http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../60605010/1006

The gist of the article can be summed up with this quote, "In sports car terms, the GT500 doesn’t prescribe to the lightweight design philosophy that ruled the likes of the Shelby Cobra: The GT500 tips the scales at a none-too-svelte 3920 pounds. Many have said the price of all those pounds is a decidedly un-500-horse feeling when propelling down the road. Some have gone so far to say the car feels slow, but we believe it’s more accurately described as the tamest-feeling 500 horses with which we’ve ever played. Is that a good thing? We’re not sure.

We wouldn’t mind a louder exhaust note, either. As is, it sounds awesome, burbling away in a satisfyingly American-V8 manner at idle and exploding at full bore. But a little more of it would be nice, perhaps accompanied by a smidge less supercharger whine, which we found fairly loud.

Most of all, we would prefer the car have a more cohesive, unified, singular sense of identity. Is it a Shelby? Is it a Cobra? Is it really a product of SVT, which has shown no signs of life for a couple of years now?

Recalling the fact the original GT500 also wore a snake emblem as part of its heritage, Ford felt it necessary to festoon the new GT500 with the same emblem, on the grille and both fenders. “SVT” can be found on the wheels, while “Shelby” appears only on the rear decklid. Frankly, we think a single brand would be less confusing to both newbies and Shelby veterans alike."

 

Man the mags for the most part are having fun tearing the car up. Sad to see this.

 

Ford had the chance to use lighter stronger materials for this engine build up, knowing it does not have to have that much additional weight to make 500hp flywheel. They had a chance to improve the power to weight ratio early on by adding the lightest materials to add real power. Then to not offer added support and roll deletion for the suspension, beyond a thicker swaybar, and somewhat beefed up shocks, struts, springs.

All I know is I'm happy with my supercharged Mustang GT, changed out suspension, and better brakes. Sadly Erik

 

They also gave a lukewarm mention of the live rear axle, noting how readily it gets a bit lively when faced at any combination of bump and turned helm. Recounted Ford's spin regarding weight/cost, but didn't seem to buy it, hook and sinker, like many others. I'm in the doubter's catagory on that too, given that Ford itself proved it could be done affordably, relatively lightly and effectively in the previous Cobra -- that on the ancient Fox platform that was far less amenable to an IRS than the S197, which was presumably designed with some thought to including it at some point.

 

The IRS debate will never end.

I know first hand that is was developed for the car. The bean counters killed it, end of story. I don't think it would have made a significant weight/price penalty as the PR spin indicates.

Considering the word on the street was the next gen Cobra was to essentially benchmark the M3, I can understand the lukewarm reception.

 

You going to comment in every single GT500 review thread about your modified, unwarrantied Mustang? I think we get the picture.

 

At least we didn't get the full list of mods in this one.

 

No, but when some kid askes his dad why that GT just smoked the GT500 at the light he'll be the last one laughing.

 

Until the GT500 owner spends a LOT less $ and time and comes back to hand the GT (modified or otherwise) it's ( ) ( ).

 

with a good tune and a few simple mods that car could be a monster

 

I think at the end of the day it ALL came down to costs...and perhaps Ford's own perception of what the Mustang is.

There are no surprises here. With that much weight, much of it leaning over the front end, and a girder for a rear axle, the results are pretty predictable.

Futher proof why this car isn't worth a penny over $40K.

Right now I'm laughing at those who are forking out an additional $20K for the car.

 

I have no doubt that his car is fast. I would be proud of it, too. I was poking fun at him listing the mods in nearly every post. As you have done, he should put them in a sig. rather than each post.

 

keep it on topic fella

 

A so-so review. I think that the only magazines that will have little criticism for the GT500 will be Mustang Magazines, such as MM&FF.

 

Truthfully, I hope it gets luke warm reviews all over. Then some of the people will lose interest in the car and demand will fall.

 

It is the function of magazines to be critical. The trade rags are not doing handsprings over the new GT500. But, part of their job is to be critical. I don't see any problem with that.

Though the press has not been overwhelmingly impressed, the general consensus is the GT500 (at MSRP) is not a bad offering. Car & Driver picked the C6 Corvette over the GT500 in their comparison test. However read the review of the C6.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...lby-gt500.html

"
... we did find a few other things to complain about. One is the transmission, which required a patient hand to accurately perform the second-to-third-gear upshift. The test drivers missed it repeatedly, and the stubby gearshift rod went into some nether land in the shift pattern that felt as if it were in gear but was actually in neutral. Both cars use the Tremec T56 design, but the GT500’s shorter, more direct shift linkage works a lot better. - from Car and Driver"

Later in the article, the author mentions the steering:

"the variable-assist steering system could also use some work. On the track, the effort is fine, but on the road it feels artificially heavy and won’t win any prizes for being communicative. It’s not awful, but the GT500’s is better. - from Car and Driver"

And though the GT500 was critizied for weight, and performance, even though the article picked the C6 as the better performer, the reported ended the review of the GT500:

"As four-seaters go, the GT500 is the best bang for your buck around - from Car and Driver"

The review of the GT500 is certainly not one of unqualified approval, but does not wind up trashing the vehicle either. It certainly seems far less harsh, critically, that what has been printed in this forum.

Just my $.02

 

Wait till Top Gear reviews the car!

 

I read somewhere that the GT-500 uses an updated model of the T56 that is called something like a T6060. Among the improvements in the GT-500 trannie are triple synchronizers in some of the gears to improve shifting.

 

With normal all options price, sales tax, gusler tax, insurance policy, and the $3500.00 to overcome the mediocre slightly lowered suspension, how much is this car going to total in the end? $52,000.00

Actually, that's not bad. I'm going to order my wife one. She likes cornering slowly when she's been shopping anyway. Love Erik

 

Why do you keep ******* the suspension? It hasn't been driven by any of us and the media has liked it. Are you here to discuss the GT500 or to brag about your car?