View Poll Results: Which would you rather have power the Next Gen GT500 (or Cobra)?
S/C Al 5.4L V8
76
50.33%
TT 5.0L V8
75
49.67%
Voters: 151. You may not vote on this poll
Next Gen GT500 Engine
11/21/09, 01:55 PM
#61
Originally Posted by max2000jp5767221
Because anyone in the know won't be posting it on the internet. JSaylor isn't a Ford engineer and if he was he wouldn't be posting any proprietary data on this forum. Look at Groot as an example.
That said, i can;t help but notice you've lost interest in the GTDi discussion, why is that?
11/21/09, 02:07 PM
#62
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HP per liter is one measure of an engine's efficiency, and as I stated earlier it is obvious that you are hung up on this particular measure, some of us aren't. Frankly, it is easy to make an engine do one thing relatively well if you are willing to sacrifice other areas like fuel economy, peak torque production, and torque curve. I'm more impressed with engines that do all things well, and as I stated earlier the Coyote will make my case for me.
As for tq curve, look at BMW's S65 motor. It's got a pretty flat curve and BMW gears it aggressively.
As for fuel economy, if we were looking at that then GM would have a few benchmark engines. A lot of things factor into that such as aero, gearing, tires, weight, tuning, etc. Frankly, I don't think you will find many M, Mustang or Corvette guys buying cars for fuel economy.
Quoting you directly.
And a few threads later it became 105hp/liter. It's obvious at this point your hedging you bet making sure you don't miss even one ounce of opportunity here worried that the Ford might be an all around superior engine, so you're focusing on a very narrow aspect of engine performance that Ford typically hasn't been hung up on to give yourself an out. Seriously, nobody here is that gullible.
And a few threads later it became 105hp/liter. It's obvious at this point your hedging you bet making sure you don't miss even one ounce of opportunity here worried that the Ford might be an all around superior engine, so you're focusing on a very narrow aspect of engine performance that Ford typically hasn't been hung up on to give yourself an out. Seriously, nobody here is that gullible.
To be blunt you wont find many. BMW's GTDi engine program is very well done in most respects, but it is probably a half generation behind Ford's at this point if were talking about engines that are actually on the road. To be fair that is to be expected since Ford's turbo mills are newer, but hanging onto some silly notion that BMW is superior just because they are BMW, which you are obviously doing, is just sad.
Hmmmm, funny, I thought I loved Porsche...thanks for clearing that up for me. Now every time I call the 911 the world's benchmark for sports cars (to be fair it might be the Cayman now, but it's hard for me to imagine the 911 not being king) I'll stop and remind myself that I don't really mean it because of what you have show us all here. I have quite the soft spot for BMW too, though I have always been at odds with their approach to their Motorsport offerings...personally I like torque. Now that they seem to be embracing the utter opposite of that philosophy I find myself particularly interested in their future offerings, the somewhat homely 5-Series sedan aside of course.
As for Corvette, that one really might be junk price considered. I just can't see myself paying that kind of money for a car with an interior that literally could have come from a Cobalt. And frankly, the Cobalt SS interior might even be better than the Vette overall and that is truly saying something as the Cobalt SS interior needs some work even if we consider the price tag. I just can't excuse that kind of apathy in any car, but especially not in one which starts at close to 50k. Throw in the forever sub-par steering rack and amazingly lazy build quality and it all just conspires to be too much. An amazing powertrain, exceptional performance, and good looks only go so far without at least some of the other ingredients. Heck, if they gave it decent seats and a standard interior on par with even Hyundai's new Forte I would give the car a pass, that makes it a bit difficult to argue that I am asking for much here.
If the comparison is you and I, and the debate is who is the true enthusiast, there is no comparison.
Hmmmm, funny, I thought I loved Porsche...thanks for clearing that up for me. Now every time I call the 911 the world's benchmark for sports cars (to be fair it might be the Cayman now, but it's hard for me to imagine the 911 not being king) I'll stop and remind myself that I don't really mean it because of what you have show us all here. I have quite the soft spot for BMW too, though I have always been at odds with their approach to their Motorsport offerings...personally I like torque. Now that they seem to be embracing the utter opposite of that philosophy I find myself particularly interested in their future offerings, the somewhat homely 5-Series sedan aside of course.
As for Corvette, that one really might be junk price considered. I just can't see myself paying that kind of money for a car with an interior that literally could have come from a Cobalt. And frankly, the Cobalt SS interior might even be better than the Vette overall and that is truly saying something as the Cobalt SS interior needs some work even if we consider the price tag. I just can't excuse that kind of apathy in any car, but especially not in one which starts at close to 50k. Throw in the forever sub-par steering rack and amazingly lazy build quality and it all just conspires to be too much. An amazing powertrain, exceptional performance, and good looks only go so far without at least some of the other ingredients. Heck, if they gave it decent seats and a standard interior on par with even Hyundai's new Forte I would give the car a pass, that makes it a bit difficult to argue that I am asking for much here.
If the comparison is you and I, and the debate is who is the true enthusiast, there is no comparison.
As for the Vette and what I've bolded shows you aren't an enthusiast. We drive Mustangs which have pretty cheap interiors. I can overlook it because it's a fun car to drive.
To knock a sports car, which is meant to be driven for it's interior is stupid. An enthusiast values performance, styling, and the driving experience over luxury.
Aren't you also the guy that was once arguing about handling and vehicle dynamics when you've never set foot on a road course?
Here is the diference between you and I (we've discussed this before). I like all cars. Hell, I think that Hyundai is building some amazing vehicles and they are pouring a lot of money in R&D. The new THETA motors sound like a winner. Ford has been on a roll, but they have a long way to go.
So the only way Coyote is ever going to be proven superior is if it produces more hp per liter? That is ridiculous. Coyote will amaze enthusiasts in every respect, including power per liter particularly when you take the whole package into consideration, what it does for folks like you who just want to look like they are right I can't say.
As for Ford's GTDi program compared to BMW's, there is no comparison...Ford wins. BMW may counter, and may take the lead again in short order, but right now the 3.5L EcoBoost already delivers it's power more efficiently than BMW's GTDi mills can, for example the Taurus SHO comes within 1mpg of the BMW 335i's highway fuel economy rating despite a half liter bigger mill that pumps out more hp per liter than the Bimmer's smaller GTDi I6 does all in a car with standard awd and which weighs roughly 1000lb more than the Bimmer. And that brings me to an interesting aside here, the EB V6 bests either of the mainstream BMW GTDi engines sold on our shores in terms of hp per liter despite being artificially limited to preserve the fwd drivelines it currently lives with. So, even if we employ your narrow and frankly ridiculous definition of superiority, hp per liter, the EB V6 has to win. Ironic the webs we weave when we try so hard to tilt the odds in our favor, wouldn't you say?
I said it before and I'll say it again, the Coyote will prove my point for me over the next year or so. And in the spirit of fairness, I do feel obliged to warn you that that the Coyote is so good that this approach you're taking trying to spin superiority into this narrow little definition of hp per liter wont carry you through like you think it will. Do yourself a favor and stop now, you are just setting yourself up to look like a fool.
As for Ford's GTDi program compared to BMW's, there is no comparison...Ford wins. BMW may counter, and may take the lead again in short order, but right now the 3.5L EcoBoost already delivers it's power more efficiently than BMW's GTDi mills can, for example the Taurus SHO comes within 1mpg of the BMW 335i's highway fuel economy rating despite a half liter bigger mill that pumps out more hp per liter than the Bimmer's smaller GTDi I6 does all in a car with standard awd and which weighs roughly 1000lb more than the Bimmer. And that brings me to an interesting aside here, the EB V6 bests either of the mainstream BMW GTDi engines sold on our shores in terms of hp per liter despite being artificially limited to preserve the fwd drivelines it currently lives with. So, even if we employ your narrow and frankly ridiculous definition of superiority, hp per liter, the EB V6 has to win. Ironic the webs we weave when we try so hard to tilt the odds in our favor, wouldn't you say?
I said it before and I'll say it again, the Coyote will prove my point for me over the next year or so. And in the spirit of fairness, I do feel obliged to warn you that that the Coyote is so good that this approach you're taking trying to spin superiority into this narrow little definition of hp per liter wont carry you through like you think it will. Do yourself a favor and stop now, you are just setting yourself up to look like a fool.
Claiming "superiority" at this point is like Bush claiming "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq. I want to be proven wrong. I really like the 2010 Mustang GT's, except they are underpowered and need some braking updates. Ford is going to address this in 2011 and they might just have a repeat customer. A 400+ factory Mustang GT sounds great to me. I just need to see the dynos to believe it!
Nice, throw that together yourself?
Last edited by max2000jp; 11/21/09 at 02:23 PM.
11/21/09, 02:20 PM
#63
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ROFL. When did I call myself a Ford engineer, or compare myself to Groot? And when did I claim to post proprietary information on this thread? I discussed what I know within the bounds of prudence, I did not and will not say anything specific.
That said, i can;t help but notice you've lost interest in the GTDi discussion, why is that?
That said, i can;t help but notice you've lost interest in the GTDi discussion, why is that?
You want to talk GTDI, here is BMW's newest:
http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicle...?prm_action=x5
You seem bent on comparing an engine that was launched 3 years BEFORE Ford's EcoBoost engine was in production. Feel free to compare the N55 to Ford's EcoBoost lineup.
Last edited by max2000jp; 11/21/09 at 02:22 PM.
11/21/09, 02:57 PM
#64
Originally Posted by max2000jp
You want to talk GTDI, here is BMW's newest:
http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicle...?prm_action=x5
You seem bent on comparing an engine that was launched 3 years BEFORE Ford's EcoBoost engine was in production. Feel free to compare the N55 to Ford's EcoBoost lineup.
http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicle...?prm_action=x5
You seem bent on comparing an engine that was launched 3 years BEFORE Ford's EcoBoost engine was in production. Feel free to compare the N55 to Ford's EcoBoost lineup.
I never stated that BMW's tech wasn't older, I said it wasn't as good. Now you're angling for some kind of lame handicap on the basis of age. You're going nowhere and the entire basis for your position seems to be that you don't like what I said. So, did you actually come into this debate with anything to say or are you going to continue making it up as you go along?
11/21/09, 03:16 PM
#65
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL, I knew the comparison to Motorsport exclusive engines was coming. You are seriously comparing what is realistically a gas swilling, high performance engine to a mainstream EcoBoost design? Your disregard for your own credibility is astounding. But I'll gladly compare them. Great horsepower and torque, genuinely terrible fuel economy. So, effectively, they took the mainstream 4.4L GTDi V8 which makes good power and gets medicore fuel economy and turned it into this which makes great power and gets terrible fuel economy. Great way to prove their turbo technology, which is primarily supposed to bring greater power and driveability with good fuel economy, is superior to Fords. The problem here is of course obvious, Ford's turbo technology does a better job accomplishing what it is actually supposed to do.
I never stated that BMW's tech wasn't older, I said it wasn't as good. Now you're angling for some kind of lame handicap on the basis of age. You're going nowhere and the entire basis for your position seems to be that you don't like what I said. So, did you actually come into this debate with anything to say or are you going to continue making it up as you go along?
I never stated that BMW's tech wasn't older, I said it wasn't as good. Now you're angling for some kind of lame handicap on the basis of age. You're going nowhere and the entire basis for your position seems to be that you don't like what I said. So, did you actually come into this debate with anything to say or are you going to continue making it up as you go along?
Compare the new N55.
http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266523
Read the article and I think you will change your opinion. This new engine beats the new Ford EcoBoost SHO in Fuel economy. Peak tq comes on sooner. I will have to see chassis dynos to comment on efficiency. The N54 was under-rated and I'd imagine this engine is too.
Last edited by max2000jp; 11/21/09 at 03:18 PM.
11/21/09, 03:18 PM
#66
Originally Posted by max2000jp
As for tq curve, look at BMW's S65 motor. It's got a pretty flat curve and BMW gears it aggressively.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
As for fuel economy, if we were looking at that then GM would have a few benchmark engines. A lot of things factor into that such as aero, gearing, tires, weight, tuning, etc. Frankly, I don't think you will find many M, Mustang or Corvette guys buying cars for fuel economy.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
Did you do the math? 414hp and 4.0L
Originally Posted by max2000jp
You knocked Porsche's engineers in the past for using direct injection because you claimed that Ford's engineers said it wasn't beneficial in N/A form. Porsche saw a nice bump in power, fuel economy, and reduced emmissions.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
As for the Vette and what I've bolded shows you aren't an enthusiast. We drive Mustangs which have pretty cheap interiors. I can overlook it because it's a fun car to drive.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
To knock a sports car, which is meant to be driven for it's interior is stupid. An enthusiast values performance, styling, and the driving experience over luxury.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
Aren't you also the guy that was once arguing about handling and vehicle dynamics when you've never set foot on a road course?
Originally Posted by max2000jp
Here is the diference between you and I (we've discussed this before). I like all cars. Hell, I think that Hyundai is building some amazing vehicles and they are pouring a lot of money in R&D. The new THETA motors sound like a winner. Ford has been on a roll, but they have a long way to go.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
We will see, that's all I am going to say. Like I said, unless Ford has re-invented the internal combustion engine you are really selling this engine up.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
Claiming "superiority" at this point is like Bush claiming "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq. I want to be proven wrong. I really like the 2010 Mustang GT's, except they are underpowered and need some braking updates. Ford is going to address this in 2011 and they might just have a repeat customer. A 400+ factory Mustang GT sounds great to me. I just need to see the dynos to believe it!
Originally Posted by max2000jp
Yes, I installed everything except the tune. The car has OEM drivability and makes 474/412 at the wheels on 10 lbs of boost.
11/21/09, 03:27 PM
#67
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're trying to tilt the board here again. What makes an engine work in the real world is usable power. Peak horsepower is but one measure of how well an engine can achieve that and not typically the best. The difference here is that you want to debate how impressive the engines are if we look at one stat and I'm looking at the overall package and how well they will work in the real world. Funny how one of those seems to make a lot more sen than they other doesn't it?
It;s easy to have a flat torque curve when the peak torque is that low. The M5 is been lambasted more than a few times for being heavily dependent upon virtually perfect gearing to get the job done, which is why the manual six speed option works so poorly, and given the specific output the economy ir genuinely horrible. The engine is good at one thing, making peak power, and fair or terrible at everything else.
Fuel economy is a very good indication of how hard an engine is working and what realistic production potential might be left in it, particularly when we are looking at fuel economy in a 4400lb awd car. That the BMW 335i does so much worse here despite a far lighter curb weight, less displacement, and less overall power absolutely tells us something unless you want to argue that the 3-Series has the aero of a brick.
You said 100hp per liter, got a problem with that figure and you might want to start with your own post. My observation was simply that you seem to be hedging your bets as the argument moves along. Wonder why?
I didn't knock Porsche, I knocked the fanbois who think that DI is the second coming. Eventually you'll see DI on everything, but I also tend to agree with Ford that, as a stand alone tech, the feature is likely too expensive right now to really be justified in most applications.
ROFL, I'm not an enthusiast because I think a car that costs 50k should have an interior on par with a Korean subcompact, seats that aren't awful, and something resembling steering feel. I feel like I've been magically transported to a Civic forum, everything you say is based on hp per liter or a spec sheet. A 16 year old can argue that. Mustang interiors cheap? 2005-2009 I'll agree it could use a lot of work, although it was still better than the Vette though that isn't saying much. The 2010 is far more than acceptable and has some really nice touches. Pardon me if I don't subscribe to the same 'Duke's of Hazard" school of performance.
Here's an idea, where am I going to be when I drive that sports car?
Now you;re telling me where I have and haven't driven? You don't know me or where I've been. You really are like one of the kids on the Honda forums.
No, you don't. You like spec sheets.
How would you know, thus far all you;ve done is post links and regurgitate info I posted trying to spin it in your favor.
Maybe they can print that dyno out in a nice little spec sheet format so you can really sink your teeth into it.
I gotta say, I don't buy the notion that you could install a supercharger even for a moment.
It;s easy to have a flat torque curve when the peak torque is that low. The M5 is been lambasted more than a few times for being heavily dependent upon virtually perfect gearing to get the job done, which is why the manual six speed option works so poorly, and given the specific output the economy ir genuinely horrible. The engine is good at one thing, making peak power, and fair or terrible at everything else.
Fuel economy is a very good indication of how hard an engine is working and what realistic production potential might be left in it, particularly when we are looking at fuel economy in a 4400lb awd car. That the BMW 335i does so much worse here despite a far lighter curb weight, less displacement, and less overall power absolutely tells us something unless you want to argue that the 3-Series has the aero of a brick.
You said 100hp per liter, got a problem with that figure and you might want to start with your own post. My observation was simply that you seem to be hedging your bets as the argument moves along. Wonder why?
I didn't knock Porsche, I knocked the fanbois who think that DI is the second coming. Eventually you'll see DI on everything, but I also tend to agree with Ford that, as a stand alone tech, the feature is likely too expensive right now to really be justified in most applications.
ROFL, I'm not an enthusiast because I think a car that costs 50k should have an interior on par with a Korean subcompact, seats that aren't awful, and something resembling steering feel. I feel like I've been magically transported to a Civic forum, everything you say is based on hp per liter or a spec sheet. A 16 year old can argue that. Mustang interiors cheap? 2005-2009 I'll agree it could use a lot of work, although it was still better than the Vette though that isn't saying much. The 2010 is far more than acceptable and has some really nice touches. Pardon me if I don't subscribe to the same 'Duke's of Hazard" school of performance.
Here's an idea, where am I going to be when I drive that sports car?
Now you;re telling me where I have and haven't driven? You don't know me or where I've been. You really are like one of the kids on the Honda forums.
No, you don't. You like spec sheets.
How would you know, thus far all you;ve done is post links and regurgitate info I posted trying to spin it in your favor.
Maybe they can print that dyno out in a nice little spec sheet format so you can really sink your teeth into it.
I gotta say, I don't buy the notion that you could install a supercharger even for a moment.
Like I said, there is no point in arguing. Ford is the GREATEST manufacturer in your eyes. I guess the Coyote and EcoBoose engine was engineered by God. I better tell the LSx guys that they've been replaced.
Last edited by max2000jp; 11/21/09 at 03:29 PM.
11/21/09, 03:29 PM
#68
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11/21/09, 06:43 PM
#69
Diarrhea posts once again. You don't even know what the latest BMW engines are and you are trying to make "superiority" claims.
Like I said, there is no point in arguing. Ford is the GREATEST manufacturer in your eyes. I guess the Coyote and EcoBoose engine was engineered by God. I better tell the LSx guys that they've been replaced.
Like I said, there is no point in arguing. Ford is the GREATEST manufacturer in your eyes. I guess the Coyote and EcoBoose engine was engineered by God. I better tell the LSx guys that they've been replaced.
Originally Posted by max2000jp
How much money are you willing to wager? Put your money where your mouth is internet warrior.
At this point you're half cocked accusations and Google-fueled arguments have completely derailed the thread (never seen that happen before) If you want to say something else say it in a pm, because you're not worth ruining a thread for everybody else on the forum.
11/21/09, 08:57 PM
#70
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, I'll tell you what, when you figure out how to calculate hp at the crank from a rwhp starting number I'll buy the notion that you've ever turned a wrench on anything, or even so much as seen a dyno, or competed in any kind of racing event......
At this point you're half cocked accusations and Google-fueled arguments have completely derailed the thread (never seen that happen before) If you want to say something else say it in a pm, because you're not worth ruining a thread for everybody else on the forum.
At this point you're half cocked accusations and Google-fueled arguments have completely derailed the thread (never seen that happen before) If you want to say something else say it in a pm, because you're not worth ruining a thread for everybody else on the forum.
I can provide timeslips and video to disprove your myth that I've never been to a track event. Again, name your price.
I like when you are clearly wrong, you want to bring it to PM's.
I don't doubt that a GTDI 5.0L will make BMW like power. My main problem was with you claiming "superiority" without an engine in production. Call me a troll all you want, but that's clearly a biased claim.
Last edited by max2000jp; 11/21/09 at 09:01 PM.
11/22/09, 01:03 AM
#71
I Have No Life
I'm not even going to read all of those posts...and I'm not going to...
Cause I'm pretty sure its just a bunch of... 'show me proof'
I'm not throwing anyone under a bus just to satisfy your curiousity.
<points to a salt block>
Have at 'er
Cause I'm pretty sure its just a bunch of... 'show me proof'
I'm not throwing anyone under a bus just to satisfy your curiousity.
<points to a salt block>
Have at 'er
I'm following this Thread, but i'm not going to post anything.
11/22/09, 09:34 AM
#73
I'm not going to feed this, if I'm wrong you'll have all the ammunition you could want to fire away as Ford releases specifications on different variants of the 5.0L Coyote engine program as the next several months pass. As desperate as you seem to be to prove you have one-upped me, you can wait that long. The only comment I'll respond to is the following.
It's obvious that you are still sulking about the fact that you felt as though you looked ridiculous when you posted an incorrect crank horsepower calculation in a previous debate. The mistake was one commonly made by those who aren't very familiar with these things, and I actually felt somewhat sorry for you at the time so I didn't rub it in.
Sadly, it's pretty obvious that this bothers you and as such you're looking for a pound of flesh you wont get, and you'll obviously go to any lengths to get it. Your need to somehow reestablish your credibility isn't important enough to me to create issues on this forum. If you have a personal issue with me because of something that happened in the past, and you obviously do, take it up with me in pm's.
It's obvious that you are still sulking about the fact that you felt as though you looked ridiculous when you posted an incorrect crank horsepower calculation in a previous debate. The mistake was one commonly made by those who aren't very familiar with these things, and I actually felt somewhat sorry for you at the time so I didn't rub it in.
Sadly, it's pretty obvious that this bothers you and as such you're looking for a pound of flesh you wont get, and you'll obviously go to any lengths to get it. Your need to somehow reestablish your credibility isn't important enough to me to create issues on this forum. If you have a personal issue with me because of something that happened in the past, and you obviously do, take it up with me in pm's.
Last edited by jsaylor; 11/22/09 at 09:36 AM.
11/22/09, 11:46 AM
#74
Cobra Member
Join Date: January 12, 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11/23/09, 03:10 PM
#75
Legacy TMS Member
Depends on how they do it, the GT500's 19's are forged IIRC and the GT's 19's are probably centrifugally cast (if they had not been doing this already), both being better than your regular dumbed down casting method.
12/3/09, 03:09 PM
#76
Member
Join Date: November 3, 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the Vette and what I've bolded shows you aren't an enthusiast. We drive Mustangs which have pretty cheap interiors. I can overlook it because it's a fun car to drive.
To knock a sports car, which is meant to be driven for it's interior is stupid. An enthusiast values performance, styling, and the driving experience over luxury.
But, to say an enthusiast does NOT and should not value a good interior is just stupid. Maybe if we all built race cars, and strip the interior it wouldn't matter. But the thing is, MOST people who drive sports cars do not do that.
If i valued driving dynamics and performance over looks, i would have bought a subaru WRX STI, or a Mitsubishi Evo. I think the mustang blends great performance and awesome looks, but an evo or STI would stomp it around the turns, braking, steering feel, etc.
And Ford obviously agrees with me, because the 2010 mustang interior is of phenomenal build quality. It makes the car much more pleasant to drive, as well as make it feel more solid.
Last edited by SilverSStang; 12/3/09 at 03:13 PM.
12/4/09, 09:24 PM
#78
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 3, 2005
Location: Iowa City
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe...there is a terrible rumor going around that only the GT will be unveiled at Detroit and the GT500 will be unveiled at the Chicago show about a month later.
12/4/09, 09:41 PM
#79
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: September 2, 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I value a good quality interior, as well as the driving dynamics, etc.
But, to say an enthusiast does NOT and should not value a good interior is just stupid. Maybe if we all built race cars, and strip the interior it wouldn't matter. But the thing is, MOST people who drive sports cars do not do that.
If i valued driving dynamics and performance over looks, i would have bought a subaru WRX STI, or a Mitsubishi Evo. I think the mustang blends great performance and awesome looks, but an evo or STI would stomp it around the turns, braking, steering feel, etc.
And Ford obviously agrees with me, because the 2010 mustang interior is of phenomenal build quality. It makes the car much more pleasant to drive, as well as make it feel more solid.
But, to say an enthusiast does NOT and should not value a good interior is just stupid. Maybe if we all built race cars, and strip the interior it wouldn't matter. But the thing is, MOST people who drive sports cars do not do that.
If i valued driving dynamics and performance over looks, i would have bought a subaru WRX STI, or a Mitsubishi Evo. I think the mustang blends great performance and awesome looks, but an evo or STI would stomp it around the turns, braking, steering feel, etc.
And Ford obviously agrees with me, because the 2010 mustang interior is of phenomenal build quality. It makes the car much more pleasant to drive, as well as make it feel more solid.
12/5/09, 07:51 PM
#80
Team Mustang Source
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,738
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts