: 2006 Carol Shelby Mustang VS 2006 CTS-V?



coldfoil
03-25-06, 10:31 AM
NO CONTEST....What do yo guys think?????

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-25-06, 10:39 AM
I'd go with the GT500, it's rarer, plus, I've never been much for the CTS's.

urbanski
03-25-06, 12:17 PM
i think this belongs in cadillac versus

coldfoil
03-25-06, 12:21 PM
i think this belongs in cadillac versus
Yes it does...sorry about that!

CVP33
03-25-06, 02:33 PM
Absolutely no contest. The Mustang is a piece of $hit. Always has been, always will be. Then again what would you expect for a bargain basement pony car. Camaro was no better, so not a hater, just speaking from experience. I realize there are no competitors for the Mustang to compare to so these kind of threads are inevitable. But c'mon, a Caddy to a Ford?

White99SLS
03-25-06, 05:29 PM
GT500, I think it'll be an animal once you do some performance upgrades like exhaust and stuff............

davesdeville
03-25-06, 09:13 PM
Not a good comparison IMO. Mustangs are no where near a luxury sports car, they're just a cheap pony car. And yes the Mustang will be faster than the V. So is a liter bike, but that doesn't mean I'd want to ride one all the time.

Zorb750
03-25-06, 10:14 PM
Cts-v.

SpeedyArizona
03-25-06, 11:38 PM
The new GT500 hands down! I've always liked Mustangs and the old Shelby GT500 is definetly one of the greatest sports cars ever made. The new one can't hold a candle to the ones on the 60's, but it does justice to the Shelby name.


Mustangs are no where near a luxury sports car, they're just a cheap pony car.
Absolutely no contest. The Mustang is a piece of $hit. Always has been, always will be. Then again what would you expect for a bargain basement pony car. Camaro was no better, so not a hater, just speaking from experience. I realize there are no competitors for the Mustang to compare to so these kind of threads are inevitable. But c'mon, a Caddy to a Ford?


I hate to pick a fight, but I disagree with you 100%. Mustangs AREN'T and DON'T WANT TO BE a luxury sports car, they are meant for speed and pure thrill. We aren't discussing the Mustang though, we're talking about the 2007Shelby GT500 based on the Mustang platform. The GT500, first off, isn't a "cheap pony car", the base price is $45,000 without options. The engine is a 475 HP (that alone would sell me) 5.4L supercharged V8.

The CTS-V is a nice car for the family, but isn't even comparable to the GT500. The clientle that will buy the GT500 wouldn't even want a Cadillac! Both cars have COMPLETELY different markets that they appeal to, but I'd take the Shelby over a CTS-V anyday:D! (I'm not saying the CTS-V is a bad car, but I prefer the Shelby)

CVP33
03-26-06, 07:10 AM
The GT500, first off, isn't a "cheap pony car", the base price is $45,000 without options. The engine is a 475 HP (that alone would sell me) 5.4L supercharged V8.

The CTS-V is a nice car for the family, but isn't even comparable to the GT500. The clientle that will buy the GT500 wouldn't even want a Cadillac! Both cars have COMPLETELY different markets that they appeal to, but I'd take the Shelby over a CTS-V anyday:D! (I'm not saying the CTS-V is a bad car, but I prefer the Shelby)

I agree with you completely but just the opposite conclusion. The GT500 isn't cheap in price just in build quality and ammenities. It is a 475HP Mustang with a handling package. Nothing will be done to address the cheap looking interior amongst it's other faults.

Also agree that the CTS-V and the GT500 are uncomparable. One is a high quality, 4 door sedan with loads of ammenities. The other is a boy racer pony car or questionable quality. I would never take a GT500 over a Caddy for the same reason I wouldn't take a WRX STi, EVO 8 or similar. All good cars for what they are, just not luxurious enough.

SpeedyArizona
03-26-06, 08:52 AM
It is a 475HP Mustang with a handling package. Nothing will be done to address the cheap looking interior amongst it's other faults.

The interior is a bit improved over the Mustang GT, but still isn't up to Cadillac standards. The Shelby name alone, is enough to sell the GT500. But, like we said, these cars are in totally different leagues...who's the idiot that started this thread:D?

The CTS-V is comparable to the Lexus GS430 and BMW 5-Series.
The Shelby GT500 is in a league of its own.

CVP33
03-26-06, 09:45 AM
The Shelby GT500 is in a league of its own.

Amen. :thumbsup:

Blackout
03-27-06, 05:56 AM
Well what are you looking for in this comparison? Are you talking performance? Ammenities *sp?*? But if your talking performance the GT500 will eat a CTS-V alive. The last gen Cobra is good for mid to upper 12's in stock trim, now you add more hp and tq and your seeing 11's. The GT500 will be the best bang for the buck car out there. And all you need to do then is a pulley swap and hello mid 11's!

CVP33
03-27-06, 05:35 PM
No argument. Just doubt many are cross-shopping the two vehicles.

davesdeville
03-29-06, 05:16 AM
The last gen Cobra is good for mid to upper 12's in stock trim, now you add more hp and tq and your seeing 11's. The GT500 will be the best bang for the buck car out there. And all you need to do then is a pulley swap and hello mid 11's!

That's not really a valid comparison being that the 03-04 cobra is a totally different car with a very different motor. I wouldn't automatically give the GT500 11s quite yet, then again I wouldn't doubt it if I saw some timeslips in the very high 11s.

Blackout
03-29-06, 05:41 AM
That's not really a valid comparison being that the 03-04 cobra is a totally different car with a very different motor. I wouldn't automatically give the GT500 11s quite yet, then again I wouldn't doubt it if I saw some timeslips in the very high 11s.Before I even opened this thread up and I saw you were the last post on here I was 100% sure that you were going to be quoting something I said and low and behold I was correct. But what you just said has to be the most stupid thing I have ever read. yes the 03-04 Cobra was a different car then the GT500. It has less power and a different motor. So now the new GT500 with a new motor and 100 more hp and a 100 more lb/tq isn't going to be a full second faster in the 1/4? Since Ford hasn't come out with the exact numbers for the GT500 the only thing they are saying is that the hp and tq is estimated at 475 and 475. The GT500 in its prototype stages I believe was running mid to upper 11's

gothicaleigh
03-29-06, 09:52 AM
http://www.drivingfuture.com/blog/news/images/ford-20050401-thumb.jpg

I must admit that the current generation Mustang is the most appealing in the line. The previous two design styles were just horrible, but they've really turned it around.

This GT500 looks to be impressive, but with the price approaching $50k (and that's before dealer markups) they need to do something about the cheap interior and the plastic grill mesh.
Performance-wise, it sounds to be right on. I just hope they do a little more to distinguish the top of the line versions from the dime a dozen V6's this time.

Blackout
03-29-06, 11:42 AM
Pricing is suposed to be around the price of the last gen Cobra. Pricing will be in the $40's which no matter how you look at it is an amazing price for a close to if not 500 hp car

Katshot
03-29-06, 12:41 PM
This thread is little vague. Are you talking a general comparison, or just performance. I'm assuming you're talking just performance, since only a moron would honestly be trying to compare these two cars IMO. If so, I think it's fair to say the GT500 driver has nothing to fear from a CTS-V driver. That said, I find it interesting that someone mentioned something about a cheap looking interior in the Mustang. I could swear I remember MANY people having the exact same complaint about the CTS interior. Hey, the Mustang isn't supposed to be a luxury car like the CTS so a plain (read "functional") interior shouldn't be a big deal, right? As for the looks, IMO, the CTS-V has the looks over the GT500. I like the new Mustang GT but really hate the GT500. FUGLY!!

davesdeville
03-29-06, 08:54 PM
blah blah blah Since Ford hasn't come out with the exact numbers for the GT500 the only thing they are saying is that the hp and tq is estimated at 475 and 475. The GT500 in its prototype stages I believe was running mid to upper 11's

So you're saying you don't know either. Good job. :rolleyes:

SpeedyArizona
03-29-06, 10:11 PM
This thread is little vague. Are you talking a general comparison, or just performance. I'm assuming you're talking just performance, since only a moron would honestly be trying to compare these two cars IMO. If so, I think it's fair to say the GT500 driver has nothing to fear from a CTS-V driver. That said, I find it interesting that someone mentioned something about a cheap looking interior in the Mustang. I could swear I remember MANY people having the exact same complaint about the CTS interior. Hey, the Mustang isn't supposed to be a luxury car like the CTS so a plain (read "functional") interior shouldn't be a big deal, right? As for the looks, IMO, the CTS-V has the looks over the GT500. I like the new Mustang GT but really hate the GT500. FUGLY!!

Thank you Katshot, these two cars CANNOT be compared! One if a luxury sports sedan, the other is a powerful and famous sports coupe. I liked the interior on both cars, the CTS-V has a nice yet subtle luxurious feel to it; the GT500 has a retro and fun interior that fits it well.

As for looks, I definetly love the GT500, the CTS-V can't hold a candle to it (my opinion). I still wish they'd bring back the GT350, that car actually has some extensive racing history.

Blackout
03-30-06, 05:36 AM
Thank you Katshot, these two cars CANNOT be compared! One if a luxury sports sedan, the other is a powerful and famous sports coupe. I liked the interior on both cars, the CTS-V has a nice yet subtle luxurious feel to it; the GT500 has a retro and fun interior that fits it well.

As for looks, I definetly love the GT500, the CTS-V can't hold a candle to it (my opinion). I still wish they'd bring back the GT350, that car actually has some extensive racing history.If you go to the New York Auto Show you will see this.....


New York show briefs: Sheby GT350H reincarnated http://www.autoweek.com/graphics/aw_spacer.gif
http://www.autoweek.com/graphics/aw_spacer.gif
AutoWeek | Published 03/21/06, 12:00 pm et


http://www.motorsportcollector.com/62301Images/Hp7.jpeg
1966 Ford Shelby Mustang 350

One more little teaser: We hear Ford is putting the finishing touches on a special throwback Mustang for New York, one that echoes the famed Hertz rental car Shelby Mustangs from the í60s. Ford isnít talking, but sources tell us the latest incarnation of the Shelby GT350H will carry the same gold-on-black paint scheme as the 1966 original. The new GT350H will also offer higher performance in keeping with the car from the past that, legend has it, was often rented and raced (though participation in SCCA events is unsubstantiated). Ford built 999 copies of the 1966 GT350H, which featured a 289-cid, 306-hp V8.

Stay tuned to AutoWeek.com for all the latest news from the New York show during media preview days April 12-13.

Blackout
03-30-06, 05:39 AM
So you're saying you don't know either. Good job. :rolleyes:

Head of SVT, Hau Thai-Tang, along with Carrol Shelby have stuffed the extraordinary 5.4-liter, DOHC, 32-valve supercharged V8 from the Ford GT super car under the Mustang's hood. Final horsepower numbers have not yet been announced, but Thai-Tang hints it will be “Well over 450 hp, closer to 500.” Look for 450-plus lb-ft of torque too. Whatever the final numbers, it will be insane. Engineer Thai-Tang, who did a stint at Newman-Haas Racing, sums up the powertrain by saying: “It's gonna be a monster.” So how are you supposed to quote numbers that aren't available yet? Due for real STFU if all you have to say is going to be something arrogant. Atleast I am contributing something useful to this thread unlike you

SpeedyArizona
03-30-06, 07:50 AM
Well looks like I'll have to go to Hertz and rent a GT350H. I wonder if they'll let me buy one...

davesdeville
03-30-06, 09:24 AM
So how are you supposed to quote numbers that aren't available yet? Due for real STFU if all you have to say is going to be something arrogant. Atleast I am contributing something useful to this thread unlike you

That's my point, you're not supposed to quote numbers that aren't available yet. You're not adding anything to the thread by doing it.

Blackout
03-30-06, 11:34 AM
That's my point, you're not supposed to quote numbers that aren't available yet. You're not adding anything to the thread by doing it.You truly are an idiot. This thread is comparing the CTS-V and the GT500. Since the current CTS-V is at the very best a upper 12 second car in stock trim and the last gen Cobra's are doing upper to mid 12's in stock trim. Now you add more hp and tq to the tune of damn near 100 more in both hp and tq and you don't think the car will be doing 11's? Who the hell cares about the exact numbers that Ford is claiming for them because they will be most likely underrated just like the last Cobra's numbers were. So yes I am adding something to this thread since were comparing the two cars. All you have managed to do is point out the obvious that the GT500 isn't a luxury sports car and then try to start crap with me because I don't have the EXACT numbers. You have become one of the biggest trolls on this forum s of late. I dunno what your issue is but if its with me PM me and tell me what the problem seems to be if your not going to do that then like I said before
http://jasonshobbyshowcase.homestead.com/files/STFUgif.gif

CVP33
03-30-06, 12:04 PM
Way to go guys. You scared Gary Coleman. :tisk:

Blackout
03-30-06, 01:34 PM
Way to go guys. You scared Gary Coleman. :tisk:lol....i love that pic. I haven't seen that one in awhile

Haleykeek
03-30-06, 02:04 PM
Well what are you looking for in this comparison? Are you talking performance? Ammenities *sp?*? But if your talking performance the GT500 will eat a CTS-V alive. The last gen Cobra is good for mid to upper 12's in stock trim, now you add more hp and tq and your seeing 11's. The GT500 will be the best bang for the buck car out there. And all you need to do then is a pulley swap and hello mid 11's!best bang for the buck? at $40,000 to $45,000? i'd take a 300 SRT/8 over the Shelby.and just wait till the HEMI Cudas come back,and not to mention Camaro.i'm very sure those two cars will be cheaper,and not to mention, fun to drive.and all stuffed with big old fashionded push-rod technology.not this rice-tech supercharged stuff that's out there now.:rant2:

Blackout
03-30-06, 04:25 PM
best bang for the buck? at $40,000 to $45,000? i'd take a 300 SRT/8 over the Shelby.Ok have fun with the slower car that only comes in a automatic.

and just wait till the HEMI Cudas come backThat won't be coming back since Plymouth isn't around anymore

,and not to mention Camaro.i'm very sure those two cars will be cheaper,and not to mention, fun to drive.The Camaro should be interesting to see but your talking 2+ years down the line so there is no comparison and you can't say as to which car iwll be cheaper and more fun to drive.

and all stuffed with big old fashionded push-rod technology.not this rice-tech supercharged stuff that's out there now.:rant2:lol......ummm.....ok. I'll take the car that comes stock with a blower and spend the $60 for the pulley to make more hp then going out and spending a few grand for a blower, then tuning it, then changing the compression, then reinforcing the block, etc. So have fun with the pushrod:highfive:

illumina
03-30-06, 08:36 PM
I am having trouble understanding something: with the suggested 475 hp-tq., this car is expected to run mid-11's? I hate to bring a new car into the mix here, but the new Z06 is running high-11's with 500 hp-tq., right? Is the GT500 so light that it will be able to beat the ZO6 with it's assumed lesser numbers?

davesdeville
03-30-06, 09:08 PM
I am having trouble understanding something: with the suggested 475 hp-tq., this car is expected to run mid-11's? I hate to bring a new car into the mix here, but the new Z06 is running high-11's with 500 hp-tq., right? Is the GT500 so light that it will be able to beat the ZO6 with it's assumed lesser numbers?

No, it's going to be heavier. The Z06 is under 3200, estimated weights for the GT500 are in excess of 3600 (sometimes well in excess.) I couldn't imagine Ford managing to get a relatively large, 4 seater that is the Mustang to be lighter than the Z06. It's an iron block with a blower on it, which definately adds weight. It does not have much lightening either.

Blackout, it's quite simple. You're giving the GT500 too much credit, that is all.

SpeedyArizona
03-30-06, 09:11 PM
but the new Z06 is running high-11's with 500 hp-tq., right

I believe the new Z06's are running mid 11's. The new Shelby will most likely run high 11's to low 12's.

illumina
03-30-06, 09:15 PM
I believe the new Z06's are running mid 11's. The new Shelby will most likely run high 11's to low 12's.

That would be my estimation as well...

But as for the Z06, Motortrend tested one (I think it was MT) and they ran a 12 flat with it. Something tells me they didn't drive the car right on that test...

SpeedyArizona
03-30-06, 09:21 PM
The GT500's estimated weight is 3700 lbs while the CTS-V is 3850 lbs and the Z06 at 3150 lbs. The Z06 is no doubt faster, but I'll expect high 11's from the GT500.

Sorry, had to correct my numbers

illumina
03-30-06, 09:29 PM
The GT500's estimated weight is 3700 lbs while the CTS-V is 3850 lbs and the Z06 at 3150 lbs. The Z06 is no doubt faster, but I'll expect high 11's from the GT500.

Sorry, had to correct my numbers

High 11's and that's it! With the Z06 having a 550 lb. advantage, as well as a hp-tq advantage, the GT500 shouldn't be so close.

As for the V and GT500 comparison, compare these scenarios:

:blasted: VS. :brutal:

Both provide similar effects, but one is more effective if you understand what I mean...:D

Blackout
03-31-06, 01:48 PM
I just got a PM back from my buddy who worked on the development of the GT500 and I was asking him about their test mule and him saying about it running 11's. I was correct but not 100%. Here is what he said


it'll run 11.9...cause our test mule did. But now that I think about it it was an 07 driveline in a 03 cobra body. I think its like a 300lb difference between gens. But like I said we did see 11.9 in testing on stock driveline only in a 03 cobra body.

Katshot
03-31-06, 02:04 PM
I believe the new Z06's are running mid 11's. The new Shelby will most likely run high 11's to low 12's.

I'd probably agree with you on this too. The one thing that the Cobra has in it's favor is ease of boosting power output. My guess is a "stock" Cobra will be a high 11, low 12 sec. car but with even something as small as a pulley swap, you could see Z06 performance fairly easily. Again, it may be fast but IMO, it's friggin' UGLY!
I'm still holding out for the Challenger!

Blackout
03-31-06, 05:10 PM
Here's Katshot at work thinking about that Challenger:rofl:

http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/3258/jreep13fd.jpg

illumina
03-31-06, 05:31 PM
Here's Katshot at work thinking about that Challenger:rofl:

http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/3258/jreep13fd.jpg

There's just something not right about that man!













:histeric: :histeric: :histeric:

Blackout
03-31-06, 05:40 PM
UPDATE:

I was talking to another board member that I know and here's what he told me


Last week the Ford Rep. at the Lehigh Valley Autoshow quoted 475/475. I am a little partial towards the car since I used to work for Carroll.
I can't wait until these things come out and people start dyno'ing them to see if Ford sand bagged the numbers like they did on the last Cobra.

Katshot
04-01-06, 05:50 AM
Well don't forget that Ford has been accused of going both ways on the Cobra in the past. They got bagged for OVER-estimating power and then later ones were actually UNDER-estimated. Like you siad, I'll wait 'til I see one on a dyno.
Oh, and BTW, where'd you get that picture of me daydreaming?

CVP33
04-01-06, 11:06 AM
Well don't forget that Ford has been accused of going both ways

That's my quote of the day. Happy April Fool's Day! :thumbsup:

Blackout
04-03-06, 05:42 AM
Well don't forget that Ford has been accused of going both ways on the Cobra in the past. They got bagged for OVER-estimating power and then later ones were actually UNDER-estimated.I think after that fiasco you will never see the Cobra being over estimated again.


Oh, and BTW, where'd you get that picture of me daydreaming?When you zone out boy do you zone out. Notice how close I was to you when you were day dreaming? :thumbsup:

Katshot
04-03-06, 06:51 AM
That's my quote of the day. Happy April Fool's Day! :thumbsup:

As I wrote that, I wondered if anyone would take it that way. ;)

CVP33
04-03-06, 07:11 PM
As I wrote that, I wondered if anyone would take it that way. ;)

Rest assured, I ALWAYS will. It's a gift really. :thumbsup:

GreenMachine
04-06-06, 12:08 AM
Met one of the guys who works on the transmission that is this Mustang. Great guy, and the auto show was closing down and he had to stick around to make sure the car was treated correctly.

I asked if he could pop the hood, he said he would love to but loves much more to keep his job. This was back in Febuary btw.

Anyway he said the numbers weren't final but upwards of 475 is where it's looking and it will be supercharged. One of the guys who talks about the car on the stage said they were trying to not to call it the Cobra, but rather aviod that name and just call it the GT500, Shelby Mustang, Shelby GT500, but not Shelby Cobra, or Cobra, or Cobra Mustang.

One thing that ticked me off is that the Ford GT WAS NOT on the showroom, the ran out of floor space and instead of takeing away one of the 3 Lincoln Zephers the GT (the pace car for the company) sat on the truck the whole show, saw it as I was leaving and asked the trucker why it on the truck, thats the reason he told me.

Pictures:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/BigEd2006/automotive/shelby3.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/BigEd2006/automotive/shelby1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/BigEd2006/automotive/shelby2.jpg

The Mustang is for the driver in us all and for the guy who hasn't grown up yet, the car nut.
The CTS-V is for the guy who cares about Luxury and all the refinement stuff but still be able to get up and go to 60 in under 5. Might have to crate around business partners or kids too.

Blackout
04-06-06, 05:38 AM
Anothe reason why they probably didn't have the GT there was because this is the last year for them so they probably figured why bother putting it in the show when its all but done

marnepup
04-06-06, 01:43 PM
the shelby in a class of it's own? :tisk: :tisk: :tisk:

I agree that you can't compare the shelby to the v-series, but it will will be in a class with the GTO, the camaro Z28, and the challenger SRT8, to name a few. Especially if the GTO and Z28 are the same car with a different badge...

THANK YOU DETROIT, HORSEPOWER WARS ARE BACK!!!:thumbsup:


/edit/ why are they trying so hard to avoid letting "cobra" escape their lips when they have those retarded snake badges all over the car?

GreenMachine
04-06-06, 09:20 PM
/edit/ why are they trying so hard to avoid letting "cobra" escape their lips when they have those retarded snake badges all over the car?

that was my question and didn't get an answer on that from them, except I don't consider them retarded, I like them.

Haleykeek
04-08-06, 01:59 AM
this is'nt much of a comparison.the Shelby GT500 would essentially mop the floor with the CTS-V.now if the CTS had the 505bhp motor ,it might be a different story.

Katshot
04-08-06, 08:08 AM
that was my question and didn't get an answer on that from them, except I don't consider them retarded, I like them.

I'm hoping that it's because this ugly-ass monstrosity is just a stand-in until a REAL Cobra hits the streets. After a long awaited return, this car is such a let down in my book. Yeah, it's fast but it doesn't have half the bad-ass looks of the last Cobra IMO.

csp3000
06-17-06, 11:09 PM
Not a good comparison IMO. Mustangs are no where near a luxury sports car, they're just a cheap pony car. And yes the Mustang will be faster than the V. So is a liter bike, but that doesn't mean I'd want to ride one all the time.

I couldn't agree more...:highfive:

CVP33
06-18-06, 12:43 AM
Here's the real news. The Shelby Mustang's times are sorry as hell for a 475 hp, supposedly under-rated pony car. I've seen 12.8 - 13.1 quarter mile times. That's all you've got?! Hell, SRT-8's are hitting those times. :rolleyes: Hardly worth the Shelby name or the $10K upcharge.