2009 Ford F350 Xlt Crew Cab Dually Diesel 4x4, 93k Miles, Looks + Drives Great!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2013 Shelby GT350

Shelby is a name as synonymous with the Ford Mustang as marshmallows are with campfires. But unlike the short-lived sugary confection that is prepared on a stick, the late Carroll Shelby's name on the placard means added performance and exclusivity. Launched in 1965, the automaker's celebrated early cars were in production for a limited run - today, a mint concours-quality 1965 Shelby GT350 can sell for upwards of $350,000.
To coincide with the 45th anniversary of the original Shelby GT350, Shelby American reintroduced the GT350 in 2011. Like the original, it was only offered in white with blue stripes. Customers were offered a choice between naturally aspirated (440 horsepower) and two levels of supercharging (525 horsepower with a warranty or 624 horsepower without). The manufacturer calls the GT350 a "post-title" package, a term that means it starts out life as a stock Mustang and is modified outside Ford's factory (this is in contrast to the Shelby GT500, which is a standard Ford production car).
As the GT350 enters its third year, Shelby has made several changes. Mechanically, Wilwood brakes replace Baer units and Recaro seats and a tinted glass roof are on the options list. Cosmetically, the vehicle is now offered in most of the Blue Oval's factory colors, new multispoke wheels are available in Satin Black or Bright Silver Metallic finish, and customers can choose between Satin Black, Silver or Gloss White stripes (or Azure Blue Metallic on Performance White or Ingot Silver). Aesthetically, the look of the car has also changed somewhat - keen eyes will note that it actually appears more 'stock' than it did last year.

More evidence GT500-replacement will be named GT350

During the recent unveiling of the 2015 Ford Mustang, we saw the car in both V6 and GT form, but we'll have to wait a little bit longer to see the successor to the Shelby GT500. In the meantime, though, it looks like SVTPerformance.com has confirmed reports that this high-performance model will bring the Shelby GT350 name back to Ford.
According to the forum post, a user found the Shelby GT350 name on a Ford promo website listing its 2015 lineup. The Shelby GT350 name was first used on a Mustang back in 1965, and most recently it has been a model created for customers as a post-title purchase by Shelby American. As for that car, Shelby confirmed earlier in the year that its GT350 would be phased out at the end of this month.
The million-dollar question for Mustang and Shelby enthusiasts is when we'll see next factory Shelby GT350. Last we heard it was planned for a debut at the New York Auto Show. We've included our previous spy shots of this hi-po, sixth-gen Mustang, and we've also captured it on spy video showing off its exhaust note.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.