Personally, I don't mind if they offer automatics with the new Shelby. They've already decided what to use for the manual tranny, so it wouldn't take away R & D from the manual.

But let's not get carried away. Autos are NOT just as fast. Unless your running the push-button trannys they have in Formula 1 cars, your automatic will NEVER be as fast as a manual with a competent driver.

And as far as the "macho" thing goes, I don't find being masculine absurd at all. Would you say the same to a feminine woman? I take pride in being a man. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a man.

 

You would be surprised what computers can do. Computers are getting faster and faster and more affordable at these higher speeds. I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years, manual drivers won't be able to hold a light to an automatic shift speeds. Not to mention that an auto would shift more consistently and performances would be easier to repeat.

 

Oh, I totally agree, holderca1! But as of right now, the only sort of trannys that are better than manuals are the push-button shifters found in the Formula 1 cars. We're still quite aways off from seeing a lightning quick auto in a street car, so for now manuals will outperform an auto any day of the week, if not for the shift speed, then for the increased powertrain loss.

 

I think it's funny reading the posts claiming a Shelby shouldn't have a automatic. The man himself has 3 automatic Shelby Mustangs(2'66 fastbacks and a '66 continuation convert),sure he's old you say.......BUT he's ALWAYS had those cars,even the GT-500s he owned in the past were autos,he also still has a couple of 289 Cobras,the REAL cobras,they are also AUTOMATICS,go figure.
The first Cobras,the 260/289 roadsters were offered with automatics,they made 25-30 in all. A automatic 427 Cobra prototype was built,but when that beast downshifts when you're not prepared,it would have been a widow-maker,they only built the one.
The '65 Shelby Mustang was the only year a auto wasn't offered for the stangs,but that one was the meanest Shelby Mustang ever made.
An automatic would be a nice option,as long as it's a option. It won't hurt the image of the car at all and at most,it would bring more sales,which means more Cobras and more Mustangs,which would be a great thing(duh)
So go ahead,bash on automatics all you want,don't like them,don't buy one and DON'T bash someone else for choosing whatever tranny,it's not your car. Carroll Shelby gave the Mustang the sporting image it has to this day,and if an automatic is good enough for the tough guy who poppped nitro pills to stay alive to win LeMans.............then a automatic is good enough for any and all mustangs and their owners.

 

Well in defense of the slushbox, while it is't as efficient as a manual tranny, those things are pretty consistant when it comes to drag racing.

 

i called svt and they said no automatic! who know? maybe this will change down the road

 

Well, I don't have data for all autos out there so I can't really say anything about that.
But as far as the semiauto trannys, you simply don't need to go all the way to F1 cars to find a mega fast tranny: SMG and SMG-II of BMW. The fastest one of these can change a gear in 150 millisecond and they cost 2400 dollars (including Park Distance Control with the package, which priced alone is 350 dollars. So I assume it's safe to say the tranny by itself would be rightly priced at 2050 dollars)
and I believe it beats 99.99 % of all manuals with all kinds of drivers.
And all of this for 2k...
PS: for you drag racers, did I forget to mention that SMG-II has a feature called "Launch Control" especially made for those take offs like a rocket-powered bat out of heck ?
Come on Ford, give us one, please !

 

Along with the fact that the SMG and SMG-II are incredibly bug plagued.

Too much reliance on techno gizmo in my view. Just ask how Bimmer owners enjoy their iDrive systems.

An SMG or paddle style shifter in a Mustang would be cost prohibitive, and frankly unnecessary. If you're not going to include IRS (and use the same arguments), then there's no need for an auto in the GT500. Besides the facts that auto actually rob power from an engine (which an IRS doesn't do).

 

I've got an 03 Mach 1 with a 5-speed and I wouldn't mind an auto in the new Shelby......

 

Granted this wasn't an actual test drive, but I was pulling an SMG equiipped bimmer into a gargage for some service and that set-up felt just plain weird, It was neat all the same, just weird

 

Plagued ? By what problems ? I personally haven't heard anything wrong about them, just praise. Do you have any info to substantiate this ? I am honestly asking, not being funny or anything.

Well, as far as I know, IDrive wasn't the most succesful gizmo ever created indeed. But here we are talking about SMG, not IDrive.

I also would love to have the GT500 with IRS as for me a car like this should be the best possible and if this means tagging another 5-10k to the price, so be it.
It's like baking the most luxurious cake and then not adding any icing in order to save a couple of bucks on the final price, with the hope of attracting 5 % more clients.
Well, I respect your opinion about the SMG in the GT500, but frankly mine is that it would be a great addition to this car as I personally feel that an SMG style tranny would just be perfect for this type of vehicle.
And I understand an auto robs power, but really, if you have 450 hp under the hood, do you mean to say that having an auto or an smg (=auto+semiauto) you'd feel this HUGE difference ? Just by the time you save with every shift, you'd be faster than with a manual tranny.


I understand. It's just a very new concept for the utter majority of drivers out there (I myself never drove a car with an SMG), I believe it just takes time to get used to it, wouldn't you think so ?
It's my opinion that in 10 years from now, auto w/semiauto capability or a manual-tranny-transformed-into-auto-but-still-with-manual-capability like the SMG will dominate the market.
You get the best of both worlds (manual and auto) in one package, can't beat it.

 

I shouldn't say that it's problem plagued, rather that reviews for it have been mixed at best. The closest thing that Ford has to SMG is the system used in the Aston Martin Vanquish, which has been drawing less than favorable reviews, which is kind of surprising because it's the same Magneti Marelli system used by Ferrari which people love. There's also the system used in the DB9, but that's more of a traditional auto with manual control (akin to Porsche's Tiptronic).

My basic argument is, if IRS is too costly to include on a GT500, then why is an automatic palatable? The same people making arguments against IRS, are also the ones making arguments for automatics. Yet automatics are more complex systems that will increase costs and actually hinder performance.

 

Yep, as far as I know as well, generally reviewers think that the SMG is a bit coarse compared to say for example the DSG of Audi, which is the one everybody seems to praise so much. I think this is caused by the fact that basically SMG was a manual tranny converted into semiauto and full auto, rather than designed from the beginning as such. But from what I gather, it seems to be mighty effective when used for sporty and/or race driving and it seemed to be the ideal candidate for the GT500, as far as what Ford ought to offer in alternative to a manual tranny.

Oh you find here a supporter of both IRS and auto+semiauto...
IMO, they should offer both as an option and everyone would be happy (so that people can choose what they want in their car. Bring the GT500 as is with a few goodies in it and then give people the chance to customize it the way they want with options. I for one, I would gladly pay 5-10k more in options, if this means IRS + SemiAuto and mind you, I drove stick for 20 years...the GT500 is the car that could beat all other sports and exotics as far as bang for the buck, let's not limit it by restricting the possibilities of improving it while still maintaining Ford's warranty...).
I agree with you regarding people that say "No IRS because it's too costly but yes to auto": it doesn't make sense to me either.

 

This car is hot and Ford knows it. It will sell even if it had square wheels. You will see all these options (IRS, Auto, etc.) but not right away. Ford is not going to let all the gooodies out of the bag until sales start slowing down, after a couple of model years. IMO, Ford should give us what we want now--we will pay for it. my $0.02.

 

Hopefully the two automatic posts in this forum - with lots of responses to both of them - will catch someone's interest at Ford. In any event, it makes for great reading - everyone's so passionate about this issue which is a good thing