Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
2020 GT500 top speed limited...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tob" data-source="post: 16155310" data-attributes="member: 83412"><p>Nobody likes being lied to. In the case of the self-imposed top speed, Ford floating the concept of equalizing the three GT500 iterations (Base, Handling Pack, CF Track Package) bothers me the most.</p><p></p><p>I can understand doing it from a cost perspective. In theory, the across the GT500 board limitation should have simplified development in<em> this </em>regard. There are a number of both direct and indirect variables that different speeds would have impacted and by reducing those variables Ford could better control testing (and ultimately production) outcomes that should help to meet budgetary constraints or mandates.</p><p></p><p>What would rub me the wrong way if any part of the argument had to do with buyer satisfaction. In other words, did Ford not want to upset the CF Track Package owner because a Base owner blew past him in Mexico? Better put...did Ford not want negative media attention in this regard, therefore a preemptive strike in the form of uniform emasculation was executed?</p><p></p><p>Decklid deflection can be dealt with so I give zero credence to that argument.</p><p></p><p>There may indeed be an issue with the volume of air entering the large grille openings at speed in terms of how well it is evacuated at speed. Hear me out - Ford patented numerous system and control designs that would limit the speed of this car if the rain tray was still in place and reduced airflow through the large hood opening. I wondered why Ford was patenting this a few months ago and hearing of a top speed limitation now it definitely falls in line.</p><p></p><p>I give zero support to any tire argument regarding this limitation.</p><p></p><p>Could there be a potential issue with the engine at those speeds? We'd all like to believe there couldn't be but I can't help but wonder how this engine would perform, durability-wise, when stressed for long stretches at the level necessary to maintain 200+mph speeds...</p><p></p><p>And was there any pressure from the legal department to put a cap on this car for whatever reason? I'm certain Ford wouldn't want to admit that and we certainly don't want to learn of that being behind it.</p><p></p><p>Thankfully, the Mustang community eventually learns most anything, eventually. We'll find out <em>the why </em>in due time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tob, post: 16155310, member: 83412"] Nobody likes being lied to. In the case of the self-imposed top speed, Ford floating the concept of equalizing the three GT500 iterations (Base, Handling Pack, CF Track Package) bothers me the most. I can understand doing it from a cost perspective. In theory, the across the GT500 board limitation should have simplified development in[i] this [/i]regard. There are a number of both direct and indirect variables that different speeds would have impacted and by reducing those variables Ford could better control testing (and ultimately production) outcomes that should help to meet budgetary constraints or mandates. What would rub me the wrong way if any part of the argument had to do with buyer satisfaction. In other words, did Ford not want to upset the CF Track Package owner because a Base owner blew past him in Mexico? Better put...did Ford not want negative media attention in this regard, therefore a preemptive strike in the form of uniform emasculation was executed? Decklid deflection can be dealt with so I give zero credence to that argument. There may indeed be an issue with the volume of air entering the large grille openings at speed in terms of how well it is evacuated at speed. Hear me out - Ford patented numerous system and control designs that would limit the speed of this car if the rain tray was still in place and reduced airflow through the large hood opening. I wondered why Ford was patenting this a few months ago and hearing of a top speed limitation now it definitely falls in line. I give zero support to any tire argument regarding this limitation. Could there be a potential issue with the engine at those speeds? We'd all like to believe there couldn't be but I can't help but wonder how this engine would perform, durability-wise, when stressed for long stretches at the level necessary to maintain 200+mph speeds... And was there any pressure from the legal department to put a cap on this car for whatever reason? I'm certain Ford wouldn't want to admit that and we certainly don't want to learn of that being behind it. Thankfully, the Mustang community eventually learns most anything, eventually. We'll find out [i]the why [/i]in due time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
2020 GT500 top speed limited...
Top