Top Gear hates the GT500?

[Bob Cosby]

The GT500 has too much power to have "safe fun"?

Wow - I've heard it all now.

[Zabo]

It almost seems that Ford/Shelby? (Do they actually have a hand post-carpocalypse or is it SVT?) tried too hard (like I'd always seem to see in the car) to cram a successor to the Ford GT and Camaro 'obliterator' into the same car. I seriously do think that if Ford decided to go with a limited production vehicle using a different chassis altogether but with the same technologies and powetrains they could use this better to take on the Viper and Corvette Z06/ZR1.

The package has so much potential, but they need to not use a Mustang chassis. It seems that NOT having a Corvette hovering over Ford's Mustang team unlike Chevrolet's Camaro team resulted in what worked on paper and controlled testing but in the hands of the world.. still isn't ready for what it could be.

Ford, stop p****footing around and just put the capital down on a new LeMans style chassis and plunk the '13 GT500 in that. Corvette/SRT/Ford(SVT) vs THE WORLD.

Do it.

I dare you, Ford.

[04svtsnke]

Originally Posted by Zabo

It almost seems that Ford/Shelby? (Do they actually have a hand post-carpocalypse or is it SVT?) tried too hard (like I'd always seem to see in the car) to cram a successor to the Ford GT and Camaro 'obliterator' into the same car. I seriously do think that if Ford decided to go with a limited production vehicle using a different chassis altogether but with the same technologies and powetrains they could use this better to take on the Viper and Corvette Z06/ZR1.

The package has so much potential, but they need to not use a Mustang chassis. It seems that NOT having a Corvette hovering over Ford's Mustang team unlike Chevrolet's Camaro team resulted in what worked on paper and controlled testing but in the hands of the world.. still isn't ready for what it could be.

Ford, stop p****footing around and just put the capital down on a new LeMans style chassis and plunk the '13 GT500 in that. Corvette/SRT/Ford(SVT) vs THE WORLD.

Do it.

I dare you, Ford.

You know eventually Ford probably will come out with a limited production type car on a racing styled chassis but it won't be called a gt500. I do have one car in mind.....

[2010-1SS-IBM]

It's Europe; they prefer handling over power. It's not a surprise that they'd recommend a Boss Laguna Seca over the GT500.

[LimaCharlie]

Top Gear doesn't like American cars in general.
It's an entertaining show to watch but don't expect them to praise our "yank tanks" here in the U.S.

[Van@RevanRacing]

There still pissed we won Independence. It's difficult driving in those bloody Red Coats.

RED WHITE AND BLUE!

The Top Gear fellas can flat out piss off! LOL

[eolson]

I agree with a lot of what they said. If SVT simply beefed up the internals and put a smaller pulley on the 5.4 liter for let's say 585HP, still gave the car it's improved cooling, bigger better brakes(with correct ford racing ducts and DOT fluid), the launch and traction controls that have improved, aerodynamic improvements, and put the left over money into a under/behind rear seat cross brace to solve the monocoque issue, a watts link, as well as taken weight off the front to get a 51/49% front/rear weight ratio, they'd have a much better car on their hands.

Ford and SVT, unlike GM with the ZL1, did not go all the way with the available technology to solve the handling issues with the GT500/Mustang platform.

The Pan hard bar and brace still slide the frame/chassis up and down diagonally over bumps and dips, Watts link solves that loss of grip and tire contact position, giving better grip over the bumps and dips.

Still not having an X brace(like the Boss LS) or equivalent under/behind rear seat cross chassis support brace system, allows the Monocoque problem to continue, which is the inner rear tire lifting in hard corners as a result of the fixed axel. This problem is mostly solved by cross diagonal bracing, and loss of traction going in and out of corners is greatly reduced as with the Boss LS (even though Boss still suffers some lateral movement on bump like track curbs/Randy Pobst, from pan hard set up). The Boss LS grips and exits out of corners very well because of the cross bracing.

GT500 needs weight taken off the front end to the tune of 220 lbs. Throw some expense into lighter materials needed critically for this.

Instead, most of the budget was put into the engine, instead of having the GT500 reaching it's true handling potential on this platform. IMO, Erik

[Overflow]

Originally Posted by lexlueger

They like the ZR1, challenger srt8 and CTS-V. Gt 500's blow.

The episode I watched they said that the ZR1 was cheap and crappy.

[chain777]

Originally Posted by eolson

I agree with a lot of what they said. If SVT simply beefed up the internals and put a smaller pulley on the 5.4 liter for let's say 585HP, still gave the car it's improved cooling, bigger better brakes(with correct ford racing ducts and DOT fluid), the launch and traction controls that have improved, aerodynamic improvements, and put the left over money into a under/behind rear seat cross brace to solve the monocoque issue, a watts link, as well as taken weight off the front to get a 51/49% front/rear weight ratio, they'd have a much better car on their hands.

Ford and SVT, unlike GM with the ZL1, did not go all the way with the available technology to solve the handling issues with the GT500/Mustang platform.

The Pan hard bar and brace still slide the frame/chassis up and down diagonally over bumps and dips, Watts link solves that loss of grip and tire contact position, giving better grip over the bumps and dips.

Still not having an X brace(like the Boss LS) or equivalent under/behind rear seat cross chassis support brace system, allows the Monocoque problem to continue, which is the inner rear tire lifting in hard corners as a result of the fixed axel. This problem is mostly solved by cross diagonal bracing, and loss of traction going in and out of corners is greatly reduced as with the Boss LS (even though Boss still suffers some lateral movement on bump like track curbs/Randy Pobst, from pan hard set up). The Boss LS grips and exits out of corners very well because of the cross bracing.

GT500 needs weight taken off the front end to the tune of 220 lbs. Throw some expense into lighter materials needed critically for this.

Instead, most of the budget was put into the engine, instead of having the GT500 reaching it's true handling potential on this platform. IMO, Erik

They could have gone that route with the GT500, but the way I see it, they spent the money where they should have with this car. I don't think the goal of the GT500 was to have the ultimate car for the road coarse, that's the Boss' job. This car is meant to excel in a straight line, and still be capable on a road course.

The ZL1 on the other hand, went the opposite way. It kind of had to, since it needs to fill two roles. Both cars hit their goals. But both cars still had to make compromises with what they have to work with.

I still wish Chevy could have gone head-to-head with Ford by building the ZL1 with the LS9, and concentrtated more on straight line accelaration, and then built a Z/28 with the Boss in mind, maybe with an LS7, or at least a tuned LS3, and concentrated more on handling. But they didn't have the luxury of that with the bankruptcy, so they did the next best thing. Maybe we'll see that with the sixth generation, and an IRS with the next generation Mustang. And a serious diet for both cars.

That would be perfect.

[TheReaper]

So you agree with Top Gear that the car has too much HP. What are you smoking ? We Americans can never have too much horsepower.

Originally Posted by eolson

I agree with a lot of what they said. If SVT simply beefed up the internals and put a smaller pulley on the 5.4 liter for let's say 585HP, still gave the car it's improved cooling, bigger better brakes(with correct ford racing ducts and DOT fluid), the launch and traction controls that have improved, aerodynamic improvements, and put the left over money into a under/behind rear seat cross brace to solve the monocoque issue, a watts link, as well as taken weight off the front to get a 51/49% front/rear weight ratio, they'd have a much better car on their hands.

Ford and SVT, unlike GM with the ZL1, did not go all the way with the available technology to solve the handling issues with the GT500/Mustang platform.

The Pan hard bar and brace still slide the frame/chassis up and down diagonally over bumps and dips, Watts link solves that loss of grip and tire contact position, giving better grip over the bumps and dips.

Still not having an X brace(like the Boss LS) or equivalent under/behind rear seat cross chassis support brace system, allows the Monocoque problem to continue, which is the inner rear tire lifting in hard corners as a result of the fixed axel. This problem is mostly solved by cross diagonal bracing, and loss of traction going in and out of corners is greatly reduced as with the Boss LS (even though Boss still suffers some lateral movement on bump like track curbs/Randy Pobst, from pan hard set up). The Boss LS grips and exits out of corners very well because of the cross bracing.

GT500 needs weight taken off the front end to the tune of 220 lbs. Throw some expense into lighter materials needed critically for this.

Instead, most of the budget was put into the engine, instead of having the GT500 reaching it's true handling potential on this platform. IMO, Erik

[Nessal]

Top Gear is retarded anyways.

[derklug]

Saying a car has too much horsepower to be fun is like saying the sex was so incredible you couldn't enjoy it.

[ChrisBlair]

Originally Posted by Bob Cosby

The GT500 has too much power to have "safe fun"?

Wow - I've heard it all now.

I wonder what they think of the 427 Cobra S/C

They'd probably wet themselves and run to Mommy

[ChrisBlair]

Originally Posted by derklug

Saying a car has too much horsepower to be fun is like saying the sex was so incredible you couldn't enjoy it.

This is signature material