Is the 2011 GT too close to the Shelby GT500?

[REVENGE]

I have seen times posted where the GT is faster in the quarter mile. I know some people here say the car magazines do not have drivers who can get the best out of the GT500 but imagine when they do a direct comparison of the two cars? Even if the Shelby is faster in the straight line the lighter weight will help the GT's lap time.Imagine when you see a cover saying "Mustang GT beats Shelby!" How soon before we start reading the price premium over the GT is not worth it? Should Ford do something to really increase the performance of the GT500 or just keep things the way they are?

[SicShelby]

I'm in the same boat. I think it's great that Ford is continuing to do great things, so let me first say that.

 

That said, I think it sucks that we're using a bigger platform (the 5.4L) AND a blower, and the n/a 5.0L is putting up comparable numbers. Talk about bang for the buck!

[Hpfisterer]

This is drepressing.. how much lighter is the GT?

[mustangshelbygt500]

I have seen times posted where the GT is faster in the quarter mile. I know some people here say the car magazines do not have drivers who can get the best out of the GT500 but imagine when they do a direct comparison of the two cars? Even if the Shelby is faster in the straight line the lighter weight will help the GT's lap time.Imagine when you see a cover saying "Mustang GT beats Shelby!" How soon before we start reading the price premium over the GT is not worth it? Should Ford do something to really increase the performance of the GT500 or just keep things the way they are?

 

 

 

I'm sure 2011 models are much faster than 2011 GT, and when it comes to potential GT500 is far ahead no matter what year Shelby you have. All you need is a Whipple

[Wicked_SVT]

I'm sure 2011 models are much faster than 2011 GT, and when it comes to potential GT500 is far ahead no matter what year Shelby you have. All you need is a Whipple

 

 

I agree. The mod potential of the GT500 is endless. The new GT with a compression ratio in the 11's will make good power modded but will have to run race gas or meth without changing the compression to make numbers similar to a modded GT500.

[William Rodgers]

The price difference is difficult to substantiate, you can add all the power you want to the GT500 and it will never lose weight, that is one main reason I went with the Shelby GT/SC. With that said, I do love the 2011 GT500 and if I did not have my Shelby GT/SC that and the GT350 would be difficult to pick between. Its good to be a mustang fan :happy feet: :happy feet: :happy feet:

[chuckstang]

Mustang GT500 is only the right choice if you add power, otherwise there are much faster Mustangs out there.

 

Roush hammer and stage 3 are about a full second faster in the 1/4

 

If you are going to leave the car stock, the GT500 is not for you

[William Rodgers]

Mustang GT500 is only the right choice if you add power, otherwise there are much faster Mustangs out there.

 

Roush hammer and stage 3 are about a full second faster in the 1/4

 

If you are going to leave the car stock, the GT500 is not for you

 

 

Agreed, Roush is definately back in the game now, they are fine works of art.

[Ezareth]

I have seen times posted where the GT is faster in the quarter mile. I know some people here say the car magazines do not have drivers who can get the best out of the GT500 but imagine when they do a direct comparison of the two cars? Even if the Shelby is faster in the straight line the lighter weight will help the GT's lap time.Imagine when you see a cover saying "Mustang GT beats Shelby!" How soon before we start reading the price premium over the GT is not worth it? Should Ford do something to really increase the performance of the GT500 or just keep things the way they are?

 

 

That is the 2010 with stock tires.

 

There is no way a stock 2011 GT can beat a stock 2011 SVT Package GT500. The only reason it is close is because the Shelby has difficulty hooking up in 1st and 2nd but I bet the '11 GT has similar issues.

 

I'd love to see the Weight Difference between the 2011 GT and the GT500s, that Aluminum block has to count for something.

[ChrisSD]

Mustang GT500 is only the right choice if you add power, otherwise there are much faster Mustangs out there.

 

Roush hammer and stage 3 are about a full second faster in the 1/4

 

If you are going to leave the car stock, the GT500 is not for you

 

 

Evan smith was .4 second slower in stock 2010 GT500 versus Stage 3. I guess you rounded .4 up to 1.0? You can't use an Evan Smith Roush time and compare it to a Motortrend GT500 time.

[ChrisSD]

 

I'd love to see the Weight Difference between the 2011 GT and the GT500s, that Aluminum block has to count for something.

 

 

Around 200 lbs. If you load the GT up with the nice options the GT500 has stock, around 150.

[springer]

I have seen times posted where the GT is faster in the quarter mile. I know some people here say the car magazines do not have drivers who can get the best out of the GT500 but imagine when they do a direct comparison of the two cars? Even if the Shelby is faster in the straight line the lighter weight will help the GT's lap time.Imagine when you see a cover saying "Mustang GT beats Shelby!" How soon before we start reading the price premium over the GT is not worth it? Should Ford do something to really increase the performance of the GT500 or just keep things the way they are?

 

 

 

If Ford can't get the power to the pavement with 540 HP, making the engine more powerful won't make it faster! They need to work on the traction issues with the GT 500 so it "hooks up" during play time. It has plenty of power now.

[ingram4868]

Isn't there always somebody with a faster car? I'm having so much fun driving this thing.

[inyadreems]

All things considered the Roush's are much more expensive then the Shelby. Before I bought my GT500 I seriously considered the Roush 427R and Stage 3. The Stage 3 is 10 grand more than a fully loaded Shelby and you don't get the NAV and HID's. The 427R is also about 5 grand more than the Shelby. In no way shape or form could I get a Stage 3 for what I got my GT500 for, believe me I tried.

 

The Stage 3 is an awesome machine but I wasn't dishing out 60 grand for a Mustang and BTW the Roush is considered a Mustang GT Premium for insurance purposes, unless you get a stated value policy from a specialty insurance company. The Shelbv is considered a Shelby.

 

I also priced out a 2011 GT500 with the SVT pkge and all the goodies and was a hair below 60 grand. I can't wait to see what the 2011 GT500 1/4 miles times and track times are with a lighter curb weight and the SVT handling pkge, it should be awesome.

 

 

The GT500 can go on a diet also 69 lbs of rotational mass

 

 

Here are the test results from MM&FF, the weight def. hurts the GT500 and the Stage 3 is def. underrated at 540 hp and maybe closer to 555 or 560 with a 9% drivetrain loss that would be around 508 to the rear wheels.

 

MM&FF 2010 GT500 test

11.951/120.29 mph stock tires

 

MM&FF Stage 3 test

11.57/124.78 mph stock tires

 

Not looking to start a major debate , they are both wonderful cars and for me it was the looks/ options, the endless potential of the 5.4 and price that pushed me towards the Shelby.

[Ezareth]

All things considered the Roush's are much more expensive then the Shelby. Before I bought my GT500 I seriously considered the Roush 427R and Stage 3. The Stage 3 is 10 grand more than a fully loaded Shelby and you don't get the NAV and HID's. The 427R is also about 5 grand more than the Shelby. In no way shape or form could I get a Stage 3 for what I got my GT500 for, believe me I tried.

 

The Stage 3 is an awesome machine but I wasn't dishing out 60 grand for a Mustang and BTW the Roush is considered a Mustang GT Premium for insurance purposes, unless you get a stated value policy from a specialty insurance company. The Shelbv is considered a Shelby.

 

I also priced out a 2011 GT500 with the SVT pkge and all the goodies and was a hair below 60 grand. I can't wait to see what the 2011 GT500 1/4 miles times and track times are with a lighter curb weight and the SVT handling pkge, it should be awesome.

 

 

The GT500 can go on a diet also 69 lbs of rotational mass

 

 

Here are the test results from MM&FF, the weight def. hurts the GT500 and the Stage 3 is def. underrated at 540 hp and maybe closer to 555 or 560 with a 9% drivetrain loss that would be around 508 to the rear wheels.

 

MM&FF 2010 GT500 test

11.951/120.29 mph stock tires

 

MM&FF Stage 3 test

11.57/124.78 mph stock tires

 

Not looking to start a major debate , they are both wonderful cars and for me it was the looks/ options, the endless potential of the 5.4 and price that pushed me towards the Shelby.

 

 

The Aluminum driveshaft is one of the first modifications I plan on making.

 

I even removed the windshield wipes and motors on my Saleen to save on weight since I had rainX on the windshield and never drove it on rainy days. Hopefully the SVT rims are worth keeping since they are much lighter than the stock rim.

 

Also has anyone ever do a battery relocation to the trunk in their shelby?

[interceptor]

2011 GT $35k +. My 09 GT500 $40k +. Comments and attention i get while parked next to a GT -priceless!! [edit note: not bashing a GT, i like them too, just saying they're two different cars to compare. the performance may be close but the shelby mistique isn't. my brother's 66 GT350 will get outrun by most any modern day GT but ask him which one he'd rather have.

[2sharpie]

If Ford can't get the power to the pavement with 540 HP, making the engine more powerful won't make it faster! They need to work on the traction issues with the GT 500 so it "hooks up" during play time. It has plenty of power now.

 

 

 

I agree.......and please put some real brakes on the car. 540hp+ should have at least 14" brakes all around. Does Ford know if they made the stock wheels an optional 10" or 11" we would buy them up like crazy??

 

On a side note, the dealership where I got my GT500 just got in a 5.0 last night. Good looking car, nice looking engine bay too. And it wasnt loaded, but stickered at $39,9XX.

[Dennis70Mach]

If Ford can't get the power to the pavement with 540 HP, making the engine more powerful won't make it faster! They need to work on the traction issues with the GT 500 so it "hooks up" during play time. It has plenty of power now.

 

 

 

Exactly!! Power isn't the issue. We have drag radials on a GT500 that has the TVS and some other light mods putting out 606 RWHP, but that power is meaningless without traction. Even the drag radials can't handle the power. I wonder if Ford is working on some type of launch control like the Corvette has, I think the Camaro has it too, but I'm not sure. From what I understand, it's not a traction control system per se, it is solely designed to get the maximum traction with maximum power resulting in much better and CONSISTENT launches for the 1/4 mile.

[smbullett]

2011 GT $35k +. My 09 GT500 $40k +. Comments and attention i get while parked next to a GT -priceless!! [edit note: not bashing a GT, i like them too, just saying they're two different cars to compare. the performance may be close but the shelby mistique isn't. my brother's 66 GT350 will get outrun by most any modern day GT but ask him which one he'd rather have.

 

 

Totally agree. In general, cars will only get better in technology and performance, thats the job of any good auto maker in order to stay competitive. However, Limited edition cars like the Shelby if marketed correctly should and always will have an allure of being something special as time goes on. If you own one, just keep driving and smiling. Just my two cents.

[GT500bro]

I have seen times posted where the GT is faster in the quarter mile. I know some people here say the car magazines do not have drivers who can get the best out of the GT500 but imagine when they do a direct comparison of the two cars? Even if the Shelby is faster in the straight line the lighter weight will help the GT's lap time.Imagine when you see a cover saying "Mustang GT beats Shelby!" How soon before we start reading the price premium over the GT is not worth it? Should Ford do something to really increase the performance of the GT500 or just keep things the way they are?

 

 

Was at my local dealer yesterday for first oil change. One of the guys who works there who has a 2007 GT500 told me its a given that ford is moving to a 6.2 litre platform for 2012 Shelby that should put out 600+ hp. He was going to buy a 2011 but now is holding off til 2012. He seemed really knowledgeable and well informed. Anyone else hearing this or is it just rumor?

[MattR]

Was at my local dealer yesterday for first oil change. One of the guys who works there who has a 2007 GT500 told me its a given that ford is moving to a 6.2 litre platform for 2012 Shelby that should put out 600+ hp. He was going to buy a 2011 but now is holding off til 2012. He seemed really knowledgeable and well informed. Anyone else hearing this or is it just rumor?

 

 

 

6.2 is a heavy iron block again isn't it? I guess I don't see a new engine until the body style changes, Ford just invested a lot of money in the all new 5.4 aluminium block to get the weight down and not have the gas tax. I might beleive that the TVS supercharger will find a home on the 5.4 and come in at 570hp. It would seem totaly agaist the grain to add the gas tax back to the car again, so how much more power can they add without dropping more weight?

[Dennis70Mach]

6.2 is a heavy iron block again isn't it? I guess I don't see a new engine until the body style changes, Ford just invested a lot of money in the all new 5.4 aluminium block to get the weight down and not have the gas tax. I might beleive that the TVS supercharger will find a home on the 5.4 and come in at 570hp. It would seem totaly agaist the grain to add the gas tax back to the car again, so how much more power can they add without dropping more weight?

 

 

 

I would think that Ford adding the TVS as a factory component makes the most sense. I can't believe that 12 months after introducing an expensive investment like a 5.4 aluminum block, that Ford would turn around and dump it for a whole different block. The TVS would add significant power with very little investment on Ford's part, seems like the easy thing to do.

[Tob]

Was at my local dealer yesterday for first oil change. One of the guys who works there who has a 2007 GT500 told me its a given that ford is moving to a 6.2 litre platform for 2012 Shelby ...

 

 

You may as well have visited one of those places that not only do nails, but also have a woman in the back with a crystal ball. At least you could have gotten the Lottery numbers as well.

[F150 Duke]

Yeah I'd be really suprised too if they dropped the AL 5.4 after touting the cylinder liner technology and lighter weight for a 6.2 block that in either AL or iron is going to weight a lot more and kill the car's handling. The only way they could do that is if they completing updated the suspension and got rid of the solid rear axle in order to further improve handling with such a heavy block.

 

However, the only 2012 changes I could see making the least sense is

 

1. Keeping as is and adding some new features

2. No longer calling it the Shelby GT500 and move to Cobra or King Cobra (saving the Shelby name for the GT350 and post title applications)

 

The only reason I say #2 is there is no word on dealers being able to purchase future year allocations yet. But then again it is only 2010.

[GT500bro]

I would think that Ford adding the TVS as a factory component makes the most sense. I can't believe that 12 months after introducing an expensive investment like a 5.4 aluminum block, that Ford would turn around and dump it for a whole different block. The TVS would add significant power with very little investment on Ford's part, seems like the easy thing to do.

 

 

On the face of it, it doesn't seem to make sense at all so the guy could be out to lunch. But svt engineers are clearly going to have to do something to keep ahead of the competition. I hope at the same time they continue to make improvements to the suspension and reduce weight. Btw he also said with the same degree of assurance that the new svt package is nothing more than the current frpp suspension. Will be interested in finding out whether this is accurate.

[GT500bro]

You may as well have visited one of those places that not only do nails, but also have a woman in the back with a crystal ball. At least you could have gotten the Lottery numbers as well.

 

 

LOL probably right! Guy spoke with absolute assurance but probably is as accurate as an old gypsy fortune telling hag....

[mike.s]

maybe take a page from the z06 handbook and do a rear mounted tranny with a torque tube to help even out the weight distribution?

[springer]

The 6.2 is coming. They built it for a reason!

[GT500 rolls]

As someone said earlier, there is always a faster car.

 

Having multiple cars (GT, GT500, GT350, SS etc) from the same manufacturer and aftermarket is a really smart business strategy when it works. Look at all the attention being paid to the smallest of differences and the variety of methods/styles to get these tiny increases in performance. Pure marketing genius is driving people to get worried or depressed that their car is .5 seconds slower and to motivate them to spend $5k, $30k in upgrades or $50k for a new automobile that will be surpassed in due time.

 

Having just purchased a 2010 GT500, I too watch the performance numbers of the new Mustangs/Shelby's and pay close attention. But unless there is a massive difference in performance I'm not going to allow the marketing to bother me because the new iron/aluminum is gaining or even passing my performance. If they came out with something that was in the mid 3's in 0-60 or 11.5/11.7 in the qtr then I'd have a wandering eye and consider the change or I'd just dump some $ in real performance upgrades to get there.

 

Then there would still be the car that was faster.

[VegasMichael]

From MMFF:

2010 Shelby GT500 Scorecard

Run 60-Foot 1/4-Mile/MPH

1. 1.852 11.855/117.66

2. 1.850 11.784/118.93

3. 1.825 11.805/117.36

4. 1.778 11.592/118.45

5. 1.913 11.951/120.29*

* Run with stock tires; all other

runs with 26x11.5x17-inch Mickey

Thompson E.T. Streets

 

Those are some incredible times for a 2010. I imagine the same driver(s) with the same tires will get even lower times with the 2011 GT500 + SVT package. None of the other tests for the 2010 that I read about from the major mags came close to run #5 above with the stock tires. But I don't think a lot of the other testers did the little things that MMFF did like adjusting tire pressure and icing down the blower and inlets and experimenting with rpms to find the best one at which to launch. I don't even think some of them powershifted. They just kind of went out there, made a few runs, noted their times and speeds and went on their merry ways. I'm constantly reminded there are so many little things you can do to shave tenths off your quarter-mile times. I just wish I could decide whether to get a 2010 or 2011 this Fall. Oh, well. There are worse decisions to be saddled with! Drive safely and smartly.