| Author | Message | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Advanced Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2958 Registered: 10-2002 |
James S these are for you and those who really know what heavy metal thunder sounds like.   | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1027 Registered: 10-2001 |
"It's called Branding guys, ferrari and the rest of premium european makes have done a good job in building the brand which equates to pricing power. A Ford is still a Ford in the branding tier hiearchy." If Ford is 5 seconds faster around the track, AND (unlike the Vette) turn as many heads on the street as a 360 or 575, for being unique. Well then the last thing someone is going to care about is the little plastic name-plate or label on the back boot lid. That's why they will sell for $150k. Ford marketing experience with high-dollar cars has nothing to do with it. Somehow, Men instinctually know which car gets the crowd looking, and his heart pumping. (I'm talking about crowd of kids that cheer and chicks that swoon) I know the 55 yr old, rich white male professional still likes his classy Ferrari, but I'm not trying to impress those guys. I'd rather have fun  | ||
| Chris A. (Asianbond)
Junior Member Username: Asianbond Post Number: 165 Registered: 5-2002 |
maybe we should rephrase it as "perceived value" It's called Branding guys, ferrari and the rest of premium european makes have done a good job in building the brand which equates to pricing power. A Ford is still a Ford in the branding tier hiearchy. I give Ford credit for generating the strong demand. Yeah, I know the Vette uses pushrod, but it's damn fast, eh...... | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 752 Registered: 9-2002 |
I heard that the 5.4l engine being used in the GT was run for 500hrs at full throttle under load. The original bench mark was 300hrs. Ford wanted to "up" the anti. They did have problems with the first few production engines "only" lasting 300hrs. But this was found to be an oversight with the crankshaft design. They corrected the problem(very simple one at that I might add) and the engine did the full 500hr at WOT under load without difficulty. In fact they said it could have gone much longer. I'd like to see an F-car engine do that. The car will be a brute and a force to be recond with in any situation. I think you guys are jelous and upset that a car costing half the price of a Ferrari,and it being a Ford of all things has got you thinking about why you paid so much for you Ferrari when it won't even beat a Corvette. | ||
| Nibblesworth (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 826 Registered: 11-2002 |
LOL Chris - pushrods. The Z06 you speak of, that you would rather drive, uses those antiquated pushrods you are disparaging. The 5.4l DOHC is, hence the nomenclature, a dual overhead cam engine. The only engines used today that aren't employing ancient technologies are F1 engine. The 360 engine, while exotic, uses absolutely no novel internal combustion engine technologies. I don't see the need for hostility for this product. If it were EXACTLY THE SAME THING, but said "Ferrari" on it, it would be lauded as a fantastic and inexpensive car. The fact is, it is a true performer, and something that I, and many other car nuts, have been looking for for ages. Jeeze - I don't like Lambos all that much, but you don't hear me screaming about their $300k pricetag. Exotic cars are TOTALLY UNREALISTIC IN ALL AREAS. The speed they deliver, the handling they offer, the aerodynamics they employ, the exotic materials used to build them, and their astronomical price tags ARE ALL UNREAL. Sh!t, if you want to spend your money wisely, DON'T BUY ANY EXOTIC. Buy a damn Kia with a 10 year/100,000 mile warranty. It'll do the same damn thing that any other car is DESIGNED to do - go from A to B. It's just a matter how fast, and in how much style, you do that. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1026 Registered: 10-2001 |
Chris- every FORD dealer in the world is fighting for these $150,000 cars. FORD has such a problem with the extreme demand� the only way they solved the problem is to start a lottery system. So even the small ford dealership might get a car. If they're lucky! Funny hearing about over-pricing at the F-chat, I always gave Ferrari credit for inventing "over pricing" Ferrari's ENZO cost $1,000 for 1 HP or $660,000 for 660 HP The Ford GT cost $300 for 1 HP or $150,000 for 500 HP (if I did my math right?) | ||
| Chris A. (Asianbond)
Junior Member Username: Asianbond Post Number: 164 Registered: 5-2002 |
Btw, I think the car is overpriced, 90,000 to 110,000 is more reasonable. Very difficult to sell american iron at european prices, look at the new Caddy XLR at $75,000, a very hard sell compare to the MB Sl. Anyone remember the Allante? | ||
| Chris A. (Asianbond)
Junior Member Username: Asianbond Post Number: 163 Registered: 5-2002 |
For god sakes, 150,000 for a FORD with an old technology engine and parts bin interior? GET REAL!!!! I like to see someone on this board put their money where their mouth is.... Who's going to buy GT40 over a brand new 360, Gallardo, Bently Continnental R or Aston Martin DB9? Compare the engine technology and interior of the Bently to the Ford and you know what my choice is. If you want speed, just buy a $50k Z06 Corvette and you're have enough left over for a brand new Jaguar XJR. Are they still using pushrods in the GT40 engine? | ||
| Kenny Herman (Kennyh)
Intermediate Member Username: Kennyh Post Number: 1462 Registered: 8-2001 |
Brian, I can host it if you send it to me over AIM: kennyherman | ||
| Brian Kennedy (Kennedy)
Member Username: Kennedy Post Number: 610 Registered: 3-2002 |
I saved it... but its 18.9MB... and I can't host it... but if you give me an FTP server that I can upload to, I'll upload it there. | ||
| Christian Carlisi (Ccarlisi)
New member Username: Ccarlisi Post Number: 2 Registered: 4-2003 |
Did anybody manage to save the video before the link was removed? I would love to see it. I know someone that could host it as well. | ||
| Dennis Rumshinski (Tradland)
New member Username: Tradland Post Number: 1 Registered: 2-2002 |
I have to put my .02cents in on this one. First of there will be only 4500 cars produced over 3 years. So dont forget that the cost of the development has to be spread out over only 4500 units so ofcourse the car will not be as cheap as a Viper. As to getting the car for under MSRP about 6 months down the road or close to that forget it. Since the 3 year only production run and 4500 unit total build the car will actually rise in price so if u can get one at MSRP or close get one cause they will only go up unlike Modern Ferrari Cars that depreciate cause their production Numbers are Higher. If i could get one at or close to MSRP i would jump on it in a sec. But Most dealears wont even see 1 car a year so they will be gougin the price like crazy. | ||
| Nibblesworth (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 822 Registered: 11-2002 |
Clax and James - Stroking a motor out does not kill the durability of a motor. Heck, I know guys running a 5.0 block stroked out to 347ci, which is around 5.65l, which is a BIG stroke for such a small stroke block. These guys run a 347 stroker with blowers running at 9psi for 80,000 trouble free miles. The 4.6 design was inherently designed as a 5.4. Ford knew they were building a family of V8's that would be used across the boards, so they kept that in mind while designing it. As for the durability, I sold Fords for two years, and sold a LOT of 5.4 V8s. I had guys who bought 5.4s and hauled 15,000lbs with them. After 40,000 miles, they blew their trannies out, but the engine was FINE. Also, keep in mind that the F150 Lightning had been through almost 4 years of production without and issues regarding loss of durability from supercharging. In addition, the 2003 Cobra has had no isses of durability regarding the stroked and blown 5.4. The fact is, it is a good motor. Plain and simple. Ford would not take an inherently weak engine, with massive stroking flaws, and put it in such visable vehicles as: 1. F150 Lightning 2. 2000 Cobra R 3. Navigator 4. Forg GT That would be pure suicide. Trust me, the engine is a performer. | ||
| Stacey S. (Staceman900)
New member Username: Staceman900 Post Number: 9 Registered: 10-2003 |
FocusForum.com is not a link it's a joke. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1025 Registered: 10-2001 |
James-"As for the Daytona/Maranello debate Vs the Ford would someone put down the crack pipe. The Maranello has styling cues from the Daytona also has styling cues from the 250 and 275." James I had to go back to my crack pipe... to see what you meant. I guess growing up with Ferrari since 1975 I was shocked when the Maranello came out. It didn't look like any exotic Ferrari I'd ever seen. But then I guess those front engine cars are before my days. If you're an expert on old cars I can see your point. To me,, the Maranello will always be a Modern Daytona.  | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Advanced Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2954 Registered: 10-2002 |
Worth? What people will pay for one. Data so far? John Shirley , who has a Ferrari or two paid 557k for the first customer 04 Ford GT. For the first 6 months it will be a feeding frenzy. | ||
| Jason W (Pristines4)
Member Username: Pristines4 Post Number: 794 Registered: 12-2002 |
Dead link. | ||
| Stacey S. (Staceman900)
New member Username: Staceman900 Post Number: 8 Registered: 10-2003 |
God I've got sucked into this.... Maybe the problem is't the Ford maybe the Ferrari's not worth $170k. But then everyone would own one and there would not be cool chat rooms about them like this one. Well I'm off to focusforum.com. | ||
| Stacey S. (Staceman900)
New member Username: Staceman900 Post Number: 7 Registered: 10-2003 |
Last one because I'm not getting any work done.... Take a Mustang GT ($30k) go down to Summit racing and spend ($40K) and now it performs like a 360 so its worth $170k, Right? WRONG!!!! | ||
| Stacey S. (Staceman900)
New member Username: Staceman900 Post Number: 6 Registered: 10-2003 |
Clax, Thanks, that's all I'm trying to say. I'd probably buy one if it cost around 50K to 80K. Mark, I don't know much about Dodge but doesn't the Viper compete for less than half the price of most exotics. And also I think we'd all agree that Ferrari's are exotic cars right. Do not the parts equal the whole? LOL | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 142 Registered: 10-2002 |
For those of you who claim this 5.4 platform is super reliable: I have a friend that is part of the powertrain development team at Ford, and without divulging any confidential details, they had one heck of time in the test phases with the GT powerplant. Stacey: Well said. Nothing like paying $150K for a car with generic parts in it. If Ford did this right, they would have priced this car in the range of the Viper. The GT does not warrant $150K. Must be nice to pillage the parts bins for a powertrain and slap it into a new chassis. Mark: Based on those photos, it is clear that the 550 is far more different than the Daytona, as opposed to the GT differing from the GT40. I don't have a problem with retro, but Ford didn't even throw in any modern styling cues. Even the side scoops look like they were glued on, just as they did in the GT40. | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 993 Registered: 2-2002 |
I've loved the GT40 since I first saw one in a magazine when I was 12 years old. I grew up in Dearborn and Kar Kraft--where they built some of the later cars--was a mile or two from my house. I went to school with the owner's kids, so I'm about as diehard a GT40 fan as you can get. I'm really not in favor of building a car that is a 98% replica of the original, though. I would rather they update it and show the vitality and creativity Ford has to offer today, but I've gotten used to the new car and I'd love to own one. | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
Junior Member Username: Aventino Post Number: 149 Registered: 6-2003 |
Nebulaclass, IMHO I have to disagree with you about the 5.4. Going longer stroke has made a mess of the rod to stroke ratio, has killed the RPM and friends I know trying to race F150s and extract even more hp say the motor isn't really up to it reliability wise. Read most Ford Forums, the motor was designed square to run in a variety of vehicles including transverse front wheel drive where it's gotta be compact. It hasn't got any room left for increased bore size so stroking is the only option for increased capacity which ups torque but reduces RPM. I'm not slagging Ford, the Northstar motor is much the same but you can't expect a motor to be all things to all people. What about a Boss 429 or 427 cammer? I think they also make a lovely 460, it's available now with Ali block and they should of gone that route instead. Look at what the Saleen uses and what it's based on. As for the Daytona/Maranello debate Vs the Ford would someone put down the crack pipe. The Maranello has styling cues from the Daytona as does the 456. The Maranello also has styling cues from the 250 and 275. And look at how the 360 looks a little bit 250LM from some angles. Nice. I'd love Ferrari to build something mid-engined that draws on the P3 and P4 and doesn't cost an Enzo. The Ford GT is a GT 40, forget styling cues it's the same retro idea they tried with the Thunderbird. The busiest two tools in the design department were the photocopier and Karl Ludvigsens book. They might sell lots, I sincerely hope they do. But I still think it's a waste of an awful lot of creative talent at FoMoCo and a real opportunity lost. And next to the Mk IV it's the ugly sister. | ||
| Robert (Rjklein4470)
Member Username: Rjklein4470 Post Number: 321 Registered: 3-2002 |
This car makes me want a ERA GT-40 Replica, It is the best reproduction of the real thing, and you can put a nice 351 with a ZF tranny. They really missed on the interior. It is lost inside, not really a practical race interior, but yet it is not very plush. | ||
| Frank K Lipinski (Kaz)
Member Username: Kaz Post Number: 418 Registered: 11-2002 |
I simply don't care for the looks of the care. Perhaps I will feel different after seeing it in person. Good to see Ford come out with something to compete with the Vette & Viper. My friend has a Pro-Stock Vega that would blow my doors off. He's got maybe $25K into it..is it better than my F-Car? Performance alone is not why I bought an F-Car. We all own F-Cars for different personal reasons. If I have to "exlpain" it to you, chances are you wouldn't get it anyway. | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 992 Registered: 2-2002 |
"And I may be wrong but didn't Ferrari beat the GT40 the first year and it was only after Ford threw tons of cash at the program that they won." Yes, but not nearly as much cash as Ferrari threw at beating BMW this year. That's racing. Don't like it, don't watch it. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1024 Registered: 10-2001 |
Stacey- "but you can't take a bunch of everyday parts, mate them to a new frame styled after an old body and call it $150K." You guys crack me up. Apparently though...you can take a bunch of "everyday parts" and be faster then a $170k 360 Ferrari that is apparently made of exotic parts. LOL If the "everyday parts" beat the "exotic special magic parts".... and don't need expensive 15k and 30k services.... I'd say it is very much worth $150k Lets review Guys if you don't like the FORD GT say- "I don't like it" But don't say: -Its a truck engine -It shows Ford has no new ideas -Its just "ordinary parts" -Its not worth $150k even though it has performance of $170k competitors. LOL (unless you haven't read the entire thread below) Just so you know were I stand. (not that anyone cares) LOL I've been waiting to buy... wanted to see new crop of cars. I'm still not in LOVE, so I'm going to wait for the next two to come out. But the score so far is- I don't like the FORD GT... just not my look I don't' like the NEW Lambo...just not my look New NSX looks like a tamed ENZO... so its strong maybe 360 replacement 2006 if its a bit more exotic looking I'd go for it, (if they get rid of 30k service). | ||
| Gary Brauch (Gary_brauch)
Junior Member Username: Gary_brauch Post Number: 52 Registered: 10-2003 |
>>look whats happening to the 360 engines with there con rods!!<< Gotta admit I hadn't heard this one. I'm new here, will someone fill me in? | ||
| Stacey S. (Staceman900)
New member Username: Staceman900 Post Number: 5 Registered: 10-2003 |
Here is what I think for what it is worth...the car great but over priced, should be around the price of a high end Corvette or Viper. Here's why...all you are getting is great looking body of a car with a bunch of everyday Ford parts. As some of you said the engine comes in a number of other cars and trucks for much less cost. And I've heard it shares a lot of it's other parts with cars like the low priced Focus. Nothing wrong with these other Ford cars or trucks (I've owned 3 F150's myself and would buy another) but you can't take a bunch of everyday parts, mate them to a new frame styled after an old body and call it $150K. There is no $25,000 car running around town with a 360 engine detuned for more midrange torque. And I may be wrong but didn't Ferrari beat the GT40 the first year and it was only after Ford threw tons of cash at the program that they won. | ||
| ryan (Ferrari_kid)
Junior Member Username: Ferrari_kid Post Number: 62 Registered: 7-2003 |
i didn't see any weight figures in it. they only mentioned the usual, performance numbers, handling at the limit. i'd have to admit though, i wasn't around when the GT40 was racing and wouldn't know the "wrath" of the ford. i guess looking at that part of it makes me niave to the fact that the car really is amazing but am bias towards something more retro. | ||
| Brian Kennedy (Kennedy)
Member Username: Kennedy Post Number: 606 Registered: 3-2002 |
> the new issue of EVO has the GT40 and F360 comparison in it. Did they weigh it? I am still waiting to see a reliable (non-estimated) weight for the car. Ford is not saying. Based on 500HP and 500 torque numbers and a 0-60 of 4.4s, I would estimate that it weighs in around 3700#... maybe more. I certainly hope not... but otherwise it must be geared bad for the 0-60 numbers. | ||
| Nibblesworth (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 816 Registered: 11-2002 |
Just some info about the motor: It isn't a "truck engine". The 5.4 is essentially the exact same engine as a 4.6, but it has a longer stroke via a taller deck. The 4.6/5.4 began development in the late 80's and was first put to use in the 1992 Crown VIctoria. This served as a fantastic test bed, because Crown Vics were used as police cars, which got the snot beat out of them. The engine performed incredibly, and Ford gave the green light to replace the aging 5.0 with the 4.6, and the 351w with the 5.4. The 4.6 was used primarily in the 1996 Mustang and Crown Vic, and the F150. The truck variant of the 5.4 is much different than the car variant. First off, the truck 5.4 is a SOHC, while tow of the three car variants were DOHC (Marauder used a SOHC, 2000 Cobra R and GT use a DOHC). The DOHC is also used on the Navigator. Aside from SOHC to DOHC, the cylinder head design, cams, and intake manifolds are completely different, mainly to allow trucks to get big torque. This engine is a world-class performer, for a number of reasons. First off, it is a modular motor, so it is very interchangable. Cobra heads will fit onto a non-cobra motor, 4.6 or 5.4, with minimal modifications. The second big deal with this motor is the block strenght. Take a 4.6 block out of a car, and put it next to a 460 big block, and you'll notice that the 4.6 is BIGGER than the 460. This comes from a big valley and a crankshaft that is housed within the block, instead of having the crank attached to the block. Bottom end durability is insane, and the big block, thick walls, and all around sturdy construction allows for a block than can get beat on, very hard, and not feel a thing. The engine that was in the 2000 Cobra R put out 385hp and 385tq AT THE WHEELS, and that's N/A. Better yet, you don't need to touch a thing for 100,000 miles. While an F-car can get 400hp NA from a liter and a half less, the engine is under soo much stress that it requires a crapload of maintenance, which we all know is expensive. Could ford produce a 3.6l NA engine putting out 395hp? Sure, but you wouldn't have the 100,000mile tune ups that the current 4.6/5.4 block have. It's no "truck motor", and it will scream. | ||
| Jason Godsil (Godsil)
Member Username: Godsil Post Number: 284 Registered: 9-2001 |
Video not working. I would love to see it. | ||
| Jeffrey Davison (Jeffdavison)
Junior Member Username: Jeffdavison Post Number: 227 Registered: 7-2002 |
Link is gone  | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Advanced Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2951 Registered: 10-2002 |
Here's what a young Mark Donohue (about 24) said about the car that's now sitting in my garage... "It's hard to imagine an ordinary amateur guy like me, with very little experience, getting to drive for a major professional team with all those engines, and parts, and engineers... I was so honored that I didn't even want to talk too loud...I would have paid them to let me drive! I have nothing but good feelings about the cars too. I saw where some guy had a MK IV for sale a while back, and I suppose that if I had a million dollars I might have bought it. They were very well built, considering all the production pieces that went into them. They seemed so strong, so safe, so thorughly tested, that nothing would break or fall off, no matter who put it together. At the time they were by far the highest performance cars I'd ever driven. They were the fastest cars on the track-except for the Chaparral, maybe-and yet they'd still last twenty-four hours. They were very durable, very powerful, very fast, and as easy to drive as a big Cadillac..." (If you click on my profile you'll see a pic of this car) | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Intermediate Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 1079 Registered: 2-2003 |
I'm 26 and would choose the Ford GT in a heartbeat. I wish I could have been there in person during these times. Sunny | ||
| peter brinzey (Ferraripete)
Junior Member Username: Ferraripete Post Number: 137 Registered: 11-2002 |
i actually applaud ford for making the new gt...i may even buy one once the premium falls away. it will be a tuners dream and i have no doubt there will be 750 hp ford gt's on the road shortly. still substitute for cubic inches! the posting of the daytona and gt 40 mk 2 photos...thanks! they are really great comparison pics. lastly the gt 40 and the porsche 917 were the most feared and respected cars in history! i am a huge ferrari fan and actually grew up near luigi chinetti...i had no choice but to be a ferrari lover. even luigi sr and jr both respected the ford and porsche as they were just so fast! well anyway, porsche now makes suv's and we all should be glad there are car manufacturers that still see benefit in embracing some great moments in history. long live the gt 40!!! | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 991 Registered: 2-2002 |
Great post, James. Disruptive technology indeed. Ford changed the face of racing by introducing the idea of developing a chassis to make it better rather than just running it as it came off the designer's desk. Previous to Ford there might have been some fiddling with shocks and bars, but no real development as we know it today. Drivers drove around problems in those days. Ford thought their way around problems and continued to hone the original until it barely resembled the car they had originally introduced. Today we take race engineers for granted. Thank Ford for that. Mark Donohue gets much of the credit for putting engineering at the forefront but, remember, he drove for Ford and was exposed to their way of thinking before he drove for Penske. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3205 Registered: 1-2002 |
By "spank", I did not just mean raw straight-line performance. I meant that plus reliability, handling, braking, etc. As for that "truck" motor: I will bet that it will be a lot more reliable, and a lot easier & cheaper to fix, than anything coming out of Ferrari or Lamborghini. By a wide margin. And if it breaks, there is a high liklihood that any Ford dealer can work on it, even in East BFE. After your Ferrari/Lambo warranty (and roadside assistance) expires, good luck if you are in a remote area. I'm with Jim G. on this one. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1613 Registered: 1-2002 |
james: i'm 22 , and favor the ford. | ||
| James Selevan (Jselevan)
Member Username: Jselevan Post Number: 785 Registered: 6-2002 |
Great discussion. It would be interesting to survey the responders for an age breakdown. I suspect that those favoring the Ford are old enough to remember the Daytona, LeMans era, and witnessed these beasts in person. In my humble opinion, there has never been, and unlikely to be, any vehicle that instilled more fear in spectators than the GT40. To see these brutes leaving the infield to enter the back-banked straight of Daytona was simply breathtaking. To stand 3/4s down the Musanne straight just before they began to brake, and watch them pass at 220+ mph left one speechless. And to see this, uncompromised in the rain was downright scary. Graham Hill, when asked why he turned off his windshield wipers (in the GT40) during a downpour at LeMans stated simply, "Nothing stays on the windshield at 230 mph." IN THE RAIN! The debate over truck engine, retro design, Ford, etc., misses the point. Rather than look at this as "...turning back the clock...", I would rather interpret this as an amazing testimonial to how far advanced Ford was in 1966-72. In addition, less we misinterpret the real issue here, Ferraris cost far more because they are manufactured in limited production, represent art as much as engineering, and realize that their brand will command the price (what the market will bear). There is little relationship between value and price when purchasing a Ferrari. On the other hand, Ford, with a better performer in the GT, can sell it for far less because they have "borrowed" engines from trucks, bearings from wheat thrashers, and engineering time from domestic designers. No, gentlemen, the GT40 represented a disruptive technology that was a sentinel event in auto racing. Without the GT40, nothing would have pushed Porsche to the 917 or Ferrari to the 512. Given all of the money in the world, I would spend a very small amount on a Ford. Jim S. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 747 Registered: 9-2002 |
You guys are too funny. Your asking about reliablity in a proven engine? An engine that goes into pick-up trucks,designed to be able to tow and haul around a big SUV? Come on people get off the crack!! What Ferrari engines are bullet proof? Geez look whats happening to the 360 engines with there con rods!! Look at the early 355 with the valve guide trouble. Look at the fear of a timing belt snapping!! Personaly in a high performance car,I would rather have a proven engine,not one that in the back of my mind could explode at any given time. This car will be a huge hit and to pick on the engines origin is just well..silly. Grow-up and face the music..you will be blowen into the weeds by this car,any day,any time,any hour, any TRACK!! | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1610 Registered: 1-2002 |
James: I do know what you mean. When I watch footage of GP's from the 50's and 60's, or films like "grand prix" and "le mans," I can't believe just how causual (read: bravado) those days were (makes you want to just drive!!!). hubert | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 990 Registered: 2-2002 |
I don't know about the interior space. My brother is 6' 1", but he has a very long torso. His inseam is only 30", which is pretty short for his height. He sat in the new Ford GT and said he did not fit. The designer told him to recline the seat all the way, but he felt it was way too difficult to drive at speed at that angle. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Advanced Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2950 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hugh I do like it but my sunday dance card is pretty filled. BTW my Duesey is really running well. That one is a trip and a half to drive. To think that they raced cars like this at LeMans once makes you think about life, the universe, and everything. Best | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1609 Registered: 1-2002 |
MrG.: Are you considering the "new blood"? | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Advanced Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2949 Registered: 10-2002 |
Dale It will with room to spare. | ||
| Dale W Spradling (Drtax)
Member Username: Drtax Post Number: 509 Registered: 4-2003 |
Well, here's one F-guy who likes it. If it turns out that it fits my 6'2" frame, oh man, am I in trouble... Dale | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1022 Registered: 10-2001 |
"C'mon, 10% chage for the 550 to daytona? Let's be serious here. If someone has the photos, then the GT40 next to the new GT." If Ford is a copycat without original ideas....so is Ferrari. When you don't like the Ford GT, just say so. But dont pick on Ford for not havning new ideas. Ferrari is playing the same game... because people like it.  | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Advanced Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2948 Registered: 10-2002 |
It depends what you want. If you want a car that's 5 sec. a lap faster at Luguna than a 360 built by a co. that has won LeMans more recently than Ferrari than this is for you. | ||
| 1987 Jerry (Slag_328gts)
Member Username: Slag_328gts Post Number: 306 Registered: 9-2003 |
If I were buying this car from Ford, I would care about : 1) Styling - I like it - Yes it's retro, but so is the mini & that seems to be doing well. :-) 2) The interior - Again - I likey 3) Price - How much is it going to cost? 100k? High for a Ford, but then again, Ford has never made a car of this caliber. 4) Performance - Definitely looks like this is a beast. Not sure why I should care if it's a truck engine?? If it has good performance and is reliable & has the right weight for the car, than what is the problem? Bottom line : I have a hard time spending 100K plus on the car. I like it, but I would rather have a used 360 or a used 355. There is something owning a Ferrari brings that just can't be seen on paper. | ||
| David N (Nboy)
New member Username: Nboy Post Number: 43 Registered: 7-2003 |
I tell ya, name cachet and truck-based engine aside, this GT is SWEET! Have you guys seen the chassis work on this thing - for an engineer and technoweenie who likes old cars like me, this car is great, and then to see its built by an American company... it just gets better. I wouldn't trade my Ferrari's for one, but I'd probably buy it over another Ferrari. David | ||
| Al Johnson (Bigal)
Junior Member Username: Bigal Post Number: 195 Registered: 3-2002 |
Good point Gary. My Pantera, an almost 30 year old car will still beat a lot of new cars and some fairly recent model Feraris too, BUT it's not a Ferrari. | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 140 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hubert, I hear ya. Every time someone talks just strictly about performance numbers, I can't help but think of a blown Z06. If all I wanted was a fast car, that would be the one. Not too many cars that I know of would hang with that car. Certainly not the GT, 360, Gallardo, 911TT, Murci, etc. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1605 Registered: 1-2002 |
Clax -- blown z06 sound AMAZING. The blower whine is surreal; there was a silver one at laguna, and you heard the blower whine in the paddock as the car was coming onto the front straight-- unnaturally quick car. Same owner also trucked in a 360, 355c and his track toy z06. | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 139 Registered: 10-2002 |
C'mon, 10% chage for the 550? If that is 10% change, the change from GT40 to GT is about 0.00001% change. Let's be serious here. If someone has the photos, post the 550 next to the daytona, then the GT40 next to the new GT. | ||
| Gary Brauch (Gary_brauch)
New member Username: Gary_brauch Post Number: 50 Registered: 10-2003 |
>>I have a feeling that it will absolutely spank the 360 & Gallardo in head-to-head comparisons in all areas but label cachet..<< Join the club. The GT3 is quicker, too, especially around a race track, and at $100k it's cheaper. And then there's the Z06. Still not a Ferrari. F-cars have never been about the bang-for-buck equation. | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 138 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hey, if it's all just about the race track or "spankings", gimme a Z06, I'll throw a blower on that car, do some suspension mods, and then we'll see how the GT40 hangs with it. Is that all we care about in a car? Not me. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1021 Registered: 10-2001 |
Clax- " The 550 and 575 are retro, but do they look EXACTLY like something else?" They look like the Daytona. maybe 10% change. Same as new GT vs. old GT40 maybe 10% change. | ||
| Al Johnson (Bigal)
Junior Member Username: Bigal Post Number: 194 Registered: 3-2002 |
Yeah Dave, Ferrari underestimated the GT40 back in the 60s and got their hat handed to by cars that had "truck engines" in them. | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Intermediate Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 1604 Registered: 1-2002 |
>>I think underestimating the Ford GT is done at one's own peril... I have a feeling that it will absolutely spank the 360 & Gallardo in head-to-head comparisons in all areas but label cachet..<< Couldn't have said it any better, and I could never resist the rumble of big bore V8 domestic; only nuance is, the GT is blown, while the 360 is NA, so it's not all too suprising that the GT makes 100 more hp, and 2x the tq. All in all the GT is a very grassroots car that makes power the old way. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 3204 Registered: 1-2002 |
I think underestimating the Ford GT is done at one's own peril... I have a feeling that it will absolutely spank the 360 & Gallardo in head-to-head comparisons in all areas but label cachet.. | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 137 Registered: 10-2002 |
Mark, If Ferrari did give you a 2005 308, do you think they would produce a skin that is nearly identical to the previous 308? I doubt it. I think they would have a little more creativity than that. | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 136 Registered: 10-2002 |
Mark, My comments are not pro-Ferrari. The 550 and 575 are retro, but do they look EXACTLY like something else? BMW did an outstanding retro concept with the Z8. Since when is developing a car with the same exact body style as the predecessor considered a design acheivement? | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 135 Registered: 10-2002 |
Mike, It's not just the fact that it is a truck engine. It's basically a beefed-up-run-of-the-mill powerplant with a blower. When I say run-of-the-mill, this 5.4L engine powers the Expedition, F-150 (& other pick-up trucks), and the Excursion. This engine & blower combo is quite inexpensive, and rather "yesterday". Ford has been running this combo in Mustang prototypes for years (and some limited production Mustangs). This may sound silly to some people, but if I'm spending $$$$, honestly I don't think I want that engine in my car. They took the easy way out. The performance results are probably awesome, but at 360/Gallardo pricing, I think you should get a little more new technology and exclusivity. But, for those who must have a car that is a "better performer than a Ferrari" (as the tester stated), then they could purchase the GT. But, they could also purchase several other cheaper cars, modify them, and have the same result (for far less money). | ||
| ryan (Ferrari_kid)
Junior Member Username: Ferrari_kid Post Number: 60 Registered: 7-2003 |
ford was about to make completely new components for the GT40 but didn't because the development team was given something like two years to build the car from scratch. they ended up taking parts where they could, which explains the truck engine. not really sure if the truck engine is a good or bad thing. doesn't seem too bad seeing as how porsche is contemplating putting the cayanne turbos V8 into the new 911TT. but then again, it's a porsche engine vs a ford engine. but the new Ford GT remains the only Ford sports car that i'd ever buy. | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 988 Registered: 2-2002 |
Great video. It was shot in southeastern Michigan, but Clarkson seemed to have difficulty staying on the 'right' side of the road. Martin: I imagine if a GM bigshot got hold of a Ford GT he'd make a mess of things on purpose. | ||
| Paul Loussia (Bumboola)
Junior Member Username: Bumboola Post Number: 227 Registered: 3-2003 |
This car is truly a bright spot in what is otherwise a poorly run company (know people that work there.) Hopefully it will spark a fire inside Ford, much in the way the Viper did at Chrysler. Even Detroit looked good in the video! | ||
| Mark (Study)
Intermediate Member Username: Study Post Number: 1020 Registered: 10-2001 |
-"Overall I think some of the automakers are way too eager to rehash & revamp the past." -"I still think they had the opportunity to create something entirely new" Are you guys talking about Ferrari's 550 or 575 ? Retro is in. But once again...if ferrari does it, its smart. If Ford does it..well its the reason that the Ford GT is lacking your respect. I wish Ferrari would have the balls to do what FORD did. And give me a 2005 308 or Dino Funny how this problem only works against all brands that aren't Ferrari | ||
| James Lee (Aventino)
Junior Member Username: Aventino Post Number: 148 Registered: 6-2003 |
I still think they had the opportunity to create something entirely new that took some design cues from the old GT40, from the MK IV and other famous Ford Products but looked modern and sadly they elected not to take it. | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 414 Registered: 12-2002 |
Clax, Can you explain to me how "truck engine" is a con? On the surface it would appear to be just an ignorant comment, but I figure maybe there is something more to it. Maybe you feel the engine is less reliable, or too heavy because it's derived from a truck engine????? | ||
| ryan (Ferrari_kid)
Junior Member Username: Ferrari_kid Post Number: 59 Registered: 7-2003 |
the new issue of EVO has the GT40 and F360 comparison in it. they say the GT40 is the hands down winner for it's feel and stability at the edge. that's great...but it's still not a Ferrari. | ||
| 1987 Jerry (Slag_328gts)
Member Username: Slag_328gts Post Number: 304 Registered: 9-2003 |
Nice vid - Thanks for posting. | ||
| Clax (Clax)
Junior Member Username: Clax Post Number: 134 Registered: 10-2002 |
It seems like the tester was a GT40 freak all his life. I think it's fair to say that his comments are a little biased. My opinion: Pros: Great HP and Torque numbers I can't think of anything else Cons: Truck engine with supercharger Styling is identical to predecessor Overall I think some of the automakers are way too eager to rehash & revamp the past. This car is getting a good amount of attention now, due to its "newness". I think the hype will subside fairly quickly. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Senior Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 6497 Registered: 5-2001 |
Nice Vid. I have seen thew GT40 on the track here in Miami and was not that much impressed but then without knowing who drove the car it is hard to judge if it was the driver or not. Almost makes sense if it was some GM bigshot driving like is gandma. | ||
| allan fiedler (Allanlambo)
Intermediate Member Username: Allanlambo Post Number: 1514 Registered: 6-2002 |
I looked this car over at Monterey. Just doesnt do anything for me. And the wheels are horrible. | ||
| Omar (Auraraptor)
Intermediate Member Username: Auraraptor Post Number: 1135 Registered: 9-2002 |
Good Video. | ||
| Lucas Taratus (Karmavore)
Member Username: Karmavore Post Number: 443 Registered: 12-2002 |
I glad Jeremy liked it. Kinda makes me proud, even. Luke. | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 296 Registered: 2-2003 |
Great video but would rather have a Ferrari than a ford! | ||
| Willis Huang (Willis360)
Intermediate Member Username: Willis360 Post Number: 1705 Registered: 8-2001 |
Why would I not like that? Look and sound pretty good. | ||
| Crawford White (Crawford)
Junior Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 216 Registered: 3-2003 |
I'd love to have one - I bought an NSX in the early 90's partially because it reminded me of a GT-40. A Ferrari will never be a GT, and the opposite applies as well. | ||
| Adam (Eldiablo_viper)
Junior Member Username: Eldiablo_viper Post Number: 178 Registered: 7-2002 |
http://www.sleepy-fish.com/other_videos/TopGear_GT40.wmv I love that car! |