potententially leaked gt500 spec sheet

Dirks9901

Paint>Vinyl
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
5,034
Location
Colorado
All I'll say is those numbers are lower than what the car was making a year ago, and it won't be officially unveiled for a while yet...

Things may have changed in the time being, but I doubt it's gone that sideways.

Faith restored! I’m anxious as hell for this GT500 to drop.


Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

Uncle Meat

Zircon Encrusted Tweezers
Established Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
6,353
Location
Prattville, Alabama
Fat-woman-236803.jpg
 

08mojo

...
Established Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
2,681
Location
Atlanta, GA
And a 190mph top speed is a let down. I know I’ll never take one that fast, but bragging rights and knowing a car is capable of the 200mph mark is a good feeling. I think this leaked document may be bullshit. I don’t think a mustang has ever weighed 4000+lbs either


Pretty much my response

Reminds me of the kids and dummies at car shows, "look this one goes to 220mph" as they stare at the speedo. :D

I agree though, I think this document is bullshit. If the GT500 weighs close to or over 4k lbs, I am going to rethink my strategy for the next car. I think I may have to go back to a C6Z...
 

GT Premi

Well known member
Established Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
8,140
Location
NC
I was almost fooled by this document this morning before my coffee kicked in. I'm calling BS. Misspelled words, weird word usage, random tow information, it doesn't say "GT500" or even "Ford" anywhere on the document... It's horse hocky that was probably created by a Camaro or Challenger fanboy.
 

13COBRA

Resident Ford Dealer
Established Member
Premium Member
Single Barrel Sirs
Joined
Jun 4, 2012
Messages
22,543
Location
Missouri
Reasons why this is bullshit.

1. Petrol, not Patrol
2. "supercharged" would have been capitalized
3. The output would not be "No commercial usage.", instead it would say "YES" or "NO".
4. It would say "not applicable" or "N/A", not "No trailer tow."
5. It wouldn't explain itself, it would just say 4905 lbs.

upload_2018-8-23_8-16-0.png
 

GT Premi

Well known member
Established Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
8,140
Location
NC
Reasons why this is bullshit.

1. Petrol, not Patrol
2. "supercharged" would have been capitalized
3. The output would not be "No commercial usage.", instead it would say "YES" or "NO".
4. It would say "not applicable" or "N/A", not "No trailer tow."
5. It wouldn't explain itself, it would just say 4905 lbs.

View attachment 1510613

Yep. Right in line with my analysis.
 

13COBRA

Resident Ford Dealer
Established Member
Premium Member
Single Barrel Sirs
Joined
Jun 4, 2012
Messages
22,543
Location
Missouri
6. Both "max" would have been capitalized.

upload_2018-8-23_8-47-36.png
 

Klaus

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
13,805
Location
minnesota
Reasons why this is bullshit.

1. Petrol, not Patrol
2. "supercharged" would have been capitalized
3. The output would not be "No commercial usage.", instead it would say "YES" or "NO".
4. It would say "not applicable" or "N/A", not "No trailer tow."
5. It wouldn't explain itself, it would just say 4905 lbs.

View attachment 1510613

Add:
6. Driveshaft dimension is not a measurement
7. wheelbase is cited in inches not millimeters. (wheelbase in millimeters, really?)
 

Luviathan_5.0

Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
32
I don't think 4200+ lb. Dry weight is accurate. Ford wouldn't focus so much on efficiency, then add an additional 400 lbs. That would just negate the additional power/efficiency... But the power numbers are very realistic. 2.27 HP/cu.in. are great power numbers! Would love to see GM match it with their P.O.S. push-rod motors lol

Sent from my Z981 using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

jsd512

Wannabe Ghostbuster
Established Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
9,698
Location
Houston area
Crash test standards are increasing, at what seems to be exponential speeds. When the '13-'14 GT500 was built, there was no small overlap test by the IIHS. 720HP is very nice though. More than the Hellcat, but less than the Redeye. The GT500 does weigh almost 300lbs. less than the Redeye. We'll have to wait and see how accurate this is.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top