
| Ford Shelby Mustang GT500 Coupe |
| Article | Image gallery (19) | Specifications | User Comments (3) |
|
|
| Here piggy piggy |
| Turbo.Jenkens 03-31-2007 |
Suee-suee here piggy piggy. This stang weighs more than my truck! It confounds me why Ford would produce ,and even more why people are so willing to purchase, a 2 ton sports car. If it shed about 500 lbs I might take it seriously. How could a legendary racer like Carrol Shelby put his name on this grotesque hunk of iron which has no business on a race track? |
| Reason for the Roots |
| Faststang64 01-24-2006 |
The reason they used the roots type supercharger instead of the centrifusial type is a simple matter of money and the number of units that could be produced. Although they could have used the same supercharger as the GT it would only provide a little bit more horsepower. They made a wise decision in putting the less expensive version. Also they could not get the number of units needed for a car like the mustang to be made. It was a wise decision to use the roots because I would rather give up a few factory horsepower for enough cars to be made for a lesser price without having to wait countless months on some list. |
| Roots-Type? |
| d.skinner 01-17-2006 |
I love the new GT500 but if Ford was wanting a maximum power outage, why didn't they go with a centrifical supercharger? I understand that the roots-type won't give any kind of lag, and that it is used on other Ford products, but the numbers could potentially be higher with a centrifical design. Maybe they have a reason (such as a desired gap between the power of the GT500 and the GT), either way, the car will be emaculate. I once drove a 2002 Saleen S281 (with a roots-type supercharger) that put out ONLY 400h.p., and that was a machine that could get a guy into a lot of trouble, so I can't imagine the feeling of driving the GT500. |
| Article | Image gallery (19) | Specifications | User Comments (3) |
| All Cars - Contact us - Privacy Statement - Top | © 1998 - 2026 Ultimatecarpage.com |