Vortech'd GT hints at Shelby GT500 performance???

[roushraven]

So there I was chillin' at my local coffee and bookstore joint when I came across a recent Road and Track performance test article of 14 cars. Performance was measured over a mile and the times and mph at various points. Of interest is the performance of the Vortech Mustang GT. The car was Vortech's own tester car driven by Richard Holdener a photog/editor of MM&FF. The tests were done with major cooling in-between runs to include ice in the intercooler reservoir and I'm sure there were other tricks up the sleeve of Richard and Vortech not reported in the story. Anyway...

Here are the specs of the car:

Ford Mustang GT with Vortech centrifugal aftercooled superchager
HP - 575 (reported as bhp)
550 (reported as bhp)
Curb weight - 3850lbs
3485lbs

Tires - F 245/40 18 R 275/35 18 Toyo R1As
F 235/45 18 R 315/40 19 Goodyear Supercar F1's

Performance:
1/4 mile - 12.9 @ 120.6
12.0 @ 121.8
1/2 mile - 19.5 @ 147.5
18.7 @ 147.2
3/4 mile - 25.2 @ 165.7
24.5 @ 162.2
1 mile - 30.4 @ 179.0
29.9 @ 171.4

0-100mph - 9.4
- 8.6
0-150mph - 20.2
- 19.5
100-150 10.8 secs
10.9 secs

Top Speed - 192mph
- (not reported in this test)

Oh, the stats in red by the way, are for the Ford GT which was tested in the group of 14 that day.


So now for my epitome (of sorts.) The Shelby GT500 is guesstimated to weigh in around 3800lbs (curb weight) and have around 475 bhp (more than likely that will be 475rwhp.) I think that the performance of the Shelby GT500 will therefore almost be in the same neighborhood as the Vortech'd GT which from the figures above suggests it will be a pretty stout machine - stock. That car stays within a gnats bottom of the Ford supercar throughout the entire test. Since most Mustang guys that I know live by the motto of "if my Mustang accelerates the same or faster than your car and costs $XXXX less it is therefore better than your car" I think there's gonna be a lot of chest beating on the horizon.

Food for thought, your opinions may vary.

-RR op:

 

[rphinney]

Show proof that the GT500 will make 475 RWHP, that's 547 BHP, just so you know.
#1 The GT weighs 400lbs. less
#2 The GT will have 75 more HP than the GT500

When it comes out go buy the GT500. Then go race a GT, last report back to the group.

That Vorteched Mustang GT has approximetly 488 RWHP and lost by a second in the quarter. So if your mustang buddies think losing by a second in the quarter mile to a car that costs $XXXXX makes it something worth talking about more power to them.

Not to mention we have seen much better quarter times for the GT, certainly 11's.

 

[roushraven]

You some how missed the entire point of the post.

-RR :shrug:

 

[WDW MKR]

You some how missed the entire point of the post.

-RR :shrug:

You stated that the car stayed within a gnats bottom of the Ford GT, yet it was a full second off of some poor times for the supercar... that must be a damn big gnat.

Regarding the original point of the Shelby being similar to the blown Mustang GT 1/4 mile times, I don't know that we'll see 120+ trap speeds from a stock Shelby. It all depends on how accurate the estimated 450bhp figure is. It's a good conversation piece, but neither the unfinished Shelby or Vortech Mustang GT are anywhere near the Ford GT.

 

[killrSVT]

I bought that issue on a flight back to Tampa... That Vortech'd GT was extremely impressive.. Some where in there it said it was even pullin .12 G's.. We shall see how well the GT500 will fare to this benchmark.

The most impressive was that Hennessey Viper, 'nough said... :bowdown:

 

[rphinney]

You some how missed the entire point of the post.

-RR :shrug:

How? You where claiming the Stang in the Article was close to the GT500, I pointed out that this stang has 575 BHP and the Shelby has 450-475BHP?

And that the Supercar has run 11's in the quarter and this Vorteched GT was running 12.9's, how are you claiming it too be close.

 

[Fourcam330]

Probably not the best comparison in the world, but if the Mustang GT had traction it would have beaten the GT in acceleration testing no questions asked. It was pulling harder than any other car at the end of measured testing even with "brick like" aerodynamics.

 

[GTSpartan]

Probably not the best comparison in the world, but if the Mustang GT had traction it would have beaten the GT in acceleration testing no questions asked. It was pulling harder than any other car at the end of measured testing even with "brick like" aerodynamics.

Even harder than the modded viper?

 

[satx]

that was the most confusing part of the article. how was the mustang pulling harder than a 750hp S7, and a 1000 HP Viper at over 170mph?

 

[Trublu01]

WTF is going on here? :rockon:

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

gearing im guessing. if i remember right wasnt the hennesey pulling lower than most of the field?

 

[Fourcam330]

Even harder than the modded viper?

Unless I read it wrong (could have been I just browsed through it while at Barnes and Noble).

 

[DBK]

Unless I read it wrong (could have been I just browsed through it while at Barnes and Noble).

You read it right.

 

[03SoCalCobra]

It was the MUSTANG GT not the Ford GT, and it was running 16 psi with no cats and all the tricks in the book and ice bags piled on the motor, ice down the intercooler... jeez... The other cars were ran as-is, which makes the Vortech car results a *complete* waste of time. That article actually lowered Vortech's credibility IMHO and pretty much invalidated that car as part of the article.

Oh, and why anyone on the planet honestly believes the GT500 will be rated at anything less than 500 HP is absolutly baffiling to me.