2011 GT350

[F150 Duke]

thanks Chip!

 

 

Hello Amy,

 

I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not because your link in one of the closed threads links to an error. But in one of the closed threads a member brought up some execellent ideas that I too liked and was hoping for in the new GT350. I've copied them below. The only modification to that list I would include is the HP #. I don't think 550+ is really necessary for the GT350. Rather lower HP would be acceptable if it meant getting it to the ground and making sure the car had better traction. As we all know, it's useable HP and not total HP that's important to the GT350.

 

1- I would rather see a build up of alot more HP of the new 5.0 engine internally (cam, heads,forged internals, etc) and do away with the supercharger (intercooler) and all that extra weight. Keep weight around above target range of 3500lbs or lighter (many performance and handling benefits).

 

2-continue the Blue Shelby painted on stripes all the way down on rear end.

 

3-move the Shelby name up higher on trunk lid

 

4- If car is going to be very limited than Remove back seat option and place in Rollbar (once again weight target range)

 

5-I like the exhaust out the back is a nice touch (how about some electric cuts-outs put in(if its legally possible).

 

6- wider meats (tires and wheels) all the way around especially back, and the old school crager S/S"s as a wheel option.

 

7-make all the add-on ground effects thru-out entire car look more like it was integrated into the body lines rather than just attached on.

 

8 im not so sure I like the location of the 2 round back up lights where they are

 

9-interior ball shifter I would like to see more old school round cueball type shifter.

 

10- how about some lower rear functional side scoops to cool off back brakes as well.

 

11-And with the internal build-up of engine (say 550+hp) NA, I would love to see some type of functional ram-air coming in

 

12- maybe alittle less badgeing

 

13- I would like to see some type of hood pins, spaced out towards outer front edge.

 

14--Overall i like the car as I said but the Shelby GT 350 remake should be more race oriented with less weight for even better handling (no S/C) more HP(Internal engine build-up from money saved from no blower etc) and less creature comforts(such as back seat etc)....especially if you say car is going to be very limited. I think this would be awesome and follow directly in line of what the "Original GT 350" had to offer at the track as well as the streets. I know that I would buy one and race it at "The Glen" for what it was initially intended for....racing heitage.

[kahmann]

I would suggest that you read through all of the other GT-350 threads again.

 

Ken

 

1- I would rather see a build up of alot more HP of the new 5.0 engine internally (cam, heads,forged internals, etc) and do away with the supercharger (intercooler) and all that extra weight. Keep weight around above target range of 3500lbs or lighter (many performance and handling benefits). -

I can't imagine that this would be cost effective, regardless of how desirable this may seem to you or I.

 

2-continue the Blue Shelby painted on stripes all the way down on rear end. -

Amy has already been quoted as saying that the stripes down the rear fascia look goofy on this car and won't be added.

 

3-move the Shelby name up higher on trunk lid -

This has been mentioned a thousand times in just a couple days. I'm sure they've seen this suggestion.

4- If car is going to be very limited than Remove back seat option and place in Rollbar (once again weight target range) -

What roll bar do you know of that weighs less than the 20 lb rear seat assembly?

 

5-I like the exhaust out the back is a nice touch (how about some electric cuts-outs put in(if its legally possible). -

It's not legally possible.

 

6- wider meats (tires and wheels) all the way around especially back, and the old school crager S/S"s as a wheel option. -

Amy has been quoted as saying that the old school wheels don't look right on this car and that the final production car will have wheels similar to what's on the prototype.

 

7-make all the add-on ground effects thru-out entire car look more like it was integrated into the body lines rather than just attached on. -

Amy has been quoted as saying that the production fascias are 1-piece and not 2-piece like on the prototype.

 

8 im not so sure I like the location of the 2 round back up lights where they are -

Amy has also said that this won't be changing.

 

9-interior ball shifter I would like to see more old school round cueball type shifter. -

SPP offers many different shifter balls for sale.

 

10- how about some lower rear functional side scoops to cool off back brakes as well. -

The ducts in the rocker panels are functional for rear brake cooling, along with separate ducts under the car.

 

11-And with the internal build-up of engine (say 550+hp) NA, I would love to see some type of functional ram-air coming in -

How do you propose to build a 550+HP 5.0 that's NA and still CARB compliant?

 

12- maybe alittle less badgeing -

Again, suggested a thousand times in a dozen threads.

13- I would like to see some type of hood pins, spaced out towards outer front edge. -

Me too.

 

14--Overall i like the car as I said but the Shelby GT 350 remake should be more race oriented with less weight for even better handling (no S/C) more HP(Internal engine build-up from money saved from no blower etc) and less creature comforts(such as back seat etc)....especially if you say car is going to be very limited. I think this would be awesome and follow directly in line of what the "Original GT 350" had to offer at the track as well as the streets. I know that I would buy one and race it at "The Glen" for what it was initially intended for....racing heitage. -

I think you're confusing the original GT-350 with the GT-350R. I personally hope that this car sees production similar to how the prototype was revealed Monday night. But I also hope that an R model is available in the future.

 

[DubbsFaris]

There has been some talk of an R package down the road...I cant comment any more on that until I hear something official....but I would say- "signs point to happy fans"

 

Amy also stated hood pins would be an option, but many would want the car without...so expect both options per her post.

 

Also, Im not sure where people are getting the weight numbers....are those from the 2010 build? I am guessing the car to come in about 300 lbs. lighter than the GT500....the 2011 GT500...

 

That is weight off the front end....which will help the balance and handling tremendously. And for the record, I spoke with Gary P. who told me this car handles better than a Terlingua and has more power than a stock GT500 by a lot. For those who have driven both, this is excellent news. Furthermore- the Shelby SR package is slower on the track per the same conversation.

 

He also mentioned that the stock mustang GT they got outperformed a KR on the track too...so set expectations high.

 

If those statements are accurate, I dont care if it weighs more than a checker cab marathon(7600lbs I owned one for some time.)

[F150 Duke]

And for the record, I spoke with Gary P. who told me this car handles better than a Terlingua and has more power than a stock GT500 by a lot.

 

 

Are you saying the GT350 is going to have more power than a stock GT500 "by a lot"? Not sure how that is possible since the quoted range goes to 550 and a GT500 is at 540 now. Sorry, maybe I'm just confused.

[ChrisSD]

I am guessing the car to come in about 300 lbs. lighter than the GT500....the 2011 GT500...

 

 

 

Stock no option 2011 Mustang GT manual trans = 3603 lbs:

 

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_Mustang_GT_Specs.pdf

 

2010 Whipple kit for Mustang GT:

 

http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=11436

 

143 lbs. One can surmise the Whipple kit for the 5.0 will weigh the same. It's just packaging differences. So, we can guess that a Whipple added to a base GT = 3746 lbs.

 

An iron block 2010 GT500 weighs in at 3920 lbs. Assuming we get around a 130 lbs weight reduction, the 2011 GT100 will weigh 3790 lbs. You are expecting the GT-350 to weigh 3490 lbs, which is 256 lbs less than what a 2011 Mustang GT with a whipple kit will probably weigh? 103 lbs less than a STOCK BASE 2011 Mustang GT with NO BLOWER will weigh? Despite no signs of weight reduction and the additions of a big brake kit all around + 20" rims and tires, blower, intercooler?

 

No way. The only way to get that weight reduction is carbon composites and an aluminum spaceframe. Or they could toss nearly EVERY creature comfort the car has, the backseat, the sound deadending, all of it.

 

My guess= 250 lbs over the base GT to due to all the upgrades. 3850 lbs.

[SGT-C0056]

I love the engine and Front look. I still dont like the rear..but thats not SAI fault, thats Ford's. SAI has improved it.

[Tob]

He also mentioned that the stock mustang GT they got outperformed a KR on the track too...so set expectations high.

 

That speaks volumes as to how good of a job Ford did with the '11 GT. That said, the '11 GT500 should be incredible!

 

My guess= 250 lbs over the base GT to due to all the upgrades. 3850 lbs.

 

A sensical, pragmatic approach to come up with a realistic estimation. Good show!

[SGT0225]

I am glad to see the center rear exhaust on a new Shelby. I was waiting for that.

[SicShelby]

Stock no option 2011 Mustang GT manual trans = 3603 lbs:

 

http://media.ford.co...ng_GT_Specs.pdf

 

2010 Whipple kit for Mustang GT:

 

http://www.fordracin...tKeyField=11436

 

143 lbs. One can surmise the Whipple kit for the 5.0 will weigh the same. It's just packaging differences. So, we can guess that a Whipple added to a base GT = 3746 lbs.

 

An iron block 2010 GT500 weighs in at 3920 lbs. Assuming we get around a 130 lbs weight reduction, the 2011 GT100 will weigh 3790 lbs. You are expecting the GT-350 to weigh 3490 lbs, which is 256 lbs less than what a 2011 Mustang GT with a whipple kit will probably weigh? 103 lbs less than a STOCK BASE 2011 Mustang GT with NO BLOWER will weigh? Despite no signs of weight reduction and the additions of a big brake kit all around + 20" rims and tires, blower, intercooler?

 

No way. The only way to get that weight reduction is carbon composites and an aluminum spaceframe. Or they could toss nearly EVERY creature comfort the car has, the backseat, the sound deadending, all of it.

 

My guess= 250 lbs over the base GT to due to all the upgrades. 3850 lbs.

 

 

Make sense to me! Listen to what he says and lets see.

[mach 1 1970]

Well i slept on it and i realize that the GT350 is starting to grow on me. Since it's not a daily driver the design maybe right on the money. Carroll Shelby said in the Motor Trend interview the car has come full circle . When you look @ it that way it's a Triple. Just fine tune the back up lights for a home run please . Nice job and i am glad you waited for the 5.0 power plant & 6 speed trans.

[2010KonaBlueGT]

Stock no option 2011 Mustang GT manual trans = 3603 lbs:

<snip>

My guess= 250 lbs over the base GT to due to all the upgrades. 3850 lbs.

 

 

 

Are you considering the Fiberglass hood and trunk lid?

 

 

Phill Pollard

[dave c]

Stock no option 2011 Mustang GT manual trans = 3603 lbs:

 

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_Mustang_GT_Specs.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

I don't believe Ford has released the weights. If you look at your link it says "estimation". I can't find the weight of the car anywhere in the specs. I'm guessing the 350 is going to weigh in around 3700.

[ChipBeck]

Gentlemen,

 

As it is currently parked about 2 miles away from my home here in Scottsdale, I spent the better part of an hour on Thursday examining the new GT350 at Barrett-Jackson. Afterwards I had dinner with Mark McGowan, vehicle dynamics engineer and one of the head test drivers for the Ford Motor Company. Mark pirated a 2011 5.0L 32 valve V-8 Mustang GT from the Ford Proving Ground and brought it to the Ford GT owners Barrett-Jackson gathering I host every year so that we could examine it. He probably has more time behind the wheel of the new 5.0 Mustang and any other man and he absolutely raves about that power plant. He told me it only weighs 30 pounds more than the current 4.6L 24-valve V-8, and has a 7000 rpm redline with 8000 rpm possible!! Dig that! He then told me that it has a higher compression ratio than the 4.6 L motor so supercharging it is a little trickier. The Ford Racing Parts Division is doing extensive testing and I'm sure they will have that ironed out.

 

On Saturday night I returned and had about a 1/2 hour conversation with Amy about the car.

 

Here's a rundown on my thoughts as I viewed the prototype GT350. First, the car looks a lot better in person than it does in the pictures. Especially the wheels which I hated in the photographs. Viewing them "in the flesh" on the car however, they looked outstanding. The grill and the hood look very nice. The open hood scoop flows cold air directly over the top of the Whipple supercharger exactly like the installation I designed and built for the Shelby GT. Obviously, I like that a lot.

 

Under the hood.......Off the charts beautiful. The selection of the black wrinkle finish Whipple is absolutely the right choice. The GT350 valve covers are really cool and correct the ugliest part of 4.6L Mustang engine which are those ugly scalloped unpolished aluminum valve covers. The underside of the fiberglass hood is well finished and the hood itself fits flawlessly. The radiator opening is fitted with an aluminum grille and there is an aluminum trim ring that surrounds it. Very nice.

 

Inside the car......The GT350 on display here has the optional upgraded Shelby interior which I thought was very tastefully done. The small red, white, and blue leather inserts in the seats and shifter boot combined with the black GT350 logo stitching on the seat backs gets a big thumbs up. The overdone tablet size Shelby plaque on the console door covering the cup holders is a badge too far and even Amy said that she did not like it and it will probably be eliminated. The CSM# plaque in front of the shifter is placed on an angled flat surface created for it and it looks a bit out of place there. Perhaps there's no other place for it. I would like to see a GT350 Cobra logo in the center of the steering wheel but I realize how tricky it is to modify anything on an airbag enclosure. The view from the drivers seat out over the functional hood scoop is nice and although I'm not a big fan of pillar mounted instruments, the three A pillar mounted gauges are clearly visible, nicely done, and do not impair visibility in any way.

 

How does it sound?........Amy was kind enough to fire the car up inside the tent while I stood behind to listen to the exhaust system developed specifically for this car. RIGHT ON!!!!!! Members might debate whether or not they prefer the center mounted exhaust or a more conventional looking system, but I can assure you that nobody will complain about the way this car sounds. The exhaust note conveys authority without being objectionably loud. Again, very well done.

 

Exterior appearance........Here, I'm going to have to eat some crow. When I first viewed the photographs, I was very critical of the cars exterior styling, I didn't like the front and rear facias, the rocker panel molding, or the wheels. When I walked up to the GT350 however, most of the items I found objectionable in the photos, looked pretty damn good on the actual car. The extreme lack of ground clearance on the prototype at the bottom of the front facia will inevitably result in damage no matter how careful the driver is. Driving across a typical rain gutter would result in contact with the pavement. Amy assures me that the production cars will have more ground clearance here and the molding at the bottom of that facia will be easily removable, replaceable and inexpensive. The front brake cooling ducts are functional and I assume that owners will be able to close them in cold or inclement whether. The ducts themselves appear to be a bit too large to my eye. I would prefer a slightly less aggressive front facia with a bit more ground clearance as I get a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach every time I hear the very low front facia of my Shelby GT or my Ford GT scraping asphalt when entering a driveway or crossing a speed bump.

 

The leading edge of the fiberglass hood and the front bumper/facia form a very attractive grill that integrates well with the headlights/turn signals. A complete change from the standard Mustang grill that integrates so well that it looks like it was designed to be that way in the first place. Again, well done here. Amy told me that the redundant GT350 badges mounted on the front fenders will either be eliminated or replaced with a "Powered by Ford" badge or something else. And finally, the GT350 badging in the hood stripes looks better on the actual car than it does in the photos. I am no longer certain that it should be removed.

 

The rocker panel molding that I didn't like at all in photos, looks very nice on the car itself. The one thing I find objectionable about it is the very narrow slit opening that feeds cold air to the rear brakes. The opening needs to be made somewhat wider as that very tiny narrow slit does not look like it could feed enough air to do much good. The air coming through that slit is supplemented by additional air coming from underneath the car.

 

The rear end styling........I still don't like the Shelby letters on the surface of the back bumper. I would relocate them someplace else or eliminate them entirely. The coolest thing on the entire car is the vintage GT350 Shelby American Cobra logo in the center of the rear facia. That logo on a genuine Shelby is the Holy Grail for all Mustang enthusiasts who grew up dreaming of owning one some day. Amy told me that about a month ago the company formally changed it's name from "Shelby Automobiles" back to it's original 1960s moniker "Shelby American". I like that. The center mounted exhaust looks very nice and as I've already mentioned, sounds even better. The backup lights in the bumper that I abhorred in the photographs, are still not particularly attractive on the actual car, but they're not as noticeable and not nearly as objectionable on the actual car either. They are actual backup light lenses from a 1967 GT350, which is very cool. I would make the porthole ridges that surround those lenses slightly less pronounced, and leave them in place. The rear spoiler has undergone wind tunnel testing and both looks right and aids aerodynamics.

 

The bottom line........And trust me on this one, you can't judge this car from the photographs. I was a big critic of the GT350 after viewing the photos. I was wrong. I can't remember another automobile that I disliked in photos but liked a lot after I viewed the actual car. I'm not saying that I like everything about it, but I definitely like the total package. Shelby American is listening and some changes will be made before final production specifications are settled so I'm sure that the finished product will be even better than the prototype displayed at Barrett-Jackson this week.

 

Shelby American has sold a couple hundred of these in just a few days here at Barrett-Jackson. Obviously, many others who have examined the car up close and personal are quite impressed with it as well.

 

You can't judge a book by it's cover, and it appears I am not talented enough to have judged the new GT350 by photographs of it. I really believe that a lot of other members whose first impression was negative based upon pictures, will also like the car a lot when they finally view it. All the best.

 

Chip

GT350 Badge.php

GT350 Badge.php

[DutchGT500]

Nice report on the car, Chip. Wish I had the money right now.

[twobjshelbys]

There were a few things that I think Chip mentioned and also Amy mentioned to me.

 

1. The low clearance of the front fascia is going to eat them alive. Amy has stated that it will be one piece, but I would encourage that some of it be sacrificial so that when a speed bump or a rain trough eats one you can replace it without a huge cost or insurance claim. Humor me. Drive the car at the speed limit on Scottsdale road north of the 101 freeway.

 

2. Hood pins are essential. It's not a Shelby without them.

 

3. Amy said the rear window covers will be sent with the car but not installed. The owner can install them at their discretion. They already have a bad enough blind spot.

 

I would also reiterate that my mind was changed when I saw the car in person. I do like it (but won't be buying one, I have to admit, so I don't really have a horse in this race). But I didn't really know for sure until I saw it in person.

 

Also, it would be nice if SA had one available for test drives in Vegas. Not track driving but just some street drives.

[ChipBeck]

1. The low clearance of the front fascia is going to eat them alive. Amy has stated that it will be one piece, but I would encourage that some of it be sacrificial so that when a speed bump or a rain trough eats one you can replace it without a huge cost or insurance claim.

 

Two,

 

That white splitter at the bottom of the front facia will be a seperate piece. When damaged it can be replaced without changing the whole facia.

 

Chip

[RogerS]

Chip,

 

Great meeting you in AZ. A point here to clarify: the intake ports in the front fascia are for additional intercooler air. The brake cooling ducts in the front are mounted under and behind the front splitter. The rear brake duct inlet in the side rocker is just a portion of the cooling, there are supplemental intakes under the floor pan that add to the flow of air on the rear brakes.

 

Roger

[Tob]

Roger, has SAI documented a rear caliper or rotor temperature decrease via the 'supplemental intakes' or 'duct inlets' when the vehicle is stopped repeatedly from high speeds? I ask because even Ford doesn't have a problem with the rear brakes in their stock condition (save for a pad upgrade) when used in the FR500GT4, FR500C, or the FR500S. If these vehicles don't have an issue why would this car?

 

I find it interesting because it seems as with SAI's SS offering, the inclusion of rear brake 'ducting' serves only to hinder the opportunity to fit a wider wheel - unless they are removed. So if there isn't an appreciable gain in vehicle performance, then why?

 

Tob

[Fontech]

My brother-in-law, Leo will be there on Thursday. I will see if he can pickup some.

 

Tom

 

 

Received an email from Leo. Numerous trips to the GT350 area and NO BROSHURES LEFT . Leo was there from Thursday night till Sunday.

 

It was a good try.

 

Tom

[check6]

Received an email from Leo. Numerous trips to the GT350 area and NO BROSHURES LEFT . Leo was there from Thursday night till Sunday.

 

It was a good try.

 

Tom

 

 

Oh well...thanks for trying Tom!

[EXPcustom]

I would just take a base Mustang GT in white sans grill lights add blue stripes and badging like the GT500 but instead it would be GT350. No Ground effects, body kits, different lights etc, then add the power upgrades.

 

Keeps it just like the original GT350, simple.

[RogerS]

Roger, has SAI documented a rear caliper or rotor temperature decrease via the 'supplemental intakes' or 'duct inlets' when the vehicle is stopped repeatedly from high speeds? I ask because even Ford doesn't have a problem with the rear brakes in their stock condition (save for a pad upgrade) when used in the FR500GT4, FR500C, or the FR500S. If these vehicles don't have an issue why would this car?

 

I find it interesting because it seems as with SAI's SS offering, the inclusion of rear brake 'ducting' serves only to hinder the opportunity to fit a wider wheel - unless they are removed. So if there isn't an appreciable gain in vehicle performance, then why?

 

Tob

 

As you know Tob wheel offset could fix the rear ducting clearance issue. What you may not know is that we have had much wider wheels on our Super Snake Concept vehicles without interference issues. And the same components may not be in use when this vehicle goes into production. We seem to forget this is the Concept and not a proto-type.

 

You may want to check your information on braking issues with the Ford FR series vehicles. There was a major brake issue in one of the series where several vehicles wrecked due to brake failure. Though not listed in the parts list or descriptions all vehicles had brake cooling functionality in one form or another.

 

Roger

[Tob]

As you know Tob wheel offset could fix the rear ducting clearance issue. What you may not know is that we have had much wider wheels on our Super Snake Concept vehicles without interference issues. And the same components may not be in use when this vehicle goes into production. We seem to forget this is the Concept and not a proto-type.

 

You may want to check your information on braking issues with the Ford FR series vehicles. There was a major brake issue in one of the series where several vehicles wrecked due to brake failure. Though not listed in the parts list or descriptions all vehicles had brake cooling functionality in one form or another.

 

Roger

 

 

Roger, thank you for the response. I've been looking for specific mention of this 'major issue' and can't find either 'it' or how any fix involved changes in rear brake cooling. Could you please be more specific?

 

And your statement...

What you may not know is that we have had much wider wheels on our Super Snake Concept vehicles without interference issues. And the same components may not be in use when this vehicle goes into production.

...is confusing. So you had a wider wheel on, and you are saying that the cooling ductwork hasn't been finalized? I'm asking if you have tested the 'ductwork' and whether or not you found an appreciable gain in (rear) braking performance during repeated high speed stops.

 

I've studied detailed photos of the Multimatic vehicles, along with others. I'm just trying to understand what your intentions are and how they would be better than what the teams running the 'FR' series vehicles are doing.

 

Tob

[mach 1 1970]

I would just take a base Mustang GT in white sans grill lights add blue stripes and badging like the GT500 but instead it would be GT350. No Ground effects, body kits, different lights etc, then add the power upgrades.

 

Keeps it just like the original GT350, simple.

 

Why not take a ca. special as your base?