I thought it was more like $10 per pound.

 

The article in which the Shelby is said to have run 12.25 is very exciting, but I think we need to take it with a grain of salt. The quote was made by the head of SVT, so you get my point?

12.25 would be awesome, but I will wait to see it before I believe it.

 

If he had quoted only the 12.25, I'd be tempted to agree with you. But he also stated a 12.9 was run during the 5 magazine test session, which leads me to believe the time is legit. If it was a pure a marketing statement as you imply, he wouldn't have quoted the slower time.

 

What he said.

 

I wasn't "implying" anything. I merely stated I will believe it when I see it (meaning I am curious to know who ran that, and how). Ford would not be stupid enough to make a comment like that for pure marketing purposes; I think we all know that.

 

I'm not trying to start an argument but this is the part of your post where you implied that it was a marketing ploy:

 

And you don't have a warranty anymore.

 

Sorry to anyone who ever actually hopes to buy one of these things, but i know i will never get a car like this, and I say Ford should simply charge what it can get. Maybe they coulda sold it for 5 grand cheaper without losing money on the deal, but I think they'll still sell every one of them at the current price, dealers will obviously get away with charging a lot more for the first few of them too. So to me, if Ford can sell all 10,000 of them or so for 5000$ more each, that's an extra $50 million in the pockets of a company i don't wanna see go broke, especially their SVT division. Ford's cars aren't a public service, its not like its government subsidized public transit which should be made attainable to lower income folk like myself. Its a private company looking to make money in a competitive market. Its a sweet car, and people will pay what ford is asking for. Ford doesn't owe us anything really.

And besides, its pretty much a given that they're gonna put out another stang somewhere in the $30K.

I will admit that the numbers i've seen in the mags are less than i was hoping, certainly due to the weight, but what are you gonna do. But its still an incredible car, I love it. I can't wait to see one on the street! And I REALLY can't wait to see what those chumps at Top Gear have to say about it.

 

That's more than $15K in upgrades for bragging rights and a 20 cents on the dollar return.

 

Yeah, and there's THAT, too.

 

[quote=cobalt]Since I'm not a track person, going over 430 rwhp with my 3550 lb Mustang GT is of no interest to me. On the street, with a Complete Suspension change out through Saleen, Steeda and BMR,(everything they list for 05/06 street) staggered chrome bullitt wheels, 285/40/18 and 255/45/18 tires, StopTech 4 piston 2 peice rotar 14" Breaks front, (better pads/breaklines rear) My Saleen series VI supercharger, The right tune, 39lb injectors, 95mm mass air kit, 3.6 pully at 430rwhp 425 rwtrk, 492 flywheel HP, 475flywheel trk (safley retaining stock fuel pump, clutch, pistons, rods ect...) the grand total for me in California with my original premium package 31,700 with Tax off the lot, plus every single upgrade mentioned above with all labor including tinting in California is .......$44,650.00

I have a better suspension than the GT500, I am lighter by 400lbs, I am more nimble in turns, I am 1/10 to 2/10ths faster 0-60mph and can put it to the ground more efficiently, my brakes are as good, I can add any number of body parts for better aerodynamic performance, chin splitters, cowled hoods, rear spoiler very inexpensively ect...

Adding these same ideas to the gt500 would add on more costs and take it out of warranty in the same manner as for the Mustang GT.

So by the standards of the street, who cares how high the horsepower can go, you can't really use it unless your on a track or in a drag race. 492 hp @ 3550 lbs is all I'll ever need driving in real LA street and highway conditions.
Love Erik

no flame intended, but how did you add all of those heavier parts, and not add weight to your car? the supercharger and all of its systems alone weighs 80-100 lbs. Bigger brakes and wheels, and heavy-duty supension parts are also usually heavier. likewise, comparing a stock forged 5.4 4-vavle to a modified 4.6 3-valve as equals is dubious at best. give me the enormous potential of the 5.4 any day.

lots of us have put a ton of money in a base car, but this does not add up to a good value. i mean no personal slam here, but for reference, put a for sale sign on your GT and see what it brings. a gt will never be a shelby, even if it has some very cool parts on it. my point is, if you want a shelby, you have to buy a shelby, not a mustang gt. my current 03 cobra will also never be a shelby. if i had a choice as to a personnally modified mustang gt or a shelby, (at $44,650.00) it would not be close.

 

And just think get the Z06 and when your at the track hit the roof eject button and cut down body weight to increase your quarter mile time! Sorry I had to. I think given the fact that the Shelby is part of the Mustang lineup and is the same body as the GT I feel it's numbers are quite impressive, especially given the weight.

 

As are a Mack truck's acceleration numbers, given its weight. But that's the rub, there's just so much weight that dulls, somewhat, even the impressive 500hp, never mind its negative effects on handling, braking and efficiency.

Ford took an cheap and easy approach to the power/weight ratio by essentially attacking only one side of that equation - power. While that can be quite effective, in a very limited scope, it basically ignores the corrosive effects on overall vehicle performance of excess weight. If you just a quarter miler, the results are probably good enough. If you desire a truly well-rounded performance vehicle, perhaps approaching the power/weight ratio thing from both ends of the equation would reap many additional performance benefits beyond the straight and narrow of acceleration.

 

If you desire a truly well-rounded performance vehicle, perhaps approaching the power/weight ratio thing from both ends of the equation would reap many additional performance benefits beyond the straight and narrow of acceleration.[/quote]


To say that Ford only addressed one side (power) I think is, at best, understating what they have done. Some of the handling and braking numbers have been very good.

However, you bring a valid point, but you also ignore the other obvious side of the equation. To lop hundreds of pounds from an existing platform is likely impossible. To redesign the chassis for this model only would, of course, set the retail price out of sight. Ford did what made the best economic sense. Design a killer Mustang and hit the $40,000 target. The only weight options I see for the existing platform are "delete" options that would make it more of a 2000 Cobra R type. I would not be against this, but how many people can Ford count on to buy a stripper car with no lxury options (no air, power windows, rear seat, stereo, sound deadener, etc). The last time they did this, they only built 300, and it was over $50,000.00. Even at this price, this car also reportedly lost money for Ford.

A BMW M5 is an awesome car, and it weighs 4000lbs. The Shelby has achieved very similar (some better) performance numbers at 45% of the price. Quite an achievement, in my opinion.

 

Ford/SVT had promised to keep the car under 40K. The car DIDN'T meet it's target price, in fact it is a few thousand over it. The Shelby name adds cost to the vehicle as well. Ford knows they can charge a premium fro the car and why not? I feel that this car wasn't the best Mustang Ford could produce, in fact given Ford's financial status, one could look upon this as a "bean counter" GT500. Ford isn't going to spend the money and resources on a low volume car to engineer it with a fine tooth comb. That time and energy would be better spent on money makers, such as the F150. All I want to know is: Where is our IRS and BMW M caliber car that was touted in the media before Colletti left?

The M5 is a 5 passenger Luxury Sedan with a V10. I understand the weight in the M5 since luxury content adds weight. The M5 undoubtably is a better performing car(compared to the GT500), but at a cost. Ford couldn't produce a M5 caliber car for an affordable price. The Ford branded(PAG) vehicle that is worth mentioning is the XJR. It really isn't a true competitor of the M5 though. Speaking of the M5, GT500 owners better beware of this car. I'd hate to see an M5 with 5 passengers blowing the doors off a GT500.

 

Don't worry, the owner will be too busy fiddling with the stupid iDrive system, and all the cars different computer settings for suspension and power output, lol. I remember seeing Top Gear when they had the new M6 It took Richard 5 or so minutes to get the car set up correctly, with all the power available (the M5 and 6 have 3 power levels, 400, 450, and 500hp), and the right shift mode, and suspension settings. While I love the way the M5 and M6 look, WAY OVER TECHNICAL!!!

 

Is "Bean Counter GT500" your way of saying that Ford is making sure that the GT500 is a profitable car? Heavens, lets hope they're not trying to make a profit. I am sure BMW sells M5/M6s at invoice just for the fun of it. If by luxury content, you mean 500HP engine, air conditioning, power windows, locks, power seat, killer stereo, quiet ride, etc, then I think the Ford has those things too. So what if its a V10? Weight is weight. The magazine test numbers show the GT500 holding up well against these cars, especially MM&FF numbers. The target was $39,995, (if memory serves me correctly) and the actual is $40,930. That 2.3% off target. We need to give the wheel hopping, broken half-shaft IRS thing a rest. My 03 Cobra's IRS leaves a lot to be desired.

One thing is for sure. That BMW M5 or M6 will completely blow the doors off of a standard Mustang GT.

 

I-Drive ain't as bad as the media makes it. The updated system in my dads 545 is pretty intuitive, but I still find plain old ***** much easier to operate. The M5 has two power levels: 400 and 500. You get the 500 hp seting by hitting the "Sport" button on the center console.

 

The GT500 is a "halo" car which isn't very profitable in regards to its lineup. It's also a low volume car as well. What I mean by "bean counter" is that we were promised a bunch of awesome features; IRS, Twin Screw, and BMW M like tuning. The GT500 costs 42,XXX with the gas guzzler tax(figure that into MSRP). The GT500 is a GT coupe and will not be confused with a luxury sedan or coupe. It's bare bones in content to a BMW 545, let alone an M5.

Again, better watch out for the M5/M6, especially from a roll when you are cruising in your GT500.

 

While I am not a fan of IRS (yay! lets add more weight!!) I generally agree with this statement. If ford is gonna charge an extra 10k (03/04 cobras were around 34k) for the 'next generation' mustang cobra it had better deliver beyond expectations. For me personally, the car has just fallen short of what I had hoped for. Its not under 40k, and it dosent dominate its price bracket performance wise (i.e. corvette).


I still want one