He has interesting comments about maximum horsepower in the 700HP range and why live axles instead of IRS.

Shelby Predicts New Horsepower War, Same Ending

By Byron Pope
WardsAuto.com, Jul 12, 2006 12:24 PM

DEARBORN – The looming horsepower war between the Ford Mustang, upcoming Dodge Challenger and rumored new version of the Chevrolet Camaro will come to the same conclusion it did in the 1960s, says famed racer and automotive designer Carroll Shelby.
“The insurance companies will be the deciding factor, as well as the (Environmental Protection Agency), the government and so forth,” Shelby tells Ward’s in a wide-ranging interview here.

Shelby says the first horsepower war got out of control, with cars developing more power than their chassis could handle. He predicts this one will peak when cars reach 600-700 hp.
He also offers up another prediction.
“They (competition) won’t get an advantage in the horsepower race like Camaro did last time,” Shelby says, throwing down the gauntlet to General Motors Corp. “You can bet on that; I guarantee that.”

Ford Motor Co.’s relationship with the 83-year-old Shelby, a former chicken farmer, dates back to the early 1960s and still is going strong today, evidenced by the new Mustang GT500 the muscle car guru helped develop.
Despite his legendary status, Shelby downplays his role in the development of the new 500-hp GT500.

Shelby foresees muscle-car horsepower war reminiscent of the 1960s.
“This day and time, with safety and emissions such a big part of things, it’s not like it was years ago,” he says. “You have to depend on the people of Hau Thai-tang (Ford director of Advanced Product Creation and SVT). All I do is sit around, and conceptually we talk about what size the engine ought to be; how much horsepower it should have; what type of brakes, gearbox, gears, gearing and things like that.”
Modesty aside, Shelby did make important decisions in the development of the GT500, including the choice of rear suspension.

While the majority of today’s auto makers are opting for more-sophisticated independent rear suspensions, the high-powered Mustang sticks with a live axle.

“I voted not to go independent suspension, because it was 150 to 200 lbs. (68-91 kg) heavier, cost $5 million to tool up and I couldn’t tell any difference (either) in ordinary driving or driving under extreme conditions,” Shelby says.
Shelby says independent rear suspensions came into vogue in the U.S. shortly after World War II, largely because they were adopted by European auto makers as a better fit with the continent’s up and down “hogback” roads.
“Suddenly (post-World War II), everybody in America thinks they have to have independent suspension,” Shelby says. “It’s completely unnecessary, and we proved that in 1965.

“We had an independent suspension for the Mustangs we built back then, and we found out there wasn’t any advantage. And there were a lot of disadvantages in the camber changes and so forth.”
Much like the debate over independent vs. live axle suspensions, many car buyers have an ill-conceived perception of domestic auto makers, Shelby says.
“All automobile companies make good product now. It’s pretty much parity out there on all of it,” he says.
Shelby is keenly aware of the current alternative-fuels movement and says much of what is being done today could have been implemented years ago.
“I think it could’ve been done a helluva lot better and quicker by just going to compressed natural gas, which there’s plenty of,” he says. “But they decided not to do that, and we probably wasted $500 million (in the meantime),” he says.
“There’s so many different companies that have their own cross to bear, and they’re trying to sell their own products, so it takes 10 times as long to get anything done,” Shelby laments.
“(But) there’s no sense in sitting around griping about any of that st

 

Interesting story. I love this quote. Words to live by.

"Just get up in the morning and get on with it and drive through it.”

I think I will use that in my sig

 

Good find Jeremiah! Thanks for sharing that. I must disagree with Shelby's idea about the Natural Gas on two grounds. 1. Natural Gas is a lot less stable fuel and is more likely to explore than gasoline. 2. The fuel economy is significantly less on Natural Gas so the cost effectiveness is actually less from what I have read, plus if they would start doing this, it would follow the path that Ethanol is currently on. Ethanol is now so expensive because the demand for it has gone up do to the banning of MTBE and Missouri has a 10% mandate.

I sounds like Shelbys influence on the GT500 was pretty low. No wonder why it isn't that great. He is getting over the hill unfortuneatly. I have had the theory that we were in another muscle car war since the HEMI was reintroduced. I don't think the Insurance companies will be as much trouble this time due to the fact that many of these newer cars are very safe, but I agree the EPA will screw things up again. They are already screwing up our chances with Diesels. I think we need to strap and sack the EPA. Their standards are redicilously high.