Audi has been making AWD for a long time so I doubt there was any real ground-breaking technology there. I'm sure it's mostly off the shelf. What you're afraid to admit is that it takes some major bucks to get that kind of power out of that small of an engine. Forced induction is a cheap, relatively low-tech (but very effective) way to get big HP. Yeah, it would be great if Ford would flex some technological muscle and build a techno marvel like the RS4 V8 but at what cost to the average car buyer?

 

That's just the character I'd expect out of a Mustang. It would certainly befit the comparitive character of, say, the original little short-stroke, high winding 289 K's or the Boss 302. Simply to see and expect the Mustang to be only a lumbering big motor muscle car is very myopic and limiting to both what its heritige really is and what it can be.

There certainly there were plenty of lumbering big block drag version more in the vein of a muscle car, The GT390 was the first instance of that, soon followed by any number of 427s, 428s and even 429's. Handling pretty much sucked with all that deadweight on the nose, but they excelled on the strip

there is also a vast heritage, starting from the very earliest models, of smaller motored, more balanced Mustangs in the vein of the Pony Car that the Stang itself created. The early GT 289 K motors were the very antithesis of a big block muscle car while the Boss 302s, with their cavernous Cleveland 4bbl heads, were practically the Audi RS motors of their day -- not so great on the strip but ruling the Trans Am circuits.

And don't forget the various odd turbo 4's, some good (various SVOs), some not, but they tended to handle very well, relatively, and off a drag strip, would hold their own quite well over hill and dale.

 

Whether or not it is myopic often does not meet with perception. Many people I talk with who hear Mustang think "big engine, fast acceleration".

My ideal Mustang has elements similar to what a number of people have been clamoring for - a 5.0L V8 revver with a flat torque curve and IRS weighing in at 3400, all with a 52/48 F-R weight distribution. Wouldn't that be a fun Mustang on a road course?

The Mustang's heritage is so varied, but ask the people who will buy the GT500 what they value most. Many, I suspect, would say power.

 

I agree with your assessment -- for better or worse.

Well, maybe for worse because I think one of the strengths of the Stang has been its broad appeal whereas, perhaps as a sign of the times, Ford now seems to be constricting its appeal to a narrow (in terms of what performance is) base -- street and strip drag racers -- to the increasing exclusion or even derision (infamous "IRS snobs" quote) of other Stang enthusiasts groups (road racers, sport tourers, road rally, etc.).

Boy, this really does seem to reflect today's world.

But whereas in today's world the other camps can't quite seem to bring together a fully coherent alternative, Ford's automotive rivals seem to be gunning full speed to do just that with the upcoming Camaro and Challenger concepts. My hope is that Ford, too, recognizing the challenge, will broaden and expand the appeal of the Stang line to include these other groups. Perhaps it will take sinking sales numbers, like poll numbers, to cause Ford to reach out to others beyond a certain base rather than lash out at them.

By the way, I'll need to don a bib the next time I read your version of an ideal Mustang Now THAT's a Stang that'll take on just about any comers, anywhere, anytime with power, poise and panache. American V8 muscle and rumble combined with European sport coupe agility and balance in an stylish, refined yet affordable fastback body ... gosh, you'd almost think you were describing, say, a 1966 Mustang GT or something...

 

I think the main problem is Ford could have hit a home run with the GT500, instead they hit a double. Ford chose what they have used in the past with sucess. They could have chosen to build a well engineered modern vehicle, but obviously didn't. HTT and Ford have give us enthusiasts a slew of BS excuses, such as the reasons behind no going with an IRS rear suspension. All they had to do tell us the truth and say "Gentlemen, given our financial status, we can't allocate the R&D and added costs". I think a lot of us would be understanding.

What's going to be interesting is the next few years. Right now, Ford really doesn't have much competition in the "Muscle Car" class. The GTO is the only challenger. In the next few years, we will see the Challenger, Camaro, and redesigned GTO. All of them will have IRS suspensions. My guess is that Ford will eventually see what the competition is doing and follow their lead. Again, IMO that's not a way to run a company and is what's wrong with the big 3.

Ford had a knockout concept Cobra! Just give us an optional IRS suspension, Concept styling cues, optional Navi, and knock some weight off that porker.

 

Bingo! I might be in the minority, but I still prefer the more svelte early Mustangs to the larger ones.

I would love to contract with some company to build something like that. Anyone got some engineering budget money laying around for us??

 

Well, by that time Ford should be making more money on each vehicle. And with that extra money thow it back into future models . . . actually it would be a very smart business decision if Ford approached the market in this manner as it relates to future development in the Mustang Chassis. Guess time will tell . . .

 

The GT500 isn't a money making car. I say that in a sense that it's not going to significantly help Ford's sales and financial troubles. Simply put, Ford needs to sell Fusions and 500s.....Cars and Sedans. Ford used to make a killing on SUVs, they obviously were Ford's bread winner.

Bill Ford stated that Ford is slow to put models in the marketplace, this is why they seem to always be behind the competition. I think Ford takes 48 months vs. 37 for Mazda. The article was in Automotive News a few issues back. The Japanese are quicker to get product to the market and Ford should pick Mazda's resources.

 

I mean the Mustang Chassis in general, not specifically the GT500. Take a look at how much Ford makes on the Crown Vics, and Grand Marquis, etc. Ford makes a ton off of each sale. Yet . . they haven't thrown that money back into any development of the Panther chassis . . so go figure.

 

I am referring to the S197. I am sure Ford made some money on the Fox and SN95 chassis, since it traced back to the late 70's.

 

With the 15-20k increase over the stock GT, I'd expect composite body panels, upgraded suspension, not just "stiffer bushings", much larger brakes and the 5.4L with the SC they have planned. It should LOSE weight as a 45k car, not GAIN weight over the base.

 

I know you are Jason. My point was that while the other competitors are gearing up Ford is selling S197 at a very high rate. By the time the Camaro and Challenger hit the market Ford will have recouped some of the costs associated with the S197, meaning Ford will have made money and further development costs would not be a direct cost on to those who purchase '08-09 Mustangs. IF, big IF, Ford uses said money to further develop the S197 Chassis . . . we might have some cost savings that were inherent in the initial development but because the S197 have sold well their further development costs wouldn't necessarily be as high.

Maybe I only make sense to myself . .

 

I see your point. I obviously don't have the development costs financials, so it's up in the air. The S197 GT uses a lot of parts from the Ford bin. Based on that I would think that the development cost wouldn't be outrageous. I have no beef with the GT, I think it's a bargain. Hence, I own one.

That being said, the GT500 is a low volume car with a 15-20K increase in cost over the GT. Makes you wonder where all the money is going, doesn't it???

Given Ford's Financial problems, I think that the further developing the S197 chassis is a low priority, hence the funding will probably be allocated elsewhere.

 

I'd bet you 60% of that cost comes from amortizing the 450+hp engine and body pieces over the volumes they are projecting.

 

The money's probably going straight into ole Shel's bank account

<!--QuoteBegin-rhumb@December 14, 2005, 12:59 PM
By the way, I'll need to don a bib the next time I read your version of an ideal Mustang Now THAT's a Stang that'll take on just about any comers, anywhere, anytime with power, poise and panache. American V8 muscle and rumble combined with European sport coupe agility and balance in an stylish, refined yet affordable fastback body ... gosh, you'd almost think you were describing, say, a 1966 Mustang GT or something...

Quoted post

[/quote]

Like a Boss 302? Ford needs to bring a car like this to market, it really fits the original SVT theme, balanced performance. I agree that Ford has narrowed the focus to only the brute acceleration crowd with the GT500, to the detriment of those of us interested in a well-rounded performance package delivering not only sparkling acceleration but also stellar handling and retina-detaching braking.

Continued interest from groups who support a similar version of the ideal Mustang along with competitive pressure will certainly make it hard for Ford to ignore. Only time will tell if our "ideal Mustang" comes to fruition.

 

Sometimes the "enthusiasts" on this site befuddle me. I'll list my thoughts on many of the gripes below.

1: "The GT500 weighs too much at 3800lbs and change".

Okay, first of all for a coupe of this size the Mustang GT is pretty typical coming in around 3500lb give or take. Add a bigger motor, a blower, bigger tires, and more content and one is hard pressed to think it wouldn't gain weight. This is especially true in light of the fact that the GT500 currently looks to be demanding about a 10k premium...despite what a lot of folks here have said not a lot of money for what you will be getting.

For those who think the car is just too big, while I disagree, I have to admit that this is by far the most logical answer to their weight concerns. Frankly, for a car with a nearly 108 inch wheelbase, the great rigidity of the Mustang chassis, and a
V-8 model starting price in the mid 20's I am surprised it doesn't weigh more.

2: "The Z06 is only 15k more than a std C6 and so is the GT500, but the Chevy crowd gets more"

No it isn't, and no they don't, not for the money. The base version of the Z06 is outfitted, more or less, like a standard C6. Sure, there are differences in the power and wheels but that is the actual Z06 package, other than those parts that make the Z06 a Z06 the only option the Z06 has standard that the C6 does not is the HUD (and frankly I think this is simply GM's way of trying to get rid of too many HUD's and not generosity)

At $65,800 the Z06 is a little more than a 20k increase over a standard $44,900 C6. The GT500 is likely to show up within a smidge of 40k, and will likely contain all the same options that a 30k Mustang GT would. Give or take a few dollars I would venture a guess that the GT500 represents just about a 10k increase over a comparable GT assuming it is about 40k. Or, 10k less than the jump from C6 to Z06 represents.

Now, for that 10k I would bet Ford could give you your aluminum block, twin screw sc, IRS, the leather interior many (including I) so liked, and even some lightening components. In fact, my "ideal" GT500 would be exactly that with a rear mounted transmission. Again, for the same 20k premium a Z06 Vette demands I am sure Ford could push exactly that out the door, but I well remember what could best be described as a virtual line of people bemoaning the idea of a 50k Cobra replacment when the rumour first floated long ago on this site and others. The problem is that you cannot have it both ways, and Ford cannot apparently please everybody.

3: 'Ford should have used an aluminum block"

Actually, I agree. However, I understand why Ford is using a cast iron block and I KNOW that there would be "enthusiasts" whining like babies at the repercussions if Ford did use an aluminum block. Why? Ford is using a cast iron block because they know that a lot of people are going to drive their GT500 home, crank up the boost to just this side of nuclear, run the lowest octane gas they think they can get away with, and promptly end a rod flying out of the side of their aluminum engine block.

Granted the cast iron block wont help avert disaster altogether, the motor will still grenade, but it wont be quite as spectacular and likely not quite as diastrous. Were I making this decision I would just say let the idiots do what they may and use the aluminum block anyway, but I fully understand why Ford is not doing this.

4: "The GT500 isn't going to be fast enough"

Huh? I wouldn't mind a faster, 50k GT500, but this car is going to go like stink 3,800lb or not. Mercedes puts a very similar engine package with similar overall power into an E Class sedan that weighs over 4,000lb and uses a 4 speed auto, and that car still manages regular mid 12 second 1/4 miles. (12.5 seconds is common) Assuming no underating the GT500 makes a bit better hp and a bit less torque, but packs a 6 speed manual, a better f/r weight balance, and at least 300lb less weight than the Mercedes. Unless traction is a serious issues (which would more likley be due to tires than weight) the GT500 should easily outrun a C6 Vette through the 1/4 mile and will likely behead it from a roll.

For those who think 475hp isn't enough from a SC 5.4L, it's called balance. Ford wanted big torque across the rpm range and hp that didn't peak too far above 500 so as not to raise eyebrows. Sure, they could have done the same with a DOHC 5.0L V-8, but a SC 5.4L would suck that torqueless wonders doors off all else being equal. Dont; believe me, roll your RS4 up next to a "porky" AMG powered E Class traveling 60mph and have a go....take a picture first though, it will last much longer than your view of his tail-lights. I'll take torque every time thank you.

Finally, there are things I would change about the GT500 myself, as I allude to above. However, it seems some people are determined to moan and cry about the GT500 no matter what approach Ford takes with it so I am glad to see Ford rolling with the punches and bringing a monster like this to life.

 

There is a ton of incorrect information in your post.

1. Incorrect. See the Z06 for a prime example. Larger Brakes, Steamroller tires, 427 Engine, etc. etc. How come it didn't gain weight? It decreased weight

2. I think you need to look a little more into the C6 Z06. They are getting A TON more for their money. Also, pay close attention to how the C6R and Z06 were developed alongside each other. The GT500's base is going to be around 40K. That's a base car and I am sure there will be options. My Premium GT stickered 27K loaded minus the Shaker 1000. That's almost a 13K+ difference. Using the same logic, a optioned out C6 with Z06 like options is almost 50K. The Base Z06 is 65K. Again, that's 15K there. We aren't getting CF panels, IRS,an Aluminum/Magnessium frame and engine cradle, dry sump oiling, etc etc.

3. No one is arguing cast iron is the stronger option. What about the Aluminum Teksid block? Ford can build strong Aluminum blocks, they chose not to. A block that handles 900+ hp stock is stout enough to please 99.99% of owners and won't lead to a lot of warranty claims.

4. As for the Mercedes you were referring to, horrible example and again incorrect information. The E55 uses a 5 speed Auto and is very under-rated. The E55 is also a full blown 5 passenger Luxury car. It also incorporates modern technolgy. Interestingly enough, AMG is using a 500+ HP N/A motor in their next generation of vehicles.

 

[QUOTE]Possibly because it costs 20k dollars more than a C6? Give me a break. Wow, you mean the Z06 comes with a different motor and tires than a C6? Really? Wish the GT500 came with those. Are you serious? Yeah, the Z06 comes with all of that, GT500 has bigger brakes, a different motor, and larger tires as well...at least last I heard. Your point is?

A base GT500 is 40k and you are sure there will be options, stop the presses. Please note that the list of options on a 04 Cobra more or less consisted of wheels and mysticrhome paint. Woo hoo. The GT500 is going to come one way, fully loaded, and you would absolutely have to buy a 30k Mustang GT to get anywhere near the same stereo, interior package, etc. A Mustang GT premium starts at just over 27k. Adding the IUP, side airbags, and anti-theft system that the GT500 is likely going to have better versions of takes you to $28,175. Adding the $1,200 Mach-1000 system that the GT500 will also no doubt meet or beat as well takes you to nearly 29.5k. I haven't even considered adding ICAP or 18" wheels which would be fully appropriate considering how both the std C6, Z06, and Mustang come standard. What were you saying again?

As for Z06-like options, what Z06 like options? If you are somehow insinuating that a base Z06 is loaded, stop. If you want to get really picky, the base 1LZ Z06 is outfitted almost exactly like a mid-level 2LT C6, in fact the only real difference is that ridulous HUD the Z06 comes with.

2LT C6 price: $46,485.

1LZ Z06 price: $65,800

Alright, it isn't exactly 20k, it's more like 19 and change If you want a Z06 that compares to the 50k 3LT C6 you refer to then you have to step up to the 2LZ package which runs $68,700...still roughly 19k difference. As for C5R development getting used on the Z06, I can only assume you consider this somehow different than Grand Am Cup experience being used to develop the GT500's suspension. Oh, I see, the Grand Am Cup car is literally a stripped and tweaked production Mustang where the C5R has been radically altered in comparison, I see how that makes the Vette' situation better. ROFLMAO

[QUOTE]3. No one is arguing cast iron is the stronger option. What about the Aluminum Teksid block. Ford can build strong Aluminum blocks, they chose not to. A block that handles 900+ hp stock is stout enough to please 99.99% of owners and won't lead to a lot of warranty claims.[/QUOTE]

Can you follow an argument? I never said anyone was arguing that aluminum was as strong as cast iron. I never said aluminum blocks can't handle high hp (The Teksid block has actually reliably handled up to 1,500hp with a main cap girdle, not just 900hp.) Ford chose not to build an aluminum block because people who don't know what they are doing or talking about need the added insurance the cast iron block brings. When things start going ping and rods start flying cast iron can handle it a lot better. The fact that Ford thinks this will be common enough to warrant cast iron unfortunately says more about a large part of the 03-04 Cobra owner body than Ford. For an example note all of the people complaining that they are developing engine knocks in their Cobra's. Hmmm, none of those people would be running high levels of boost and expecting Accord reliability would they? Naaaah.

The AMG is under-rated, your kidding? Glad SVT has never done the same because, as well all know, neither the 03-04 Cobra or GT is under-rated. Earth to max, anyone home? As for my mistake with 4 or 5 speed auto, please look at essentially everything you said about the Z06 and SVT pricing, because none of it was correct. That aside, the E55 packs a 5.4L supercharged V-8 and makes around a rated (pointing that out again for you benefit) 469hp and just over 510ft-lb of torque. The GT500 packs a 5.4L SC V-8 and makes at least 475hp and 475 ft-lbs torque according to ratings. I can see how those two engines are night and day.

As for the modern technology comment, huh? As for the AMG being a luxury sedan. I wouls think that is obvious but have no idea what your point is since, with the MB being larger, heavier, and ill balanced compared to the GT500 this should lend an advantage to the GT500.

Do you read what you type?

 

Ok, I'm new here, so feel free to flame away...(actually, I've watched the Boards for a couple of years, but this is my first post).

I just wanted to weigh in with my thoughts on the GT 500, but first, a little background. I am in my mid 30s and have always dreamed of driving a Mustang...my dad bought one new in 64 and drove it the rest of his life and that is what I have always planned on doing. Problem is, I am real, real bad about waiting for the NEXT BIG THING, which is what has stopped me in the past from buying a 99 Cobra, 03 Terminator, 05 GT so far. So when the concept Shelby GT 500 was first shown earlier this year, I told myself that this was it, I was going to bite the bullet and finally buy my dream car.

I am still planning on doing that.

Yep, I am as upset as everyone else about the diluting of the concept that has occured (I really, really liked the leather interior treatment and the original hood). But in the end, it comes down to the fact that this is still a darn fine value.

First off, as much as we want it to be, since we are mostly Ford fans and the Mustang is Ford's main performance car (sorry GT fans, it is in an altogether different class)--the Mustang has never and will never be a Corvette competitor. I absolutely love Vettes, and think the C6 is an incredible vehicle, but I have to have a back seat.

So lets compare other cars that have 4 seats, RWD (that is a must for me if you are talking true performance car, not a nimble track vehicle) and 300 hp.

Shelby GT 500--3855 lbs, RWD, 450 hp--$40,000

GTO—3725 lbs, RWD 400 hp--$32,995

Audi RS4 Quattro—3637 lbs, AWD 420 hp--$70-80,000
2006 Audi S4—3825 lbs, RWD 340 hp--$47,120

BMW 650i—3814 lbs, RWD 360 hp--$72,000

Mercedes C55 AMG—3588 lbs, RWD 362 hp--$55,500

Charger SRT8—4180 lbs, RWD 425 hp--$35,320
Charger Hemi—4031 lbs, RWD 340 hp--$31,000

Chrysler 300SRT8—4160 lbs, RWD 425 hp--$39,999
Chrysler 300C--4251 lbs, RWD 340 hp--$36,000

Lexus IS 350—3527 lbs, RWD 306 hp--$36.050 base, $39,500 with Sport package

Infiniti G35 coupe—3524 lbs, RWD 298 hp—$33,650 base, $35,900 with Premium package

Current BMW M3—3394 lbs, RWD 333 hp--$45,000
Coming BMW M3—TBA, RWD 400+ est--$51,000

Cadillac CTSv—3833 lbs, RWD 400 hp--$51,399

Mustang GT—3483 lbs, RWD 300 hp--$24,999

I'm sure I missed several that should be on the list, but I tried to stay within reasonable price range. First thing that pops to mind is that the GT 500 will be the cheapest way to get 450 hp in a 4 seater. Will it be the fastest between $35 and $45? In a straight line, probably...in the curves, it might have a hard time with the GTO, but I doubt it...a current M3 might keep up, and of course, a C6 I think will outdrive it.

Speaking of the C6, I don't mean to discout that in a comparision, but remember, the Vette is designed from the ground up as a 2 seater sports car, whereas the Mustang is designed as a relatively high volume 4 seater car.

Second thing that pops to mind is that we are living in a wonderful era of cheap speed...the Daimler/Chrysler vehicles are an incredible value, as is the GTO (but sooooo boring to look at) and the Mustang GT.

Do I wish it was lighter? Absolutely. Do I think I could take a current GT and spend $12 to $15 on mods and beat the GT 500...yep, but I don't have the desire to do it. I want to buy this out of the dealer and won't be turning a lot of wrenches on it.

And yes, I do think I'll be able to get my Shelby GT 500 for $40,000. I won't get one of the first ones to drive off the lot, but they will be able to be had at sticker within 6 months.

Feel free to shoot away, and thanks for the Board for all of the great info and discussion that is here...

 

65to05-

Great post and hello and welcome!