Topic: Preview: 2011 Ford Shelby GT500

[Autos_Editor]

The 2011 Shelby GT500's supercharged 5.4-litre V8 gets a modest 10 horsepower increase, but more importantly its new aluminum block cuts the motor's weight by a significant 46 kg (102 lbs), says Contributing Editor, Chris Chase, "improving the car's handling abilities."

Read More...

[Julie]

I usually prefer European sports sedans/coupes, but this is an exception!  Love the new GT500.

EDIT:  Is it just me?  Can't get the article when I click the link.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Error 404 - Not Found

[Triple Bob]

I like the GT500, don't like the new thin white stripes though, go back to the old ones please...

[johngenx]

I want one with no stripes and "V-6" emblems!

Of course, the stance, wheels/tires and exhaust are total give aways...

[CanuckS2K]

What a sweet car.  IMHO, for what you get this car is well worth the $59k.   

[Roy]

What a sweet car.  IMHO, for what you get this car is well worth the $59k.   

Funny - I was just thinking it's $10k overpriced - the track pack should be standard on the halo mustang.

I like the car overall too, but one thing with this generation GTs that I don't like is forced induction.  Muscle cars IMO should be about pure natural power.  Too bad Ford couldn't just drop in an unmodified engine from the GT (now that's its gone - RIP) to make a clean naturally aspirated 540hp.

Edit: oop - forgot the GT was also supercharged.  Never mind.

[Snowman]

boooo Error 404 - Not Found

[CanuckS2K]

What a sweet car.  IMHO, for what you get this car is well worth the $59k.   

Funny - I was just thinking it's $10k overpriced - the track pack should be standard on the halo mustang.

I like the car overall too, but one thing with this generation GTs that I don't like is forced induction.  Muscle cars IMO should be about pure natural power.  Too bad Ford couldn't just drop in an unmodified engine from the GT (now that's its gone - RIP) to make a clean naturally aspirated 540hp.

Edit: oop - forgot the GT was also supercharged.  Never mind.

While $59k is a LOT of money, I personally don't think it's overpriced at all.  The reason that I say that is because other cars that match the GT500's numbers are going to be significantly higher priced.  To me, it's a performance bargain.      

[PJAvenger]

Love the Mustang, but I find this one has a little too much 'Look At Me' with all the stripes and Cobra logos.
Would prefer if you could get a sleeper version...

[SJP]

Too much money, coming from a long time Mustang fan. I think the Mustang always falters when it gets into this lofty territory. Not that it doesn't have a lot going for it, but the Mustangs attraction has always been great bang for the buck. Style and performance without breaking the bank. As the price climbs, the equation gets skewed.

[wing]

You guys do know you can get to articles via the front page right?  http://www.canadiandriver.com
hahha

Here's the link:
http://www.canadiandriver.com/2010/06/14/preview-2011-ford-shelby-gt500.htm

I'll fix it.

[evil_twin]

This really is a pretty ridiculous amount of performance for the price tag.  Really depends on your tastes whether $60k on a super mustang is the right thing to do.

I'd rather spend the money on a Cayman S if I were looking to spend this much cheddar on a sportscar - but I certainly wouldn't falt the person who picked a GT500.  (Rather, I would cower in fear...)

[SJP]

Actually, anyone buying this would certainly have a great car, and i am sure would be thrilled. It's just personally, I would spend this amount of money elsewhere. To me, it's like the $50 hamburger, sure they can make it better, but at some point you have diminishing returns. At under $40 grand, the GT represents a great deal, The GT500 is fantastic, but I just don't think this is a 50% better car.

[Roy]

I'm of the same opinion where the mustang was an affordable performance vehicle.  Even the GT is straying from this a bit coming in just under $40k, but the 300hp secretary's mustang for $24k is THE performance coupe bargain hands down, no question...IMO.

I guess the GT500 is an evolution of this formula and represents more than bang for buck parameters.  But look at one in person - the rear and front to my eye is about 1/3 plastic - that cheap fisher-price kind of plastic.  To me it just looks like it outta be less than $60k.  If it was all engine (i.e. no super charger) then that is a different story.  But a bolt-on supercharger kit for the GT runs maybe $6-10k depending on the additions, that gets similar output.  Swap the tires and you get a very comparable vehicle for much less, no? (without all of the plasticky hardware of the GT).

I will concede though in terms of relative OEM performance numbers the GT500 is at a good price.

[SJP]

Is a $300,000 Ferrari or Lamborghini three times better a sports car than a Corvette ZR1? Of course not.

I am not saying this is not a great car, but there is a big difference between the perceived difference between a Corvette and  Ferrari, than there is between a Mustang, and another, fancier Mustang. That is exactly my point, the Corvette is a super bargain for what it can do, but no matter what else you do to it, it is not a Ferrari. At the price it sells for, it is a brilliant choice. Add $50 000  of accessories, and the relative value deceases. ANd I would pay $20 for a great burger tops

[evil_twin]

Roy's comments do make sense, but you can apply that to almost any car.

Someone with the means could save a lot money and turbocharge their "run-of-the-mill" 911 (amongst other mods) to build a discount 911 Turbo, but who the heck's gonna do that?

For me, the 5.0 2011 GT is probably in the sweet spot for bang-for-the-buck mustangs.  V8, 400+ hp, $40k, RWD, looks cool, sounds insane, okay interior...sweet.  

Beyond that is getting silly to me for a mustang, but I'm not headed to drag races, nor am I baby boomer with cash to burn.  I could absolutely see the draw for some to buy this beast rather than Boxster/E Class/loaded 335i/etc like all their 'pansy' country club friends...

Especially if you've already got an E class in the garage.

[CanuckS2K]

A few people have mentioned the Cayman in this thread.  The base Cayman (non S) starts at $65k and doesn't have close to the performance of the GT 500.  Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with the Cayman, it's just not in the same performance class as the GT 500.  I honestly can't think of another car for $59k that has the performance of the GT 500, which is why I think it's a performance bargain in comparison of what else is out there.  But $59k for a Mustang won't be everyone's cup of tea that's for sure.  Anyways, just my .02 cents. 

[Winterpeg]

If you want to talk about "bang for the buck" please, Ford, bring back the "Bullitt" edition of the 'Stang. The upgrades done to the Bullitt led to this version of the GT.
Some people go for all the add ons (stripes, spoilers, etc) but the Bullitt was clean AND mean........and better all around than the GT....the "bang" for your buck!     

[evil_twin]

A few people have mentioned the Cayman in this thread.  The base Cayman (non S) starts at $65k and doesn't have close to the performance of the GT 500.  Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with the Cayman, it's just not in the same performance class as the GT 500.  I honestly can't think of another car for $59k that has the performance of the GT 500, which is why I think it's a performance bargain in comparison of what else is out there.  But $59k for a Mustang won't be everyone's cup of tea that's for sure.  Anyways, just my .02 cents. 

True actually.  I guess it would need to be a base Cayman...or lightly used Cayman S.  Same point though:  The GT500 is a whole LOTTA car for $59k...if it's your thing.