I hate the Mustang seats as well. I slip and slide when I take a tight turn.

 

I haven't followed this whole arguement but something caught my eye. One of you guys said the Z06 is a sales flop? I found that hard to believe so I looked it up. The Z06 has been selling around 5-6,000 units a year since 2001. In 2007, over 8,000 sold. I'm not sure how that would qualify as a sales flop when they keep selling more each year.

Have fun.

 

My father owns a C6 Z06. It is the best car I have ever driven.

 

I didn't say that I wanted soft and plush, I said I wanted comfortable and plenty of firmer seats are very comfortable. Also, I agree that a sports coupes seats should hold you firmly in place, as I alluded to above IMO the Vette's seats are terrible at the same offering no real bolstering and only the appearance of the same.

Don't let appearances fool you. The design of the seat skins themselves can make a seat appear radically different even in shape, but it doesn't mean that the seats aren't otherwise the same. .

 

I said it and I'll stand by it. The bigger issue here isn't how many Z06 models Chevy has been able to sell, but what they have had to do to sell them. Z06 is subject to the same rebates and incentives the standard Vette is which means it has at least 2k on the hood that I know of, and that is just from memory I haven't bothered to look it up for this discussion.

Further, the car was regularly moving below msrp before the first model year was even through. The whole point of cars like this is a: prestige/image, b: increased sales revenue for GM and the dealer. Given the fact that most performance models demand premiums for the first year or two of production any hi-po special edition of this magnitude that can't make it through at least one model year selling at msrp is a failure, and a blatant one at that.

 

Why was it a "dumb name"? What would be a better name? I don't think some people sat around and said "let's get rid of SVT because its a dumb name." Cost cutting removed a low volume program with a special marketing arm that was out of mainstream Ford processes.

I am not sure what the good reason was. It has been reported that the changes happened because of $$.

 

http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-mus...t500-2010.html

 

GM could easily reduce production, like Nissan did with the GTR and the dealers would sell them with ADM's. Simple supply and demand my friend. In the end, the C6 Z06 is a great car but does have its faults. Performance people will see what the car is capable of and forgive the cheapish interior. Hell, Ford had to charge double the MSRP for the Ford GT to match the C6 Z06 in performance.

I am really looking forward to the C7's interior. GM is leaps and bounds ahead of Ford and Chrysler in new interiors. The new CTS and Malibu is a great example.

 

 

Looks good and Can't wait.

 

That door panel is looking great.

 

Exactly!

BANG for the BUCK, nothing on the planet comes close to comparing to the FACTORY warranted 500 horsepower GT500. The only guys arguing otherwise do not have one.

I couldn’t give a rodent’s derriere about CARROLL SHELBY or SVT or having those names on my car. I simply put up with it because it is the ONLY way to get a FACTORY (not modified) FORD supercharged 500 Horsepower hand built 5.4 liter race engine and a six-speed transmission in a bone stock car for under $50,000, PERIOD! I’ve had a lifetime of half-assed hotrods, there is absolutely no comparing an after market modified car with the factory 500 Horsepower hand built race engine you get in the GT500.

For less than what a comparable 2008 Chevy 505-horsepower Z06 ($72,985~$82,000 MSRP) or the 2008 now 600-horsepower Viper SRT-10 ($85,985~$98,110 MSRP) costs I have my 2008 GT500 ($45,095 MSRP) and my 2008 Bullitt ($32,165 MSRP).

 

LMAO, Here we go with the 5.4 crapola again...

Hum Lets see how that little 281 stands up to the 390….

The original 1968 Mustang GT 390 boasted a 0-60 time of 7.8 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 15.2 seconds at 94.0 mph, according to Motor Trend. Now: Ford engineers modified the 2008 Mustang Bullitt’s chassis and suspension to fine-tune handling and ensure the extra horsepower and torque from the 4.6-liter V-8 is put to good use. Motor Trend clocks the 2008 Ford Mustang Bullitt at 5 seconds even for 0-60, with a quarter-mile time of 13.7 seconds at 102.7 mph.

Obviously you wouldn't know performance or a home run if you tripped over it...

0-60 ¼ mile
1968 390 ci 7.8 15.2

2008 281 ci 5.0 13.7

 

The standard LS3 C6 is the same MSRP and blows the doors off the GT500. It's arguably the best bang for the buck sports car.

 

This man does have a point.

 

Before anyone blows a gasket and this turns into a huge wine fest, the man did say "arguably". Which means it could be argued to be the best, as can the GT500.

 

I don't know if I would say that GM's interiors are leaps and bounds ahead of Ford's and Chrysler's. While I've never actually been inside the cabin of a Malibu, I have sat in a co-worker's brand new CTS and, I agree, it's better than anything Ford and Chrysler currently have to offer. However, it looks as though Ford's stepping up big time with the new Lincoln MKS and F-150; and the new Dodge Ram interior is really, really sweet!

 

+ 1

A c6 can be had for 40K. There is no arguing bang for the buck.

 

Yeah the mustang has the bang for buck catagory in the 25k market but the 40k market is clearly the vette.

and thats perfectly fine, the gt500 is a limited production car and with limited production you are rarely going to match a full production model already costing that much in bang for buck.

 

You say SVT sucks? but i'm pretty sure SVT did the work on that GT500 of yours. all Shelby did is let them use the name. so if SVT sucks then your car sucks is what your saying. no matter what the situation is for SVT these days, they were a big part of Ford in the past and should be in the future.