You know that bumper sticker “He who dies with the most toys wins?” While it might be perfectly at home affixed to the bumper of a BMW M6 or a Lamborghini Gallardo, such a wholesome piece of braggadocio would be hopelessly out of place stuck to the bumper of the thuggish Shelby GT500. A more appropriate piece of signage might be, “My muscle car can beat up your supercar.” If we are being honest, the sticker would read “I did your Mamma and she liked it.”
From certain angles, a lay person would have no idea that the Shelby GT500 is the most powerful and expensive Mustang ever to scream out of Flat Rock. The obvious tell is the gaped-maw with its deep, parking-block hostile air dam, and the pec implant known as the power dome hood. But the snakes on a ‘Stang are the best giveaway. The Shelby’s sheetmetal is festooned with no less than four cobras. Keen eyes will also clock the goofy-wide 285 tires nestled snugly in front of the rear-diffuser. The ten-spoke 18” wheels are sharply dressed and the blue skunk-stripes sufficiently gauche. The whole package adds up to a life-size Hot Wheel.
Once inside, Mustang aficionados will feel right at home, with a few noteworthy exceptions. A giant Cobra hisses humorously from the center of the steering wheel, adding animal animus to the two angry serpents stitched into the hard leather seats. If you have any doubts about the GT500’s patriotic fervor (and why would you?), just set the adjustable gauge colors to red, white and blue. The SVT badge in the center of the tach (switched from left to right for visibility) is the interior’s coolest feature. When you reach your (selectable) shift-point, it glows a fiery orange. Might I suggest 4,300rpm?
So how does a vehicle that lays down 89.999% of its righteous 500 horsepower sound? Like the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse in an echo chamber. How does it feel? Like a head butt. Release the clutch and there is a moment of hesitation, almost as if the rear tires are asking, “You’re not serious?” And then BAM, you’re going 60, then 80, then much faster– until finally you are standing on the perfectly chosen 14” Brembos praying that nothing crosses your path before the speedo is once again displaying double-digits. The insane shrieking from the supercharger and the feeling of certain death from the abysmal suspension setup only makes you pray harder.
FoMoCo alleges that the Shelby hits 60mph in 4.5 seconds. I wager that you actually hit 60mph in 3.5 seconds. Again, the GT500 seems to muck about for a full second before it decides to go anywhere. Some blame is due to the ridiculously antiquated live rear-axle. Over certain pieces of pavement you are left wondering what happened to the ox. Fault also lies in the fact that 58% of the lardy 3920lbs. ride up front. Unlike the equally unbalanced RS4, there is no German precision engineering holding down the fort. What happens is entirely between you and your right foot.
It’s true: the GT500 isn’t clever, engineered, refined or dignified. It’s just plain old mean. If you were to autopomorphize Jack Lambert, you’d wind up with a GT500, missing teeth and all. I have never ridden in a cruder modern vehicle. It bangs and lurches and drunkenly slurs all over the road, especially when you are pointed straight ahead. Case in point; the headrests feature more squish than the rest of the seat.
Luckily, Ford’s go-faster crew have replaced the Mustang’s floppy, last-century five-speed with a short-throw six-speed Tremec device. While it’s a highly effective cog swapper, the gearbox feels as if it were crafted from bone and piano wire. Do I care? Hell no. The GT500 is more exciting to drive than any vehicle in memory. You like cars that wag their tails? Brother, have I got a dog for you! With the traction control (stupidly) switched off and a few degrees dialed into the tiller, you will swear on your mother’s eyes that a ski is mounted east/west where the rear wheels should be. Donuts? I was doing éclairs. They were delicious.
At heart Shelby’s GT500 is the modern muscle car that pistonheads have been clamoring for since Buick put the GNX out to pasture. Mindless, irresponsible power coupled with antisocial handling equals a big, dumb grin. At just a hair over $40,000 (not counting the well earned, $1300 gas-guzzler fine), the price is right. For what you ask? A two-plus-two that doesn't quite equal four, that can't take down corners with half the grace of cars with half the horsepower, whose engine note signals to anyone within earshot that the GT500's driver is a politically incorrect speed freak whose heart pumps premium unleaded? Yup.
160 Comments on “Ford Shelby GT500 Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
“…live rear-axle” *(Snigger)
But would I if I could, oooh yes.
“Donuts? I was doing éclairs. They were delicious.”
I vote this the best line in a TTAC review yet!
Holy crap, 3900+ pounds? Funny, it doesn’ *look* fat. What’s the chassis made out of, lead?
this thing sounds like about 7/10 of a viper but with no handling ability whatsoever. maybe a weekend of burnouts and dragstrip runs, but after that what’s the point?
Some people’s drug of choice is low-end torque, plain and simple. Something in the brain enjoys the simple pleasure of being thrust back into the seat at the whim of one’s right foot. Any skill involved? No. But there’s no skill involved in eating donuts, and people love to eat them.
Otherwise, there’s little point to the car. A Corvette, down 100 horses but also down over 700 pounds, lists for just $2,000 more and even this difference is largely wiped out when you adjust for feature differences.
http://www.truedelta.com/prices.php
I suspect Any numberof tuner shops have a suspension setup for the GT500 already.
With an Aluminum block and IRS this really could have been a contender. But all is forgiven – it sounds great, goes like hell and is a timely reminder that there is still someone at Ford that hasn’t forgotten how to have fun.
Michael,
“Otherwise, there’s little point to the car. A Corvette, down 100 horses but also down over 700 pounds, lists for just $2,000 more and even this difference is largely wiped out when you adjust for feature differences.”
Rarely have you ever typed anything so off the mark. You need to think in terms of football. The Corvette doesn’t play the same position.
Are Porsche people working at Ford now? There are already so many variants of the new Mustang, I can’t even keep up.
Very entertaining review.
Gotta agree with Chanman:
“Donuts? I was doing éclairs. They were delicious.”
Great line, nice review.
Hal.
Okay, so the Mustang is fun. But it’s so “old school.” This is currently Ford’s most iconic passenger car and yet it’s decidedly neanderthal. Heck, at least the ill-fated Dodge Challenger will have Mercedes suspension bits.
Why must bean counting always come first at Ford? Why can’t the brand stand for great engineering and forward thinking? Really, what’s so hard about designing a modern Mustang?
Really, what’s so hard about designing a modern Mustang?
Making the V6 version affordable (and fleet ready). I don’t have the numbers, but based on what I see around town, I’d guess that’s 80% of the unit sales and most of the profits for the entire line. I agree it should have IRS as a bare minimum, but most entry-level “flash over substance” people buying the base model probably don’t even care. The mustangs (1980s+) have always struck me as a bottom-up type design, rather than a top-down. Your average well-off high school chick does not lust after the GT500 and settle for the V6…she wants whatever she can get so she’ll look cool and have a Mustang. Designing to that market means that the upgraded versions are often compromised (parts bin, solid axle, etc). My $0.02 worth of supposition.
Steven,
Two thoughts
1) Sometimes fun is enough. In the case of the Shelby, it is more than enough.
2) Why not steal the chassis from Aston Martin’s V8 and call it a Mustang? You own the damn company?
To me, this is just another sad example of American Engineering. In a world of seemingly endless automotive technology – such as that mentioned in the RS4, the best we here in America can do is still just “fast in a straight line” Greater displacement = fast. We know. We’ve known for almost half a century. In the modern days of automotive engineering, brute force is only appealing to dragsters and your neighbor with the IROC-Z.
I’m actually offended they had the nerve to associate Carroll Shelby’s name with this thing. Ugh.
I suppose to Ford it’s very convenient that “Quintessential American Pony/Muscle Car” also means iron block, solid rear axle etc. In other words – cheap.
There a large pool of buyers out there that still talk about rear axles in terms of “inches” that also feel that there’s no way an axle shaft with CV joints can handle the torque blah blah. Of course, if you’re modding it for strictly 1/4 mile performance, this may make sense.
Whereas Chevy has continuously (if slowly) evolved the Corvette, Ford seems stuck in the 60’s, putting in just enough “stuff” to meet the minimum legal and social (traction control) requirements.
Some of you are really missing the 500hp for $40,000 part.
Supercharged 03 Cobra SVTs are capable of fragging IRS diffs at will. With significantly more power on tap, the GT500’s live axle choice is a good one.
Some of you are really missing the 500hp for $40,000 part.
Yep. With a 60,000 mile powertrain warranty. Still think they could have included an aluminum block. That 70+ pound weight advantage over the nose would transform it from a one trick drag pony to a sweetheart road car (even more than IRS).
It does look cool, but I’ll stick with my ‘06 GTO, thanks. Plenty of power (400 hp), IRS, switchable traction control to get your hoon on and an average of $12,000 less to buy. Yes it is bland looking but I prefer stealth.
The GT500 exemplifies American design and engineering. A whole lot of fast for not a whole lot of dough as long as you go in a straight-line. Do a Google or a Youtube on “Top Gear Mustang” and there is a very good review and fairly honest review of the 2005 Mustang.
Ford knows exactly what it’s doing with the Mustang although I think they could have done better on the 500 on the suspension bits. Mustang GT’s are fast, cheap and look good. Your average 18-28 year old is the target demographic and it does everything they want for a price they can afford.
Start adding good engineering, IRS and various computer controls and you may have a great car but you won’t have a Mustang. I’d never buy one, I’m more finesse than brute force but I think Ford knows what it’s doing with this model more than anything else.
I’m glad FoMoCo makes this car. This is exactly what American sports cars should be. Who cares if you can barely keep it going straight, this car is about just getting a silly grin every time you step on the gas. I think that more models like this could be used to save Detroit. They should be going back to quintessential American muscle – the stuff they used to be good at.
The current Mustang has almost identical dimensions to a recent T-Bird, which which was built on a shortened Lincoln LS platform. The T-Bird had IRS.
Does anybody know if the Mustang is based on a decontented T-Bird platform? If so, would the cost of IRS have been that great?
If so, would the cost of IRS have been that great?
Ford admitted that IRS cost about $1000 on the last-gen Mustang Cobra.
Developing that IRS to take 500+ lb-ft sledgehammer hits of abuse day in/ day out over 60,000 miles at Ford’s powertrain warranty risk is a different story.
Remember that the last-generation Cobra was a limited production model, so economies of scale wouldn’t have been so hot. The IRS on the last T-Bird was shared with Lincoln LS and Jag S Type — all of which used fairly performance-oriented V8s.
Am I reading this correctly? Are you guys serious?
“American Muscle” is a relic from a bygone era. There is no longer a need, or a reason to create gas-guzzling hogs that can’t do anything but go fast in a straight line. These cars have the fit and finish of a lego set. If anyone needed to know why Detroit is in the toilet, you need look no further than this car. The big three continue to churn out the same, rehashed crap they have for 50 years. And then they wonder why they have the problems they do.
The American consumer doesn’t want this car. $40K for 500hp? Cool. But what the hell can you do with it? Nothing. You can take it to the drag strip. You can wrap it around a telephone pole. You can pay exorbitant insurance premiums. And for what? A Ford?
in a world of incredible engineering advancement, we’re lauding independant rear suspension? Don’t encourage them…
IRS would make a heavy car heavier.
IRS is not as strong. It could be made strong but that would be even more weight.
Live axle will hook better in a strait line.
IRS is expensive.
The benefits of IRS would make the Mustang handle better but it would never handle as good as a lighter car with IRS so what is the use anyway.
Mustang is fast, cheap and sharp. Remove those aspects and you find yourself in a superior car but an absolute sales failure. I believe it is called the Pontiac GTO.
Yeah – So I’m really asking and not trying to be smart: Do Corvette, the Italians or Germans have a problem with grenading rear axles? Or is the cost to get to near “bulletproof” too much?
I just wonder how the Vette can do it in near this price range. Becasue the tranny is mounted aft?
Speaking of warranty – even with a solid axle I think that Ford will be replacing a few. At least those on cars that don’t crash into trees the first 1,000 miles.
penguinpwrdbox,
The GT500 is hardly “the best we here in America can do” when it comes to precision. The GT500 fills its niche perfectly, but if you want tight handling, just look to the lightweight material intensive, low Cg, front-mid engined Corvette. It had items like magnetorheological adjustable shocks in 2003, 4 years before Audi and Ferrari, among other things.
The RS4 plays to a different crowd, and for near $80k, it damn well better have “German precision engineering,” ie an intelligent AWD setup “holding down the fort.”
Jonny sums it up well with the Jack Lambert analogy, but in stock trim, the GT500 barely scratches the surface of what it is capable of. Add a smaller blower pulley (or better yet FRPP’s new 3.3L Whipple supercharger), headers, an ECU reflash, and a pair of drag radials, and you are looking at one of the fastest straight line cars in the country, period….two ton weight be damned. All with no internal engine mods, thanks to the stout factory longblock with forged internals and heads cribbed from the Ford GT supercar.
1984, I disagree that IRS makes a car heavier. The opposite has historically been the case when IRS is built into the platform rather than added on. Ford clearly could have done the former by using the T-bird platform.
Dr. V,
I really can’t get behind the ‘Vette either. IMHO, GM is just as guilty as Ford and DCX when it comes to making high displacement junk.
Yes, the RS4 is twice the price. Bad analogy. I should be shot for that’n.
For $8K more, you could have a 335i, with twin screws, and be able to take that power ’round a bend without wincing.
As far as the mods go, if one were seeking to create a purpose-built drag car, this thing is gold. But, how many of us would do that? How many of the millions within Ford’s demographic would have that in mind? I’d say you could count them on one hand.
By far, the most amusing thing about this whole debacle, is the rediculous commercial with the guy that freights his ‘Stang to Germany because he “couldn’t find a speed limit in America he liked”. What a joke. Bottom line, it’s just more of the same…
RE: ‘the American consumer doesn’t want this car’
I bet ya a box of eclairs that these babies are already close to being pre-sold out. People bitch about focusing brands and giving people what they want. I guarantee that this car is focused on the target set of people, and giving them just what they want. Don’t really see how any one person here is qualified to speak to what ‘the American consumer’ wants, anyway.
Carroll Shelby was quite involved in this program, and he gave it his thumbs up. Again . . . speak for yourself, not for others.
Not only do some folks here want to tell the car companies what they should be doing, then now want to tell the whole American public what they should be wanting. Thanks, but no thanks.
Steven T
Historically no RWD vehicles have had an IRS and then been strait up been replaced with a live axle… so I’m not sure how that comparison can be made.
[Corvette] had items like magnetorheological adjustable shocks in 2003, 4 years before Audi and Ferrari, among other things.
GM/Delphi supplies Ferrari (and others) with the high-tech mag shocks. They work VERY well, IMO.
1984, you’ve got it backwards. Consider the previous-generation Mustang, which was built around a live axle but IRS was retrofitted on the Cobras.
Retrofitting doesn’t maximize IRS’s packaging advantages, which have been used by some manufacturers (including Ford of Europe in the 1980s) to reduce weight without having to go to FWD.
penguin,
Your personal bias is showing here. Go drive a new Z06 around a racetrack, down the 1/4 mile, and then on a nice leisurely interstate cruise, and you’ll find it excels at all three, while getting 26+ mpg on the interstate. The Euro snobs are even impressed by its top shelf Nurburgring lap times.
The 300 horse 335 TT is a nice rapid, refined sedan, but hardly in the performance league of the “high displacement junk” you refer to. I own an E39 M5, and love the car, but like the 335, it is targeted a bit more toward cushy cruising than Vettes, and yes, even the GT500.
Actually, even the GT500, when driven with judicious use of the throttle instead of in all out attack mode, will corner quite reasonably at 6 or 7/10ths. Granted, it’s not an M3 CSL or a Boxster, but don’t let the fact that it can leave 50 yards of rubber like a circa 1971 musclecar fool you into thinking it corners on its door handles.
In the GT500’s defense, it handles and brakes better than 99 of 100 cars on the road. It lapped VIR ( http://www.caranddriver.com/features/11755/the-lightning-lap.html) faster than a Nissan 350Z and within one second of BMW’s mighty M6. Come to think of it, the M6 is pretty similar (500hp, 3900 lbs, 2+2). You’d think the M6 would be significantly faster for $63,000 more. AND the M6 has IRS.
Steven T
And the cobra as a car and the rear axle is heavier. I’m not sure what you are trying to say here?
I have been an ASE technician for several years and have personally removed a variety of rear suspensions. I have not run across a RWD IRS suspension that was lighter than a comparable old diff-and-tube live axle.
Live axle just has no content.
The issue with IRS vs a live axle is more one of unsprung mass….though the assembly may be heavier, the IRS’s advantage is that the entire diff doesn’t bounce around, but rather is solidly mounted to the chassis.
The SN95 IRS is a poor example, having been cost/space engineered into an existing outdated chassis. The new S197 Mustangs have a highly evolved, well located live axle that is superior in straight line traction and quite acceptable over smooth pavement. As Eric pointed out, the GT500 has quite reasonable lap times for a new car in its price range. This car is more than a one trick pony, for sure…..but it’s hard not to fantasize about an Al blocked car with the battery in the back and about 500 lbs less mass to accelerate. That would indeed be one wicked “musclecar.”
Does anybody know if the Mustang is based on a decontented T-Bird platform? If so, would the cost of IRS have been that great?
The Jag/LS/Tbird platform modified for Mustang duty was too expensive (DEW-lite) or something like that. Ford took some global Mazda platform to make the S197, probably saved a lot of coin in the process.
My problem is that the SN-95 Cobra had an IRS, less weight, similar straight line performance and didn’t look like Disco Stu’s replacement for his 1978 King Cobra.
I took a friend for a ride who had recently replaced his E39 M5 with an RS6.
He was blown away by how fast the Shelby was. i think his exact comment was, “What Torque!!!” He also couldn’t believe that I had the Nanny on, as the Shelby let’s the rear step out a few feet (and step it will) before it starts interfering. He commented how his German cars shut off the fuel among other unpleasantness during attempted hoonage.
Not the case in the Shelby, though in a pinch, the traction control will save your bacon.
Also, forget all this talk about IRS vs. ox-carts — the Shelby GT500 has the most important attribute a car can have. Soul.
And by the bucket-full, too.
I’m sure this car will sell as much as Ford intended it to, and will make them a tidy profit. If nothing else, everyone’s been talking about this and the Shelby GT-H in the last few months.
And let’s face it, the people pining for an IRS in this car would be no closer to buying it if it were so-equipped. I wouldn’t pay $40k for a Mustang if I won the lottery, but I get that people are going to like this car.
I don’t necessarily agree with Lieberman that the Corvette and the Shelby GT500 are playing different positions. Both of them are pretty likely to be garage queens.
The Shelby GT500 has the most important attribute a car can have. Soul.
Great point.
Soul, and an intoxicating American exhaust note.
The Ford Mustang has thrived for over 40 years on a very simple formula. Big horsepower, good looks and easy on the wallet. Any time Ford has messed with this formula, the results have been disappointing (Mustang II, Mustang SVO for a couple of examples).
Ford has offered us more “modern” takes on performance (SVT Contour and Focus, Probe, T-Bird) and none have resonated with consumers like the `Stang.
Does anyone complain that a Jeep remains a Jeep or that Porsche keeps the basics of the 911 the same?
The Shelby Cobra keeps true to the formula (looks hot, goes like stink and gives you 500 iron-fortified ponies for $40K).
If you want a all-wheel driven, independently suspended, turbocharged, aluminumed performance car, there’s plenty of other choices out there.
The Mustang stays true to itself and it will thrive as long as it continues to do so.
If it Ain’t Broke…
Eric Miller,
you cannot hear the exhaust note over the shrieking madness of the blower.
Though… I’m sure anyone outside the vehicle will get an earful.
“The American consumer doesn’t want this car. $40K for 500hp? Cool. But what the hell can you do with it? Nothing. You can take it to the drag strip. You can wrap it around a telephone pole. You can pay exorbitant insurance premiums. And for what? A Ford?”
You’re kidding, right? When I read the article and the price quoted was the MSRP, I chuckled to myself. These cars are selling in the mid $50K’s not a little over $40k. Dealers were auctioning off these cars as soon as they knew how many they were getting. While the mark up wasn’t as high as the mark up on a Ford GT (Over 100%), it was still 30% to 50% over MSRP. I’m sure Ford will have no trouble selling every Shelby GT500 it wants to make for several years to come. It will be the status symbol that Mustang junkies lust after like previous generation Cobra and Saleen Mustangs.
You cannot hear the exhaust note over the shrieking madness of the blower.
Drive the convertible version and you can hear more of the exhaust and less of the blower.
Porsche keeps the basics of the 911 the same
Yeah, except for the air cooled thing. And the weight. Oh, and the nannies. But otherwise it’s the same.
I drove the convertible version.
No thank you.
Any time Ford has messed with this formula, the results have been disappointing (Mustang II, Mustang SVO for a couple of examples).
Except the Mustang II sold well, especially in the first year.
Steven T.:
November 27th, 2006 at 11:38 am
Why must bean counting always come first at Ford? Why can’t the brand stand for great engineering and forward thinking? Really, what’s so hard about designing a modern Mustang?
This is so on-the-mark! Anything that looks like a Mustang just makes me yawn. Even my Prius is more shapely! Er…okay, maybe not.
Anyhow, I’ve always preferred my sports cars with sleeker lines and sexier curves…as it where. The ’stang is just..boxy looking to my eyes.
And all strapped in, I’ve never felt secure inside one.
Finally, I don’t eat donuts or eclairs, thanks. Too much sugar in the food, and the line, but I’ll forgive you on that one. :)
ZoomZoom,
I don’t think the Shelby is aimed at Prius drivers.
It should be noted that the solid rear axle is actually beneficial to straight line acceleration – hence why the Camaro Z28 with the LS1 is faster than a Vette at the quarter mile, despite weighing more.
Ford kept the solid rear because die hard Mustang fans were complaining that an independent rear would hinder it at the dragstrip.
This is awesome. Great review.
Anyone who argues against classic american muscle should test-drive one. No handling and sophistication in the world is worth the feeling of driving a rabid hurricane on steriods.