2010KonaBlueGT Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Are you insinuating that everyone who bought a GT500 with the SVTPP only got the package for the Gurney flap? I don't know how you could get *that* out of what I clearly stated.... What we are pointing out is how Ford continues to market items as "special" that are nothing near special. So far, what I've seen for the SVTPP package is: The Gurney flap (i.e. wickerbill) that Ford "adds" to the SVTPP package, WHICH YOU PAID A PREMIUM FOR, and which Ford claims to be "more agressive" (and in fact, they state numbers of the percentage of downforce vs. the percentage of drag) is in fact, THE SAME EXACT ITEM that was *stock* on all 2010 GT500's. The only thing is is "more agressive" than is the "base" 2011 GT500 wickerbill, that was "dumbed down" in order to enable Ford to claim "a more agressive aero package" on the higher priced SVT Performance Package. It's "fluff". Then there's the "SVTPP" front struts that are part of their "superior handling" (and more expensive) Performance Package that are by all published accounts, THE SAME EXACT ITEM that was *stock* on all 2010 GT500's and if not, THE SAME EXACT ITEM that is offered on the "base" 2011 GT500's. More "fluff". And how about that rear axle ratio that ALL publications (and Ford/SVT) have/has touted as making the 2011 GT500 SVTPP "quicker accelerating"....but in reality, when calculated out with the larger rear tire diameter, you get a nearly identical final drive ratio so in reality there is NO "Performance gain" achieved with the lower (higher numeric) gear ratio. Even more "fluff". MY point is (and I think the other posters point also) that the Ford Marketing genius' are making it sound like you are getting a whole bunch of performance items when in fact, some of them are pure "fluff". So I can understand your plight....I mean, if *I* paid extra for some fluff, I'd be reading things into statements that weren't there too! :o Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrakRat Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Nice attitude Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010KonaBlueGT Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Nice attitude Phill Ehh??? <??SHRUG??> *I'm* not the one getting bent out of shape when somone points out some simple facts. But then again...*I'm* not the one that paid good money for "fluff". Back at'cha, Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlock Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 You can't say the Ford Marketing guys are STOOPID, that's fer sure. Hell, they can get people to pay extra for items that were stock/OE on their previous year model and/or on their base model with a different color of paint (apparently). You'v hit the nail on the head. It's the 20oz bottle of catsup that's now 18oz at the same price - all under the guise of "creating" value. But what excuse to I have? I signed on the bottom-line and handed over my cash just like everybody else. What worries me most, however, is that it's one thing committed among co-conspirators churning-out weak product by damaged brands. Not only are items like this not the lowest-hanging fruit to bitch about, but (as pathetic as it may seem) it's almost a bit expected - like buying from today's car dealers. Nobody really EXPECTS a straight answer or full disclosure, no matter how entitled anybody should be. But now that Ford has so successfully reinvested SO much into itself, not only does it no longer have crappy, "well... what did you expect?" product to set the stage for downstream schlock. It now has valuable business and brand name that's worth paying to protect, and factors like inherent distrust is something NO amount of reinvestment or horsepower can overcome. It's the exact reason I was willing to support Ford while its vehicles were improving, but not quite "there" yet. The only way I could expect Ford to ever achieve its goals was to support it on its way. But at the first sign the pretense may have been disingenuous, I'm out the door, never to return no matter how phenomenal any particular vehicle might be. And as the stronger a brand becomes, the smaller the issue becomes meaningful - if only by contrast and how little Ford would do to protect a reputation it spent so much and worked so hard to create. You know? Ford gets the benefit of my doubt (and my disproportionate investment) for a little while longer - given the tremendous disadvantage it has to compete against, like competitors who don't have the burden of balance sheets or past sins and not being able to pare-down its retail presence to a relevant size of meaningful quality with the stroke of a pen, not to mention the tax levied against Ford and every other maker in the form of every GM and Chrysler vehicles sold in perpetuity. But with each dramatically-improved vehicle, cent of debt it retires and dollar of profit, it raises its own bar. I'm not pounding my fist and demanding something for nothing - or even more for less. I'm just reaching the point at which Ford no longer has any excuses for not delivering to buyers willing to pay for them the very best that's available. My dream is for Ford to sell a ridiculously expensive Mustang - and for me to want to run into the dealer and pay the ludicrous price - and be glad I did thereafter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlock Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Are you insinuating that everyone who bought a GT500 with the SVTPP only got the package for the Gurney flap? Yikes. Most people only have to worry about the things they've actually said - without also having to contend with defending things they didn't. It's about expecting the same lack of disingenuousness from a multi-billion dollar global enterprise that takes-on the responsibility of engineering machines that claim to be able keep people alive while defying the razor's edge of physics than anybody would expect to receive from any other business - and NOT cutting Ford (or any car maker) slack because they're car makers and therefore expected to exaggerate. And while it's possible to debate whether or not the factual points of any advertised claim may or may not be true - the fact of the matter is that anything put into print should be beyond misinterpretation, and there's absolutely no reason it can't. If Ford is going to advertise a unique Gurney flap for the purpose of implying it can deliver improved performance to help justify a $3,500 option, it ought to be more than a plastic trim piece that was dumbed-down from last year's model. The test is pretty simple - if anybody wouldn't feel good about persuading his mother to buy it under the same pretense, it probably doesn't pass the stink test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010KonaBlueGT Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Yikes. Most people only have to worry about the things they've actually said - without also having to contend with defending things they didn't. LOL...I like that. Never heard it, but like it! People tend to get their feathers ruffled when one points out that the King really *IS* naked! And in this case.....his dong is hanging out too! Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrakRat Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Pretty sure the fluff I paid for put 9 painfully long seconds on the non fluffed 2010 model @ VIR. Musta been that flap! *shrug* Poo poo it all you want but the numbers don't lie. I bought my fluff because it's the first GT500 I've driven that doesn't handle like a sofa, also knowing that I was going to change most if not all of the suspension anyway. I'm not blind, Phil, I am well aware that despite having a 200 hp deficit, my Cobra would easily walk around my GT500 on the track. Now, does anyone have any unbiased performance data of a car with the FR3 kit in it? Pleeease? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeVA Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Pretty sure the fluff I paid for put 9 painfully long seconds on the non fluffed 2010 model @ VIR. Musta been that flap! *shrug* Poo poo it all you want but the numbers don't lie. I bought my fluff because it's the first GT500 I've driven that doesn't handle like a sofa, also knowing that I was going to change most if not all of the suspension anyway. I'm not blind, Phil, I am well aware that despite having a 200 hp deficit, my Cobra would easily walk around my GT500 on the track. Now, does anyone have any unbiased performance data of a car with the FR3 kit in it? Pleeease? Unbiased performance data ---- probably not. One poster (henrycp?) the previous 07-09 kit in his 2011 and said it ran like it was on rails...There are a few more of us with the kit on order because of what we think it is going to offer but can't give you any performance data yet and when we do it will also most likely be feeling based. While I would also like to see before and after numbers at a track with a consistent driver I jut don't think it's available. Maybe someone will pop up with something however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlock Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 LOL...I like that. Never heard it, but like it! People tend to get their feathers ruffled when one points out that the King really *IS* naked! And in this case.....his dong is hanging out too! Phill True - but the real question is how much shorter and stiffer it is, compared to stock of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingrider Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 True - but the real question is how much shorter and stiffer it is, compared to [*SVPP*] of course. Fixed that for ya... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlock Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Fixed that for ya... Thanks. But what you do with your own SVPP is your bidness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingrider Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Thanks. But what you do with your own SVPP is your bidness. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vapor08GT500 Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 WOW, this whole thread has really gotten out of hand!!! WOW WOW WOW...any of you that know me, know I say what I experience with out any sugarcoating....but now???? I wish I could say what I feel NOW (and would love to say)......I have owned, built, brokered, drag raced, road raced, dynoed, tested...etc etc.... well over 2500 cars....no BS....those of you that know me can pipe in... Many manufacturers put their names on other leading names just to be different or to "keep up" sometimes being the same part...that is all I will say here. Spring rates, Gurney Flap, shock lb to spring rate ratio, high speed deflection, control arm side deflection, upper control arm/bracket wheel hop factor, bushing durometer???......Lots of factors to make or break our cars....I have built, driven, raced and taken apart 60's through 11's Shelby's, Mustangs, SGT's. Terlingua's. 40th's, Super Snake's, SE's. GT350's 500's, KR's, Boss's, CJ's, etc....and most don't handle like the 11 GT350 or GT500 PP....but as with anything and everything, these is room for improvement, mainly in the upper and lower control arms and the shocks/struts... Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT NAJA Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Alex, Thank you! Finally, the voice of reason... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlock Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Lots of factors to make or break our cars....I have built, driven, raced and taken apart 60's through 11's Shelby's, Mustangs, SGT's. Terlingua's. 40th's, Super Snake's, SE's. GT350's 500's, KR's, Boss's, CJ's, etc....and most don't handle like the 11 GT350 or GT500 PP....but as with anything and everything, these is room for improvement, mainly in the upper and lower control arms and the shocks/struts... It's very good to know the SVTPP stands-up so well among such distinguished company. I didn't intimate the SVTPP handled poorly - only that I wanted to better-understand the differences, both technically and practically, upon adding an FR-3 Handling Pack to a GT500 with the SVTPP - and whether it amounts to a wholesale undoing of the suspension attributes and benefits the SVTPP sought to provide - particularly given how much Ford SVT emphasizes every aspect of the SVTPP suspension is tuned from the tires (and wheels) up. As to the myriad other dot-points, they're just that - and some may be insignificant unto themselves. However, particularly for a matter like suspension to which "better" can be almost entirely subjective, one man's "nothing" can be another man's "everything". As such, and particularly in terms of demonstrating a modicum of appreciation for those who're willing to pony-up the kind of ask for a Mustang a GT500 requires, the very least Ford can and should do it provide at least one source of straightforward factual statistical data for owners (ANY owner - including first-time and repeat offenders) to make an objective and informed decision for themselves with the marketing hype stripped away. "Cornering on rails" is the holy grail of suspension - unless you happen to want a GT500 that rides like more like a Grand Marquis. (I don't, but some might.) I'm not anti-marketing by any means - a huge part of my day-to-day existence relies upon resources earned from it. But that doesn't mean I'd ever advocate fluff as a substitute for fact. And if Ford were to provide buyers and owners with just one measly resource where that information can be found presented in a straightforward manner, it'd be free to market itself as ridiculously as it wants without the slightest bit of disingenuousness whatsoever - particularly for a vehicle to which customizing and "making it one's own" is so integral to its DNA and the image Ford capitalizes upon. It could also be to Ford's benefit - as the retail and parts aspects of this global paragon of carmaking are about as amateurish and hamstrung by its own ineptness as to deny Ford a huge additional source of virtually-free incremental revenue which would only further increase the ownership appeal of the vehicles that comprise its core business - and be the ultimate win/win for both the shareholder AND customer in me, which is the one recipe for success that's almost impossible to improve upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmurr Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Pretty sure the fluff I paid for put 9 painfully long seconds on the non fluffed 2010 model @ VIR. Musta been that flap! *shrug* Poo poo it all you want but the numbers don't lie. I bought my fluff because it's the first GT500 I've driven that doesn't handle like a sofa, also knowing that I was going to change most if not all of the suspension anyway. I'm not blind, Phil, I am well aware that despite having a 200 hp deficit, my Cobra would easily walk around my GT500 on the track. Now, does anyone have any unbiased performance data of a car with the FR3 kit in it? Pleeease? I'd like to see how your car does against a non-SVTPP 2011 on the same day. I have a feeling most of the benefit comes from the better tires. The bottom line is if you are happy with your purchase that is all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeVA Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 It's very good to know the SVTPP stands-up so well among such distinguished company. I didn't intimate the SVTPP handled poorly - only that I wanted to better-understand the differences, both technically and practically, upon adding an FR-3 Handling Pack to a GT500 with the SVTPP - and whether it amounts to a wholesale undoing of the suspension attributes and benefits the SVTPP sought to provide - particularly given how much Ford SVT emphasizes every aspect of the SVTPP suspension is tuned from the tires (and wheels) up. As to the myriad other dot-points, they're just that - and some may be insignificant unto themselves. However, particularly for a matter like suspension to which "better" can be almost entirely subjective, one man's "nothing" can be another man's "everything". As such, and particularly in terms of demonstrating a modicum of appreciation for those who're willing to pony-up the kind of ask for a Mustang a GT500 requires, the very least Ford can and should do it provide at least one source of straightforward factual statistical data for owners (ANY owner - including first-time and repeat offenders) to make an objective and informed decision for themselves with the marketing hype stripped away. "Cornering on rails" is the holy grail of suspension - unless you happen to want a GT500 that rides like more like a Grand Marquis. (I don't, but some might.) I'm not anti-marketing by any means - a huge part of my day-to-day existence relies upon resources earned from it. But that doesn't mean I'd ever advocate fluff as a substitute for fact. And if Ford were to provide buyers and owners with just one measly resource where that information can be found presented in a straightforward manner, it'd be free to market itself as ridiculously as it wants without the slightest bit of disingenuousness whatsoever - particularly for a vehicle to which customizing and "making it one's own" is so integral to its DNA and the image Ford capitalizes upon. It could also be to Ford's benefit - as the retail and parts aspects of this global paragon of carmaking are about as amateurish and hamstrung by its own ineptness as to deny Ford a huge additional source of virtually-free incremental revenue which would only further increase the ownership appeal of the vehicles that comprise its core business - and be the ultimate win/win for both the shareholder AND customer in me, which is the one recipe for success that's almost impossible to improve upon. Wow I am sure glad you are so passionate about this madlock.... me, I am just going to accept that there really aren't any absolutes to publish and that the whole handling thing really is a personal issue (as it seems to be between the handling characteristics of the cars of J Johnson and J Gordon, or Michael Schumaker and his various co-drivers)..... I have accepted that Ford SVT has built in the stock car (both in SVTPP and non-SVTPP versions) a compromised system that they think provides the best blend between good handling and something the general GT500 buying public wants and Ford corporate's imposed cost structure ..... I did not get the SVTPP suspension as it wasn't on the car my dealer had for sale so it makes it pretty easy for me since I wanted something a little tighter than what I have to go to the FR3 package .... since I am not going to track the car on a regular basis there is a very real chance that it will be a little stiffer than I want/need ..... however since i can't order the SVTPP components at a reasonable cost AND I know that I am not happy with what I have it makes it a fairly easy, although still expensive, decision...... Now if I had the SVTPP suspension already, as you do, I would have gone through the same thought process --- ie, is what I have what I want? If not, is it worth it to do something about it? if not firm enough then it is off to something else. Do I want to track it? If so, then I would start talking to those shops that are racing mustangs and see what they are doing for suspension .... I know the one near me has already told me that the FR3 is a good START (??? got my attention) but if I am going to get it on the track then I will need something more suited for hard track work. (Now I will admit that I am not sure that the Ford factory teams would agree with that but that is what makes racing.) At any rate I really do wish you the best of luck on your quest and I also think it is a reasonable request ...... me, I am going to accept that even reasonable requests don't always get answered and I am going to try to get to something that I will hopefully be happier with and drive the hell out of it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsarkis Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Here is an example of a bone stock 11 GT500 PP on a road course: You may have to paste and click if the links below don't work, enjoy: http://www.fordgt500...read.php?t=8908 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlock Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 me, I am just going to accept that there really aren't any absolutes to publish and that the whole handling thing really is a personal issue (as it seems to be between the handling characteristics of the cars of J Johnson and J Gordon, or Michael Schumaker and his various co-drivers)..... I have accepted that Ford SVT has built in the stock car (both in SVTPP and non-SVTPP versions) a compromised system that they think provides the best blend between good handling and something the general GT500 buying public wants and Ford corporate's imposed cost structure ..... I get it. And I'm not looking for any promises. But some sort of objective standard - even if it's entirely Ford created, would be hugely beneficial - and something a company with any sort of marketing competency would do from square one. It's one of the many ways Detroit judges itself compared only to Detroit - and not the real world it lives in. Any of the ways its prospects have improved has come from whatever aspects of the outside world it's managed to embrace. And yes, cost structure is hugely important. One of the most (deliberately) overlooked facts is that Detroit's problem had absolutely NOTHING to do with volume or revenue - it had EVERYTHING to do with cost - and the turning every asset into a marketable commodity and maximizing the profit it can claim from it - regardless of volume. The two guiding principles were break-even at historically-unprecedented low volume and quality, not paying customers to buy the cars you make, is the only true "demand" that matters. Ford's done that PHENOMENALLY well. Of its $6.5B profit last year, fully $3B was attributable to higher net margins. One of the most telling results was January sales. 2011 Explorer sold about 7,300 units. Fiesta sold 4,300. It's the opposite of what most people would've guessed, right? Except Ford went to a premium pricing strategy on almost all its vehicles - and if it makes an extra $1,000 on each Fiesta, it may make more selling 4,000 than it would've if it had lowered the price to create enough demand to sell 15,000. I have a tremendous appreciation for Ford's cost structure and what it's been able to accomplish within it - but I also want Ford to raise the value of the brand by doing the non-car building parts of its business far better to create sustainable and natural growth - and it's the kind of things that would benefit everybody, because they'd benefit ME as both a vehicle owner AND a shareholder. Otherwise, I was just trying to better-understand what parts of the SVTPP the FR-3 pack would undo - the many tangents this thread has taken notwithstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racin' randy Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 I never cease to be awed - nay dumbstruck by how thoroughly and painstakingly these cars and their aftermarket modifications are developed, designed and tested with virtually no thought whatsoever given to quantifying what they're intended to do. Granted, there's often a wealth of information available within the owner community, but that presumes not only that somebody had to first be willing to take a leap of faith - and then any information passed-on would be almost entirely subjected. I'd never entrust the marketing or perception of any product I developed to the public at-large without first setting for it a clear direction to begin with. Let alone making it as difficult as possible to make a decision to buy a particular product - simply by virtue of so little specific information bout what it is or what it's supposed to do. This past year or so has really been enlightening for me - both in terms of owning my first performance car and really taking a critical eye to the business of car making through the lenses of an unwilling funder of the bailouts and a significant (in terms of my own overall holdings) investor in Ford. The more closely I look at more areas of car makers (Ford tends to be more culturally similar than dissimilar to its competitors), the more amazed I become at how truly stone age the non car designing or building aspects of these global enterprises happen to be. Many home-based eBay sellers provide more intuitive and comprehensive commerce infrastructures. Beyond spending millions or uber-produced TopGear-quality TV commercials, when car makers dip their toes into the water, even the most basic undertakings privately owned-entrepreneurial businesses were doing a decade ago or more are heralded as revolutionary. Suffice to say we've all probably experienced what happens when you leave the entire distribution and retail aspects of your enterprise in the hands of thousands of different owners who aren't just in it for themselves, but often sell competitors' products out of the same showroom. It's such an inbred and insular world that it's literally mind boggling. Anything Detroit has done to improve its prospects has come from any way it's been able to adopt the same principles and practices that govern any other business in any other industry - and its biggest ongoing threat continues to be any way it hasn't. For as much as it's accomplished, Ford hasn't even begun scratching the surface of change in the non-line aspects of its business. As far as the FR-3 goes, there's absolutely no excuse for an official information blurb to not accompany it detailing exactly what it includes - what it would change from each of the stock configurations of the vehicles with which it's meant to be compatible, and what it's intended to accomplish - both statistically and theoretically. I can only think of how many performance enhancements I've been reluctant to buy ONLY because there's no objective information available about what it's meant to do - or what I could expect by owning it. It's particularly frustrating when I see Ford's parts and service business was a net money-loser for FY2010, despite doing some $500M better than 2009. With SO much enthusiast interest being served by SUCH a robust aftermarket, there's absolutely NO reason why Ford shouldn't be leveraging the exclusive insight it has into its own products to ensure its OEM parts and Racing divisions aren't the first place people turn to - and choose, even if ONLY they happen to be the sources where the most information is available, because Ford builds the damn cars to begin with. Nice bitch session Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrickshelby Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 If this question is directed at me...the only difference between the '07 - '09 kit and the '10 - '11 kit is the strut brace and jounce stops. All other parts are identical (springs, shocks, struts, bars, etc.). I liked the '07-'09 strut bar much better, so I went with it. Unfortunately, the strut bar will not fit, won't clear the SC. Does the '07-'09 strut bar fit a '11-'12 if you use the Ford Racing Resonator Eliminator Kit M9B659MSVT ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2010KonaBlueGT Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 Does the '07-'09 strut bar fit a '11-'12 if you use the Ford Racing Resonator Eliminator Kit M9B659MSVT ??? I'm interested in the answer too. Phill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninjak Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 Well I ran a FR3 setup on my 08 GT and it was not as bad as it could be..some big bumps were on the rougher side I will admit. On my Shelby I have just as much confidence in the turns, and on big bumps, its a little more subtle. As for the LCA's I replaced them on both of the cars. L&M on the 08, and Steeda's on the Shelby. Makes a huge difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32V-SVT Posted May 15, 2012 Report Share Posted May 15, 2012 Guys, there's a simple fix on the subject of Wheel Hop... I replaced the upper diff mount with a unit put out by Roush. This thing work AWESOME!!! http://www.roushperformance.com/parts/3rd-Link-Wheel-Hop-Reduction-Kit-for-Mustang-2011-2012.html Also, I installed Stifflers sub frame connectors, and a BMR K-member on my 2011. Amazing how the car feels now... Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.