2010 Ford Mustang GT500 - Brief Impression

Recently I had the opportunity to have a couple of rides in a 2010 Ford GT500. What I learned during that brief time was pleasantly surprising. I used to be "down" on the car due to the weight. And actually still am. It's woefully overweight at 3917lbs as tested by Car &Driver, not to mention a bit front heavy in terms of weight distribution. But Ford continues to revise the solid rear axle and has anyone ever said a low 12-second car isn't fun to drive if it's generally refined? The other reason I frowned on it was when it had excessive badging making it a Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra SVT GT00.

The owner stated it's quite difficult to launch despite the solid rear axle (SRA) and weight. Managing a clutch and accelerator isn't easy with a car of this power on unprepped surfaces. Even Car & Driver managed a lousy 12.9 second ET despite a 113mph trap speed. I would suspect excessive wheelspin that shortened the distance of the track. The car should be in the mid-teens.

Besides a tasteful dark blue color, my next favorable impression was the exhaust note at start-up. "How is that street legal from a production car?" was my first thought. It has a nice bark and a great burble. When inside, it isn't intrusive at all.

The door shuts with a very satisfying and surprisiningly refined "thunk" with close tolerances. It was at this point I started to re-think the car. A few years ago, I had the opportunity to put 200 fun miles on a Hertz Shelby GT Mustang convertible. The sub-standard interior wasn't exactly impressive and a 4-speed automatic was archaic.

Now the improvementst of the 2010 is apparent and a nicer interior with steering wheel controls. The screen for the satellite radio doesn't have the sharpest resolution, but I didn't see the navigation portion. The hoodline is still excessively high so placing the car in the corner is more of a guess than a proper sports car. It doesn't have all the creature comforts and might be one of the lowest content cars for the money. But that isn't what it's about. It's about nostalgia, power, heritage and acceleration.

Also easily upgradable in terms of additional horsepower due to the supercharger, it is the muscle car alterative to the Corvette. In other words, a bigger, heavier cruiser that does well on the dragstrip but is second place on the road circuit.

_____

Have a question about cars you would like answered? Want to know about performance, racing, modifying, shopping, makes, models, events, etc? Ask me here: AskRobAboutCars@gmail.com and I'll do my best to answer your question and publish it here on Examiner.com!

Sound Off! Lexus LF-A vs. Mustang GT

The super high-tech, incredibly fast and expensive ($375,000) Lexus LF-A actually has something in common with the $30,000 '10 Ford Mustang GT. Believe me, they don't share any common components and they are not even remotely related in any way. But they do share one common trait that is rather unique. They both have methods of directly transmitting the sound of the engine into the passenger compartment.

The new 560hp Lexus LF-A, with it's 9000rpm V-10 engine has sound tubes that transmit the engine sounds into two locations in the passenger compartment. As reported in the December '09 Road & Track, the sound comes in above and below the dashboard. The 2010 Mustang GT also has a "sound induction tube" as reported in Car & Driver, February 2009.

To be perfectly honest, it's an ugly addition to the engine compartment on the Mustang. Looking at the photo here, it unfortunately looks like an afterthought and creates clutter. This engine compartment looks better.

Is this a sign of performance cars being so refined that sound effects are needed to engage the driver? As if the car is so quiet that the enthusiast driver receives so little audio feedback the factory deems it necessary to "pipe it in". What happens when the owner installs a less restrictive "cold air intake"? That is a common upgrade that not only can increase horsepower, but also the audible sound level of the engine as well. Will these "CAI's" still allow for the "sound injection" as well?

Is it another foreshadowing of upcoming sound regulation? Electric cars are naturally very silent and so are hybrids when under full electric power. Is there anticipation of internal combustion engines having even stricter sound requirements? That doesn't bode well for diesels, does it?

A question I always ask is how much R&D and resulting cost did it take? And for these cars, was it really necessary? Is there an after-thought to discourage modifications to the cars?

If that much R&D goes into the sound tube design, shouldn't it be driver selectable? Many want the speed, but what about their music? Gotta have the tunes! Others may want to impress those outside of the car. with the sound. If there are passengers, they are already impressed, right? Hopefully by both you and your car.

Unless exterior sound regulations get so outrageous, I predict the sound tube fad may become an adjustable "feature" in high-end cars and simply fade away in the rest. Just like the digital dashboard. Which, by the way, the Lexus LF-A also has but luckily in the shape of a traditional speedometer and tachometer. The reason? Lexus states the engine revs too fast for an analog gauge to keep up.

So do you want two volume control dials plus the one under your right foot?
______________
Got a question about cars you would like answered? Want to know about performance, racing, modifying, shopping, makes, models, events, etc? Ask me here: AskRobAboutCars@gmail.com and I'll do my best to answer your question and publish it here on Examiner.com!

The proper comparison of Pony Cars

Only AutoWeek (AW) did the proper comparison of the current Pony Cars. The testers don't drive very well, but they trumped Motor Trend and Car & Driver. The June 15th issue of AW featured a comparison test of the new Chevrolet Camaro SS, Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 and Dodge Challenger SRT-8. http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090612/CARNEWS/906129990

Why is this test better than rest? It isn't because of the performance results, it's because they compared the top-of-the-line models from each manufacturer. Car & Driver didn't do it right in the July 2009 issue: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/coupes/2010_chevy_camaro_ss_vs_2010_ford_mustang_gt_2009_dodge_challenger_r_t_comparison_test

and neither did Motor Trend in the June 2009 issue: http://www.motortrend.com/multimedia/wallpaper/112_0906_2010_camaro_2009_challenger_2010_mustang_wallpaper/index.html

Before I get into the problem with the performance numbers, what is overlooked is market segment vs. pricing. When shopping for over $30k domestic performance coupes, the enthusiast is going to shop capability first, price second. These magazines are bringing existing models to a test with the new Camaro SS. Since the SS is the top performer in the Camaro model line-up, don't bring the Challenger R/T, bring the SRT-8. Doesn't it make sense to see how a 426hp Chevy does against a 425hp Dodge? The Mustang GT, at 315hp, doesn't belong either. Bring the 540hp GT500. So what if the GT500 is nearly $51k. The Camaro is $37k and the Dodge nearly $44k.

Yes, the Camaro is a bargain, but a used GT500 is in the same range. And the Challenger SRT-8 new or used, is close enough as well. So again, AW did the right thing by comparing a the top models to each other.

What about the driving? Well in the simplest terms, when the 425hp Dodge is clocked from 0-60mph in 5.7 seconds, that is garbage. Literally. Especially when other sources are clocking the 376hp R/T version in 5.1 seconds. If the car is faulty, get another from the press pool or at least tell us the quarter-mile results. All of models tested in AW are capable of mid/high 4-second blasts. And that is only part of the story.

The 0-60mph test is valid but there is much more to straight line performance. The Mustang GT has it's lunch handed to it by the others in the quarter mile and in the triple digits. Take a look at the Car & Driver story. The 0-140mph times are 22.3 seconds, 27.7 seconds and the GT might as well give up at 34.2 seconds. These are enormous gaps at triple digit speeds. Who drives that fast and where you ask? Well considering the 60-130mph measurement is becoming the new standard, if you're still asking, you're not in the market for a 400hp car, are you? http://www.examiner.com/x-5826-San-Jose-Autos-Examiner~y2009m3d21-New-performance-standard-of-60mph-to-130mph-replacing-the-quartermile-drag-race

The bottom line is when the top model warrants a comparison, bring in the heavy hitters, not the price leaders. Once you have that resolved, drive 'em to their ability just like your competition and the owners themselves.

Photo: The 2010 Mustang GT at 315hp is quick, but is Car & Driver's top pick despite being the slowest, by far. http://www.desktopcar.net/ford/mustang/Ford_Mustang_2010_01.jpg.html

The Key for more viewers of SpeedTV and Koni Challenge Racing

SpeedTV televised the Koni Challenge Series at Daytona in Florida. The same reoccurring problem with racing coverage was evident for this race. However, it is even MORE essential in this series! Why? Because these cars are the closest to what is sold in the showrooms and driven on the street.

If viewers can't understand how cars can compete against one another, the interest will diminish. If SpeedTV would give a review of each car with some details and Grand-Am provided some information, the viewing audience will grow.

Racing is the most expensive sport in the world. Many can only dream to race, let alone at a professional level. Even a "track day" is about $200 plus thousands of miles taken off the life of brakes and tires. These performance cars being televised are sold based on their abilities. When obvious disparities are reduced and these various cars compete against one another head-to-head, the viewer must be informed how this is done. Not only that, many owners want to make street-legal modifications to their cars to make them closer to what is being raced. Faster is better, right?

The following cars were racing each other: Ford Mustang GT, previous generation BMW M3 with a 333hp 6-cylinder engine, current generation M3 with a 414hp 8-cylinder, a Dodge Challenger SRT-8 with 425hp but a very heavy, large car; Porsche 997 - the quintessential race car. Unmodified, the Porsche and V8 BMW would dominate the rest, hands down. And these are just the "GS" or Grand-Sport class cars:http://grand-am.com/koni/schedule/results.cfm?eid=877

In NASA, these cars are spread over 3 to 4 classes due to how much of a difference they are in performance:
http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/Performance-Touring-rules.pdf

While the names of the drivers and teams is good information that must be provided, it is equally or more important for the masses to understand what makes this racing possible.