Simple question. Also, I wonder what this car would have been like with Coletti around.

 

That instead of hardware then looks, it's now looks then hardware.

Don't get me wrong. The new GT500 is full of impressive hardware. The brakes are world class pieces, the engine is about as indestructable as humanly possible, ditto the drivetrain. 500 horses for less than 45 grand is nothing to sneese at (name just one car that has 500 horses for less money!). But one gets the feeling that this is more of a modern Shelby GT500KR than a SVT Cobra.

I like the car, but it's now a bit over the top in looks, price, weight, and IMO, the drivetrain is overkill.

Only the latter is a good thing.

 

Simple answer: Something that would be very good

 

SVT is just about done. The planned SVT version of the Explorer Sport Trac, the Adrenalin (no, I'm not missing the "e" at the end) was scrapped. I'm guessing it's because they realized no one asked for it. With the SVT Focus being the flop that it was, the Cobra going to Shelby, and the inexplicable demise of the Lightning (which I thought was a great truck), they've literally got nothing.

 

Honestly, I don't see where it would be any different. My number one biggest complaint with this car is its tonnage. However, it didn't just all of a sudden end up weighing nearly 2 tons. The 03/04 Cobras were also heavy for their genre. Same goes for the 99/01. Even the 2000 Cobra R was an oinker (in respect to its competition).

Looking at the 05+ Mustang, it gained tonnage over the SN95, so it makes sense that the GT500 would also have to gain weight.

I guess if it tells anybody anything, is that Mustangs have gotten stupid heavy, and will probably continue to be stupid heavy for the forseeable future - SVT or not. Colleti or not.

 

But in addition to your thoughts, I would add that MOST cars (and trucks) have gotten significantly heavier over the years. That does NOT make it right or acceptable for the Mustang, but just pointing out that there's a trend here. With the exception of B-class cars, it's hard to find a regular sedan these days that doesn't fly up into the 3000-lb class deeply.

All these airbags, sensors, fancy suspension systems, anti-lock brakes, extra displays/projectors/screens in the car, 5-mph this/20-mph that crumple zones, sound-deadening mats, insulation, air filtration systems, power lumbar pumps and bags, power seat motors, power window motors, multiple computers, hu-freakin-mongous wiring harnesses, moon roofs (some powered)... it goes on and on. Well, all that crap adds up - to weight and cost.

What is truely amazing is the effort that GM put into keeping the Corvette lean and how they pulled it off. It wasn't cheap, but it was worth every penny IMO.

As for SVT...
The talent is still in the company, but I fear it will be diluted significantly and that will show in the products.
The SVT team that was in place through 2003 was a core of great talent that fed off of each other and did some really great things. Colletti was the greatest coach you could ask for, and knew how to motivate and feed the team to spark enthusiasm and make them do "great things".
Simply put, I personally think that chemistry is gone.

Ford will not drop a turd on the Mustang - Bill Ford himself is too passionate about that car to let that happen. But if we are looking for passionate performers in any of the other marques, I think we will be looking to Ford of Australia for the path forward. Their performance group is still very passionate and active, and it shows in vehicles like their Falcon and Ute.

 

At the NY Auto Show, Mark Fields said flat-out that there would be a second SVT product on the way, and that it would be a pickup truck. Make of that what you wish.

I'm not seeing what flaws the Shelby has beyond its weight (if this trend keeps up, I won't get laughed at for trying to make my 4200lb Impala go fast), and I don't understand how Coletti would have gotten around the weight problem beyond simply not doing the car at all. I mean, it's not like SVT had the "pull" to execute the sort of weight-reduction measures that we've seen on the Z06, and even that wouldn't make much of a dent in this case.

At some point, we either start begging for stripped-down cars, or people start demanding lower-weight technology. Things such as multiplexed electrical bus, more efficient actuators (such as brushless motors), and the use of "exotic" higher-strength materials could cut tens or even hundreds of pounds away from many vehicles, but at a cost. Right now, not enough consumers are willing to pay an up-front cost for something that doesn't result in an immediate (like, "in the showroom") payoff. That's too bad, considering the average life of a vehicle in the US.

 

What does the GT500 tell us?

That the car can be hundreds of pounds overweight, and it will still sell like mad, with crazy premiums over sticker.

 

SVT did a great job with the GT(44)

The GT500 engine, like guionM said, will take all that owners can throw at it, but it probably isn't the right engine for that car due to weight. An Aluminum 427 V8 from the Saleen S7 (a Ford engine) would have been a better choice. Cost is also high, but what other 500HP car can you get for under $45 or even $65K (didn't we say that about the 400HP $33K GTO )

The ironic thing is around the time of the 500HP s/c DOHC 5.4L '04 Lightning concept I remember Coletti saying that SVT wasn't only going to focus on HP, but also weight in future cars. Too bad he left.

The GT500 is an awesome looking car though, since weight obviously wasn't an issue they should have went with 19"s like on the first concept, or 20"s

The next SVT will probably be a Fusion with the Mazdaspeed turbo AWD setup. I guess a SVT truck is dead forever and $3 gas isn't going to bring it back.

 

The motor as bulletproof and powerful as it is is what's killing the cars performance in terms of weight/balance. 700+lbs for motor alone. That's almost double the weight of an LsX motor. And to top it off, all that weights sitting up front. Atleast in the Ford GT, the engine is positioned midship.

Ford REALLY needs to come up with a lighter and more physically compact v8. Here's to hoping the rumored 6.2L Hurricane v8 delivers something along the lines of GM's v8's in terms of output, efficiency, and weight.

I'll try and hold off further judgement on the GT500 till later this summer when they've hit streets and further testing is done, but i will say that i'm a bit dissapointed with some of the early figures/numbers being published now.

 

SVT needs to pull a Lee Iaco.. (however the hell you spell it), and get John Coletti back. When he was around SVT cars were some of best balances of performance, luxury, and price. The Contour SVT is still one of my favorite cars for those reasons.

 

I was just going to say the exact same thing. Actually if I remember right, Coletti actually mentioned capping horsepower and working to cut weight to improve performance.

I hope that is the formula for the next Camaro. Horsepower is great, and it's needed in these cars. But less horsepower and weight can give you all the performance with none of the efficiency, braking and handling penalties.

I'm guessing it is much cheaper to pump up horsepower than remove weight, so unfortunately, this is the direction we're going in.

 

You guys remember right, but John Coletti was talking about Ford deciding not to produce the new Lightning. The issue was weight.

His replacement, Hau Thai-Tang, spoke about focusing more on weight-horsepower balence.

The GT500's powertrain is all John Colletti. Therefore, the engine's 700 pound weight is all John Colletti's as well. You could almost throw a wrench into the intake & it would spit out twisted through the exhaust. He's been retired for a year and a half, meaning that the GT500's powertrain was done and under testing.

Hau Thai-Tang's influence on the GT500 is minimal. Besides trim, the name, marketing, etc.., his role so far is essentially overseeing SVT's demise.




BTW: as far as Mustang's weight increases, consider this:

*The '05 Mustang convertible is only 70 pounds heavier than the '04.

*The Mustang GT (3450 base w/manual tranny) is actually lighter than the '04 Mustang Mach 1 (3470) and a mere 100 pounds heavier than a 2004 Mustang GT (3345).

*The 2007 Shelby GT500's 3920 curb weight therefore is DIRECTLY tracable to the nearly 500 pounds worth of supercharger, intercooler, piping, and heavy duty performance parts!!!!!
(Many of the same type of parts rumored for the "Super Camaro").


This brings up a new question for everyone:

Knowing an LS7 engine costs 3 times to make as an LS2 (it retails for about $17,000 next to an LS2's $5,000), and that alot of the performance parts from the upcoming "Red Devil" Corvette are going to be extremely expensive, would you rather see a "super Camaro" that's well over $40,000 with these items or would you rather see a supercharged "super Camaro" with alot of heavier, but cheaper and just as capable parts that would weigh around what a GT500 weighs, but would cheaper than a GT500?

The extremely ugly truth is that Horsepower equals either weight or expense.

The new Mustang structure is made to handle more horsepower than the old lightweight SN95, which could handle more than it's predecessor, the "Fox". The affordable way to add more power are blowers, intercoolers, and piping that add weight. If you want the drivetrain to be bulletproof, that means thicker, heavier parts.

The heavier 500 horse GT500 seems to be only slightly quicker than the 400 horse Cobra.

Perhaps 500 horsepower in a "affordable" car is the point of dimishing returns.

 

Guy, Charlie's said it a million times and I agree. Give me a top Camaro with a N/A ~450 HP V8 in a package that weighs ~3500 pounds any day and twice on Sunday against what we have in the GT500.

 

Maybe they should've went with a NA 5.4. They probaly could've got 400+ hp without a supercharger.