It's Official. Skyline GT-R coming to U.S. in late 2007.

shack

Sami wrote:

Well, not much more. HP, brakes and wheels. No IRS? No suspension modifications? Much more weight!

What Jeremy wrote in the article would still hold truth to this Shelby Cobra. It's meant for a straight line.

Don't forget the six speed tranny plus roll bar and spring changes. Close to 200 MORE hp, better tanny, better brakes, better suspension, better looks for $15,000. Sounds like a bargain to me!

Typical Euro snobbery.....There has NEVER been a car made in the US that any of the auto press on that side of the Atlantic will ever speak highly of...including the Viper or Vette....

And he is so fond of the GTI...well, I've had both a GTI (and a GLI) and a Mustang LX 5.0 (Lighter than a GT) and while I really like the VWs for what they were...I will take a Mustang anytime.

jdhdiggs

Sami wrote:

Well, not much more. HP, brakes and wheels. No IRS? No suspension modifications? Much more weight!

What Jeremy wrote in the article would still hold truth to this Shelby Cobra. It's meant for a straight line.

Straight line is all most Americans give a rip about. A buddy of mine raced a super modded mustang (700+ HP at the wheels) in his '72 911 race car at around 165 HP at a track outside of Dallas.

Let's just say the mustang driver is now re-doing his suspension, wheels, and braking systems.

shack

jdhdiggs wrote:

Straight line is all most Americans give a rip about. A buddy of mine raced a super modded mustang (700+ HP at the wheels) in his '72 911 race car at around 165 HP at a track outside of Dallas.

Let's just say the mustang driver is now re-doing his suspension, wheels, and braking systems.

Apples and oranges. Ford had a couple of pretty nice race cars around that time (late 60s early 70s) that were somewhat successful :rolleyes: ...GT40 and the Daytona Cobra coupe. As I recall they did pretty well against the Porsches and Ferraris of the day
...

jdhdiggs

I don't get your point?

My point was that a 2002 Mustang with a tricked out engine, tranny, and rear end can't hang with a stripped down 911 that is still street legal (by rules) and only putting out a quarter of the horses (Granted it probably weighs half of the mustang). That the person built a car witout consideration for the handling shows a lot about the drag / straight line culture in America. A lot more people know the HP and 0-60 times than the 60-0 or size of the rubber patch on a car. HP and acceleration are not king without the rest of the pieces.

shack

My point is there are a lot of great handling American road course cars that have been built in the past and can be built now. Mustangs do quite well in several of the SCCA classes. There are many experienced road race drivers in the US that know EXACTLY the 0-60 times and tire patch size as well as the skid pad ratings (and exactly what they mean). Is drag racing big in the US. Of course...it originated here. But there were American road races before there were drag races. I've been to Road Atlanta more than Atlanta Dragway or Atlanta Motor Speedway. I have seen some race prepped Mustangs hold their own against the much more expensive and exotic 911s. The Shelby that I pictured above lineage is from a PURE ROAD RACING heritage. The original AC Cobras and Shelby GT350 were created to road race. I get tired of hearing how American's don't know anything about road racing or build road race cars.... Especially when it comes to Shelbys! Sort of like the article in the London Times.

End of rant

shack

The first racing I ever really watched was not NHRA or NASCAR even though I don't live too far from Bristol Motor Speedway and "Thunder Valley" (the drag strip at Bristol). I grew up a Trans-Am and Can-Am fan. As a huge Mustang fan in the late 60s I didn't want a 68 428 Cobra Jet or a 69 Boss 429 Mustang. I wanted a Boss 302 (and still do) with it's road race background.

ND13

Finally, someone mentions the Boss 302 :rolleyes:

audiobliss

Awww, forget that!!!!

What you need is a.....

Jstas

jdhdiggs wrote:

Sorry John, that is funny!

It's diassappointing really. I saw the episode of Top Gear where the reviewed the Lightning. All the stuff he was complaining about is non-existent in the U.S. market versions. It seemed that most of his grips were due to the right-hand drive conversion being so crappy. The loose steering, the ill-fitting dash components, the interior materials and so on. None of it resembled anything in my truck or any other Lightning I've seen. Also, he mentioned that it doesn't handle so well but then again, it is a truck, not a sports car. For a truck, it handles incredibly well. For a car it is average at best. They also aren't used to having such a large vehicle over there. It's just over 17 feet long and it's over 6.5 feet wide and doesn't fit well on small British roads. He complained about the turning radius too but when you have a wheelbase that is longer than most small cars in Europe, it's not going to be able to turn as tightly as one who is used to thoe kinds of cars would think.

Needless to say, from what I saw, the Lightning they got over there and the Lightning I have here are very different and it's dissappointing. They are mising out on one hell of ride! I drive mine everyday and have almost 60K on it. I have no rattles that my stereo hasn't induced itself, fit and finish was and still is top notch and it is comfortable and easy to live with everyday. It will accelerate and handle like a Mustang or Camaro but it will still haul a load of plywood or tow a boat like any other truck out there. It's teh best of both worlds IMO and works well for me. I really don't care what some guy in England has to say about it. It was interesting to see his review though. I always wondered what he'd thought of it. Then again, the guys on Fith Gear are much less critical and more accepting of American vehicles and they absolutly loved the Lightning for what it is, a hot rod truck and didn't down it for what it isn't, a sports car.

audiobliss

Jstas wrote:

I really don't care what some guy in England has to say about it. It was interesting to see his review though. I always wondered what he'd thought of it.

Isn't that kinda contradictory? lol

I know what ya mean...just read funny...

Jstas

shack wrote:

I get tired of hearing how American's don't know anything about road racing or build road race cars....

Well, honestly, the Shelby cars, aside from the Mustang, were built on British chassis. The Shelby Cobra was an AC Ace body/chassis with a 289 HiPo under the hood. It later came with bigger engines but it was a huge success with even the lowly 289. That wasn't really an all American car. The electronics and drivetrain were American 'cause England seemingly couldn't figure out how to build a reliable electrical system until some time in the 90's when most of thier marques were bought by American companies.

The Ford GT40 was a Lola GT body/chassis. Again though, same formula. Small, nimble British car with a big lump of American iron under the hood. The GT40 didn't have a Ford tuned and built engine though. It had a rocket built by Holman-Moody who were chosen because they were one of the factory backed drag teams running the Ford Thunderbolts with the ground-pouding 427 under the hood.

Both cars trounced Ferrari easily but they were not completley American.

However, you have cars like the Panoz racers. They are all american and they went and dominated Le Mans racing for 2 or 3 years in the 90's until everyone else finally caught up.

The real problem with alot of tehse reviews is that these guys are testing cars built for regular roads on race tracks and expecting race car performance out of everyday cars.

A Mustang is not meant to be tearing up the track at Laguna Seca. It can but it needs some work done. A Mustang is meant to be sporty transportation that has style, class and power. You can easily take it drag racing or autocrossing but if you want to do anything more, you need to change some parts. The beauty of it is though is the fact that it is cheap. The car itself is inexpensive but so are the go-fast goodies. Hell, I can still take about 3500-5000 bucks and buy and build a mid 90's Ford Mustang to blow the doors off of anything on the road today in any respect. That is the idea of the Mustang. It may not be a huge performer out of the box but for the guy who wants something solid to work with, the Mustang has it. Especially with its new chassis. The hot rod versions like the Cobra and the GT500 are meant for collectors or for enthusiats who are more interested in driving and not wrenching.

Jstas

audiobliss wrote:

Isn't that kinda contradictory? lol

I know what ya mean...just read funny...

I can objectivly read his review with interest and still not care if he likes it or hates it. It obviously hasn't swayed my opinion. I mean, afterall, it may be rubbish to him but I still get to drive a Lightning to work every day!

Jstas

Sami wrote:

Well, not much more. HP, brakes and wheels. No IRS? No suspension modifications? Much more weight!

What Jeremy wrote in the article would still hold truth to this Shelby Cobra. It's meant for a straight line.

Nope, they full expect to go racing with it. It's not what you think it is.

I also think it's funny that you believe that IRS is a requirement for good handling. A solid rear axle car can be made to handle just as well as an IRS. About the only benefit an IRS has over a solid axle is that it can take bumps in a turn better because the wheels are less likely to affect each other. On a race track, which is relativly smooth and devoid of any serious imperfections that could unsettle a car to the point of losing control, the difference between an IRS and a solid rear axle are negligible. Ask any SCCA racer who runs in the open classes on the tracks which is better and I can promise you that it will be an 50/50 divide.

Sure, the live axle setup is much better suited to drag racing than IRS. Does that mean it is terrible for road racing? Well, I guess one should go and look at the records at what cars have been the most successful in SCCA for the past 15-20 years. You'll be surprised how many live axle equipped cars are on the list. You'll also want to comapre lap times for each race course. You'll be surprised at how fast those "ox cart" live axle equipped cars can run.

You guys should follow Noel's advice. He's correct. Blind brand allegiance and unreasonable and unsubstantiated hatred for a brand or entire country worth of vehicles gets you no where and only serves to artificially limit your realm of experience. If you are happy living life with the blinders on the go ahead and have fun. You are missing out on a world of experience.

Sami

Jstas wrote:

I can objectivly read his review with interest and still not care if he likes it or hates it. It obviously hasn't swayed my opinion. I mean, afterall, it may be rubbish to him but I still get to drive a Lightning to work every day!

It's the different mentality he is after in his article. On the other you have the pickup truck that has power underneath the hood but isn't much fun on the twisted roads, on the other you have a well handling nimble car that doesn't necessarily have all the hp in the world. For some the hp is the fun factor, for others it's the ability to take on twisty roads. We all know which one is more American and which is European. We also know which one the Mustang is.

And of course all his "criticism" shouldn't be taken seriously (he's Jeremy Clarkson for crying out loud ) but his prologues are fun to read.

SCCA. Sports Car Club of America, right? Are they a FIA organization? I'm sure there is competetive racing going on there but I think you should some other more known racing series in your example.

PolkThug

IRS didn't help the BMW's and Porsche's in this race, the #05 Stang took 1st and #55 Stang took 3rd.
http://www.grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=4475
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/05/05/Mosport-3.jpg
http://bradbarnett.net/mustangs/timeline/05/05/Mosport-3.jpg

Debut at Daytona, Stangs take 1st and 2nd:
http://www.grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=3626

2nd Place at Watkins Glen, beat every Porsche but lost to an M3:
http://www.grandamerican.com/Events/SessionResults.asp?SessionID=515

1st at Laguna Seca, Mustangs take three out of top four spots:
http://www.grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=4220

1st at Fontana
http://www.grandamerican.com/News/Article.asp?ID=3626

shack

SCCA. Sports Car Club of America, right?

yes

Are they a FIA organization?

THANK GOD NO!

I'm sure there is competetive racing going on there but I think you should some other more known racing series in your example.

The LARGEST active membership participation organization in motorsports today (60,000+ members), with over 2,000 amateur and professional motor sports events each year.

How much more KNOWN do you want?

Jstas

Sami wrote:

SCCA. Sports Car Club of America, right? Are they a FIA organization? I'm sure there is competetive racing going on there but I think you should some other more known racing series in your example.

Dude, you're kidding, right? SCCA, also know as Sports Car racing. Trans Am series? Speedvision Cup? SCCA Pro-Rally? Does any of that ring a bell? Probably not. The SCCA, with all of it's infighting and flaws, is still a world-reknowned racing sanctioning body, not just a group of guys going club racing. The SCCA is widely known and respected across the world and many organizations, including FIA, will activly recruit drivers for touring car championships, rally car championships and even the bush leagues of F1 from SCCA. They have tremendous levels of support and backing from businesses and organizations all over the country. Hell, Dodge was making ACR versions of the Neon and the Viper just for club racing classes in organizations like SCCA.

It's well known.

shack

SCCA Trans Am series. I've been following it since 1968. I knew who Jack Roush was long before he ever fielded his first NASCAR effort with Mark Martin because he dominated the Trans Am series for years beginning in the mid 80s.

SCCA World Challenge Series is pretty well KNOWN. Factory sponsorship from Porsche, Accura, BMW, Mazda, Ford, GM, Dailmer. GT class is good racing.

Not well known enough....how about IMSA. you know...American LeMans Series, GT3...(The old IMSA GTP class was way better than the FIA Group C series in Europe).

Of course there is Sebring, Daytona and so forth...

My point in all this is that Ford/Mustang has been a part in many of these road racing series in the US and has done well. A showroom stock Porsche may be a much better race car than a stock Mustang....IT SHOULD BE. Let a knowlegeable builder/racer have $50,000-$100,000 to equal the playing field a little....and we'll go racing with the Germans...

and BTW....I don't care if he's Jeremy Clarkson or Kelly Clarkson...he's full of it...IMO of course.

PolkThug

shack wrote:

My point in all this is that Ford/Mustang has been a part in many of these road racing series in the US and has done well. A showroom stock Porsche may be a much better race car than a stock Mustang....IT SHOULD BE. Let a knowlegeable builder/racer have $50,000-$100,000 to equal the playing field a little....and we'll go racing with the Germans...

Here's a German fighter for ya!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Ford-Mustang-Grand-Am-Cup-2005-Ford-MUSTANG-GT-Race-Car-Like-FR500C-GAC_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6236QQitemZ4584450004QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

shack

PolkThug wrote:

Here's a German fighter for ya!

And another one. Here is what Ford may be building to sell to the guys/gals that want to turn left and right when they race...the GTR...I actually saw the prototype at the Atlanta Auto show last spring.







And the specs.....

Body
Lightweight RPS body panels with carbon fiber hood, aero devices, instrument panel, interior door panels and floor heal pads

Engine
Ford Racing 5.0L "Cammer" V8
Configuration: V-8, aluminum block, aluminum four-valve cylinder heads, forged aluminum pistons
Bore x Stroke: 94 mm bore x 90.0 mm stroke
Displacement: 5.0 liters (302 cu in/4995 cc)
Compression ratio: 11.0:1
Horsepower: 440 @ 7000 rpm
Torque 400 lb-ft @ 5500 rpm
Redline: 7,000 rpm

Valvetrain:
Double overhead camshafts, four valves per cylinder
Intake valves: Two per cylinder, 38 mm
Exhaust valves: Two per cylinder, 32 mm
Throttle body:Twin 57 mm

Drivetrain
Transmission: Ford Racing/Tremec T-56 6-speed
Rear axle: Winters/Ford 9-inch design
Gear ratios:
1st : 2.97
2nd : 2.07
3rd : 1.43
4th : 1.00
5th : .80
6th : .62
Final drive : 4.56:1

Differential: Winter's race-spec rear differential
Clutch: Ford Racing "Cobra R" heavy-duty clutch/flywheel assembly
Driveshaft: Metal matrix composite aluminum custom driveshaft
Exhaust: Complete stainless steel race exhaust with Tri-Y design headers, crossover and side exit tips

Chassis and Suspension
Chassis: Fully reinforced fabrication
Suspension: Original production geometry with lightweight chrome-moly tube (aircraft quality) construction
Front: Reverse-L independent rigid strut tower brace with lightweight chrome-moly K-member and race-spec anti-sway bar with 1.25-inch box section
Rear: Three-link, solid axle with dynamic, fully adjustable shocks with remote reservoirs and coil-over springs, race-spec 1.25-inch panhard rod, and race-spec anti-sway bar

Brakes
Front: Brembo Racing 6-piston calipers and 14.3-inch rotors, 1.25-inch thickness
Rear: Brembo Racing 4-piston calipers and 13-inch rotors, 1.25-inch thickness

Wheels & Tires
Front: Pirelli P275/35/20 racing slicks
20 x 10-inch, 5-spoke billet aluminum wheels
Rear:
Pirelli P315/30/20 racing slicks
20 x 11-inch, 5-spoke billet aluminum wheels

aaharvel

shack wrote:

Typical Euro snobbery.....There has NEVER been a car made in the US that any of the auto press on that side of the Atlantic will ever speak highly of...including the Viper or Vette....

not for long. Z06 is going into competition mode very soon.

For $65,000 there's not a better car on the planet than the Z06, and I HATE American cars with a passion.

$45,000 for a mustang with a TON of horsepower but NO independent suspension? Pass. It's nice, but for the same amount of money i'll be able to come within $6k shy of a 2006 BMW m3 v8.

aaharvel

shack wrote:

Typical Euro snobbery.....There has NEVER been a car made in the US that any of the auto press on that side of the Atlantic will ever speak highly of...including the Viper or Vette....

not for long. Z06 is going into competition mode very soon.

For $65,000 there's not a better car on the planet than the Z06, and I HATE American cars with a passion.

$45,000 for a mustang with a TON of horsepower but NO independent suspension? Pass. It's nice, but for the same amount of money i'll be able to get a 2007 BMW m3 v8. 4.0 V8, 400hp.

Jstas

Wow! He hates it all so much he had to post it twice!

aaharvel

****. my apologies. Stupid double post. :rolleyes:

shack

aaharvel wrote:

$45,000 for a mustang with a TON of horsepower but NO independent suspension? Pass.

Maybe so...but Ford listened to the target market for the Mustang ....

Working on a clean sheet of paper, Mustang's engineering team could have selected any type of setup at the rear, including an independent suspension. So why choose a solid rear axle? The answer lies in Mustang's position as America's muscle car.

"We talked to a lot of Mustang owners and racers when we were developing this program," says Thai-Tang. "They are a very passionate group, and a lot of them told us - very strongly - that the all-new Mustang must have a solid rear axle because of its combination of performance and modification flexibility."

The new-from-the-ground-up chassis and careful attention to vehicle dynamics give the all-new Mustang world-class ride and handling. With this ultra-rigid structure, Mustang engineers could tune spring, damping and bushing rates to a finer degree than ever possible.

audiobliss

The GTR is pretty awesome. I remember reading about it in Motor Trend or Car and Driver, and they were impressed with it. Another article also focused on Thai-Tang a good bit and, while I was initially dissappointed that the development of a car with roots purely American and deep into the muscle car era, what I read about him, and his attitude, was impressive.

All-in-all, despite my want to dislike the new Mustange because 1) they could have made the design (cosmetically) a lot better, 2) it's got too much horsepower to be that cheap!, and 3) (see number 2) it's pretty stiff competition for the base C6. However, I'll admit the new Mustang looks pretty good, seems to perform very well all the way around, and I wouldn't mind owning one one day.

audiobliss

Let's see just how many times I can revive this....

The 1969 Camaro RULES!!!

:D

ND13

Sure, if one could only find one that didn't have rust holes the size of the Holland Tunnel in the rear quarters and floorpans :eek:

PolkThug

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=8052

aaharvel

~lol