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

Shelby GT500 Balance

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 5/4/05, 10:42 AM
  #61  
 
rhumb's Avatar
 
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'd love to see Nissan take the FM chassis, stick in one of their 300hp plus V8s, go light on the fluff, and create a Japanese Pony car. I'm not sure why they haven't really tried yet, but I think such an effort would really hold Ford's feet to the fire and instead of excuses and rationalizations, you'd get true world class engineering and all around performance (not just straight line, which the Mustang has always done well). Look how their full-size pickup, a traditionally American bastion, stacks up against the locals. Why couldn't they do likewise in the performance coupe / ponycar arena?

Or maybe Daimler/Chrysler using a shortened and lightened version of the 300/Magnum chassis *** Hemi motor...

Or GM waking from its ineptitude and torpor and doing a decent F-car successor...

I believe good, robust competition is the best driver for automotive and performance excellence. The Mustang, especially with the demise of the F-cars, really doesn't have any truly direct competition, and I think suffers somewhat for it. Not that's it's a bad car, it's really quite good in general, it's just that I don't think it's quite what it could and ought to be.

While I generally like HTT, I do think his statements, and those of SVT, do have some credibility issues. Why would it cost SVT $5K to put an IRS into the S197 chassis, one supposedly designed to accept it, when it cost Coletti and co. far less to put one in the 199-2004 Cobra, a chassis never intended for such a suspension? And this statement about the torsional rigidity going flaccid seems just silly.

I think he really is sort of forced to put on the good corporate hat and parrot the propaganda over what was likely an economic decision rather than engineering. Ford's hemorrhaging money at a prodigious rate and I'm sure they’d rather sink development money into the trucks and SUVs they've gotten so comfortable selling rather than a good-enough Mustang that'll sell well enough by sheer dint of being a new Mustang if nothing else.
Old 5/4/05, 11:40 AM
  #62  
GT Member
 
Vermillion98's Avatar
 
Join Date: April 25, 2004
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by grabbergreen+May 4, 2005, 12:10 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(grabbergreen @ May 4, 2005, 12:10 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Joes66Pony@May 3, 2005, 8:45 PM
He also said in Motor Trend way back when that the new Cobra was definitely going to have IRS.

I'm not saying that HTT is lying or anything. But I'm sure he also knows the questions people are having as to why change to SRA when the previous gen Cobra had IRS, so he's going to say what he has to say to paint the SRA in the best possible light.

It's also worth noting that the word "Cobra" doesn't appear anywhere on the badging of the car, and Motor Trend's cover article simply calls it the "Shelby GT-500" (which is less of a mouthful and works far better anyway), despite the fact that the article on Ford's website inserts the word "Cobra" in there.

The possibility (though however unlikely) does exist that this effort from SVT and Shelby is not the next "Cobra," since I'm getting the feeling that HTT would love to do an SVT-only Mustang...

[/b][/quote]

The GT-500 is probably another special edition like the Bullitt and Mach 1... and not what the SVT Cobra was in previous years. They probably have more surprises waiting...
Old 5/4/05, 09:14 PM
  #63  
GT Member
Thread Starter
 
grabbergreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by SigMachi@May 4, 2005, 9:19 AM
American workers should just eat bread and water and live in shacks down by the river. Who needs electricity, running water and sanitation anyway.
Indeed not, but that doesn't mean they should get paid more (in both wage AND benefits) for unskilled labor than a job that I got a 150K dollar education just to meet the eligibility requirements for.

The UAW has negotiated themselves out of a job. Maybe they might realize it before it comes true, but I doubt it.
Old 5/5/05, 07:48 AM
  #64  
Cobra Member
 
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@May 4, 2005, 10:45 AM
I believe good, robust competition is the best driver for automotive and performance excellence. The Mustang, especially with the demise of the F-cars, really doesn't have any truly direct competition, and I think suffers somewhat for it. Not that's it's a bad car, it's really quite good in general, it's just that I don't think it's quite what it could and ought to be.

While I generally like HTT, I do think his statements, and those of SVT, do have some credibility issues. Why would it cost SVT $5K to put an IRS into the S197 chassis, one supposedly designed to accept it, when it cost Coletti and co. far less to put one in the 199-2004 Cobra, a chassis never intended for such a suspension? And this statement about the torsional rigidity going flaccid seems just silly.

I think he really is sort of forced to put on the good corporate hat and parrot the propaganda over what was likely an economic decision rather than engineering. Ford's hemorrhaging money at a prodigious rate and I'm sure they’d rather sink development money into the trucks and SUVs they've gotten so comfortable selling rather than a good-enough Mustang that'll sell well enough by sheer dint of being a new Mustang if nothing else.

While I do love the GT500 from a styling perspective, I agree that Ford left something on the table in terms of developing the ultimate Mustang (which is what the GT500 SHOULD be). The lack of direct competition should concern all of us who love Mustangs. Without a direct competitor, Ford will never fully develop the car to it's maximum potential.

If you want an example, take a look back at the Mustangs of the past two decades. Because of the Camaro, Ford spent development dollars to continually upgrade the Mustang in an effort to capture the hearts, minds and wallets of consumers and it worked. Interest in the Mustang is large and growing, based in large part on the effort Ford made to refine and improve the breed.

HTT's argument on the IRS doesn't wash with me either, I just think he is towing the corporate line and being a good little boy and saying the price was too high. The new Mustang was born to have an IRS and should have one along with other refinements to go from being a great car to an exceptional one. Just my $.02

Woo hoo!! 100 posts!!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CoyotePremium13
2015 - 2023 MUSTANG
11
10/7/15 07:17 PM
austin101385
'10-14 Shelby Mustangs
3
10/2/15 01:00 PM
GLOCKer
General Mustang Chat
2
9/28/15 05:20 PM



Quick Reply: Shelby GT500 Balance



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:28 AM.