View Full Version : New Shelby Cobra unveiled

03/23/2005, 07:11 AM
:)CNN has a story under business news about the new Ford Shelby Cobra GT 500. The 450 hp 6 speed is the most powerful Mustang yet. The concept car was unveiled at the New York Auto Show. It was a collaboration between Carroll Shelby and Ford. Its been 35 years since Shelby and Ford collaborated on something. From the pictures they show of it, I can only imagine that the design of the new California Special will be pretty close to this. Especially the tail section. I would `nt mind having one of these although I still like the design of the 67 and 68 Shelby`s better. Rhonda

03/23/2005, 07:58 AM
I would have thought they would of done a little more for the side scoops then what it currently shows. Not really a lot of change from the 05 in regards to make it really distinctive other than the shelby lettering on the back. Hopefully they will make a few more changes before actual production to make it distinctive as a shelby. Just my thoughts.

Don 8)

03/23/2005, 08:08 AM
I would have thought they would of done a little more for the side scoops then what it currently shows. Not really a lot of change from the 05 in regards to make it really distinctive other than the shelby lettering on the back. Hopefully they will make a few more changes before actual production to make it distinctive as a shelby. Just my thoughts.

Don 8)

I completely agree.

PB gtcs
03/23/2005, 08:11 AM
Love the grill, but hard to think of a Shelby w/out fog lights. Love the turnsignal hood, stripes look great, rear is ok. Agree, needs the side scoops. Pretty car.


03/23/2005, 09:03 AM

How about a little help for those who are technologically challenged? Can someone post the thread?


03/23/2005, 09:18 AM
I`m computer illiterate. So all I know is to go to and click on Business news and then the story should be there in the list. Rhonda

03/23/2005, 09:44 AM
Here are the pictures and the caption: Casey

The 450-horsepower, supercharged 5.4 liter V-8 will outperform the current SVT Cobra Mustang, which goes from 0 to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds and tops out at 155 mph, according to a spokesman for Ford.

03/23/2005, 09:45 AM
picture 2

03/23/2005, 09:45 AM
picture 3

03/23/2005, 09:46 AM
picture 4

03/23/2005, 11:05 AM
I haven't wanted to buy a new vehicle in years (except for newer trucks when I put to many miles on them) and now, I want to buy a bunch. I really need a Ford GT, Shelby GR1, the hoped for new CS, the maybe never new Boss 351 and now this! You guys are killing me.

03/24/2005, 12:08 PM
This new GT-500 is an absolute dissappointment.

It looks like they handed some designer at SVT "to come up with something", and it turned out like a plastic toy car next to the"Real" '68 GT-500.

SVT even had the gall to put their name on the valve covers--instead of "Shelby".

The real diss is the lack of unique taillights, and the "nose" looks like a sad face. No Side scoops. And the rear spolier is not very "realistic". Roush has a better rear spoliler.

Honestly, I am really unhappy with this. It looks like a "quick and dirty" attempt at doing this car. Too bad.

Paul N.

03/24/2005, 01:43 PM
I noticed the valve covers also.
It's hard to imagine a Shelby Mustang without the foglights. It would definitely make the car more appealing.
I just wonder what the spoiler and side scoops do to the car in a wind tunnel. Is it possible they opted away from these items for a purpose?
Don't get me wrong, I think they look cool too.
If they are building a top contender vehicle and these items adversely effect aerodynamics then they would leave them off.
The other styling changes or lack of them in this case I can't come up with an excuse for them. It is obvious that they didn't put too much effort into the project.

03/24/2005, 03:59 PM
I have to admit, the part that got me excited was that Corvette Killer engine. The rest really isn't that much different.

03/24/2005, 04:29 PM
Found out today that there are Fog Lights on the car. They are mounted in the bumpers at the bottom. Word also has it that SVT will team with Ford Racing Performance Parts to offer add-on items for the car.

How about we put together a list of add-on parts we would like to see for the car.

Functional side air scoops for air flow to rear brakes.
Shelby stamped valve covers (Drop the SVT crap). They already have there logo on the center cap on the wheels.


03/24/2005, 11:51 PM
When these new cars come out, everyone is expected to just fall in line and go along with whatever gets cranked out. Magazine and book writers rarely speak out, because it can get them cut out of the automotive press and corporate loop. However, sometimes, it takes that kid to point out that "The Emperor Has No Clothes".

This is one of those times.

The '65-'67 Shelbys and the Shelby Automotive/Ford cars of '68-'70 ALL had a sense of individualism. The Shelby enthusiasts have been waiting for over thirty years for a way to recapture that spirit. The early cars had "seat-of'the-pants" engineering, and race on Sunday, sell on Monday attitude. They stood out from the regular Mustangs in so many ways. Carroll had a hand in every aspect, and the engineering and styling teams worked together so well, producing cars that were greater than the sum of their parts. Shelby had created a true history for the Mustang; something that every Mustang owner could be proud of. They knew that every Shelby had a little bit of GT-40 in it. Just pick up any issue of SAAC's "Shelby American", and there is that unique Shelby mythos.

This new GT-500 may have a hot SVT engine, but it does not stand apart from it's Mustang root. There is the Shelby name, but it's tied to the SVT name; so it's really an SVT Mustang with a Shelby badge. So what? As much as I'm NOT enamoured with the Saleen cars, the new S-281 has more success as a stand-alone vehicle than the GT-500. What Shelby did in '67 and '68 was cleverly make a few fiberglas pieces that completely transformed a Mustang into a completely new car. A style that still rings strong, by the popularity of the GT-500-E, and how the '68 styling cues ended up on the 2005 overall.

As a designer myself, I find the comment "form follows function" a bit of as misnomer, since if that were truly the case, most of the historic Mustang design cues wouldn't be on the car to begin with. The '67 Shelby prototype "Little Red" had only one problem. The front of the hood made the car lift up, and limited it's speed to 140. I, actually would have preferred that Camilo Pardo had designed the Mustang, and repeated the "GT-40-to-Mustang" trickle down design thinking from 1965. He is the only designer at Ford that has the knack for translating the original Mustang design cues into a contemporary translation. The design team on the new Ford GT, and the Cobra Coupe should have been in on this Shelby GT-500 project. They had the thinking right on both cars. This car--after all the hopes and desires of Shelby Mustang enthusiasts for over 30 years--falls short. If there was a unique body design part, it COULD have been made by one of many outside OEM vendors out of carbon fiber, fiberglass, or other materials as a limited run.

The appeal of the Shelbys has always been the uniqueness of the look of the car. The Shelby team in the 60's would have found a way to make anything happen in design and/or engineering "by hook or by crook". (this car at least could have retractible shoulder harnesses mounted in the roof, just as Fred Goodell made happen from an F-4 Phanton ejector seat he saw at an L.A. airshow).

Why is there no IRS suspension? Ford touts the "solid axle" like it was something new and exciting, because marketing doesn't want anyone to ask "why not IRS"? Shelby had an IRS ready to go in '68. It was on the "Green Hornet" prototype. IRS is a Shelby type of unique item. I guess the bean counters nixed that idea. If you're going to have that kind of HP, you're going to want IRS to handle the corners. Otherwise, it's just useless as another straight-line musclecar. IRS would have truly made this an ultimate Mustang (until the next one comes out).

SVT has a formula for doing their cars. Big engine, tweak the suspension, leather interior, and name badges. Period. This is the corporate way to produce cars on budget, and let marketing (and the magazines) hype this for the consumer. The real Shelbys of the 60's were not dictated by corporate suits telling them what and what not to do. They just did it. Clever design and engineering by folks that by today's standards would be called "radicals'. In that spirit of that original Shelby team, in my opinion, this car is a failure--in that it will never recapture that spirit.

Paul M. Newitt
GT/CS Registrar, and SAAC Member.

03/25/2005, 09:43 AM
Well said Paul! Now cut and paste it in an email to Mustang Monthly so they can let you say it and not get themselves in any trouble. I agree whole heartedly, a big let down that does not set itself apart from the GT Mustang, I'd be ashamed to have my name on it if I was Carol Shelby. Man I wish I was.


03/25/2005, 09:52 AM
You sure you want to be Shelby?
I keep hearing people say he's gonna kick the bucket soon. lol

03/25/2005, 09:54 AM
I sent a copy to Donald Farr at MM already. He responded by saying that there is a lot of response already.

There are those who say that '67 was the last year of the "real" Shelbys, since they were hand built at Shelby American at the L.A. Airport ('68-'70 cars were made at A.O. Smith in Livonia, Mi.). I wonder what those same purists think about this new Shelby.

Other companies like Roush, Saleen, etc., are more "seat of the pants" type of engineering and design than SVT.

I do wonder what Carroll Shelby is thinking....and those guys in Texas that make the GT-500-E.


03/25/2005, 10:06 AM
Very well put Paul!!!!!.
I seem to remember that with the original Shelby's, Ford brought Shelby into the game to help them spruce up their toys and make Ford a winner (which by the way he did), and Ford was along for the ride. Now it seems that Shelby is along for the ride. The worm has turned.

Don :(

03/25/2005, 10:09 AM
You sure you want to be Shelby?
I keep hearing people say he's gonna kick the bucket soon. lol

Let's just say I wish I'd lived his life in the fast lane, nothing against the life I'm living but it would sure have been fun to have been Mr. Carol S.


03/25/2005, 09:00 PM
I also agree with Paul. I have been waiting since the new Mustang came out for the Shelby version. While I really like the new Mustang, I was hoping for more drama in the design of the Shelby. I guess I will wait to see it in person , but may now wait for the GTCS or maybe an HCS???

03/25/2005, 09:37 PM
With the way they've designed the new Shelby, I gringe to think what they might do to the GT/CS when they go to design it?

Don :'(

03/25/2005, 09:48 PM
Well, I read that SVT gets to do all the Mustang variants, like Mach 1, Boss, etc.

That department is driven by marketing, and not engineering or design as much, so I wouldn't hold my breath for being asked to provide ideas, history, or "input". Nah, none of that stuff. They're into selling cars.

These are the people who brought you the Harley-Davidson Pickup. Oh, joy!! Not that those are "bad" vehicles, but where is Camilo Pardo when you need him to do it right??

I think I need to e-mail him.

Paul N. ::)

03/25/2005, 10:43 PM
Dont' get me wrong, I have nothing but respect for Shelby and all his numerous accomplishments over the years, but I too am disappointed in these new cars. Back in the day, to buy a Shelby really meant something, you were buying a car designed (and built) by a racing legend, these new cars have nothing Shelby-inspired other than the name. It seems Shelby has been putting his name on just about anything he can, to make a buck, as long as it sells.
I remember when all the "Eleanor" cars came out, Shelby hated them and thought they were ripping him off, now he makes his own version. I hope this isn't the beginning of Shelby selling out to corporate America, he has developed too good of a name to be remembered with cheap knock off cars and uninspired designs.
Just my two cents.


03/26/2005, 05:32 AM
Dissapointed is an understatement of my feelings when I viewed this car. I was eagerly anticipating the arrival of the new Shelby Mustang. Not any more though. I would not buy this car for the more than certain ELEVATED price they will want for it. I too like the vette killer engine but it needs more than that to make it great like the classics. Even the 03 and 04 Cobra Mustangs had IRS and it's not on the Shelby? I can go on but why? I just won't buy one until Ford pulls their heads out! :P


P.S. Like Don said, what will they do wrong on the GT/CS version? I hate to think after seeing the Shelby. :-\

03/26/2005, 06:27 AM
If the Shelby is offered to the public as it is presently designed I wonder who will be blamed if it doesn't sell. Will it be the people at Ford who designed and marketed it or will they claim that the Shelby name just doesn't carry as much weight as it used to?

It's interesting that we keep talking about how different the old Shelby's looked from the stock Mustangs but that wasn't really the case right out of the blocks.
The original '65s looked a lot like normal Mustang fastbacks. So did the '66s. It wasn't until Ford started taking over in '67 that the look between the two really changed. The variance between Shelbys and stock Mustangs reached it peak with the '69/'70 cars, which were the worst selling years.

I have no idea what all that means as it relates to what is a true Shelby and/or what will sell but I just found it interesting. I certainly agree with the other posters that the few cheap little add-ons don't do anything for the new car, and the Ford designers can certainly do better if given the proper budget. Might as well just put a huge screaming chicken decal on the hood. Oops, sorry wrong brand.

03/26/2005, 08:23 AM
my first thought is that they will put it out in present form and then tweak it in a year or two from customer input.

Here is my input:


03/26/2005, 07:52 PM
I think that the bottom line to all of this--is that this Shelby Mustang is really just another SVT Mustang, like the Cobra they've been making for the past few years.

They need to put an IRS into this car, because Carroll Shelby always built "world class" cars, like the Cobra 427 and Ford GT. But, like some of you have already said, he might just be into using his name for the royalty check. I guess if you get to a certain age, and have a staff within a company to pay, you go for things like this. I just find it too bad that there isn't someone there to rekindle that fire that Carroll had when he built cars--cars today worth a fortune (and cars that beat Ferrari in '66!).

The new Mustang platform is the same as the one used for the '02-'05 T-Bird, which has a long/short IRS setup. My best guess is that Ford:
1. doesn't want to spend the development money for this IRS for the Shelby ;
2. based on the past problems with the SVT Cobra IRSs, engineering might be apprehensive.
3. marketing may think that new Mustang owners won't care about an IRS, since they would "only be into drag racing".

Then why did Shelby Automotive (Fred Goodell) work on an IRS for the '68 Shelby Mustang (Green Hornet)? It's because Shelby always brought world class thinking into cars like the Mustang. That is what elevated the Mustang above the Falcon and Fairlane. That is why classic Mustangs are still shown and appreciated in the same class as much higher-end cars. The '65 was awarded the "Tiffany Award" for excellence, and today it's not aimed at the champagne crowd, but to "the beer crowd".

The only reason why I say all of this--is because there is a wonderful and serious legacy with the Shelby-produced automobiles. As a historian of these cars. In my opinion, you can't buy a piece of this past legacy by buying this new SVT car. I had visions of something that was going to regain the #1 spot with very a cool looking modified Mustang, with a sophisticated drivetrain that was going to outshine even the Saleen S-281. But that didn't happen.

What all of this does is leave a bad taste in my mouth for a possible (SVT?) GT/CS.

Paul N.

04/18/2005, 03:12 PM
In the May Motor Trend magazine they talk about the IRS decision for the new Shelby.
Hau TAi-Tang, the 2005 Mustang's chief program engineer and now the manager of SVT stated:
"Sure, we could've done it, we looked at the marginal handling improvement attainable by going to an IRS, and we didn't feel the gain justified the cost. The incremental benefit of an IRS is refinement, but not much more in terms of all-out performance. We've got good geometry and good shock-motion ratios, and we're happy with the suspension we have. We won't hesitate to have you do a driving cmparison against IRS-suspended competitions."

Why would cost be a factor if it was already designed and on the T-bird, maybe just some easy changes/improvements for the Shelby?


04/18/2005, 06:56 PM
Well, then let's see one of those magazines do a "test" with the GT-500 and a new Jag XK (that has an IRS).

..and, by the way, Ford owns Jag, too.

Paul N.

05/08/2005, 09:12 PM
I certainly appreciate everyone's comments - I am a little nieve with the whole Shelby genre - maybe that is why I would taint a Mustang and do a replica.

Anyway, I wonder if they introduced it and then are waiting for some tooling - e.g. valve covers.

I agree about the side scoops and hood. I also think the fog lights should be in the grill - it would be really cool.

I read that the IRS was forgone (as per the quote above) because the new Mustang is beating the BMW's and Porches on the track. Maybe that was enough evidence to Ford that the current suspension is good enough. Not that good enough was ever a "Shelby" approach.

I do beleive that Shelby is just putting his name on anything - look at the Dodge cars of the 80's and the recent Oldsmobile (however, at least it's body was radically redesigned - even if performance suffered). My guess is that this is the path of least resistance for Carroll - so what a great ROI. the lack of change tied to production restrictions? As Paul has mentioned in later threads (Hood Holes) - Production hates the special, optioned models down the assembly line as it really screws things up. (I heard that this new Mustang is being built at the joint Mazda/Ford plant).

Now with that said, I went to talk to the Ford dealership about them and try to find out more about the program. I was told by the dealership that Ford was going to produce only a few and do a lottery on the Shelby's - much like they did for the GT's. This is my biggest point to gripe about. Why in the @%@#$%@#^@ would they save on the IRS, side scoops, custom hood, etc if they are only going to sell a few at what would obviously be HIGH DOLLAR price points? If not on the MSRP, surely scalping would be on the DEALER side. I hope that they are not that stupid. However, with the price of the Shelby Oldmobile, they may be shooting for something similar. I am confident that there are enough people out there to buy it as it will possibly be the last car with Shelby's name on it....

...But really, I hope, as does Paul, that they would follow the HEART of the Shelby's - an innovative car with appealing design accents available to the "beer" market.

Thanks for letting me soap box it.

05/08/2005, 10:42 PM
WOW. Great comments, X-Code.

I probably shouldn't say this, but it's my opinion from what I've seen Ford do over the past 20 or so years:

I once read that the (then) head of the Mustang program (a lady) said in a newspaper article something about going after "the beer crowd", not "the champagne crowd" to market the Mustang.

I remember when the '65 got a Tiffany Award for excellence in design. The '65-'69 (and maybe 70-73's) Mustangs were considered a very classy car.

Anyway--as you know, EVERY CAR IS DESIGNED BY MARKETING, not engineering, or design, or what (sometimes) would make sense to you and me. There is this thing about other cars in a lineup competing with each other. THe Fiero with the Corvette, the Cougar with the Mustang (Trans Am racing in particular), and I think that the current (but soon to be lost) T-Bird was the classy car that had IRS that would lose market share against a Mustang that was too classy, or had too many cool things on it.

THe options and stuff you could buy for a Mustang in the late 60's was unbelieveable!! It was a flagship Ford. Where has that thinking gone today??

But today--I really think that the Mustang (from a marketing perspective) is directed to the same market as the Celica, and others in the fast crowd. Just look at an issue of 5.0 Mustang magazine. It's the makings of "Fast and Furious".

So....why put IRS into a car that Ford markets to those who wouldn't care. They miss the mark (marque?) by overlooking the baby boomer crowd who want a classy car, with what the early cars had. They would rather sell the baby boomers an SUV, or Ford 500 because that is where the big profit is (and that, IMO, is why American car companies are shooting themselves in the foot, and losing market share to Toyota and Daimler--to the point of "junk bond" status. Funny--it's ironic how Mustang sales are keeping Ford looking good for now.

I think we deserve better--and it just might be that those old glory days of Shelby have faded long ago (in today's products). It's just not the same as those days at the L.A. Airport, hand assembling '65-'67 Shelbys, and making cool stuff like Little Red.

Race on Sunday, Sell on Monday!!

my two bits.

Paul N.

05/09/2005, 04:12 AM
I read somewhere that Ford will make no more than 3000-5000 Shelby's a year.

05/10/2005, 12:09 PM
Paul, I am with you 100%. I would have loved to have seen all the previously discused styling cues and the valve covers just as you and everyone else spoke of.

However, we (the collective old geezers that feel this way) are obviously missing something. My story:

As I was moving my 19 year old son out of his dorm room at Purdue after he had just completed his freshman year (thank you very much) he was unusaully excited. Me being the naive father assumed it was the fact that he was finished with his first year of engineering school and therefore temporarally finished spending "our" money. No, that was not what had gotten my usually docile youngest in a tizzy. It was his first spotting of a "real" GT 500 Shelby off-campus a couple of days prior. Reminded me of the stories we tell of the first time we saw our "first" Mustang. I have to admit it brought a tear to my eye. Don't get me wrong, he's been exposed to these beautys his whole life, thanks to me. Still, in the past I've heard of his thoughts of purchasing a Focus, a Mustang Convertible, a Honda Civic and even a Pontiac Aztec (ick with a capital I). But this time it was different. He was enthralled. He set his sights on what he wanted when he graduated. He IS bound and determined to own the 2008 (if it exists). I've not seen him get so wrapped-around-the-axle (note: none IRS axle) about a car since, well...ever.

I've just recently retired from the Army. A couple of years ago, some genius who shall remain nameless, though it would be a great idea to have everyone begin wearing the black beret instead of the customary patrol cap for our daily headgear. The vast majority of us in the combat arms were very upset by this. That was, after all, the traditional headgear of the vaunted Army Rangers.

Well, guess who thought it was cool. My son the young PFC...and many of the thousands of young men and women who've joined since. Forget that it's a pain in the a@@ to shave, form, care for and that it takes 3 hands and a mirror to put on properly. It was cool. We can look like a Special Ops soldier without the pain of Airborne school, Ranger training or Special Forces assessment.

MY POINT IS (by now I'm sure you're ready for it ::) that this generation doesn't give a rats a@@ about the things we care about in a car. This is what they care about. I'm now in marketing and have had to learn this. Does it make me look cool? Does it hurt the environment? Will people think I am a gamer/player? How many inches of wheel can I stuff under the wheel wells? Is there enough room for expansion of the existing audio/video system (yes, video...more than we realize, much more important than exhaust note or rated HP at the rear axle, they can by a chip to give it even more power, for now). Is the stereo MP3 capable?By driving this vehicle, will I be the MAN/WOMAN? Will chics (dudes for Rhonda)dig it? IRS, yeah OK whatever. Valve covers with SVT or Shelby? Ahhh, ha ha (picture Beavis and butthead here). Rear taillights and spoiler? They should look how? Really?!?

Note I did not say "Can I afford it". Not a problem with creative financing for all!!

In the end, I know these things:
1)Marketing does rule the world and they got this car right for that generation (too bad these kids will perish when they get the first insurance quote).
2)Ol' Shel's involvement in this project is in name only. Too bad, too.
3)Thank god he's not this excited about a Honda Insight, Toyota Prious or one of those god awful Scion "boxes on wheels". Sorry if I offend I'm not.

In the end, yes it's a dissappointment to all of the SAAC members and many of us that have waited 30 years for the next real Shelby. It does, however, create another generation of enthusiasts. Uneducated on the merits of "side scoops for rear brake cooling" as they are.
My one question is this. When my kid comes to us to join our clubs because he's as ate up with the Mustang bug as we are will we welcome him in with open arms or will we nit-pick his choice of his "pride and Joy" because it lacks what we think it should have had? I already know the answer to that. Geez, we have 4 banger 74 Mustang II's in our clubs, don't we?!?

05/10/2005, 12:29 PM
Well Said!

And one last note, it's the same kids you describe, in there designing the thing anyway, the only one that had any chance of sending the new Shelby in our direction (read Boomers and beyond) was Shelby himself and he's apparently given up, which is typical of soon to be retired or pushing up daisy types.


05/10/2005, 01:32 PM
Meadows, that was a sure a lot of words just to say we are a bunch of old farts!!! But you have nailed it. The Mustang buyers of today don't like what we like. That's ok, but I will take one of Hook's guns an shoot the first rodent who puts spinner wheels on any Mustang! >:( ;D

05/10/2005, 01:45 PM
Now, now. I specifically used the term ol' geezers not ol' farts to maintain political correctness. Don't want to offend any ol' coots with a gastric condition. ;D

05/10/2005, 09:42 PM
Hey M28 (can I call you that? Sounds like a British spy code),

Anyway, you illustrated your point very well. It makes sense, and there will always be that next generation with their cars. This is a time of spinners (watch yer fingers!!), and bling-bling stuff, and thumping stereos. Late model (i.e. 5.0) Mustangs are now part of the car culture that includes the cars you mentioned, part of movies like "2 Fast & 2 Furious". Not that this is a bad thing, but it's left turn in Mustang heritage.

As for the new Shelby, yes, it's a marketing plan, and not (IMO) anything to do with Shelby as we've embraced for so many years.

I think the best perspective to have on this is to look back at our own generation. The baby-boomers (that I'm in) were not quite into the Ford flathead V8 thing, nor the Model a's to early V8's. Model A values are not today what they should be (for how nice they are), and Model T's are more exotic than appreciated by anyone who had one originally. Even the 1950's cars, which should be $15-25K, are now going for $7,500. This is a sliding scale of automobile enthusuasm, and I've always said that the value of ANY collectible is only as good as those who lived to remember them. I don't know what the collectible future of the GT/CS, HCS, or any '65-73 Mustang will be--that may depend on how the industry (and the type of fuel) changes in the next 30 years. But, I can say that the older Mustangs "have legs" (a movie promotion term), because as the values of the late model Mustangs fall (gradually), the older Mustang values rise. The thing is--the older Mustangs are more easily restorable, and they are solid metal, and less plastic. I just read how the SVO of the 90's isn't even in the top ten cars to collect. I really don't think that ANY of the SVT COBRA Mustangs since '93 will hold onto the same type of value--because plastic (literally!) breaks down over time, and the complex electronics (and other parts) will be too expensive to get, or just won't exist for restoration.

We live in a throw-away society. Cars are just 3-D fashion that you can drive. A friend of mine who writes car and truck books once told me that an exec at a car company told him: "We don't care about old cars, we don't even care about last year's model". What does that tell you?

There is something to be said about what we have. The redeux Shelbys from Texas are getting something like $80K. That's a 38 year old Mustang getting twice the cost of an SVT/Shelby for 2006. Look at the six figures from the auctions for 60's muscle cars, like the Superbirds, and Hemi 'Cuda's. I know that it's apples and oranges, but even though the SHELBY name is on it, I think the SVT name with it also will knock the value (IMO). Compare the Shelby 427 and 289 Cobras made in Vegas, along with the Series 1, vs. this SVT Mustang. it will be interesting to see how this shakes out in a couple of years. I read in the Shelby "Snakebite" (SAAC) newsletter that they are getting swamped with interest about these cars.

Paul N.

05/11/2005, 08:57 AM
M28? Yeah, I like it. M28- Master double agent no, better yet M....M28....saving the world from extinction in an AC Cobra.

Total agreement. I don't get the speed channel on my satellite but my dad does so I get weekly tapes hand-delivered when he cuts my grass (one day I'll tell this man's story, it's great) because he's bored. Anyway one recent tape was continuing coverage of the most recent Barrett-Jackson auction. It amazed me the price the '60s muscle cars were bringing. Even non-originals and non-numbers matching and resto mods. They had a Z-28 with a bit of a racing heritage that originally came factory with the cross ram intake that went for $81,000. And the Elinore clone? Wow!! Some of the others like one Buick I saw barely made book. It's just not in favor anymore. It was as clean as they come, too. Many of the 55-57 Chevys went well, but I get the feeling, their days may be #ed. Time will tell.
I'm sure that some 60's era cars will never go out of fashion. As you mentioned "having legs" . I believe that every generation will have someone on film tooling around in a Red 641/2 Mustang convertible. Regardless of cost. They just define cool thoughout generational, gender and racial lines. Did you notice on NBC's "Las Vegas" the young, "got-life-by-the-shorthairs" former Marine security guy tooling around Glitter Gulch in a sweet yellow Z28? They could have cast any car in that role, yet they chose a classic pony car (it should have been a GT 350 of 500KR IMO but I digress). I think 20 years from now the next hip show will still have the same cars in them. Like you, I don't see anything much past the 60's being able to stand up to the test of time and the wear and tear. Fuel and legislation not withstanding, these cars of ours should be in fashion long after we're dust.

05/11/2005, 11:28 AM
the generation under me, i am 28 btw. dont have a clue what a real car is . or even what a real truck is either . they just watch all these shows and think smaller less displacement is where its at and its not. this ricer scene makes me soo mad, but that a topic in itself . everyone by me tells me , oh thats whats available. why dont they get off their butts and see whats actually out there? you can still get some real nice cars for dirt cheap . one very overlooked is the mn12 chassis, tbird cat and fn10 mark8, all v8s all with some aftermarket. all they see is ricer or late mustang and camaro / firechicken. theres a lot out there if they want to take the time and get a car thats worth the time .

05/11/2005, 02:05 PM
one very overlooked is the mn12 chassis, tbird cat and fn10 mark8,

The what and the what?

05/11/2005, 02:36 PM
1989 -1997 thunderbird and cougar and fn10 is 93-98 mark 8

05/12/2005, 10:21 PM
With all that is said and done (mostly by myself) - I am going to try and get one just because. It would be my only real Shelby... ::)

05/13/2005, 06:54 AM
I think the proof that we are not the generation the automakers are targeting (big mistake since we have all the disposable income, and the time to spend it) can be seen in the recent changes to the Mitsubishi Galant.

IMHO the Galant was a good looking car for a 4-door. It was also one of the few cars that looked better with a rear wing, as on the GTZ, or whatever it was called. It had the classic late '60s proportions with the long nose and short rear deck. Now it is a Japanese origami nightmare. It looks like they tried to take the same route as Cadillac with the knife edge, folded paper look. Cadillac saw the light and has since rounded off the edges a little. And, of course, Chrysler hit a home run with their new 300 and its creased look.

I don't know......I'd take the look of the old 300 over the new one any day, and I'd certainly take the old Galant over the new Galant.

But then I thought that the early 90's Mustang looked much better than the late 90's slab-sided version so what do I know.

What do you think, is the new trend towards creases and slant-eyed taillights what the public wants or is it just a new look that the designers and marketing people are trying to force upon us?

05/13/2005, 12:46 PM
I think that if SVT had approached the SHELBY Mustang project with the same attitude and sincerity that the FORD GT team did, we wouldn't be having this discussion about "dissappointment".

What if the FORD GT had a solid axle and no side scoops?

Could you include new SHELBY in same league as the prototype COBRA, and COBRA Coupe?

Remember the '93 SAAC Mustang? A great effort, but what are those cars worth now? They originally sold for $39,900--the same as the MSRP for the new Shelby for '06 (before dealer markup!!)

Paul N.