• Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.

    You can register to join the community.

GT500 on Top Gear

281Thunder said:
It wasn't designed to be a specific handling car. It's an all around performance car. Ford did an awesome job with it too.

MM&FF did a test on one, straight off the assembly line, even with street tires, and they were able to rip off a 12.2 with it...not bad for a $42k car. Sure, a Z06 runs mid-high 11's...but at what price tag? Less we even get into exotics...

The LSD was the other thing I noticed that they said that was wrong. Ford puts TL rear's in any moderately fast car. As for the GT engine, it's more than just the blower (GT=M112, Shelby=M122)...I gotta look it up, lol.
Click to expand...

So wait, you make a comment about handling and then you only talk about a test that measures 1/4 mile times? Hardly seems like it addresses the issue at all. :shrug:
 
Pen_Two said:
In Clarksons "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" he liked the C6 and Z06 the most out of all of the cars he had in the movie. He ragged on it numerous times on the segment from it though. The only other car he actually admitted to liking was the Ford GTX1.
Click to expand...

Yeah but in that same video, he tested a V6 mustang and was saying it had a V8 and how "it has now power" and "it got beaten by a horse".

Clarkson changes his mind on cars all the time. He even admits it himself.
 
In the end, you guys need to realize that Top Gear is all about being a show and entertainment, getting the truth out is only important in so much as how much it contributes to the entertainment value of the show.
 
Guitarman19853 said:
So wait, you make a comment about handling and then you only talk about a test that measures 1/4 mile times? Hardly seems like it addresses the issue at all. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Meh, lol. It all depends on where you go about the handling issues. Modified Mustangs did a test on one a couple months back. And while they admitted it was no Terminator, they thought it handled great. Like it was mentioned a few posts back. The car is heavy...the one they had checked in at a touch over 4,000 lbs, and a lot of that weight is over the front of the car. That was another difference between it and the GT, the Shelby uses an iron block.
 
Rara said:
In the end, you guys need to realize that Top Gear is all about being a show and entertainment, getting the truth out is only important in so much as how much it contributes to the entertainment value of the show.
Click to expand...

Well said that man,you dont actually think the presenters research all of the tech info they,ve got lackies that do that for them and they just read whats put up on the autoque or rehearsed.
 
svt4stv said:
yeah, also, i didnt know Shelby made a GT390 :confused: did he take a GT350 and convert it to metric or somethin? wtf?
Click to expand...
Hamster referred to his '67 as a "GT390". Actually, it's just a GT (not a Shelby) with a 390 c.i. engine. If his car happened to have the standard 289 (the base motor in GTs in '67), I guess he would've called it a GT289. As a side note, Ford made GTA-designated Mustangs in '67 also. The "A" stood for automatic transmission :crazy: .
 
Martin said:
Hamster referred to his '67 as a "GT390". Actually, it's just a GT (not a Shelby) with a 390 c.i. engine. If his car happened to have the standard 289 (the base motor in GTs in '67), I guess he would've called it a GT289. As a side note, Ford made GTA-designated Mustangs in '67 also. The "A" stood for automatic transmission :crazy: .
Click to expand...

He also tried to call it the Bullitt Mustang which was a '68. Shelby made the GT350s from '65 to '66 (I think?) and GT500s from '67-'69. Back then the GT was an appearance package, unlike today where it means you have a bigger engine as well.
 
PurpleMystique said:
He also tried to call it the Bullitt Mustang which was a '68. Shelby made the GT350s from '65 to '66 (I think?) and GT500s from '67-'69. Back then the GT was an appearance package, unlike today where it means you have a bigger engine as well.
Click to expand...
Shelby did make GT350s on up to 1970 (well, actually the '70 models were just re-VINed '69 models with a few add-ons). The '67 GT350 had the same HiPo 289 as the earlier models. The '68 had a mildly tweeked 302 and the '69/'70 had a 351W. Here's a pic of a '70 model (showing the '70-only features of hood stripes and front spoiler):
Red70GT350.jpg
 
Martin said:
Shelby did make GT350s on up to 1970 (well, actually the '70 models were just re-VINed '69 models with a few add-ons). The '67 GT350 had the same HiPo 289 as the earlier models. The '68 had a mildly tweeked 302 and the '69/'70 had a 351W. Here's a pic of a '70 model (showing the '70-only features of hood stripes and front spoiler):
Red70GT350.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks for the help. I do think I remember reading about the '70s being re-badged. My dad has a collection of Mustang and Fords from the mid-ninety's that I read over and over again back in Jr. High/high school.
 
The Mustang has 8 pounds per horsepower (based on 3950lbs and 500hp), and the Monaro has about 9.3ish (based on 3730/400), plus an IRS, not to mention the Mustang is quite nose-heavy. Make of it what you want.
 
I can't believe they don't know the difference between "gross" and "take home hp":shrug: IMO 447 is about right where a 500 hp car should be but is it true the car doesn't have a LSD with all that power:confused: Either way the comment about the sister is yet another slam against us, why?
 
Klasse Act said:
I can't believe they don't know the difference between "gross" and "take home hp":shrug: IMO 447 is about right where a 500 hp car should be but is it true the car doesn't have a LSD with all that power:confused: Either way the comment about the sister is yet another slam against us, why?
Click to expand...

I have a feeling he's still a little sore from losing a war about 230 years ago. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top