New 2010 GT500! I want one
- Thread starter x10secondzx2
- Start date
- Status
Keros;1251179 said:
This is one thing I don't understand. They know people are going to put aftermarket exhaust's on these "race car." Why put so much time and money making it sound right. Go for efficiency first. And its a modular motor, it's really hard to make one sound bad.
IRS was only on the Cobras (03-06?) It's a shame too because they handled well for the weight (a little lighter than a mk3)
I like these 500's but they are even heavier, not like the old 5.0's that were fairly light. I think even the current GT's aren't too heavy but these are. They've got ridiculous power though.
I like these 500's but they are even heavier, not like the old 5.0's that were fairly light. I think even the current GT's aren't too heavy but these are. They've got ridiculous power though.
+1 about the Dodge truck comment. WTF are they thinking? I've always loved low and wide cars. Seems everything these days gets taller and more narrow. Looks bad.
prsrcokr;1270720 said:
99-04 Cobras had IRS
The current GTs are doing quite well in the Koni Challenge with their solid axles too, last year the stangs mostly placed in the top places (beating 911s and M3s lol)The new GT500 is heavy, but look at its competitors weights... the Camaro and Challenger are even huger!
meh. Not enthused.
The back end of the car disturbs me. I dig the front, the aggresiveness is nice... but it looks like a notchback/fastback hybrid and it's a shame.... fastbacks are complete sex, but fuck it up with that little notch there and it throws the look off. Plus the windows annoy me too. I picture the GT500s having the 1/4 vent thingy, but, they don't look right with them or w/o them
*sigh*
...goes and looks at new Challenger pics
*smiles*
The back end of the car disturbs me. I dig the front, the aggresiveness is nice... but it looks like a notchback/fastback hybrid and it's a shame.... fastbacks are complete sex, but fuck it up with that little notch there and it throws the look off. Plus the windows annoy me too. I picture the GT500s having the 1/4 vent thingy, but, they don't look right with them or w/o them
*sigh*
...goes and looks at new Challenger pics
*smiles*
I don't have any idea where they came up with the styling for that front end. Can you say Classic modernized? As Classic Mustang fan, I see a lot of real Mustang in that car.
CTsupra
Supramania Contributor
x10secondzx2;1218454 said:
Yes I can. What does cost have to do with power to weight? So, by your logic, I can't compare a 93' - 98' turbo supra to a mid 90's LT4 (yes, i know it's a special edition) Corvette?
suprahero;1218268 said:
Exactly, just like the new dodge rams. they have the same headlights. Goo Supraaaaa!!!
suprahero;1218268 said:
I was thinking this the ENTIRE time I was scrolling down the pictures!
Although I have to admit, it has a very appealing look to it,
I think it is a bit overdone.
If they extended the ass of it about 10-15", lifted it, 4x4'd it,
and cut a spot out in the back for a bed, then it'd find it's match.
Hell, even the cockpit/interior looks like a newer truck.
Go Fordodge Ramstang! :biglaugh:
Jeff
ForcedTorque;1278456 said:
Your opinion is invalid until you paint your damn car.
Someone who sees real mustang in a piece of crap retro-nostalgia b.s. is also someone who rocks 16 inch wheels purchased at Pep Boys with multichromatic primer.
The new mustang is simply an evolution of more of the same. A car to sell to teenage girls and baby-boomers who grew up idolizing the original cars. It's not going to be a world-class performer or a "bargain".
I can think of a number of better ways to spend $75,000. Not that it wouldn't be fun, but come on, the price on those cars is outrageous!
Neodeuccio;1284984 said:
Where did that figure come from? I doubt the sticker has drastically changed from the 07-08 Cobra's, so more like 45k starting price...
Maybe it's just locally, but around here the GT500's have at least $20,000 dealer mark up. That's just WAY to much money for these cars, in my opinion.
So what?Zach;1284775 said:
Does it sell? YES. Then what are they doing wrong?
To be honest I have never seen a teenage girls in a GT500. Maybe I'm living in the wrong part of Florida.
Its not trying to be a world class car. Its trying to be a sweet deal for $50,000. Which it is.
There is a reason why the Mustang has been around for 45 years.
CTsupra;1278495 said:
I don't care what car you compare it too. Its quite obvious you have some hatred toward this car. I'm not trying to change your opinion. I just don't know why anyone would say "Oh shit, the $50,000 Mustang sucks cuz it gets its ass beat by a $110,000 Vette?" Well no fucking shit. Of course it is going to be a slower car.
As far as the IRS is concerned, I don't think Ford really cares all that much about making the car handle 8 tenths of a second faster around the Nürburgring. For the most part this is a drag car, not a road race car. And it is cheaper for them to make the solid axle with technology that they already have. Its the same debate that goes on with pushrod motors. Why change it if it ain't broke? The LSX is plenty good.
CTsupra
Supramania Contributor
x10secondzx2;1285357 said:
You still don't get it. The MSRP doesn't determine how fast a car is going to be. Your argument is flawed.
CTsupra;1285919 said:
I don't think his argument is entirely invalid. In the sports car market you can usually expect price to reflect the quality of the car you're getting; frequently with "quality" meaning "speed". Basically, the more money you spend, the faster you go. That's not an unreasonable assumption. What does make his argument hold a little less water is that the Mustang, regardless of model or trim, is no longer a true, pure-bred sports car.
Yes, the ZR1 Vette tips the charts at over $105k, but that's not entirely the point. There are very few cars available that aren't considered "Supercars" that can touch the ZR1, and not a single one of them is American. The point is that the base Corvette starts at just below $50k, which is very close to the GT500 price wise (assuming no dealer mark-ups on either). Yet even the Corvette will still hand the GT500 it's ass on a silver platter. The Vette has gone through generation after generation of refining, where power has been increased and weight has been decreased, while the Mustang has taken a different route. The power output of the Mustang has increased, but so has the weight of the car (so much so that the new Mustang is now 900lbs heavier than the Corvette, just an FYI). Ford is not trying to make the Mustang a balls-to-the-wall speed machine, they're trying to make it a good-looking, fast, fun car that's easily accessible to pretty much everyone. And they've succeeded. Pretty much any driver, who can afford to, can hop into a new Mustang, go for a drive, and have fun. They're nice, comfortable, enjoyable, sporty cars. The new Corvette is not overly comfortable. The suspension is stiff (which I like, but my sister hates), the transmission tunnel gets very warm as you drive, and though there's good legroom, don't count on moving your seat too much. Also, the average driver would not do well in a Vette. They sit very low, they're quite wide, and the powerband is such that if you give it a little too much gas, the back end will step out of line. This is great for sports car drivers like us, but again, the average driver isn't one of us, and would not enjoy the Vette. But Chevy isn't concerned by this. They want a car that is street legal and still good at the track. Again, they succeeded.
Personally, I think comparing a new Vette to a new Mustang is a foolish thing to do. They never were really intended to compete with each other on any playing field, and now more than ever, the differences are growing. How many people who are looking for a new car ever think "Hmm, should I get the Vette or the Mustang?" I'm betting very few. You either want one type of car, or the other.
- Status