desire to be apologists for Ford and HTT despite how they have approached and handled the issues and concerns of IRS, the hood, price, Barrett-Jackson, and abusive dealers, it is fine to express your opinions just like it should be fine for those who have been forced to have different and contrasting opinions.

max2000jp

Again, I can make assumptions using givens. First, weight is a performance cars enemy. A heavy car usually tends to understeer and obviously not feel nimble. Second, we have a good idea of what the curb weight will be and how much HP the car will have. I can calculate an estimated power to weight ratio. Using the figures already given to us, the hp/lbs will be similar to a base C6. A 4000 lbs car doesn't make for a great performance platform. Again, weight is our enemy. The GT500 will be a straight line car IMO, given what we have been told. My guess is the car runs roughly 12.6-12.8@112ish based on preliminary data.

TomServo92

I don't disagree with you but it's still based on assumptions albeit on some pretty good preliminary info. That being said, I will still reserve final judgement until I see actual test data.

max2000jp

Ford could be throwing us some bad information to throw us off too. They could also underrate the GT500. If everything holds true, my numbers should be fairly accurate.

Tony Alonso

His bachelor's degree is in mechanical engineering...see this story.

Tony Alonso

I think the engineering challenge of making a bigger 4-seat car that has to stand up to such big power means the Mustang will invariably weigh more.

The Corvette is more focused. GM had a good starting point for further weight reduction by starting with the C5. The base C6 chassis was shortened from the C5. The C6 Z06 is even further optimized with carbon fiber body panels and an aluminum chassis.

You do bring up a good point about the price differential, but the base Corvette's price is $4000 more than the GT500 coupe.

It is a bummer the highest performing Mustang is the heaviest one. Since the engine and bigger suspension and braking components account for a lot of weight, I don't see what Ford could have done and still kept the $40,000 price. I still cringe at $40,000 for a Mustang. Heck, I cringe at a $27,000 300 hp Mustang!

bigred0383

Just for anybody else, besides me, who was wondering what the actual weight gain over a GT was...roughly 330 LBS. (GT's are listed at ~3520 in Motor Trend, the SVT link says the GT500 will be ~3850).

Now I am not an engineer, but how much heavier is a 5.4 Iron block (with DOHC) than a 4.6 Aluminum block (with SOHC)? + some upgraded suspension bits and a 6 speed...am I forgetting anything?

This car is really starting to remind me of the late 60's early 70's Shelbys, less race, more luxury. Sure it's got the engine still, but the engine has a lot more crap to pull around.

And I still despise the hood.

That being said, I can't wait to see the reviews and the final product (even though I am guessing the convertible pictures we saw are it).

future9er24

that statement caused an idea to smack me in the face. as we all know the later Shelbys werent really much in the way of performance automobile. big motors yeah, but like bigred sed, there was more stuff to haul.

i think what the name "Shelby" has become is a status symbol more than anything. its not really the nimble speedy peppy sports car of '65. its more of a "look at me and how badarse i am"

know what i mean? people these days just associate his name with "fast" (and with good reason, the cobra roadsters and early GT350s were darn nice cars) but the thing is, this new shelby isnt being built in the same spirit. its a showoff car, not a street legal racer anymore.

and this is whats turning ME off as a customer (HA yeah rite... like i can afford another car, let alone a new SE...)

what i think most enthusiasts REALLY want is a car that doesnt have too many frills, but is still conveneint and ergonomical as a street car, yet still has a major emphasis on performance. the modern mustang doesnt have the no frills, zero option, bigb block so to speak. u cant get the best motor without getting all this crap you might not neccasarily want.

im not really sure if my post has a point anymore, b/c if it did its been lost with my ranting... but heres what i really want to say:

ford, give us an SE without leather stitched everything, without ginormous wheels or craaazy bodykits and little doodads like that. give us an SE that looks a bit different (just black out the friggin hood and put magnums and a ductail and thats really all anyone needs lol) but still pays more attention to the suspension and motor. dont make us pay $40K for a car to pay for all that leather, ask us to pay about $5K less for a car that has everything we need , and nothing we dont.

i probably offended someone with all that, or said something blatantly ignorant or something, and if i did let me know. but this is how i feel on the GT500 in general. in otherwords.... for a halo car its not all that alluring...

max2000jp

Withstanding power isn't a challenge in a modern designed chassis. The Corvette is a more focused sports car, but look at the difference btwn the C6 and Z06. It's really almost a different car. I am not trying to compare MSRPs since the C6 is more expensive. Rather I was just trying to point out that the differnce between a GT and GT500 versus a C6 and Z06 is very much the same.

Ford could have produced a car that is lighter than the GT. Heck, there are mods out such as the BMR K-member that save weight. Add some CF panels and aluminum to that and it should be easy. That approach takes time and engineering. The easy way is to add more power.

I can't wait to see the reaction from the Mopar and GM guys. We are going to see some criticism!

Hollywood_North GT

If you're going to Detroit, don't forget to pack the camera!

I think we're all just going to have to wait and see what Ford gives us. The problem is that so much of the leaked info (and after all, we've been impatiently scavenging for it) does not bode well for the car. The two big mechanical issues that will be hard to get around are the portly nature of the beast and the steel girder rear suspension (you just KNOW what Jeremy Clarkson will have to say about THAT when he and 'The Stig' get it out for a spin!). Manufacturers of GT cars (most cars, in fact) just don't use SRA anymore, and haven't for years. It went out with the carburetor and bias ply tires. It's there because apparently Ford didn't have the R&D money for this implementation or felt they needed to cut the costs somewhere and that Mustang devotees wouldn't care.

So this new 21st century Mustang is immediately handicapped by employing long out-of-date bits of engineering for important aspects of the driving dynamic. Sure, SRA is fine for straight lines and smooth pavement, but twisty roads with a choppy surface are almost guaranteed to destabilize the back end. The Europeans have been making fun of us for YEARS about this...yet Ford keeps finding new justifications for using it (and keeps losing money, I might add).

Then there's the cosmetic de-contenting. The hood, the wheels, the badging, the interior, etc...all appear to be suffering from the accounting department's red pen. And that's unfortunate. Because if this car doesn't even SAY Shelby anywhere on it, then it's NOT a Shelby, IMHO.

And a non-Shelby "Shelby" is not a car I'm going to pay $40K + for.

68notch

Cast iron is ~2.5 times as dense as common aluminum alloys. That is, for the same volume, cast iron will weigh more than twice as much. So, yeah, the weight difference between the two motors could be significant depending on the percentage of the engine's total mass the block comprises. EDIT: On the other hand, cast iron is practically indestructible (see MKIV Toyota Supra Turbo).

Tony Alonso

I would say the S197 is a modern, designed chassis that was compromised in ultimate performance terms by cost and time constraints and having to be all things to all model levels from least to most performance. The fit and finish and strength levels are much better than the last generation, and there is more room inside. However, it gained weight to do that.

I do wish Ford would have been able to take more time to really look at creative solutions to reduce the weight, given the price level. I would love to have sat in on those engineering discussions which resulted in the decisions that led to where the car is now. It's too bad carbon fiber and aluminum cost more to repair. I would assume those might have helped at some level.

I am wondering if people would buy the car if the power output was reduced to save on weight. It reminds of the 427 Cobra - big, fat motor making a light chassis nose-heavy but people still think "Now that's a Shelby"!

I do think the Z06 C6 Corvette is an excellent example of time and engineering being applied to a fantastic performance result. I expect that car's business model is much, much different than Mustang.

Ford's bottom line right now is to stay in business. In the end, I am guessing the GT500 will help in that mission, no matter the compromises they made. I certainly hope it helps.

conv_stang

4155!!!!!!!!!!!! good grief. maybe each one comes with a Carroll Shelby lifesize clone in the trunk to help resale value???

Autotrader Ad......
2007 Limited Edition Shelby GT500, low miles Carroll Shelby clone still in plastic!

at that weight it might not beat the 03/04 cobra

Shelby Roadster

Could you imagine what the car would weigh if it was equipped with IRS?