Talk:Shelby Mustang

message: Just to comment, those quarter mile times by the majors are pathetic. I watched a GT500 go down a crappy track yesterday and do a 13.5 on the guy's first DRAG RUN IN HIS LIFE EVER. He hasn't even driven a stick in 7 years! How Motor Trend can only get a 13.1 with that car is beyond me. They suck, I could do a flat 13 in that car no problem, and I'm pretty inexperienced. Somebody with skills (i.e. a driver from an actual drag racing magazine, or team) could get that car into the low 12s no problem a la Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords, with their 12.2s run. 70.29.190.17 17:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quarter mile times by Major magazines

message: I removed the following paragraph due to several untrue statements:
:"The heavy iron block V8, with supercharger and water-to-air intercooler, shift the weight bias further forward than the standard Mustang GT (57/43%; front/rear), but the car is said to handle predictably and ride comfortably. According to Car & Driver, the Corvette was deemed to be a better performance vehicle based on the tests performed, but found the Shelby to be more practical, and to offer a more comfortable ride, and stated that the Shelby offered the "best [overall] bang for the buck around." One of the considerations for the for Car & Drivers statement was based on the top end speed test conducted at the same time. The Shelby attained 155 mph (Electronically limited) while the Corvette reached 186 mph."
Besides the fact that none of this has been properly cited (please use Template:Cite journal to do so), a very recent Car and Driver article (January 2007) has stated facts that disagree with many of these numbers. I have made sure to place a proper magazine citation in the article as a real resource. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 19:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've restored the paragraph and cited the Car and Driver article. TomTheHand 19:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've also replaced top speed data from July 06 from an early production GT500 with newer data from January 07 from a full production GT500. Roguegeek (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Performance facts

message: The sentence: "The GT500 is the best bang for your buck around, but for pure performance at the price, there’s a better alternative" seems very non-sensical to me.  How can the shelby be the "best bang for the buck" but for the price there are better alternatives. ??????  This needs to either be deleted or changed around. I would normally do the edit but for the life of me I really don't understand what the intent of the sentence was.  Any help?? FrankWilliams 13:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed Sentence

message: I totally revamped the section of the article regarding the 2007 Ford Shelby GT500 by adding the car's specifications and performance figures. I hope this can resolve the dispute over its capabilities. I also added a section regarding Carroll Shelby's collaboration with Unique Performance on the GT500E.
* Anonymous User, 23:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Contributions

message: Here, it states that Bill Cosby's album, 200 mph, talks about Cos getting a Shelby Mustang.  The monologue is actually about his getting a Shelby COBRA "...with dual pipes, dual rollbars, dual....everything." LiveOnAPlane 00:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this article it's a 2007 model (see the image caption on the side).~ Dusk Knight 21:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mistake in Popular Culture Section

message: How can you claim that the GT500KR supersnake is faster than the viper when it has not been built yet.  The line reads, "and a 0-60 time of under 4 seconds, faster than the Dodge Viper. " Whereas the current Dodge Viper HAS a sub- 4 second 0-60 time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.39.36.205 (talk) 19:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Gt500KR supersnake

message: Did 1967 Shelby Mustangs not exist? It just goes from 66 to 68... Zchris87v 00:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, someone vandalized the page, and it looks like someone else removed that vandalism (along with the entire section) and never bothered to restore it. I just put it back how it was, I did NOT add in a copyvio image, as I simply restored the page as to how it was BEFORE someone vandalized it. 00:05, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

text: 97.81.78.5 has twice added a 1967 section to this article, and, along with a request to upload a Shelby Mustang collage, these are his only contributions.  I think he seems to be knowledgeable about the Shelby Mustang but the edits he has made are so blatantly POV that I see no option instead of reverting them.  According to the edit history as far as I can tell, there has not been a 1967 section.  If anyone, including the aforementioned anon, will write up a 1967 section which is to some degree palatable, then that would certainly improve the article. Chaparral2J (talk) 00:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 1967

message: Hi, everyone. I am an international student from USC. I am doing a school project for the WIKIPEDIA and I chose the section "Shelby GT350" to be my project since I have been a fan of Shelby since long time ago. Anyway, I updated and add third paragraph under the "Shelby GT350" last week. The paragraph was going to be the Shelby GT350 road test based on the Motor Trend, but someone just removed the paragraph after two days. However, I am international and I am new for WIKIPEDIA. I am here to ask everyone's help. I am going to add the paragraph back again, and if you have any suggestions or improvement you went me to make; just let me know instead of remove the paragraph.  Thank You. MVD (talk) 22:05, 1 May, 2011.  —Preceding undated comment added 02:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The wording of the paragraph may be edited to use more encyclopedic language and for other reasons, just like any other Wikipedia article.  If you would prefer that people not edit your work, you may want to practice using the WP:SANDBOX in Wikipedia.  Alanraywiki (talk) 03:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: School Project

message: According to Ford's website, the proper is listed, I do not know how reliable the $250,000 quote is.  A 1967 Shelby Cobra GT500 fully restored costs less according to ebay sales.  Unlikely that it costs more for a new than Eleanore. thegreatco (talk) 03:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Price quote for the KR

message: Caution should be exercised when posting photos of vehicles where the license plate (vehicle's registration tag) is visible.  If the vehicle is owned by a rental agency, permission may be needed by that agency.  If privately owned, the plate may be subjected to criminal abuse.  It would be advisable to have the plate "blurred" or covered up, or to even take the photo without the plate visible. MVD (talk) 11:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo Advisory

message: I just uploaded this file. It's my own work. If anyone wants to use it in the article, go ahead. I don't know what is the year. It's looks like it could be any year from 2006 and later, I guess. I'm not too good at this, lol. --Chewsteraghi (talk) 15:05, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:File:Photo072309001fordshel_bygt.jpg]]

message: The GT500 engines are Ford Modular engines. The engine design is created by Ford and the design is their intellectual property. 
Ford chose Honsel to cast the blocks but Ford is still the owner of the Modular design. The GT500 Modular engine is designed by Ford engineers, and that is what designates the GT500 block as a Ford Modular. Who they hire to cast the blocks does not change the GT500 engine is a Ford engine.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.147.252 (talk) 04:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALL GT500 engines made in 2000 ARE Modular FORDS 

message: Your souce link does not say anything about the GT500 engine displacement being 11.6L just because of the supercharger. 
According to the link to House of Power.com, they only said superchargers can make a smaller engine make the power of a larger engine. It never said it makes the smaller engine grown into a larger engine. 
I never said it did, & you have no link saying i said it did. your link doesn't prove smurf's exist so I must be right.
"It never said it makes the smaller engine grown into a larger engine." ACTUALLY IT DID!!!!! You can't makes over 600hp at 6000rpm with only 5.8L of air & gasoline displaced per 2 revs, there is only so much energy in gasoline, superchargers don't make gasoline a more potent fuel. 5.8L GT500 engine will need approximately 200% volumetric efficiency to make 662hp. oops see how that works. this information has been blocked from being edited by Ford fans before. make sure to use tilde(~) 4 times to sign your posts. also read and learn, this car and it's setup is perfect to learn and comprehend superchargers and how they make power, don't let it go to waste because of brand loyalty.
XXXVaporXXX (talk) 06:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  GT500 engine displacement 

message: This article has been protected from editing for three days to try to generate talk page discussion of the disputed content. Please follow the WP:BRD guideline. You may also wish to consider dispute resolution (WP:DR). Mark Arsten (talk) 16:29, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article protected 

message: My uncle's brother tested this car in Germany (at the Nordschleife), and it completed in under 7:20.000. Guess what? It completed in just 7:13.547 (100% stock)!
BTW, it was tested in normal condition and by a professional driver. :D
Source: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131009204827AA9GHqb
Mrtacos2 (talk) 18:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nordschleife 

message: The usage of  is under discussion, see Talk:Mustang horse -- 65.94.78.70 (talk) 09:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: "{{noredirect|Mustang}}"

message: I was just wondering why the 1973 Mach 1 "Eleanor" Mustang from the original "Gone In Sixty Seconds" is included on this page.  It was not produced by Shelby and is not a Shelby Mustang.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.26.220.32 (talk) 03:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  73 "Eleanor" Mustang is NOT a Shelby Mustang - Why is it on this page? 

message: IS there a race in the world that lasts 5 minutes, and everyone goes home. 
how about we start using lap times where you pack ice under your hood. 
if the lap can't be repeated, then it shouldn't count. 
if i am not mistaken, the tracks GT500 ran on went in a circle cause you are supposed to continue racing. 
If a drag car could do it fast, but the brakes stop working and the filled block overheats before you coast across finish line, should it still count. 
if you have an opinion on this, also include whether you think Ford is the best brand in the world, AKA a Big. Fan.XXXVaporXXX (talk) 07:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lap times after coolant is warm 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mustang (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Dicklyon (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: The authentic 1967 GT500 Super Snake sold in January of 2019 at Mecum Auctions for 2.2 million dollars Conan312 (talk) 08:47, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Snake auction 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:11, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion