1989 Ford Mustang Gt Convertible 2-door 5.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R named Road & Track Performance Car of the Year

With a 526-horsepower, 5.2-liter V8 that roars to 8,250 rpm, it's really hard to consider the 2016 Ford Shelby Mustang GT350R an underdog in any fight. However, the Shelby held the lowest as-tested price and was only middle of the pack in terms of power in Road & Track's 2016 Performance Car of the Year challenge. The 'Stang's numbers clearly didn't tell the whole story about the potent coupe because Ford's muscle car grabbed the title in this year's test. A model needs to be new or significantly updated to be eligible for the honor, and R&T found an impressive slate of eight candidates this year. The challengers included the Bentley Continental GT3-R, Cadillac ATS-V Coupe, Chevrolet Corvette Z06, Dodge Viper ACR, Mercedes-AMG GT S, and Porsche Cayman GT4. The Ferrari 488 GTB was the most expensive of the bunch with an as-tested price of $347,942, which is five times more than the Shelby. Once the group was together, R&T hustled them over curving roads and on the National Corvette Museum Motorsports Park. There was a lot to love about the Shelby, even in this impressive crew. "With a flat-plane crank and Sport Cup 2 tires, the GT350R is a Mustang turned up to 11," editor-in-chief Larry Webster said in the announcement of the results. The GT350R joins some great company. Past winners include the Porsche 911 GT3 last year and the Corvette in 2013. For some fantastic photography and the complete appraisal of these performance machines check out R&T's website for the full story. Related Video: ROAD & TRACK NAMES THE FORD MUSTANG SHELBY GT350R THE 2016 PERFORMANCE CAR OF THE YEAR New York, NY (November 9, 2015) – Road & Track today named the Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R the 2016 Performance Car of the Year, beating out seven of the world's best new sports cars. The article appears in the December/January issue, on newsstands November 17, and on RoadandTrack.com. "With a flat-plane crank and Sport Cup 2 tires, the GT350R is a Mustang turned up to 11," said Larry Webster, editor-in-chief of Road & Track. "Not only does the car have soul and harness so much firepower with such ease, but the real achievement here is that it's so approachable. It's a car you can't help but love." The Mustang Shelby GT350R was the winner by a runaway vote.

Top torque-to-weight ratios under $100k, $50k and $25k

Horsepower may steal a lot of headlines, but the always-more-complex torque figure is often a critical one for both the workingman and the motoring playboy. The measure of rotational force represents the twist that can liquefy one's tires or haul one's horse trailer. Good stuff.
It follows then, that as with the horsepower-to-weight list that we assembled for you a few months ago, a list of cars that offer the most pound-feet with the fewest pounds to carry, is an interesting one to break down. Sure, there's a big difference in how the torque is applied from a turbocharged six-cylinder in a Swedish luxury sedan and a massive heavy-duty truck's turbo-diesel. But being the car/stat geeks that we are, we think it's kinda neat that those two vehicles rank near each other where torque and weight intersect.
As with the horsepower list, we've given you figures as pounds per every one pound-foot. Again broken down into broad price categories, we've got a mixed bag of 2014 and 2015 models here, too. Every effort has been made to select the most up-to-date prices and specs, and we've also to omitted some '14 cars that won't be re-upped after the ongoing yearly changeover.

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.