GT500 compared to Corvette C6
06-01-2006, 07:30 PM
#11
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 448
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
ORIGINAL: tdappleman
Actually it wasn't a Z06 - it was a normal C6 with the Z51 option (plus a few other non-performance options). The Mustang was rated lower for heavy curb weight, bad understeer due to all of the weight in the nose and "boy-racer stripes". The GT500 is 175lbs heavier up front than a GT and 321lbs more total than a GT - and 616lbs heavier than a C6. They said the last SVT only cost $35k and was just as quick. I think I agree with a lot of what they say since a lot of folks on this forum are exceeding the GT500 performance numbers for a lot less money. It does have a programmable shift lift with an audible chirp as well. I guess it doesn't get you the Shelby name, but I'm not sure I care....
Their performance tests led to the following:
GT500 - C6
0-60 - 4.5 - 4.3
0-100 - 10.3 - 9.9
1/4 - 12.8 @113 - 12.9@112
70-0 - 161ft - 172ft
120-0 - 462ft - 485ft
Actually it wasn't a Z06 - it was a normal C6 with the Z51 option (plus a few other non-performance options). The Mustang was rated lower for heavy curb weight, bad understeer due to all of the weight in the nose and "boy-racer stripes". The GT500 is 175lbs heavier up front than a GT and 321lbs more total than a GT - and 616lbs heavier than a C6. They said the last SVT only cost $35k and was just as quick. I think I agree with a lot of what they say since a lot of folks on this forum are exceeding the GT500 performance numbers for a lot less money. It does have a programmable shift lift with an audible chirp as well. I guess it doesn't get you the Shelby name, but I'm not sure I care....
Their performance tests led to the following:
GT500 - C6
0-60 - 4.5 - 4.3
0-100 - 10.3 - 9.9
1/4 - 12.8 @113 - 12.9@112
70-0 - 161ft - 172ft
120-0 - 462ft - 485ft
06-01-2006, 08:01 PM
#12
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Small walk way by big walk way
Posts: 4,717
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
I agree with Philostang that grill looks like a pumped up bass. The corvette they are comparing to has 400 horsepower? Well I guess the Ford didn't measure up. But who is to say that Car and Driver isn't kissing up to the Chevy? Besides it's a Chevy. I wouldn't drive a chevy regardless.
06-01-2006, 08:35 PM
#13
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location:
Posts: 1,313
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
I agree on the looks as well. The interior looks plain jane compared to my GT. Front is just OK but looking at pictures of both side by side the GT wins over the gt500 hands down. They took an already large appearing car and make the front taller and even larger appearing.
On another note, my copy of road and track just arrived today. They werent blown away either with their testing.
0-60 4.7sec
1/4 mile 13.1 sec
skidpad 0.87g
slalom 65.3mph.
I mean come on, while I am sure the GT500 left some performance on the table, a lightly modified GT with a tune and intake can turn those numbers or darn close to it.
And the slalom and skidpad numbers are worse than some magazines got with a normal GT with 17" wheels and the stock pirellis. Judging by this, I would say the GT given the same rolling stock is the better handling car of the two.
The 6 speed is sweet, but if it adds a ton of weight, any minor performance gains get cancelled out and we end up back at square one.
On another note, my copy of road and track just arrived today. They werent blown away either with their testing.
0-60 4.7sec
1/4 mile 13.1 sec
skidpad 0.87g
slalom 65.3mph.
I mean come on, while I am sure the GT500 left some performance on the table, a lightly modified GT with a tune and intake can turn those numbers or darn close to it.
And the slalom and skidpad numbers are worse than some magazines got with a normal GT with 17" wheels and the stock pirellis. Judging by this, I would say the GT given the same rolling stock is the better handling car of the two.
The 6 speed is sweet, but if it adds a ton of weight, any minor performance gains get cancelled out and we end up back at square one.
06-02-2006, 12:58 AM
#14
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 448
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
I'm not a Shelby GT500 fan either. A regular GT has an all aluminum block that takes to supercharging quite easily. Why go with an heavy iron block on a Shelby when you've already got a superior aluminum block in your GT?
06-02-2006, 01:57 AM
#16
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,716
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
Well, I'll be a dissenting voice here. Keep in mind the high-12's numbers on the Shelby are on a bone stock car. An intake and tune will likely get it down into the low 12's. Drag radials and it will probably be in the 11's. The car is going to be a serious performer in the right hands, don't sell it short before it's even hit the showrooms.
I suppose comparisons to the Vette are inevitable, but they are really two different cars. The Vette has more of a sports car slant while the Shelby is all muscle car. True to it's heritage, it is heavy and probably doesn't handle that great. But was the Boss 429 anyone's favorite autocrosser? Or any of the 428 Shelby and Mustang offerings? I think not!
Yet those machines are LEGENDS. The Shelby is a bad-boy go-fast muscle machine, don't hate it because it doesn't handle like a Vette or have the price of a Civic 
Ask yourself which car you'd be more likely to check out on the freeway or in a parking lot, a Vette or a Shelby? There are so many Vettes out there they don't garner much more attention than a phone pole. But the Shelby, THAT is a car people are going to notice. They'll be telling their wives, coworkers & friends about seeing it hours or even days later!
I suppose comparisons to the Vette are inevitable, but they are really two different cars. The Vette has more of a sports car slant while the Shelby is all muscle car. True to it's heritage, it is heavy and probably doesn't handle that great. But was the Boss 429 anyone's favorite autocrosser? Or any of the 428 Shelby and Mustang offerings? I think not!
Yet those machines are LEGENDS. The Shelby is a bad-boy go-fast muscle machine, don't hate it because it doesn't handle like a Vette or have the price of a Civic Ask yourself which car you'd be more likely to check out on the freeway or in a parking lot, a Vette or a Shelby? There are so many Vettes out there they don't garner much more attention than a phone pole. But the Shelby, THAT is a car people are going to notice. They'll be telling their wives, coworkers & friends about seeing it hours or even days later!
06-02-2006, 05:07 AM
#19
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 763
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
If I started with the Shelby I would be adding what ever they come out with over the next years to be faster than a stock one, just like my GT is already able to beat the one I bought. Your getting a higher platform.
Our Mustangs to me are a lot better looking than a Vette.
Our Mustangs to me are a lot better looking than a Vette.
06-02-2006, 05:27 AM
#20
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1
RE: GT500 compared to Corvette C6
I would have thought with something that carries the name Shelby that they would have went with an aluminum block to reduce weight. They sould have put the Ford GT motor in there. I am thinking of getting a GT Coupe and I could just make my own shelby with the after market body parts available. Like the hood that has a scoop similar to the 67 shelby hood and the upper and lower side scoops.