FordGeek Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 OK my fellow GT500 geeks, I like you am waiting to plunk down my money on the much anticipated car of our dreams. However, just for the sake of intelligent dialogue, let's disconnect ourselves for a moment from the passion we have for this car and its namesake and ask ourselves, is the $8,000 increase in sticker from the "old" terminator cobra (The Shelby, after all, it it's direct replacement) to the new GT500 REALLY worth it? Outside of the monstrous engine we all hoped would show up sooner than later (internals included); I've compiled a brief list of key features found in our old worthy snake, and attempted to find an equivalent in the Shelby. The question I have for everyone is this: Are the "new" features (outside of the engine) really worth the $8K increase? Keep in mind that the Terminator's engine had manley rods and a host of other go fast goodies that would have taken an equal share of R&D prior to deploying into a production model. My own opinion is that there are some redeaming, unique features in each vehicle. But, I must say that tagging the "Shelby" name to the car is really where the cost resides. I would have expected this car to go up by, at the most, $5K. Let the rebuttals begin! OK my fellow GT500 geeks, I like you am waiting to plunk down my money on the much anticipated car of our dreams. However, just for the sake of intelligent dialogue, let's disconnect ourselves for a moment from the passion we have for this car and its namesake and ask ourselves, is the $8,000 increase in sticker from the "old" terminator cobra (The Shelby, after all, it it's direct replacement) to the new GT500 REALLY worth it? Outside of the monstrous engine we all hoped would show up sooner than later (internals included); I've compiled a brief list of key features found in our old worthy snake, and attempted to find an equivalent in the Shelby. The question I have for everyone is this: Are the "new" features (outside of the engine) really worth the $8K increase? Keep in mind that the Terminator's engine had manley rods and a host of other go fast goodies that would have taken an equal share of R&D prior to deploying into a production model. My own opinion is that there are some redeaming, unique features in each vehicle. But, I must say that tagging the "Shelby" name to the car is really where the cost resides. I would have expected this car to go up by, at the most, $5K. Let the rebuttals begin! SORRY FOLKS...I screwed up on the rims. My terminator came with 17", not 18". Hey, it's late and I'm seeing double! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5.4 Shelby Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 That is the first I have heard of the strut tower brace. Thanks Ford. We don't like stuff like chassis support, real leather dash or twin screws anyway. Others: Ford GT heads Dual disc clutch Bigger, newer technology blower attempt at interior refinement If you want the upgraded stereo, you can get it now (couldn't on previous Cobra) Those brakes are a significant upgrade The chassis is light years ahead We don't really know much about these rods and pistons yet It is my understanding that the traction control is improved to allow burnouts and launches Inflation I honestly feel that if the power can get to the ground, this car will respond very well to mods. IF that is the case, this car should spank Terms mod for mod. More displacement and bigger blower should make the difference significant. I will likely use mine primarily at track events and on the road (as opposed to standing starts). This is where this car should really shine (once the traction is overcome and the weight is already moving). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VNMOUS1 Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 OK my fellow GT500 geeks, I like you am waiting to plunk down my money on the much anticipated car of our dreams. However, just for the sake of intelligent dialogue, let's disconnect ourselves for a moment from the passion we have for this car and its namesake and ask ourselves, is the $8,000 increase in sticker from the "old" terminator cobra (The Shelby, after all, it it's direct replacement) to the new GT500 REALLY worth it? Outside of the monstrous engine we all hoped would show up sooner than later (internals included); I've compiled a brief list of key features found in our old worthy snake, and attempted to find an equivalent in the Shelby. The question I have for everyone is this: Are the "new" features (outside of the engine) really worth the $8K increase? Keep in mind that the Terminator's engine had manley rods and a host of other go fast goodies that would have taken an equal share of R&D prior to deploying into a production model. My own opinion is that there are some redeaming, unique features in each vehicle. But, I must say that tagging the "Shelby" name to the car is really where the cost resides. I would have expected this car to go up by, at the most, $5K. Let the rebuttals begin! SORRY FOLKS...I screwed up on the rims. My terminator came with 17", not 18". Hey, it's late and I'm seeing double! Your post is (sort of) a compliation of the questions posed throughout these forums for the past year. The answer is simple: It's worth it if it's what you want. If you're questioning it, the answer is no, for you. If you're trying to create justification of the cost in graphic form, the answer is no, for you. If you really don't get the value of a "different" car...whether it's badging or not....than the past decade's worth of Cobras, then the answer is no, for you. My take on your post? The answer is no, for you. That's one more for somebody else for whom all those questions are answered with an undeniable "yes". Enjoy your Terminator. bj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVS2XS Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 Of your $8000 price difference, a couple thousand is inflation. The remaining pays for a 5.4L engine and cooling system, a larger and improved Eaton SC, improved engine management, and the name on the car. The looks of the two cars may push you one way or the other - a purely personal choice. I know several Terminator owners that have payed quite a bit just to remove the IRS and install a live axel. If you don't think it is worth the price increase, don't get one. A car is a personal decision. To answer your question - YES. To me the price is WELL worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldimp Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 That is the first I have heard of the strut tower brace. Thanks Ford. We don't like stuff like chassis support, real leather dash or twin screws anyway. I have it from a very reliable source that the strut tower braces are being installed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipchay61 Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 I have it from a very reliable source that the strut tower braces are being installed. All of the magazine road test articles, for the GT500 that I've read, show the strut tower brace in the engine pics. Chip in SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Cobras Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 I went through the same back and forth debate with myself for months. It was more than academic since I have an 04 Cobra and it's the best car I've ever owned. Period. I was especially unhappy about the weight gain, front/rear weight bias, and lack of IRS inthe GT500. Still, I have decided to buy and keep the new car and turn in my '04 PowerLease car. I still swallow hard on the new car price. I have a below-MSRP deal, but I had the same deal on the '04, so the differential is the same. I can't point to any one thing that swayed me. Obviously it is hard to make an informed decision without actually driving it for a while. I take all those reviews with a grain of salt because I haven't driven the car myself. So it's a tough decision. I accept the fact I may have made the wrong choice, but once I decide I move on and don't agonize over 'what if?' I will drive the car, not park it and adore it in the garage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVS2XS Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 The Aug 2006 MM&FF GT500 test has Evan Smith getting 12.257 ET @ 117 mph (12.67 with the traction control on). When MM&FF tested the Terminator against the SS Camaro with the same driver (Evan Smith) the Cobra ran 12.835 @ 107.44. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/feat...atch/index.html I think this is about as good of a comparison as you will get between the two cars. I hope it helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordGeek Posted June 11, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 Thank you everyone for your candid feedback. I will say, which perhaps I didn't make clear, my car is scheduled for production this week. I'm not trying to sway myself into buying it, I'm definitely getting this gorgeous car. Just curious as to what others thought about the significant % increase in price. On another note, I tried capturing the article in the "Inside the Oval" magazine (for those of you that don't know membership in the Ford Racing Team gives you a free subscription; SVTOA members were automatically put on the distribution list after the merger of all of Ford's performance clubs). It came out a little blurry, but it's clear that the STRUT TOWER BRACE WILL NOT BE PART OF THE PRODUCTION VEHICLE. I agree with everyone about the fact that all pre-production models tested in the the various car magazines all have it. Not sure why the change of mind. By the way, it was the May 2006, Vol 8, Number 5 edition. It's blurry, but it states: "...Another change since the New York unveiling is that the production version is missing the shock tower brace that the show car wore. According to Champman (Tom Chapman; SVT vehicle dynamics supervisor, "The brace was originally fitted for structural durability based on computer-assisted engineering projection. Turns out, the brace is not really needed..." The article goes on to another page (that I didn't try to scan) that states: "...The handling benefit with street tires and wheel rates is negligible. Plus, it adds weight high up in the front of the car, just where it's not needed..." I still would have opted for it just to give it that "next level" stiffness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVS2XS Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 I would not get too upset about the strut tower brace not being included. If it was triangulated to the firewall it might be different (and stiffer). But several sources have said that it adds nothing but weight to the car - in street trim. If you are planning track time - and track tires - adding a better designed brace will be a simple mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSOLVER Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 I was under the impression that the coupe does without, and the ragtop gets one. I will install one (factory or otherwise) as ANY unibody car driven hard is improved with chassis stiffening. The install of the full length subs on my old SN-95 made the car feel like it cost about 15k more in terms of quietness and balance. Of course the ride/handling tradeoff is subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Five Oh B Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 It is my understanding that the traction control is improved to allow burnouts and launches Worth noting: Traction Control on Mustangs has had the "power start" feature since 1999. This is not new or unique to the 2007 GT500. My 2000 Mustang GT and my 2003 Mach 1 have the power start feature that allow a little tire spin if the accelerometer and ABS systems detect tire spin with "adequate" forward acceleration (such as launching hard at the dragstrip or on dry pavement). However, if not enough (or no) forward acceleration are detected (such as when you're on a slick surface) then the power start feature gives way to traction control setting off the reduction in spark/fuel and brake application as needed to provide forward acceleration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regalt87 Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 Is the Best bang for the buck, 05 GTO 400 Hp?. rather than supercharging a 300 HP Mustang GT to the breaking point, consider the GTO. and then supercharge that. Some of the reviews haven't been that bad, there are suspension mods needed but worth considering. A used one is $23,000 to $28,000. It is fast, drives nice and handles good and is half the cost of the Shelby (and can easily be made just as fast) But its not a Shelby and when you get out and walk away from it you won't be inclined to look back at it because it looks like a cavalier!!! I found one this week for $26,000.00 with 1200 miles on it, the payment calculator at 4.25% X 48 months is around $590/month. You have to decide what works best for your situation and what has priority. I want a nice handling performance car that doesn't need restored ( been there done that, tired of undoing other peoples crap) My 87 Regal T dyno'd at 429 HP but I want more. I am in love with the Shelby but the more I think about it the more I just can't justify the $46,000 plus interest, (that is if I could even find one for MSRP) I think Ford overpriced the car. I would like to see a 400 plus HP S197 SVT at $35,000. Sorry about the rant I will stop now. Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaylan1521 Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 Is the Best bang for the buck, 05 GTO 400 Hp?. rather than supercharging a 300 HP Mustang GT to the breaking point, consider the GTO. and then supercharge that. Couldn't do it. Too ugly (No offense JMO) Looks like a Grand Prix on roids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68fastback Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 Couldn't do it. Too ugly (No offense JMO) Looks like a Grand Prix on roids. . Ditto, here.... don't mean to offend anyone but the GTO is not a handsome car. GTO = Gigantic Total Ogre GTO = Going Totally Outsourced Sheby = g-o-r-g-e-o-u-s ! (all the letters are silent ;-) . I was under the impression that the coupe does without, and the ragtop gets one. I will install one (factory or otherwise) as ANY unibody car driven hard is improved with chassis stiffening. The install of the full length subs on my old SN-95 made the car feel like it cost about 15k more in terms of quietness and balance. Of course the ride/handling tradeoff is subjective. Yeah, and why they did not do a triangulated one is beyond me. I suspect you are correct.. it's to make sure there's no low-freq vibes/shake on the vert. You also touched on the one item I didn't notice anyone call out concerning: is $8K more worth it -- the fundamental structure on this 'stang is 300% stiffer than the SN-95. All in all, def worth the $8K to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVS2XS Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 68fastback, I think the torsional stiffness of the new Mustang is a bit overstated from a lot of sources. The 2005 mustang is almost 31% stiffer than the SN95 platform. The CONVERTABLE is twice as stiff as the SN95 vert. In the words of Ford Media: "With a body structure providing considerably more torsional rigidity than the previous generation Mustang hard top, the chassis of the 2007 GT500 coupe is better able to respond to driver inputs to help control the vehicle in emergency maneuvers. The body structure is 31 percent stiffer in torsion, meaning that a twisting force of 15,500 foot-pounds can deform the body by only one degree. Such dramatic leaps in body stiffness contribute to the GT500’s driving performance, with parallel benefits in accident protection. " I hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Cobras Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 One thing to remember about a strut tower brace triangulated to the firewall - collision damage to either front suspension assembly could be transferred back to the firewall increasing the damage to be repaired (to include a cracked or broken windshield perhaps?). When I went through Bondurant's course, they encouraged us to talk to the mechanics about the Mustangs in the school. Since I was thinking of doing some suspension mods to my '93 Cobra, I did just that. I was surprised to find their cars did not have the shock tower braces. They told me that the braces added little to the rigidity, the bar tying the lower rear control arm bushings together had a bigger impact. (Ford did this on the GT500.) He then talked about the collision repair problem I just discussed. I realize none of us will EVER get into an accident with this car. But I'm sure Ford thinks about that part and insurance claims anyway for all the other morons who don't visit this site. Remember, these are the same folks (Ford) who were considerate enough to leave space to get those tire chains of yours onto the GT500's wheels next winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVS2XS Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 If enough force from a colision is transfered from the strut towers, through a triangulated brace, to the firewall and damage it, the car would have been a write off either way. The strength and stiffness gained by triangulating the strut towers to the firewall is enough to support these parts (and others) in many collisions where they would be otherwise damaged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mach1fever Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 I like the gto personally but its at least a half second slower. Nuff said for me. Roger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETSOLVER Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 One thing to remember about a strut tower brace triangulated to the firewall - collision damage to either front suspension assembly could be transferred back to the firewall increasing the damage to be repaired (to include a cracked or broken windshield perhaps?). When I went through Bondurant's course, they encouraged us to talk to the mechanics about the Mustangs in the school. Since I was thinking of doing some suspension mods to my '93 Cobra, I did just that. I was surprised to find their cars did not have the shock tower braces. They told me that the braces added little to the rigidity, the bar tying the lower rear control arm bushings together had a bigger impact. (Ford did this on the GT500.) He then talked about the collision repair problem I just discussed. I realize none of us will EVER get into an accident with this car. But I'm sure Ford thinks about that part and insurance claims anyway for all the other morons who don't visit this site. Remember, these are the same folks (Ford) who were considerate enough to leave space to get those tire chains of yours onto the GT500's wheels next winter. Excellant points. But just as they had the strut tower brace(a beefy one) on the 96-97 Cobra's and beefed up the firewall on the 98up(sound familiar?) it is a response to a design issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68fastback Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 68fastback, I think the torsional stiffness of the new Mustang is a bit overstated from a lot of sources. The 2005 mustang is almost 31% stiffer than the SN95 platform. The CONVERTABLE is twice as stiff as the SN95 vert. In the words of Ford Media: "With a body structure providing considerably more torsional rigidity than the previous generation Mustang hard top, the chassis of the 2007 GT500 coupe is better able to respond to driver inputs to help control the vehicle in emergency maneuvers. The body structure is 31 percent stiffer in torsion, meaning that a twisting force of 15,500 foot-pounds can deform the body by only one degree. Such dramatic leaps in body stiffness contribute to the GT500’s driving performance, with parallel benefits in accident protection. " I hope this helps. I must have confused it with something else. Usually there's two specs: stiffness and tortional rigidity. But the revised mustang is improved further over the '05 as well -- but I'm not sure where I saw the 3-fold improvement (could be my alzheimers kicking in). Thanks DVS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.