Just when you got the new Shelby Mustang kit...

[sjordan2]

Ford is making a few tweaks to the Shelby GT500 that you may be interested in...

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/4997/Ford-Shelby-Mustang-GT500-Coupe.html

[Harry P.]

"Beyond that, the daily driver also will find this car perfectly fits his or her needs."

Um... what sane daily driver needs a car with 650 HP and 600 lb./ft. of torque?

I like fast cars as much as the next guy, but seriously...

[Jantrix]

"Beyond that, the daily driver also will find this car perfectly fits his or her needs."

Um... what sane daily driver needs a car with 650 HP and 600 lb./ft. of torque?

I like fast cars as much as the next guy, but seriously...

Whoa, you totally read my mind on this. Exactly who is Fords target demographic on this? People with more money that brains? How many joe-average types with $85k to spend has any idea how to handle a car with that kind of power?

[sjordan2]

According to the email accompanying the article, it's intended to one-up the Camaro ZL1:

"In response to the very well received and very quick Chevrolet Camaro ZL1, Ford have today announced a revised version of the top-of-the-range Shelby Mustang GT500. Due to be released at the upcoming Los Angeles Auto Show, the latest Shelby Mustang boasts a styling tweak and most importantly an enlarged version of the supercharged V8. Now displacing 5.8 litre, the all-aluminium engine thumps out a hugely impressive 650 bhp thanks to a TVS supercharger that according to Ford "creates 2.3 litre of displacement." According to Ford, the Shelby's new engine is the most powerful V8 currently available."

As for the "daily driver" claim, it appears the article is a Ford press release.

[Cato]

Geico will feast on your first-born...

[Harry P.]

there is nothing "need" about a GT500. it's mostly because you can if you are in the financial position to do so.

Right, I get that. But the Ford PR flack saying that the car is perfect as a "daily driver" is nuts. Typical advertising BS. Saying that it makes a sensible everyday car is idiotic.

[Chuck Most]

If you ever do need 650 hp, and don't have it, I'm sure you'll be singin' a different tune.

That engine isn't always producing the full 650- Ford is just naturally trumping the top rating for bragging rights. There are more 400+ horsepower cars out now than during the muscle car era, yet you don't hear people complaining about how impractical and undrivable they are because of the power they make. I'm sure this car would be a sensible everyday car.... IF you could keep your foot out of it. I don't think I could do that, so for me personally, no, it wouldn't be a sensible everyday car.

[Guest]

There's no reason it couldn't be a daily driver. It's exempt from the gas guzzler tax,so it must get pretty good gas mileage. You better believe if I could afford one that it would be my daily driver! My current daily driver only gets 17mpg,so the new Mustang GT500 would probably be an improvement. Besides,how many $65,000 cars are practical anyway? People buy them because they can not because they want to take the kids to soccer practice in them.

[Peter Lombardo]

Look, if you have a spare $85K and a desire for 650HP, then go for it........sure it is impractical and overkill, but to some it is just what they want.....remember, one mans ceiling is another mans floor, for me, I'm down about 10 floors below this.

The marketing of this car I find interesting here.......... and don't anyone dare call me a sexist , because I'm not one. Look at the second picture...the only picture of the car moving....actually on a banked race track, has a reasonably attractive blond woman driving. Is she the target market, or are they trying to tell me I need this car to keep up with her? You know what they say about guys needing a fast car to supplement for anatomical shortcomings.

Anyway, these cars really do look great.....if I bought one, I would drain the fluids and park it in my living room for the next 20 or 30 years and then take it to auction with 10 miles on the odometer and the window sticker still in place. Actually, I should have done that in 1967 with a Shelby GT500.....it would certainly help supplement my up coming retirement now.

[Darin Bastedo]

'perfect daily driver" depends on where you do your driving. If I was diving in and out of NYC daily, no, But around Kingsport TN yeah I could do it. I won't because;

1. if I had 85K burning a hole in my pocket, I'd pay off my house and save for my daughter's college

2. the insurance rates would dwarf my current car payment even with my clean record.

3. owning a performance car to me is not about going 200mph, it's about being able to have a bit of fun while still not risking my license. A Mazda Miata, or an S2000 would be more than enough to have some fun on the twisty roads surrounding my home in the mountains of TN.

[sjordan2]

Back in the mid-80s when I was doing Exxon's racing program advertising, 650 hp was typical for NASCAR cars. As for $85,000, that will buy some used, hair-raising supercars.

[Junkman]

"Beyond that, the daily driver also will find this car perfectly fits his or her needs."

Um... what sane daily driver needs a car with 650 HP and 600 lb./ft. of torque?

I do. And if it was for me, you could pack me another 650hp and another 600lb/ft in it, I wouldn't complain.

However, what amuses me much more is this:

"SVT keeps the Shelby GT500 on the cutting edge of technology"

Yes, with a solid rear axle for example :D

Edited November 16, 2011 by Junkman

[Chuck Most]

As for $85,000, that will buy some used, hair-raising supercars.

True enough, but who knows what kind of torture a used 'hair-raising' supercar has been through?

Add to that the fact the Shelby has better availability of parts and service than anything you could call 'exotic', I'd say that's another bump in its favor.

[Kaleb]

Its a gentle 650 HP. I want one, I would actually think about selling my 02 to buy that one.

[Cato]

Add to that the fact the Shelby has better availability of parts and service than anything you could call 'exotic', I'd say that's another bump in its favor.

Not when you get to the cashier in the service department...

[Junkman]

the Mustang has a solid rear axle because that's what America wants. the rest of the world doesn't matter.

Granted. But it's hardly cutting edge technology.

[Harry P.]

Granted. But it's hardly cutting edge technology.

Exactly. It's covered wagon technology.

And it's not that America "wants" a solid axle car. It's all about Ford saving a few bucks.

[Darin Bastedo]

Exactly. It's covered wagon technology.

And it's not that America "wants" a solid axle car. It's all about Ford saving a few bucks.

Actually, keeping the solid rear axle in the Mustang in the 2005+ Mustangs cost ford money. Originally it was intended as a cost saving measure, but the fact that the setup shares no parts with existing models means it actually cost more to produce. The reason they kept it though is that it is what their core market prefers.

[sjordan2]

Well, to me, it all depends on what you're looking for. If people don't care about a solid rear axle, and Ford can cut thousands off the price, what's the problem? A Corvette would cost a bunch more if they wanted to add world-class interior materials instead of the cheap stuff (always at the top of the criticism list), and they and their buyers are happy to deal with it and pay a more affordable price (though the Corvette value paradigm has become a thing of the past).

[whale392]

As Dave stated, the reason the Mustang has a solid axle is BECAUSE 99% of the Mustang driving group WANTS IT. Drag racers swap back to a Live Axle because it is more durable and dependable launch-wise than the IRS. Road guys will spend about what a good IRS costs to set their live axles up to articulate BETTER than the IRS. The added weight of the IRS can be seen as both a plus and a negative. The complexity is a negative to most US buyers. If IRS were so good, it would be in the car, but it isn't. Ford isn't BMW and has an entirely different client base.

Yeah, you naysayers are right. Who needs 650 docile horsepower as a daily driver? (insert roll-eyes sarcastic smiley here) Guess you didn't need 450hp LS6 Chevelles and 425HP Hemis either. But that is what defined an era of American performance. Wow, some of you guys really are wearing blinders aren't you?

[Darin Bastedo]

I do. And if it was for me, you could pack me another 650hp and another 600lb/ft in it, I wouldn't complain.

However, what amuses me much more is this:

"SVT keeps the Shelby GT500 on the cutting edge of technology"

Yes, with a solid rear axle for example :D

It might not be the latest and greatest, but nobody knows how to make it work better than ford. In a recent comparison test between the Boss 302 Mustang and ten other super cars, the Boss 302 was ranked 5th ahead of cutting edge cars like the Lexus LF-A and Lotus Evora. if it ain't broke why fix it?

[Maindrian Pace]

The Boss 302 is faster on a track than a new M3. And that's with the Conestoga wagon axle. We don't need no girly IRS to beat the world.

-MJS

[Cato]

Just imagine if it had 100 less horsepower and weighed 1000 pounds less-

like mine...

[Chuck Most]

Not when you get to the cashier in the service department...

Still, I'd rather pay Ford dealer prices than, say, Ferrari dealer prices on parts.

As far as the solid rear axle.... doesn't the Corvette still use a freakin' TRANSVERSE LEAF SPRING in the rear suspension? Or at least until a few years ago? Yeah, it's independent, but still, a buggy spring? Like a stagecoach? Come on! That's more backwards than a coil-sprung live axle, if you ask me.

[Junkman]

(though the Corvette value paradigm has become a thing of the past).

Well, the new ZR1 can outperform a Fiorano in every aspect, except for the alcantara headliner, should someone care for such stuff. However, for Fiorano money, I can buy two ZR1s, have one of them shipped to Monaco and make a year's holiday there. So the Corvette value paradigm still stands as far as I'm concerned.

Re. the Mustang:

I couldn't care less what rear axle is in it and why and I quite like the Mustang as it is. I just found it amusing when I read the term "cutting edge technology" in an article about a Mustang. That's a bit like finding the term "sophisticated creature comfort" in an article about a Super Seven.

Isn't exactly the Mustang an island of refreshingly congenial old-fashionedness in a sea of technology gone overboard for no apparent reason?

I'd buy a 'stang just for that if I was in the money for one.

And speaking of Mustangs and Super Sevens. I'd like the engine of the former in the latter.