I thought this was a rather fun episode, but there were quite a few errors in the GT500 segment.
First is the obvious. Richard seemed upset that the GT500 only dyno 440+ "horsepower", but failed to realize this was RWHP. Using the drivetrain loss of about 15%, we're looking at 522 fwhp (flywheel). His own GT390 dyno'd 250 rwhp which is roughly 300 fwhp.
Jeremy Clarkson said the Roush Mustang was better because it had a limited slip differential, whereas the GT500 didn't. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, OVER. The Mustang GT, Shelby GT, Shelby GT-H, and Shelby GT500 ALL have a Traction-Lok differential (limited slip). I'm surprised that these experts on cars would get these simple details totally wrong.
I'm a fan of live-axle rear suspensions, and I still find their bashing quite humorous. They come up with witty ways of admonishing our "technology". It's also interesting the GT500 was slower in the Top Gear track than the WRX STi right above it.
The problem with the GT500 is its 4000 lb curb weight. The weight to power ratio is only comparable with the BASE C6 Corvette. Factor in massive wheelhop and a crude suspension design, the GT500 isn't going to stick to the curves as well as some of the competitors without modifications. The dealer markups make it even worse because for $43k, the GT500 is an EXCELLENT buy. For $65k+ that most dealers want, the GT500 is kind of a rip-off. The base C6 corvette can be equipped with a heads up display, sport suspension system with magnetic ride shocks, advanced traction control, etc... for about $50k.
The Z06, which will run the 1/4 faster than the GT500 in bone stock factory form, is almost 1000 lb lighter than the GT500 and has the same horsepower The Z06 isn't cheap though.
I agree. I am not impressed with the power output of the 5.4L quad-cam V8. For an engine that has more displacement and more valves than the 4.6L 2V or 3V V8, it's only producing slightly more horsepower with the stock blower. For that matter, I wasn't impressed with the 05-06 GT's supercharged 5.4L 4V V8. Chevy can pump out that much power with a naturally aspirated OHV V8.
The FRPP 11 psi Whipple kit can help the 4.6L 3V V8 produce over 500 fwhp. With forged internals and a solid tune, a Mustang GT can become an inexpensive "GT500".
Yes, but there you said it. Whipple kit and forged internals. The price for labor, parts and tuning can cost you easily 10K. Then what type of warranty would you have? And once you forge the 3v v8, how much power can you get? The idea behind the GT500 is the "hard stuff" is done for you, tune, and warranty. Plus the potiential for more power is much better than the typical 3v v8.
Bottom line. GT500 for msrp is the best bang for your buck, hands down.
I agree with you, and was about to mention the GT500 has a factory warranty. Just wait 5 years or drive 60k miles with a base GT and install the FRPP whipple kit. The tune that it comes with is supposed to be EXTREMELY conservative, yielding 475 rwhp. If you take a used 05-06 Mustang GT and add $10k worth of parts and labor, you're still a good $10k-$20k below the GT500s asking prices.
However, the GT500 is not selling for MSRP and thus isn't a good bang for the buck. The base level C6 Corvette can match the GT500's performance and has better handling, all for under $50k MSRP without any markups. The Stig's lap times with the C6 Vette and Z06 show that the base Vette is faster and better handling. In addition, you can get the magnetic ride system, a superior traction control system, and a heads up display in the base C6 Vette. These are not available for the GT500.
I can't believe you guys are still talking about this. How is it that Mustang enthusiasts don't understand that Mustangs AREN'T "sports cars"?
Just because magazines and TV shows compare the GT500 to a Corvette or Viper, it doesn't mean they're in the same market. Hell, in the last few years of the F-Body cars production, it was a stretch to compare THEM to the Mustang, as they were turned more into "sports cars" than "pony-cars" (or "sport-y cars" as they're sometimes being called).
Yeah, the Mustang is heavier and softer than most of it's "competition" but that's because the media is telling YOU who the competition is, rather than you telling THEM.
I'm NOT a huge fan of the GT500 anyway but still, I think it's getting taken to task for not measuring up to targets that it wasn't designed to compete directly against. Just because another car is fast, sporty, and aimed at the enthusiast crowd, it doesn't mean it's the same as all the others that also fit that rather vague description.
Yeah, the Corvette might do better lap times but is it as comfortable to drive? Or can it transport 4 people? You want to compare the GT500 with something? Find a 2+2 sports coupe first, and THEN start comparing. Hell, IMO, you'd be more fair to compare it to a sport sedan than a sports car.
I thought this was a rather fun episode, but there were quite a few errors in the GT500 segment.
First is the obvious. Richard seemed upset that the GT500 only dyno 440+ "horsepower", but failed to realize this was RWHP. Using the drivetrain loss of about 15%, we're looking at 522 fwhp (flywheel). His own GT390 dyno'd 250 rwhp which is roughly 300 fwhp.
Jeremy Clarkson said the Roush Mustang was better because it had a limited slip differential, whereas the GT500 didn't. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, OVER. The Mustang GT, Shelby GT, Shelby GT-H, and Shelby GT500 ALL have a Traction-Lok differential (limited slip). I'm surprised that these experts on cars would get these simple details totally wrong.
I'm a fan of live-axle rear suspensions, and I still find their bashing quite humorous. They come up with witty ways of admonishing our "technology". It's also interesting the GT500 was slower in the Top Gear track than the WRX STi right above it.
The problem with the GT500 is its 4000 lb curb weight. The weight to power ratio is only comparable with the BASE C6 Corvette. Factor in massive wheelhop and a crude suspension design, the GT500 isn't going to stick to the curves as well as some of the competitors without modifications. The dealer markups make it even worse because for $43k, the GT500 is an EXCELLENT buy. For $65k+ that most dealers want, the GT500 is kind of a rip-off. The base C6 corvette can be equipped with a heads up display, sport suspension system with magnetic ride shocks, advanced traction control, etc... for about $50k.
The Z06, which will run the 1/4 faster than the GT500 in bone stock factory form, is almost 1000 lb lighter than the GT500 and has the same horsepower The Z06 isn't cheap though.
..................................Also as you stated, you can't find a GT500 for MSRP, this is very true. However, in 2-3 months, I will bet you can find them for MSRP or even under MSRP. 2008 models will be coming out. This is how I purchased my 2004 Cobra. I purchased below MSRP in 2005.
However, I am holding out for GT500. I'd like to grab one for 39K. So either it be used or 2007 still sitting somewhere, I'll wait. Becase in 2-3 years, the car is going to be a 25-30K car easily. So my little delima is trying to keep this current car I own stock or add parts and forget the GT500. I'll give it 3 months and then make my decision.
You do know that SVT aimed the cobra at the corvette? With knowledge of the camaro / ta going out, they decided the vette was the next victim. Dubbed the Terminator and vette killer for the 2003-04 Cobra's. And it was. The vette would bearly beat 03-04 cobra around a track, and the cobra was 10k less.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0305_sport_convertibles_comparison/index.html
To not compare them is UnAmerican.
Because most people when shopping for this "type" of car, they are spending the same amount of money and want to compare the differences. And there is always ways to angle the debate to were your favorite car will win.
Just agree they are both cars out there and it's more or less a decisions of preference. You either like ford or chevy. Either way you get a fun great car for your money.