GTP Cool Wall: 2010 Shelby Mustang GT500

  • Thread starter TheBook
  • 44 comments
  • 8,834 views

2010 Shelby Mustang GT500 Super Snake

  • Total voters
    88
  • Poll closed .
That's a 1967 GT350. Probably a clone.

The easiest way to distinguish a 68 from a 67 is to look for side reflectors. The 68 (Bullitt) has them, 67's do not.

GT350's and GT500's have identical exteriors. GT350's had engine sizes of 289ci (67) or 302ci (68). The GT500 had a 428ci Police Interceptor or a 390ci in some 1968 models.
the_more_you_know2.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's OTT, but that's the point. Doesn't make it cool, but at times it could be. If it was in the UK it would never be cool in a million years.

And the main thing: see Astrodude's post.
 
It is not cool because it is a shelby. If this was a factory mustang with a strong nostalgia flavor like Super cobra Jet or something like that, it would be freaking cool. but it's a shelby, and like Mustang GT 90210 said, shelby today is just the epitome of uncool. the paradox is, Ford would never EVER sell a 750 hp Mustang. So for it to even exist, it HAS to be a Shelby. Which deems it absolutely uncool.
 
Eh, I said cool. Sure the scoop is just wrong but there's been worse. One of the problems looking through the specs though, is the compression. If it had a 10.0, it'd be a little faster. Instead of this, OR a new GT500, I'll go to Chevrolet and get a Corvette Z06 Carbon.
 
GT_Prologue5
If it had a 10.0, it'd be a little faster.
Click to expand...

I suppose we simply must inform all the ricers who buy low-compression turbo pistons that they're doing it wrong, eh? :lol:

High compression = better fuel economy and the need for premium fuel and/or expensive direct injection system to prevent knock-knock-kaboom. But it doesn't make more power. Not that a 700+ hp front-engine rear-drive car actually needs more power.
 
niky
High compression = better fuel economy and the need for premium fuel and/or expensive direct injection system to prevent knock-knock-kaboom. But it doesn't make more power. Not that a 700+ hp front-engine rear-drive car actually needs more power.
Click to expand...

But *sob* I like more *sob* power.
And if you can buy one of these, I'm pretty sure you can pay for premium. *sob*
 
GT_Prologue5
But *sob* I like more *sob* power.
And if you can buy one of these, I'm pretty sure you can pay for premium. *sob*
Click to expand...

If you want more power, you want more boost, not more compression. More compression is only an answer if you don't have a huge blower pushing masses of air through the motor. More compression + high boost needed for over 700 hp? Bent rods and a blown engine.

With boost, less compression = more power. It's telling that even with direct-injection to prevent knock, the Mazdaspeed3 has a lower compression ratio (at 9.5) than the naturally aspirated mill (at 10) and has over twice the horsepower. The old Mazdaspeed Protege kept stock compression and got a measly 30 more horses than the non-blown model.
 
Last edited:
COOL-> I saw the last version, S197 725hp prototype at the Shelby mueseum. And it was sick!

Loved the tinted headlights!
01222008178.jpg


Scary Modular V8 under there
01222008212.jpg


:)
 
I assume the idea for these Cool Wall threads was a copy of Top Gear. That said, why is everyone basing their opinions on how good of a car it is? Statistics... handling...? None of that is supposed to matter when deciding its "cool" factor. It's all about presence.

The Mustang has always been an embodiment of American muscle (debatable 'pony car vs muscle', I know...). Plus, chicks always dig a nice 'stang. I say cool.
 
Toronado
If it was about presence, this thing would be so amazingly uncool as to be off the scale.
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, some people do think Lady Gaga is the best thing since sliced bread.







Oh.



We were talking about a Mustang? I thought it was a prop from her latest music video.
 

Latest Posts

Back