Jakup

I know everyone says the GT500 is overweight, handles poorly, and gets no traction, but has anyone looked at the Roush? 85hp less (still, 415 though) but they upgrade the suspension/interior more and I doubt it's as heavy as the GT500.

Here's a Top Gear comparison: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq06eUNlyzI

"90% as good as the Z06 on the track, but 90% better on the street," Clarkson says about the Roush version. I don't know if I'd go that far, but it does seem to work out much better than the GT500.

I love the quote: "It's one inch lower, and 35% stiffer, and quite honestly so am I..."

It's a shame about the Shelby. If they just got it down to ~3200 pounds, made it more balanced, then threw on a better suspension, it'd be hanging with cars that were much more expensive just like the Z06 does

Sr2oD3

nice vid, I know that the SHELBY GT500 convertible was a porker...

friggin 4040lbs.!!!!!

Spartikus

Get it down to even just 3500lbs and it'd be pretty nice.

QUIKAG

I'll take a base Z51 C6 for less money than the Rousch.

Z06-KILLR

a lot of people would but I guess that is the poing the original thread starter wanted to make...

If the car were considerably lighter, I doubt a lot of Z06 owners would go for the car...and I think it would still fail to attract more buyers. I have owned several mustangs before...but I could not care less about the newer body styles. I don't think I would buy one, even if they were 15% cheaper and even if they were 3,000 lbs...or less...

Fanman

The big difference is the aluminum block vs. the iron block in the GT500. While the iron block makes adding hp to the GT500 much easier, it probably adds a few hundred lbs to the front of the car. If they got the Roush Stage 3 up to 450 hp, it might just be the best, most balanced stock/factory fixed (has warranty) american car out there.

Jakup

I believe the Rousch is around $40k, about the same price as the GT500 (before mark-up, of course).
I wasn't saying people would take the Mustang over the Vette if it were lighter/more balanced, I was just saying it'd be cool because there'd be two relatively cheap American cars beating up on supercars two and three times their price. Instead, all it gets is power, and because of its lack of balance/heavyness/bad handling it's not even considered for comparisons.

GT_2003

I totally agree with the point. I really hope something happens in the next few years to convince Ford to cut some serious weight off the Mustang with a new design. They've made little Mustangs and big Mustangs in the past, so I don't doubt things will come around in the future, I just don't know how long I want to wait.

I don't have any hopes the new Challenger will be lighter than a luxury sedan, and I'm thinking chances are slim the new Camaro will weigh less than a GTO. Hopefully someone at Ford will see this as an opportunity to make a lighter Mustang instead of permission to make it heavier. But the light at the end of the tunnel is dim indeed from where I am sitting. Between federal safety regulations and the American driving environment, future lightweight and low priced sports coupes probably aren't going to be high powered.

bjohnston

I agree. I think Corvettes make tuner Mustangs irrelevant. The Mustang platform just has too many baked-in deficiencies to compare favorably with a stock Z-51 or Z06 Vette, regardless of how much power is stuffed into it. That being said, this is my favorite tuner Mustang: http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...=73272136132484. Looks nice, and it's NA. But, as usual, the price is rediculous, when a Z-51 can be had for $10K less.

topcat7111

I'll take the Saleen New Boss 302, only 500 made...$60k+