Toggle sidebar

Thoughts on the 2007 Shelby GT500

F

Freedom Froggy

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2001
2,757
128
63
40
bay area, california
Vehicle Type Model Year: 2007

Make: Ford

Model: Mustang

Style GT500

Base Price: $39,000 (est.)

Drive Type: RWD

Transmission Type: T-56 6-speed manual

Displacement (liters): 5.4

Engine Type: Supercharged V8

Bore x Stroke: 3.552 x 4.165 inches / 90.22 x 105.8 mm

Valvetrain: DOHC, four valves per cylinder

Induction: Cast aluminum screw-type supercharger with air-to-
water intercooler

Horsepower: 450+

Torque: 450+

Braking System: Front: Brembo 14-inch cross-drilled disc w/ four-piston calipers; Rear: Brembo 13-inch cross-drilled disc w/ two-piston calipers

Steering System: Power rack and pinion

Body Construction: Unitized welded steel body; aluminum hood

Suspension Type (front): Reverse-L independent MacPherson strut,
34-mm tubular stabilizer bar

Suspension Type (rear): Three-link solid axle with coil springs,
Panhard rod, 24-mm solid stabilizer bar.

Tire Size: P255/45ZR19

Wheel Size: 19x9.5 in. machined aluminum

Curb Weight (lbs): 3,600 (est.)

Recommended Fuel: Premimum Unleaded

07.ford.shelby.cobra.gt.eng.500.jpg


07.ford.shelby.cobra.gt.int.500.jpg


07.ford.shelby.cobra.gt.f34.500.jpg
Click to expand...

Im feeling the car over all... other than the cast iron block
 
For a supercharged 5.4 I thought it would go faster. But I still dont feel the look, not really a fan.
 
I like it. Many people aren't feeling the looks of the new Stang but i like em. Supercharged 5.4 ---> 450 isn't the heaviest strain on the engine, but ok. As far as muscle cars go, i like this one.
 
The 450+ hp and 450+ lb.-ft is going to make it a beast when it comes to straightline acceleration, but I was expecting more from a supercharged 5.4-liter V-8. Come on, Mercedes had 493 hp (469 in the E55/CLS55) and 516 lb.-ft in their AMG-tuned supercharged 5.4-liter V-8 that came out four years ago and will be replaced within the next year by the new AMG-developed naturally aspirated 6.2-liter V-8 with 503 hp and 465 lb.-ft (just 2 hp and 5 lb.-ft less than GM's LS7, but with almost a liter less). Toyota's new 5.0-liter V-8 that will power the upcoming IS500 and Supra is expected to also have at least 450 hp, and they did it with less displacement and without a supercharger (which will result in a slightly lower torque curve, but will have a higher compression ratio and a much more exciting top end). That rear axle is a piece of shit, too. But I do think it is a good looking car that should've been what the Mustang GT looked like, much closer to the concept car. But as I said earlier, it is going to be hard to beat when it comes to straightline acceleration for the price, but I hope GT500 owners don't plan on either driving in any weather that is tougher than a slight drizzle or competing in autocross events, much less anything that has a curve.
 
not a real techincal person when it comes to cars...i hated how gay the mustang looked, but i gotta say, just by changing the grill, it looks so much better....im liking it...
 
FrOgStRaDaMuS said:
weight till some one puts TT on it... no stopping it... this thing is a beast tho
Click to expand...
"TT" as in "twin-turbo"? Why would somebody twin-turbo a supercharged V-8? If you're talking about them taking out the supercharger, then that would be too much money and too much work. It would be more practical to do that to a regular Mustang GT.
 
Man, same story with the Z06 really, instead of them actually engineering a better engine, they kick the displacement up and stuff a supercharger up it.

450/5.4 = a paltry 83.3 HP/litre. That's awful for a forced induction engine.

Maybe I'm only a spoiled Euro, but if Ferrari can get 118 bhp/litre out of a NA engine, i see no reason why Ford has to perform so poorly.
 
Duke said:
Man, same story with the Z06 really, instead of them actually engineering a better engine, they kick the displacement up and stuff a supercharger up it.

450/5.4 = a paltry 83.3 HP/litre. That's awful for a forced induction engine.

Maybe I'm only a spoiled Euro, but if Ferrari can get 118 bhp/litre out of a NA engine, i see no reason why Ford has to perform so poorly.
Click to expand...
Exactly. In my opinion, with today's standards and engineering capabilities, any new performance engine with forced induction putting out any less than 90 hp/liter is a waste. Likewise, any new naturally aspirated performance engine putting out any less than 75 hp/liter needs some more tuning. Or maybe I, too, am spoiled by the 143 hp/liter that my car has :hungry:
 
DeeezNuuuts83 said:
"TT" as in "twin-turbo"? Why would somebody twin-turbo a supercharged V-8? If you're talking about them taking out the supercharger, then that would be too much money and too much work. It would be more practical to do that to a regular Mustang GT.
Click to expand...
actually... the 03/04 "terminator" cobras.. have been getting transplanted with turbo/twin turbos and making very big numbers

whats the difference between taking a civic or some other 4cyl and putting a 10k turbo setup on it and doing the same to an engine thats already setup for forced induction and getting 4 times the power depending on the tune?

and i say switch to turbos because they make much more power than superchargers while taking stress off the engine and at the same time.. are alilbetter on gas... why not do it?
 
FrOgStRaDaMuS said:
actually... the 03/04 "terminator" cobras.. have been getting transplanted with turbo/twin turbos and making very big numbers
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm aware of these cars.
FrOgStRaDaMuS said:
whats the difference between taking a civic or some other 4cyl and putting a 10k turbo setup on it and doing the same to an engine thats already setup for forced induction and getting 4 times the power depending on the tune?
Click to expand...
There are differences, but the point I was trying to make was that it might not be in the best interest financially to spend $45k (or however much the new GT500 will cost) on a car that is mostly an engine then yank out the supercharger and replace it with turbos that will probably cost another $5-10k, depending on the setup. The point I was trying to make was that it would be more financially sound to start with a naturally aspirated Mustang GT and to twin-turbo it.
FrOgStRaDaMuS said:
and i say switch to turbos because they make much more power than superchargers while taking stress off the engine and at the same time.. are alilbetter on gas... why not do it?
Click to expand...
I'm not denying that a twin-turbo setup on a GT500 would tear a stock supercharged GT500 to shreds. I'm very familiar with that type of setup with the previous Mustang Cobras. The only reason why I questioned it was because of the price involved and the disposal of all the supercharger hardware (which probably accounts for a large chunk of the price) and introduction and installation of all the twin-turbo hardware, whereas turboing a 4-cylinder will only force you to toss out the exhaust manifold, fuel injectors, and some other things. Or in the event of replacing a stock turbo with a bigger turbo, sometimes it's a direct fit or sometimes you'll only have to swap out a few of the stock components (obviously depending on tune).

But like I said before, I don't deny that a twin-turbo setup is superior in terms of power output. I'm just saying its application on the GT500 will make you spend a lot of money and toss out a lot of expensive hardware. Perhaps the twin-turbo application on a $26k Mustang GT would be cheaper overall.
 
FrOgStRaDaMuS said:
i agree with you.. but prices aside.. If your a car enthusiast... you will find ways to do what you want to a car... and im sure THIS will be done regardless of prices
Click to expand...
True... after all, there are still owners to add twin-turbo kits to their Ferraris, so I'm sure there are a few GT500 owners who will do the same.
 
DeeezNuuuts83 said:
Exactly. In my opinion, with today's standards and engineering capabilities, any new performance engine with forced induction putting out any less than 90 hp/liter is a waste. Likewise, any new naturally aspirated performance engine putting out any less than 75 hp/liter needs some more tuning. Or maybe I, too, am spoiled by the 143 hp/liter that my car has :hungry:
Click to expand...


truthfully, I didnt read thru the ENTIRE thread, so Im just gonn ask you, what kind of car do you have? Evo?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Donate

Back in the day, we used to recieve donations sent as cash in fake birthday cards! Those were the days! I still have some of them, actually.

Now we have crypto.

Ethereum/EVM: 0x9c70214f34ea949095308dca827380295b201e80

Bitcoin: bc1qa5twnqsqm8jxrcxm2z9w6gts7syha8gasqacww

Solana: 8xePHrFwsduS7xU4XNjp2FRArTD7RFzmCQsjBaetE2y8

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 144 (members: 1, guests: 143)
Top Bottom
Back