Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

2007 Ford Shelby GT500 Reviews


phr3121

Recommended Posts

Ok, I just wanted some feedback on what you folks think of the reviews listed below.

 

British review, which pretty much destroys this car:

Link -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMvWiooqLbg...ted&search=

 

American review:

Link -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4nMEYIJt38...ted&search=

 

“Unlike the late-1960s GT500, the 2007 GT500 doesn't rely on a massive 428-cubic-inch (7.0-liter) V8 to juice its rear tires. Rather, it uses a small-block, 5.4-liter V8 that's basically a detuned version of the engine from the GT supercar. On the GT500, supplier and cost concerns required the use of a wet-sump oil system (instead of dry-sump), a cast-iron block (instead of aluminum) and a "Roots-type" supercharger with 9 psi of boost (instead of an Eaton "screw-type" with 13.5 psi). But the GT's four-valve aluminum heads transferred over unchanged to the Shelby GT500, as did many smaller items, such as the piston rings and bearings. The result is 500 hp, 480 pound-feet of torque and a mid-4-second 0-60-mph estimate. Assuming the GT500 makes good on that claim, it would be the quickest car under $50,000. To manage that horsepower boost, Ford's Special Vehicle Team (SVT) engineers reworked the Mustang's MacPherson strut front suspension, fitting stiffer shocks, higher-rate springs and an upgraded stabilizer bar. The solid-axle rear suspension uses upgraded springs as well, along with a Panhard rod to control wheel movement. Although a non-independent rear suspension might seem out of place on what's supposed to be a state-of-the-art performance car, the GT500 proves to be an agile and willing performer, whether on a racetrack or a remote two-lane road. Credit goes to the quick rack-and-pinion steering system, as well as the liberal traction control system, which allows for plenty of tail-out thrills. You can thank Carroll Shelby for the GT500's 18-by-9.5-inch wheels and 255/45 front and 285/40 rear Goodyear F1 tires: After driving a prototype, Shelby insisted on larger rolling stock to better manage the car's power and handling capabilities.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thoughts from Edmunds.com site:

 

"If you have one of these beasts, you fall in love with it at first sight and it just gets better after that. Performance is next to none. Comparisons with the Z06 are a joke as this car's collector's status will be here long after the Z06's are in the junk yard. I was literally blown away by the power this thing generates right off the assembly line. I can't imagine what some after market mod's will do. I was one of the lucky ones who got mine at MSRP, but I can tell you that even at 1$0-15K over, I think it's worth the investment."

 

"I ordered mine in June and just received it last week. When I first saw this two years ago in New York I knew I had to have one. It is everything I hoped it would be and more. Can not fully explain feeling I had when I saw it for the very first time on the back of the car carrier that brought her to dealership. The acceleration that this car has is probably comparable to being on the space shuttle. It pushes you back into your seat and you remain there until you let up. I have yet to fully open her up. It drives so smooth, takes corners with precision, accelerates quickly and effortlessly. Driving it on smooth roads at 80mph feels like 40mph. Always wanted to own a Shelby, dream come true."

 

"First for the naysayers I put on just a few miles then went straight to the chassis dyno. How does 460+hp & 445lb ft of tq @ rear wheels sound? That's PURE stock, not a single change from stock. Same dyno a very healthy 426 Hemi made 310hp @ wheels; that's 150+ rwhp over a HEMI! Nothing short of incredible overall. I would take this car over 2 Z06's. Fit & finish is SUPERB! Paint is the nicest I have ever seen on an American car & I am a body painter. Not a single complaint. Minor mods put these cars in the 10's in 1/4 mile. Braking & handling are also nothing short of incredible. 60-0 110ft. A very nice chassis with too many changes over standard Mustang GT to mention."

 

"Previosly owned 6-7 Vettes ('73-'95), plus early 70s Formula Firebirds and late 70s Trans Ams. While powerful, only the 73 Corvette 454 big block matched up w/ the Shelby GT 500. Both are breathtaking. The Shelby far outclasses the early-mid 90s Vettes. I traded a 2007 GT/CS for the Shelby. The GT's straight-line performance pales against all of the aforementioned muscle cars. Groused about paying the $10K over sticker premium, but now have zero regrets about price. The Shelby GT 500 is a legitimate $60K ride that is docile until you light the fuse. This is quite simply the best car I've ever owned. If you want your heart to pound the way it did at 21, this is the ticket."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thoughts from Edmunds.com site:

 

"If you have one of these beasts, you fall in love with it at first sight and it just gets better after that. Performance is next to none. Comparisons with the Z06 are a joke as this car's collector's status will be here long after the Z06's are in the junk yard. I was literally blown away by the power this thing generates right off the assembly line. I can't imagine what some after market mod's will do. I was one of the lucky ones who got mine at MSRP, but I can tell you that even at 1$0-15K over, I think it's worth the investment."

 

"I ordered mine in June and just received it last week. When I first saw this two years ago in New York I knew I had to have one. It is everything I hoped it would be and more. Can not fully explain feeling I had when I saw it for the very first time on the back of the car carrier that brought her to dealership. The acceleration that this car has is probably comparable to being on the space shuttle. It pushes you back into your seat and you remain there until you let up. I have yet to fully open her up. It drives so smooth, takes corners with precision, accelerates quickly and effortlessly. Driving it on smooth roads at 80mph feels like 40mph. Always wanted to own a Shelby, dream come true."

 

"First for the naysayers I put on just a few miles then went straight to the chassis dyno. How does 460+hp & 445lb ft of tq @ rear wheels sound? That's PURE stock, not a single change from stock. Same dyno a very healthy 426 Hemi made 310hp @ wheels; that's 150+ rwhp over a HEMI! Nothing short of incredible overall. I would take this car over 2 Z06's. Fit & finish is SUPERB! Paint is the nicest I have ever seen on an American car & I am a body painter. Not a single complaint. Minor mods put these cars in the 10's in 1/4 mile. Braking & handling are also nothing short of incredible. 60-0 110ft. A very nice chassis with too many changes over standard Mustang GT to mention."

 

"Previosly owned 6-7 Vettes ('73-'95), plus early 70s Formula Firebirds and late 70s Trans Ams. While powerful, only the 73 Corvette 454 big block matched up w/ the Shelby GT 500. Both are breathtaking. The Shelby far outclasses the early-mid 90s Vettes. I traded a 2007 GT/CS for the Shelby. The GT's straight-line performance pales against all of the aforementioned muscle cars. Groused about paying the $10K over sticker premium, but now have zero regrets about price. The Shelby GT 500 is a legitimate $60K ride that is docile until you light the fuse. This is quite simply the best car I've ever owned. If you want your heart to pound the way it did at 21, this is the ticket."

 

This HEMI quote is so true.

 

Though I love the '60s muscle cars, we forget that the factory stock big dogs like Ford's 427/8/ Boss429, GM's 427 and the 426 Hemi, were all rated at 425-430 HP (before the insurance-rating games) and actually made about 485 (475-525) or so crankHP. But that same 485HP is about 410 at the wheels, and when that's further adjusted for an apples-to-apples comparison using the current SAE testing standards, it's about 310rwHP.

 

Edmonds speaks the truth. And those were 7-7.5 liter monster motors. Amazing the level of engineering and tech sohpistication that can deliver a totally docile grocery-getter-smooth motor making 460rwHP dead stock from a factory 330CID motor that passes modern durability testing -- something I suspect none of the old factory motors we know and love would likely survive withing tolerances. They likely weren't even manufactured to tolerances that these motors exhibit after stress testing.

 

Of course some of the old motors were fully forged and built damn well and were essentially factory blueprinted race engines - 427s side-oilers, SOHC 427s, the Boss 351s, Boss 429s maybe others(?) (top dogs from GM and Chrysler too), but I'd bet their tolerance specs barely measure up to the 5.4 Romeo niche-line engines -- made in the 10s of thousands. And I wonder if any of the volume production performance motors back then would even survive the stress testing that this 5.4 undergoes and survives. In fact, I'd bet the 5.4 comes out of a 150K test with tolerances tighter than most muscle car motors of the '60s were made too.

 

I love the '60s cars but there's just no comparo to this GT500's (engine or total car) apples-to-apples -- not even close, imo.

 

That's why someting like the 427 Fairlance T-Bolts were so amazing to me. 427 side-oilers, fully blue-printed, 425HP rated (about 525 actual = 420 wheel = 315wheel SAE today) running 11.7s right off the showrom floor were so amazing! A true "factory-racer" with suspension & chassis mods, major lightening, and form dictated by function ...in 1964!!!

 

---

 

Fwiw, the only earlier Ford factory racer I'm aware of were the rare 'red-racer' version of the S/C's '57 T-bird -- not many were made and only a few survive -- but they were the factory pinicle for the old Y-block (312cid) meant to whip the 'vette and showcase what could be done with weight reduction (cheapo deoptioned interior), ride-height/spring-rate tuning, and a CAI that was just so far ahead of it's time it would be credible even today (well, almost)! They were under-rated (by standards back then) at 300HP, but I have no idea what their equivalent HP by today's SAE standards would be -- maybe only 240-crank or so ...stillimpressive in a sub-3000lb factory car. I'd driven many times as a kid in the '57 Fairlance (full sized Ford back then) version with the same motor (Latham axial-flow S/C, rated 300HP) -- they were quick!!

 

post-4902-1185123855_thumb.jpg

post-4902-1185123890_thumb.jpg

post-4902-1185123941_thumb.jpg

post-4902-1185123974_thumb.jpg

 

<edit:> sorry for the off-topic side-trip, but it does provide an historical backdrop for just how powerfull these cars really are.

post-4902-1185123855_thumb.jpg

post-4902-1185123890_thumb.jpg

post-4902-1185123941_thumb.jpg

post-4902-1185123974_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

I complain about computers but computer control of the fuel delivery and spark combined with variable valve timing and ohc's have done things with these engines that I never dreamed were possible. The 4.6 3v is a fantastic engine. If they would go to DOHCs and 4v with attention to big passages and exhausts, I think we would see 400 NA HP and that is amazing from a 289 small (light :happy feet:) engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

I complain about computers but computer control of the fuel delivery and spark combined with variable valve timing and ohc's have done things with these engines that I never dreamed were possible. The 4.6 3v is a fantastic engine. If they would go to DOHCs and 4v with attention to big passages and exhausts, I think we would see 400 NA HP and that is amazing from a 289 small (light :happy feet:) engine.

 

:hyper: :hyper: :hyper: :hyper: :hyper: :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The press, especially the Europeans, never really understood the orginal Shelby Mustangs and they have'nt gotten any smarter. Shelby took his Mustangs (and even Falcons) to Europe and kicked their asses. The European response was ban them. These cars did not fit into the mold. Car and Driver magazine had nothing nice to say about them in the 60's and they still have nothing nice to say in 2007. Some other editors get it and they are fairly complementary.

 

While the new Shelby make not be up to some people's standards, it fits many of us Americans, just right. It also fits many Canadians and some Europeans and who knows who else because they understand the old Shelby and the new (kudos to them).

 

The problem then and now, is magazine articles are opinions. And we have just as many opinion as we do .............. :hysterical2:

 

Wow did I get off topic, sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The press, especially the Europeans, never really understood the orginal Shelby Mustangs and they have'nt gotten any smarter. Shelby took his Mustangs (and even Falcons) to Europe and kicked their asses. The European response was ban them. These cars did not fit into the mold. Car and Driver magazine had nothing nice to say about them in the 60's and they still have nothing nice to say in 2007. Some other editors get it and they are fairly complementary.

 

While the new Shelby make not be up to some people's standards, it fits many of us Americans, just right. It also fits many Canadians and some Europeans and who knows who else because they understand the old Shelby and the new (kudos to them).

 

The problem then and now, is magazine articles are opinions. And we have just as many opinion as we do .............. :hysterical2:

 

Wow did I get off topic, sorry.

 

Sounds right on-topic to me! ..but I'm not known to be a good judge of that :hysterical:

 

I liked how even in the Brit reviewer (forget his name now), he did get hooked the more he tossed it around the turns ...he started smiling about half-way thru and it didn't wear off ...may be the most telling 'review' of all? ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
...