Videos

let me start by saying I love TOPGEAR. absolutely love it. But this video has some wrong information. Well not so much as wrong as just not right. The GT500 meaning it is a Gran tourer with a 500 horse power motor. Key word in that sentence being (motor). They proceed to prove this wrong by running it on a rwhp dyno meter, and let us know that it only has 447 rwhp. Which would make it correct that the motor more than likely does have 500hp losing some of that power to turn the crank the flywheel, then drive shaft and wheels all under the pressure of just under 2ton with driver. In america unfortunately when a car company tells its cars horse power it means the motors power before it hits all the other hub-bub to help lure in customers its wrong but they do it. Like my old favorite which used to spank many stock american production cars and many high end BMWs at the time, my Ford Taurus SHO. factory claims of 240hp but at the wheels it was merely 218 when I had it dynoed. Thanks.

The dyno measures Wheel horse power. Most likely Ford's statistic was measured at the fly wheel (like most manufaturers do). Power is lost as it is transfered through the drive train.... So there is the explaination to the lower number.

Test the 2011 GT500!!! I would love to see that.

It's very, very cool car!

Oh common, that is completely rubbish. Wheel horse power and crank horsepower are completely different! I don't even like mustangs but I still feek the need to defend it.

The Ford Gt500 ( almost) a real American muscle car.

Part I The plain and simple truth is: You don't own, restore and drive a classic car for making best time round a race track or a deserted airfield, in that instance. Be it a Mustang 390 or a Rolly or a VW Beetle. Full stop. Rather race modern cars, they're designed for it - and the *have* to, for a simple reason: With peak oil past, time is running out fast for driving fast! As for looks: I agree with you - retro styling is no substitute for the original. Why, they didn't even catch the character. (cont part II)

part II The 1960s and 70s American Muscle Cars were *not* sports cars in today's sense, this must never be misunderstood. (Unfortunately, they were built by companies focussed on selling by the numbers yet economizing for the sake of revenue and the customers wanted just that: cars that took them from home to office and back without any extra need for care) Today's there are those who build up Big Block V8s to yield vast / uncanny or even ridiculous bhp - yet beyond a certain 'healthy' point - what do you gain? what's the point? There is a Indian saying: "Europeans always want to save time - but what will they do with that saved time? Time cannot be saved on a bank account, time will continue to run through your hands. That said, just drop into your Mustang, relax - let the engine effortlessly roll the car, take your time and enjoy! That's what these cars were good at. = J =

My first car was a 1973 mustang and I have never been without a mustang since and I am now 57. I will admit that they are not great at handling on the corners but as Hammond says you can always upgrade them. I have also owned a few lotus cars and a spitfire and MG. I would never own a BMW. Here in California everyone seems to have one and I see more of them getting a free ride ( on the back of a tow truck) than any other car. Also sometimes it,s more important how you look and a mustang does that better than any BMW , but still a lotus trumps them all with me. No matter what these guys say about the cars they test on this show , who cares...this is one of the most entrtaining shows I have ever watched , no matter what side of the pond your on...thanks top gear.

did Richards put his car to the track? If so, What was its time??