Stavesacre21

lol...the fox body mustangs came with less HP than most V6s now days! For the first time i this thead, i completely agree with you on a heart transfer. They were definetely needed. I love the windsor pushrods as much as the next, but they just didn't make squat out of the box in comparison.

strokercharged95gt

fanbois? are you french or something? Ill give it to you that the mid 90's mustang were sluggish stock for stock against an LS1 or LT1. If you go onto any mustang board and ask that same question 99.9% of the people would agree that the Z28's and Trans Ams were faster. I mean you could kind of make the same comparison about the 350Z and the Rx8. I have been walked by an auto 350Z banging the gears as hard as I could at 9K, and as with the SBC vs SBF argument, 99.9% of people would agree that the 350z is indeed faster stock for stock. Should I then make a blanket statement saying that the RX8's motor sucks? Rotarys suck? Is that fair to compare one car to another, find out the winner then infer that the other engine sucks. Grow-up.

Ike

You're reading into this too much and letting your heart interfere where you head should be. I'd post a long drawn out thread but I'm tired of fighting for something I don't care all that much about. I'm not a Chevy or a Ford guy, I've never owned a car from either company and I don't know if I ever will.

Hopefully this will make you understand where I'm coming from a little better. I love Subarus and I love my Evo. Even before I had the Evo I admited the 4g63 in the Evo was a better all around engine when compared to the EJ20 and EJ25. I like both of them and I'd be happy with either of them, but one is clearly superior in my eyes. That's pretty much how I feel about a Ford V8 vs. a Chevy V8, they're both good, but in general Chevy has had the upper hand for a while.

zoom44

just saw what at first i thoguht was acool bit of info on autoblog abotu a Shelby KR at NY Autoshow

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/29/n...-is-shelby-kr/
but then it goews on to say it wont have the new "boss" engine so im a little miffed

the original gt500 kr from 68 and 69 (especially in convertible) are my favorite mustangs ever- even over the 65 i used to own or my dad's 64 1/2

zoom44

nice vid with Carrol

CKay

I just drove the Shelby GT, and all i can say is wow! that thing is so fast off the line, i really think it could take the GT500 off the line up to about 60.

Ike

I really think you're insane.

snizzle

Huh, doesn't the Shelby GT only have 325hp? A far cry from 500. I thought it was the Hertz rental car turned into production version.

Ike

319hp, up a whopping 19hp from a plain old Mustang GT. People that spend the extra money over the GT are fools.

CKay

I think it's because of the gears, and I've ridden and drove both. Thats just what i think of the two. And Ike you really think that people that spend the extra money is stupid now, wait 50 years when the shelby gt is going for $500,00 at the Barret Jackson when the plain gt is goin for $50,000.

Ike

Hardly, this version of the Shelby Mustang will be about as valuable a collector as the Shelby Charger. At least that car ws impressive when compared to what it was based on... If they do end up being collectible it will be the Hertz cars that are the most sought after. And maybe the one that the moron paid 600k for this year so he could be the first one on his block.

snizzle

If you drove the GT500, something was wrong with it. You'll shave off about a second from the Shelby GT 0-60 i'm sure.

I think you're confused about which cars you drove and when.

Here's a quote I just found:

So...

Mustang GT < Shelby GT < Shelby GT500

CKay

I know what car i was driving, it just feels like the Shelby gt is faster off the line, thats all

snizzle

CKay butt dyno = broke

dillsrotary

probably because it's easier for the average joe to put 350hp to the ground than 500hp to the ground (let alone the gt500 has small factory rubber for those numbers)

Stavesacre21

well the first time you drive any type of muscle car in the realm of 300HP/300TQ, you'll think you're on top of the world!

However, it is definetely true that a 500HP car feels worlds apart from a Shelby GT. Claiming a GT500 would be taken off the line is a pretty obsurd claim. lol. really.

snizzle

And even if you're spinning from a dig, you still can tell a huge difference with a 175hp advantage once those tires hook.

CKay

Ok so i know we aren't suppose to talk about racing but here i go any ways. i ran the Shelby gt last night from a 60 punch and it wasnt bad at all, at first it was neck and neck then he pulled slowly and had about a car or two before we shut it down. And it's not like his a bad driver, he's actually the best driver i know. All I have is K&N filter and RP supercat.
Just thought i would share

Stavesacre21

and what kinda car were you driving?

CKay

The rx8, and he was drive the Shelby gt not the 500 but the gt. Of course the GT won but it was as bad as i thought

Stavesacre21

Not gonna raise the BS flag or anything, but the likelihood that an 8 could keep up with a 315HP mustang seems to be a rather obtuse thought...even with the added weight of the newer platform it's built on.

I also own a 97 cobra with 305HP, and i know that it wouldn't even be a close call between the 2 of them. However, current gear and driver talent also must be taken into account. At any rate, I just love them both for what they are...completely different machines.

CKay

My friend with the GT500, and the Shelby GT just pulled up at work to day, in the Shelby-H, that thing is so ragged out, but it's another Shelby lol

snizzle

WTF are you talking about man?

CKay

The 2006 Shelby-H, Hertz edition, like the rental place. Hertz is auctioning them off, and my friend bought one. It's all ragged out because it was a rental.

snizzle

So your friend owns...

1). Shelby GT500
2). Shebly GT
3). Shebly-H (see #2 except AT only)

Correct?