Top Gear and the GT500

[Quickshift_02GT]

Well, it started good...

It never takes them long to destroy any American car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGbhKQlUhLo

 

[timeless2]

Hey, it's been on the front page for a few days now...where have you been?

http://www.stangnet.com/Videos/Exhibition/Top-Gear-on-Shelby-GT500:-Old-vs-New/details/

 

[Quickshift_02GT]

This is the ONLY place on StangNet that I go to. I've linked my browser directly to this Northwest Forum.

If it's not here, I don't see it!

 

[Rootus]

I thought overall it was a pretty fair review. The GT500 is a porker of a car tipping the scales at close to two tons, and let's face it ... a live axle on a $45K car is laughable. Ford has done nice things with the live axle, but if they want to stay competitive they should plan on deleting it for good.

I saw two mistakes. One which had to be deliberate -- the dyno test, which said 440, and he wrote "almost" next to the 500. That was a pretty big goof, as 440 at the wheels is a believable 500 bhp. The second mistake was the comment that the GT500 did not have a LSD, which is (or at least had better be) false. Pretty minor, as he only mentioned it in passing when the Roush video was playing.

And let's be honest -- as many negative comments as they had about the GT500, they seemed to have only praise for the Roush. "Costs $10K more than the Shelby, but it is $10K more car!"

I'd really like to see Ford come up with a road race Mustang. Nicely tuned suspension, make it IRS even, and as light as possible... none of this supercharger & iron block crap. Maybe a nice aluminum block 5.4L. Or better yet, lose the modular altogether and stick something better in there. Bring back the Windsor 351

 

[98Snakebite]

I thought overall it was a pretty fair review. The GT500 is a porker of a car tipping the scales at close to two tons, and let's face it ... a live axle on a $45K car is laughable. Ford has done nice things with the live axle, but if they want to stay competitive they should plan on deleting it for good.

I saw two mistakes. One which had to be deliberate -- the dyno test, which said 440, and he wrote "almost" next to the 500. That was a pretty big goof, as 440 at the wheels is a believable 500 bhp. The second mistake was the comment that the GT500 did not have a LSD, which is (or at least had better be) false. Pretty minor, as he only mentioned it in passing when the Roush video was playing.

And let's be honest -- as many negative comments as they had about the GT500, they seemed to have only praise for the Roush. "Costs $10K more than the Shelby, but it is $10K more car!"

I'd really like to see Ford come up with a road race Mustang. Nicely tuned suspension, make it IRS even, and as light as possible... none of this supercharger & iron block crap. Maybe a nice aluminum block 5.4L. Or better yet, lose the modular altogether and stick something better in there. Bring back the Windsor 351

Yeah they also goofed when they said the Shelby did not have upgraded brakes. I guess 14 inch 4 pot Brembo Gran Turismos don't count.

I am with you. I wish they would bring back the Boss as a modern reincarnation of the original Trans Am racer. 5.0 Aluminum Cammer, 6sp manual, Irs, No options, No back Seat, Lightweight thrill machine. I think they'd sell a grip of em.

 

[Scooby5.0Doo]

they siad ten thousand pounds more not dollars . big difference. i would take either one if i had the money. probly sent it to MM so they can put a custon 3link and the live axel. well enough dreaming like i have money.

 

[TheRedBlur]

yeah word about the almost. 440 at the wheels is ~504 at the flywheel with 15% drivetrain loss. Thing about it is though, in europe they state brake horsepower numbers as the big deal, here we do flywheel, so it's a bit of a culture error on thier part.

 

[saleenster]

Good vid, and the responses are awesome too

I totally agree with all that is fore-mentioned. Roush or Shelby.....that guys is smoking or is getting some kick backs from Jack himself.

 

[Rootus]

Thing about it is though, in europe they state brake horsepower numbers as the big deal, here we do flywheel.

Errr... what do you think brake horsepower is?

 

[TheRedBlur]

Errr... what do you think brake horsepower is?

brake horsepower is wheel horsepower. They advertise their horsepower numbers for thier cars at the wheels, we advertise our horsepower nubers at the flywheel. If the GT500 has 500 horsepower, we assume it to be at the flywheel, whereas in europe, they expect that to mean a wheel horsepower number, hence the guy saying almost.

I don't think you understood my earlier posts then.

 

[Rootus]

brake horsepower is wheel horsepower.

Nope, brake horsepower is measured at the flywheel. For your reading pleasure, someone has written a nice Wikipedia article that covers all kinds of details on horsepower, including brake horsepower.

I don't think you understood my earlier posts then.

I admit that I will have difficulty understanding you so long as you use terminology incompatible with the rest of the world .

 

[TheRedBlur]

Nope, brake horsepower is measured at the flywheel. For your reading pleasure, someone has written a nice Wikipedia article that covers all kinds of details on horsepower, including brake horsepower.

I admit that I will have difficulty understanding you so long as you use terminology incompatible with the rest of the world .

Yah, it looks like I may have my foot in my mouth. Thing about wikipedia though, it's not like webster.
I did some looking around and it appears there's two definitions for brake horsepower, one at the driveshaft, and one at the flywheel. so far it's 50/50.

 

[Rootus]

Google for "De Prony Brake". I find that kind of stuff interesting -- the origin of words and terminology.

 

[stock50LX]

I thought overall it was a pretty fair review. The GT500 is a porker of a car tipping the scales at close to two tons, and let's face it ... a live axle on a $45K car is laughable. Ford has done nice things with the live axle, but if they want to stay competitive they should plan on deleting it for good.

I saw two mistakes. One which had to be deliberate -- the dyno test, which said 440, and he wrote "almost" next to the 500. That was a pretty big goof, as 440 at the wheels is a believable 500 bhp. The second mistake was the comment that the GT500 did not have a LSD, which is (or at least had better be) false. Pretty minor, as he only mentioned it in passing when the Roush video was playing.

And let's be honest -- as many negative comments as they had about the GT500, they seemed to have only praise for the Roush. "Costs $10K more than the Shelby, but it is $10K more car!"

I'd really like to see Ford come up with a road race Mustang. Nicely tuned suspension, make it IRS even, and as light as possible... none of this supercharger & iron block crap. Maybe a nice aluminum block 5.4L. Or better yet, lose the modular altogether and stick something better in there. Bring back the Windsor 351

Spot on! The Mustang is built for the American driving experience which is much different than the British one. The American road system means greater distances to travel, more highways, fewer tiny spaces, etc. Moreover, many Cobra owners did not like the IRS and traded for the live axle because they drag race. Americans drag race in greater numbers than they road race. The live axle is just an attempt to give the people what they want (Exception noted, Rootus). I want the Windsor too! Bring back the pushrods!!

 

[98Snakebite]

Spot on! The Mustang is built for the American driving experience which is much different than the British one. The American road system means greater distances to travel, more highways, fewer tiny spaces, etc. Moreover, many Cobra owners did not like the IRS and traded for the live axle because they drag race. Americans drag race in greater numbers than they road race. The live axle is just an attempt to give the people what they want (Exception noted, Rootus). I want the Windsor too! Bring back the pushrods!!

F*** pushrods, and F*** stick axles. My .02. The Mustang originally was a "european inspired" design and was relatively high tech for 1964. The mod motor was a good step in modernization, but they need the suspension to back it up. My girlfriend's benz suspension beat my pre IRS suspension in every category. Better ride, better traction, better control, better predictibility. Ford can do better. The IRS needs to be standard, with an option to order a stick axle for the 5% of buyers that EVER throw a set of slicks on and thrash the 1320.

Innovation is why the Mustang is still around, and the Camaro isn't. People didn't like it when a car had technology that hadn't changed in 40 years. If it was all about straight line performance the Mustang would be gone. Look up what would happen if you stood a 2002 SS Camaro up against a 2001 Cobra. Sad to say, the Stang would get walked every time.

Don't get offended, just my opinion

 

[Rootus]

You're high.

The modular is an abortion. With three & four valve heads, VVT, and a lot of RPM we have finally produced Mustang GT's that make 300 bhp. While in the meantime people routinely take pushrod 5.0's to 300+ rwhp using significantly less complex technology.

Chevy uses pushrod motors to this day, and they create wonders like the Z06 Vette that will trounce anything Ford has ever produced, including the Ford GT.

The Camaro sucked because it was a poorly designed body put together cheaply and stuffed with a very nice drivetrain. Both Camaro and Mustang live or die based on V6 sales and only enthusiasts would suffer through the shortcomings of the Camaro to get the performance. Mustang has been for a long time a much more liveable daily driver, and it has ruled the V6 pony car world for a long time.

It's kinda sad that the only way Ford could make a Mustang that would take a Camaro in a straight line was to slap a roots blower on it. They need to ditch the modulars ASAP and go with a design that was actually meant to be RWD and offers the flexibility to evolve as needs dictate.

 

[stock50LX]

You're high.

The modular is an abortion. With three & four valve heads, VVT, and a lot of RPM we have finally produced Mustang GT's that make 300 bhp. While in the meantime people routinely take pushrod 5.0's to 300+ rwhp using significantly less complex technology.

Chevy uses pushrod motors to this day, and they create wonders like the Z06 Vette that will trounce anything Ford has ever produced, including the Ford GT.

The Camaro sucked because it was a poorly designed body put together cheaply and stuffed with a very nice drivetrain. Both Camaro and Mustang live or die based on V6 sales and only enthusiasts would suffer through the shortcomings of the Camaro to get the performance. Mustang has been for a long time a much more liveable daily driver, and it has ruled the V6 pony car world for a long time.

It's kinda sad that the only way Ford could make a Mustang that would take a Camaro in a straight line was to slap a roots blower on it. They need to ditch the modulars ASAP and go with a design that was actually meant to be RWD and offers the flexibility to evolve as needs dictate.

I agree again. Ford's not trying very hard. I would add that I really dislike the girth of the mod motors too.

Finally, the Mustang was based on the Falcon bellypan (introduced in 1960). It was just a cheap car with a sporty body.

 

[Rootus]

I would add that I really dislike the girth of the mod motors too.

I find it somewhat entertaining that the original design intent of the modular was FWD (and not any V8's IIRC), and now the only modulars left in production are RWD V8's. Whoops.

At the rate Ford is bleeding money right now, I wonder how much longer this can go on. With rumors going around that the "Big Three" may become the "Big Two", it seems like the domestic auto industry is in for some substantial changes. Who will own Ford in five years? What would a buyout mean for the Mustang?

 

[stock50LX]

I find it somewhat entertaining that the original design intent of the modular was FWD (and not any V8's IIRC), and now the only modulars left in production are RWD V8's. Whoops.

At the rate Ford is bleeding money right now, I wonder how much longer this can go on. With rumors going around that the "Big Three" may become the "Big Two", it seems like the domestic auto industry is in for some substantial changes. Who will own Ford in five years? What would a buyout mean for the Mustang?

They're already the "big two" unless Daimler gave back Chrysler. One good-selling-model is just not enough to keep Ford in the black, or within eyesight of being in the black.

US automakers have lost the youth market utterly. The future does not look good.

 

[TheRedBlur]

I think it's funny because both types of motors can make great horsepower, but ford is not willing to commit one way or another. It seems like half of ford is tryin to modernize, whereas the other half is working for the niche.

I think modern thinking is the most competetive way to compete with modern thinking. We need a mustang that we can be proud of; a well-rounded car that scares other drivers.