Shelby GT500 sucks !

White05GT said:
Price and magazines aside, a plausible, quickly overlooked, explanation for the Shelby's lack of consistency in e.t. and m.p.h. is heat soak. Anyone with an '03 and '04 Cobra that has been on a dyno can attest to the significant difference in numbers after a few pulls.

Without getting into an NA vs. supercharger debate, the Shelby is going to lose a lot of "power" with a heat soaked Eaton. Notice the 111 m.p.h. trap speed and 117 m.p.h. trap speed in the MM&FF article from the same car. Also, C&D and Motortrend had differing trap speeds and different elapsed times.

Of course, I'm in the wait-and-see camp as far as the Shelby is concerned. For those of you who have the MM&FF article, check out the little box with the yellow Shelby and the "tune" talk. Questions to ask: is the Silver Oak processor pulling timing on shifts? Does the stock tune make the car lay down on the top end? Also, I'd be curious to know what the track conditions, weather and air quality were like, too.

In addition, there is merit to the "why should I have to mod it at all to beat an entry level Vette" argument, but I know my opinion would change if a simple reflash has a dramatic effect on the Shelby's performance. I'd be pissed if I decided on the C6 based on the article then got beat (in a drag race) by a Shelby with an SCT tune. I'll wonder about handling in another long-ass post.


Just so you know, the weather conditions were as follows: 66 degrees F, 46% humidity, and 29.9 barometric pressure for the MM&FF run. Not sure on track prep but I don't think they would have went to the trouble of prepping the track much for one car.
 
  • Sponsors (?)


big bad Vette

Dude I have seen a stock GT 40 eat and spit out your vette,
you can also find it on you tube there are no chances"""

Be sides its not very smart to invest in a Vette they loose there value very fast and take several several years to gain value back.. check your history
 
You read to much, test the car for your self.
:track:

bring_out_your_dead.jpg
 
The GT500 looks amazing but I admit the performance should be leaps and bounds what it is now. I would venture to say my GT would outrun a stock gt500 in the 1/4 and that's not the way it should be with my few mods. I would buy a standard Corvette coupe before i. purchased a gt500 because of subpar performance.
 
5.0s will not run down any GT500 stock for stock. They're badass, but they're not going to make up for 90 more hp. It's still closer than it should be against the '07 GT500s, but the 500 should come out solidly on top in a straight line.

I've never personally been impressed with the GT500 for what it is. One 2 mustangs have pleasantly surprised me in the last decade: the '03 Cobra, and the '11 GT. The solid internals and easy modability of the '03 made it the best pony car ever produced when it came out. The '11 GT put the base V8 mustang back out in front of all of the other pony/muscle cars for the first time since 1992! An awesome improvement. I honestly expected more from the GT500 when it was new. It seemed to be a driver's race with the '03 Cobra with a slight edge to the 500. The Boss 302 is amazing and for the money, it's the car I would purchase today if I had to buy one. Still, expectations were pretty high with the name and a price point. It met those expectations, but realistically couldn't have exceeded them. The original Boss 302 was a lightweight honest race car. The new one is a quick street car.