| Author | Message | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 831 Registered: 2-2002 |
 | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1366 Registered: 10-2002 |
Jack That is one I've not seen. Best Jim | ||
| Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Member Username: Ferraristuff Post Number: 633 Registered: 4-2003 |
Jim G., are you aware of the article in "Style Auto" 4/1969 about the development of the J-cars? Gives GREAT insight in the design and construction process. Also features a number of pics of your car (amongst others the one you posted, in front of the pits, but then in color). Best, Jack | ||
| Victor G. Rough (Vic)
New member Username: Vic Post Number: 2 Registered: 4-2003 |
I have heard that you have to invited by Ferrari for the priveledge of buying their Enzo. So, anybody here been invited? | ||
| Me Myself (Kid_enzoz)
New member Username: Kid_enzoz Post Number: 26 Registered: 4-2003 |
The GT40 competed with a V12 Ferrari... Let's see it up against the Enzo. Can't compair it to a 'baby' Fcar... IMHO. | ||
| David W Burnett Jr (Dbdreams)
Junior Member Username: Dbdreams Post Number: 74 Registered: 3-2003 |
TWA Not sure what you mean. Personally, I would rather have a 308/328 than any Ford. I don't care how fast it is, was, or might be. To me a Ferrari just has that "special something" that Ford never will, better performer or not. I must admit I have never been a Ford fan and I have always had a soft spot for Ferraris but that's just me. Fords are ponies and Ferraris are "Prancing Horses" | ||
| TWA (Exoticars)
Junior Member Username: Exoticars Post Number: 105 Registered: 8-2001 |
I think the 308/328 would qualify as a "Ferrari beater"...........  | ||
| KCCK (Kenneth)
Member Username: Kenneth Post Number: 347 Registered: 10-2002 |
Some comparison, surely, will never hurt, and will always help to stimulate progress? | ||
| David W Burnett Jr (Dbdreams)
Junior Member Username: Dbdreams Post Number: 73 Registered: 3-2003 |
Ken I agree with your point on comparison, well put. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1324 Registered: 10-2002 |
Ken I agree with that. Either you understand what Ferrari's truely about or you don't. Bill In the later editions of GT40 Books this error has been corrected. Best Jim | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 887 Registered: 10-2001 |
I would take a GT40 over most Ferraris because they're so cool, but it's a pure toy (the new ones I mean; the originals are something else again!). I'd take a 360 or 550 over a GT40 however if I was only allowed ONE toy. I think comparing anything to a Ferrari is kind of pointless in the sense that there is no competition. Lamborghinis are not the same niche, nor are Lotus', Saleens, Vipers or Porsches. Ferraris are a unique blend of looks, engineering, mystique and in a middle price range. When people say, "Oh my Supra or Diablo is faster" I glaze over and find another thread to read. | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 826 Registered: 2-2002 |
I would love to see the GT-40 be a world beater but reports from people who know say that there are decisions being made that may not allow that to happen. That doesn't mean that things won't change prior to production, but if it does turn out well it won't happen easily. That said, I find all this carping about bigger engines and superchargers to be sour grapes. Each company starts with a clean sheet of paper and they have the ability to produce anything they want as long as they meet federal regulations and comply with the laws of physics. Ferrari chose one route, Ford another. I'm sure no one here will complain when the Enzo spanks the GT 40 because they maximized their engineering in an area Ford didn't exploit. Also, remember that superchargers rob power. Some of these units require 100 hp just to spin the unit. They also require larger radiators and take up more space, making the car larger and potentially heavier. In the end it's the total package that wins the game. | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 825 Registered: 2-2002 |
BTW James, I found an interesting error in Ronnie Spain's book while researching the results. On Page 154 in the Race Record section it shows Gurney /Grant winning the '67 event in a J-6. I wonder what A. J. thinks about that. | ||
| Arnaldo Torres (Caribe)
Member Username: Caribe Post Number: 493 Registered: 2-2001 |
James, great story! I remember from the show that they stressed the fact that Ford put huge amounts of money just to be able to beat Ferrari. Their justification, Ferrari back up at the last minute from selling the company to Ford since Ford couldn't guarantee Enzo the management of the racing team. Henry wanted revenge! Did he get it? I guess it depends on your point of view. With equal commitment of resources perhaps history would have been written differently. Great stuff! | ||
| Erich Walz (Deleteall)
Member Username: Deleteall Post Number: 269 Registered: 12-2001 |
Reminds me of the Ferrari ad from the 80's "Ferrari: We are the competition." | ||
| Jeff (Jeff_m)
Junior Member Username: Jeff_m Post Number: 134 Registered: 9-2002 |
Good story Napolis,you are one lucky mofo! | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1322 Registered: 10-2002 |
Arnaldo As someone who is familar with both GT40ies and P4's, having driven, compared and currently owning both I can tell you the Ford that beat Ferrari, The MK-IV, (the only "GT40" completely built by Ford) is on a completely different level than the P4. It has a honeycomb composit tub, it's engine used computer modeling, it is far more comfortable to drive, it was 24mph faster on the Mulsanne, and it finished 135miles ahead of the nearest P4. The Ford motor Co spent 12 Million 1967 US dollars developing and building the MK-IV's. (8 cars) In 1967 the entire Ferrari Co. was only worth about 20 Million US. Those who reported on that race said "France had not seen as massive a US force desend on LeMans since General Patton rolled through during WWII." You have to realize Henry Ford II had a new, young Italian wife who upon watching Ford DNF in 65 had remarked: "Oh well a Ford could never beat Ferrari anyway." As I once told Des. When I stand in my garage at night and look at my MK-IV I can hear her wispering in Henry's ear and smell the 12 million dollars he spent to prove her wrong... | ||
| Arnaldo Torres (Caribe)
Member Username: Caribe Post Number: 492 Registered: 2-2001 |
Bill, thanks for clarifying the data. I guess the show was not too specific, or perhaps I misinterpreted the narrative. | ||
| Stephen S. Saia (Sssaia)
New member Username: Sssaia Post Number: 19 Registered: 4-2003 |
Also, don't forget the new ford gt is not only a 5.4 liter V8, it's also supercharged. So it's forced induction, bigger engine. Ferrari is smaller engine and naturally aspirated. Anyone wanna put a supercharger on their F360 and then look at the numbers | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
Member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 823 Registered: 2-2002 |
Arnaldo: Your facts are wrong. Following are Ford's results at Le Mans: 1964-DNF 1965-DNF 1966-1st Place Overall Amon/McLaren 1967-1st Place Overall Gurney/Foyt 1968-1st Place Overall Rodriguez/Bianchi 1969-1st Place Overall Ickx/Oliver | ||
| David W Burnett Jr (Dbdreams)
Junior Member Username: Dbdreams Post Number: 72 Registered: 3-2003 |
Branko, I think the comparison is bogus. I have heard it said here before but the story goes something like this. A guy in a Ferrari gets smoked by a Mustang GT but at the end of the day the guy with the Ferrari has a Ferrari in his garage. Any car that is compared to a Ferrari is a "wanna-be", (just my opinion). Think about it, outperformer or not, its not a Ferrari. Appreciate it for what it is, a dog-gone fast Ford but still its just a Ford. | ||
| Arnaldo Torres (Caribe)
Member Username: Caribe Post Number: 491 Registered: 2-2001 |
So what was the difference between that race and the 6 previous races in which Ferrari beat them? Just curious. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1605 Registered: 6-2001 |
The Fords won because they were faster, and the guys driving the Ferrari rung the piss out of them trying to stay with them. Then they broke, which is what usually happens when you are running an endurance race, and you need 100% from your car. Those 427 Fords were FAST. The 240 cu in Ferraris were overmatched in that race. The class got changed right after that, because we'd have seen even bigger engines. The old CanAm series ended up with some of the teams running 9 liter engines. Art | ||
| Arnaldo Torres (Caribe)
Member Username: Caribe Post Number: 490 Registered: 2-2001 |
I thought the only reason the GT-40 beat Ferrari on Lemans was because the Ferraris (3 of them) DNF the race, and it was actually the 7th Lemans race in which they competed. I saw it at the Ferrari biography on the History Channel the other night. Were they wrong? | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1321 Registered: 10-2002 |
As my MK-IV has 50 more HP and is over 1000lbs lighter I don't think the new one will beat my 36 year old one either. | ||
| Frank Parker (Parkerfe)
Intermediate Member Username: Parkerfe Post Number: 2300 Registered: 9-2001 |
The original Ford GT40 WAS a Ferrari beater. That was the reason is was built. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1320 Registered: 10-2002 |
This will not be the Ford that beats Ferrari. (Enzo 0-60 3.15 sec. 0-100 6.67 sec. Autoweek) | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 890 Registered: 10-2001 |
Most magazines feel the need to compare every fast cars to Ferrari no matter how big their engine is or how expensive they are , etc.. They just need ! Using the Ferrari name helps selling i guess | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 844 Registered: 3-2002 |
And they both taste delicious! | ||
| Branko Medenica (Branko)
Junior Member Username: Branko Post Number: 65 Registered: 3-2003 |
In (of all magazines) the June issue of Popular Science, there is an article entitled, "Ford builds a Ferrari-Beater". The article is mainly about the building of the Ford GT. But there is a specs page comparing the GT, with a Ferrari 360 and a Viper. Reading down the specs, I come across the engine size. For the Ferrari 360 it stated 3.6 liter V8 with 394hp, while the GT had a 5.4 liter V8 and 500hp. How can you compare the two? This is like comparing apples to oranges. |