New Mustang selling big

To an extent yes. Maybe it's not a Shelby of old, but good ol' Shel's slapped his name on anything he could in the last 40 years to make a buck. Remember the Shelby Daytonas/Chargers of the early 80's?

To me, the GT500 looks like an updated 67/68 Shelby Mustang. I think the name Ford SVT Shelby Mustang Cobra GT500 is rediculous, but the car was pretty much on the mark as far as what they were trying to accomplish. Shelby's Mustangs in the 60's were top-of-the-line cars with the styling to go with all of that power and handling. I feel the only thing they misfired on was putting the solid rear axle in. Shelby always wanted to turn too.

Had they called the plain jane GT a Shelby to sell more cars, I might have been a little more likely to agree with you on this point. Calling a

450-500hp car that looks like nothing but a Shelby Mustang could (not even Saleen, Roush, or Steeda made their cars look this good IMO) a Shelby isn't such a bad thing.

That's true. I take it for face value as well. I'm disappointed that they called that thing a Charger, but the car is solid. I don't care for the looks, but I'll respect it at a stoplight. I'd enjoy driving one if given the chance... I'm sure it's a blast... but it's not the car for me, and wouldn't pay my hard earned cash for it.

The Shelby, on the other hand, already has me making plans to sell or trade in the '97 Cobra for it. I wouldn't care what name it had on the back.

I guess if I were in the market for a 4-door sedan with some balls, I might consider the Charger though. Up until now, if forced into that segment by a change of family status, I'd have probably taken the turbo 5-cylinder Volvo... this might change my mind. Does it come in a stick?

JS

"JS" wrote

What a mouthful. It's gonna have the freaks out there trying to call their old rustbucket stangs... "Ford Shelby Mustang Boss 390 GT Z's". Yes, I've actually heard something close to this uttered at the local show and shine. AARRRGGGHHH!!!!!

That's God awful. We have two manufacturers' names (one a coachbuilder, if you prefer), three model names and then the SVT qualifier. It's sort of like, "The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim". They need to drop three of the above. Dropping two might make it passable. What are the badges on the car going to say?

"JS" wrote in news:Qoh1e.21602$I16.640@trndny03:

Unfortunately, yes. But everybody's playing the name game now. GM, Ford, and DC have all done it.

Obviously, that's the inevitable comparison. Even Ford's got pix of the two cars together.

I'll bet they kept the solid rear for price constraints. I think they had to cut back somewhere to keep the car in the low $40s, and the solid rear took away the least from the car they had in mind.

At this point, the Shelby name is nothing to those in the know. As you've already said, look at those Shelby Daytonas and Chargers of the '80s.

I think it's only available as an automatic, but supposedly they're coming out with an SRT version, just like the 300 and the Magnum with the 6.1 Hemi.

At any rate, I think Ford's guilty of trading IRS for the Shelby name. They could've kicked Shelby off the bus and installed an IRS in the car probably for what the use of Shelby's name cost.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Understood. The point I was trying to make is that, thus far, Ford's kept to the original essences of this particular car better than the other manufacturers have with their big names. It's unmistakably Shelby Mustang material... even if he didn't really do anything but decorate the rear section with his name.

The sad thing is that there isn't even an option - this is a big mistake - and that we're no longer working with the SN95/Fox-4 chassis, and the parts aren't as plentiful for a rear swap. Is there another DEW-chassis IRS available that'll bolt into the Mustang for those of us who might want to turn when the road's bumpy?

Sad... very sad. Like you and many others, I wonder what he really contributed.

I figured the Daytona would be SRT's entry, though I know they like to stick with the numbered scheme. Sad that it's not available in a manual row gearbox... insult to injury.

I couldn't agree with you more. I know SVT could have done this on their own. What's the big deal with Carroll's name at this point? SVT's established, as is the Mustang Cobra name. We didn't need another name, just another Cobra. What was his involvement? "Stick the Ford GT/Lightning motor in it. Put that built-in wing on the back and move the cobra grille emblem to the driver's side... and get rid of some of that aluminum in the dash, it's too shiny." I think any one of us here could have done that.

Yes, he was a legend, but this is like watching Mario Lemieux try to play for the Penguins when we all know his back won't let him play like he should. Sometimes, legends need to hang it up too.

JS

I'm with you on this take. I bet they found the performance improvement from going with an IRS wasn't worth the cost. With the power this beast will be capable of with minimal after market tuning, I bet to make it reliable with an IRS added substantial weight to the car. I don't think the lack of it will sway one buyer. I know it wouldn't matter to me. I actually like the solid axle for a car like this. It is a torque monster and the tried and true solid axle is a good fit, IMHO.

The Shelby name means nothing to me either. All I care about is the specs and this car has them in spades. I must say though that Ford has honored the heritage of the original GT500 in this car.

Aside from cost, I think Ford dropped the IRS due to added weight. With the new rear end geometry and mounting the current setup is much better than the solid axle on the Fox platform cars. It probably brought it close enough to IRS performance to make it not worth the absorbing the cost and weight penalties. Especially considering how much hp/torque the read end will need to handle once the after market tuners get their hands on them.

"JS" wrote in news:aTu1e.44842$db6.11928@trndny02:

Agreed. I think it would've been cool though if Ford incorporated the sequential turn signals into the car.

Does the T-Bird have IRS? Although as Michael pointed out, the weight factor could be a problem.

I'll bet Ford simply paid for the use of the name.

AFAIK, the Daytona has the 5.7 Hemi; the SRT will sport the 6.1. Don't know what tranny the 6.1 will have.

I think it's simply to attract more interest in the car. Marketing.

Absolutely. But 'Shelby' will probably attract more people than 'SVT'.

Indeed. Old Shel's milking it for all it's worth at this point.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

They might not have even got that far. They could've balked immediately when they found out what it would cost per car.

I think you're right, Michael. Sure, IRS would be cool, but the lack of it certainly won't be a showstopper. Even if it is for some people, there will probably be someone else ready to snap the car right up.

Agreed. As JS said, Ford has stayed true to the car's heritage whereas GM and DC have not done that with their old-is-now-new names.

As you've already said, it's not a showstopper. If I were in the market I'd buy it in a second.

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC