Ferrari vs ford

Oh well excuuuuuuuuse me professor. The GT then.

 

Havent seen a GT on the road yet. Just at the show.
I prefer the F430 looks and surely its sound ( Dont really like modern American V8 sound ) .
The interior in the GT looks really cheap although im not a fan of the F430's.

 

WHERE ARE THE SIDE BY SIDE PICS?! I'd love to see a pic of the GT in the 430's shadow

 

pics
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

And the Pagani Zonda uses a block from the S600 Mercedes.. but that doesn't stop it being fantastic.. While the block has generic origins Roush have done a fair bit of work to it.

But what about torque ? The GT stomps all over the F430 by over 150 lb/ft.

Right.. but it doesn't come with one, and one is a very brave person (there's a fine line between bravery + stupidity) to go modifying a F430.

 

I think someone got the f wrong in f-chat...
It's still Ferrari-chat, right?

I wouldn't mind owning wither one of them, but my first choice would be the F430.

I think the styling of the Enzo and the F430 will be re-evaluated over time.

/Peter

 

I personally agree. You have to look at the engineering. That is one reason I bought the 355. 109 hp per liter. The 430 is 116 per liter. Still more than Ford. Let's all agree engineering is about refinement and the pursuit of excellence. I have a large amount of respect for normally aspirated engines. The 430 is leaps and bound better than the 360. The Ferrari sounds better and looks better. My Bassett "Dugan" has a better looking ass than the GT. The rear end of the GT has way too much activity going on and I hate the generic bumper. The pricing on the Gt's are in runaway mode right now. I would truly hate to buy one now and see what the prices will be this spring. Do you all understand they are selling for 55-70 percent over MSRP on EBAY. The dealer in my area wants 78 percent over retail. If that was the 430 your talking 372K!!!!! By the way my 355 has more horsepower per liter than the GT and it is 1999 engineering. Look beyond emotions and history and the Ferrari is my choice. NOW, CAN WE PLEASE BURY THIS THREAD.........

 

And ?? The Zonda kicks out 550bhp from 7.3 litres (75bhp / litre) .. does that make it any less of a car ? Don't think so.

You've seen the back end of the F430 right and detect no irony in your comment ?

I'd agree with you there.

Given the desirability and limited numbers, prices may not come down.. like the F40.. then again they might.. who knows.

 

Yes it does imo. Please understand engineering. It all about the tweeks and engineering proficiency. Seriously, go look at the GT in person and then understand why I like the Ferrari rear better. My god can we end this thread. Listen, I don't know if you ever coached sports, but if you have you will realize the effiency of number engineering or so called "stats". The 430 has some very large stats that I don't personally think the GT looks good against. I am done now. Unsubscribed.

 

I have, I've seen both in the metal, and bought the GT.

 

Both cars are brilliant, but I'm a Ferrari man (yet to be Ferrari man).

Anyone arguing against the Ford GT's qualities is flat out wrong.

In the end it's all about what makes your pants tight. There are no other valid reasons for buying such an expensive toy.

 

the GT is definitely stunning, but the f430 still has my heart.

the F430, i just read, is 112.1hp/liter, which is still better than the Enzo's (OMG!) 110 per liter! And to think that the Ford even has a power-adder!

The brave, the bold, the blasphemous! Add me to that category, because I can assure you that if I had the money, I'd be taking my F430 straight to Koenigg. Granted, any Ferrari is art, in its purest form, but I am a power hungry speed freak, and will rebuild, restyle, and BLOW _ANY_ car to make it suit my personal preferences.

Ferrari may be perfect for a car, but nothing is perfect for YOU when its being (sub)mass produced for the masses.

that being said, for $300,000 I'm sure you could aquire an F40, or a Jaguar XJ-220! Supercars! Not mundane humdrum exotics!

 

While I agree with you and the numbers look great on paper but based on my own experience it is just a marketing hype and doesn't have any significance unless Ferrari can show every engine coming out of their assembly shows the stats. While F430 has some awesome performance I have become skeptic on what Ferrari says and does with regards to their marketing propaganda...

 

I agree. Too bad 355Flyer has refused to be shown the err of his ways, what's with the hangup on a high strung engine? I don't understand the people that argue that a car with a narrow, high RPM powerband is so much better to drive. Give me mountains of torque down low with gobs of horsepower further up and it's easier to drive. Maybe it's just because in the end, I see the goal as a low laptime rather than most shifts per lap.

In the day that the Integra GS-R was a sensation, I recall that autocrossers were talking about something like 14 shifts per run at Solo II Nationals (this would be in about 70 seconds). In the Camaro, I was making 1; put it in 2nd and concentrate on your lines, not when am I going to run out of gear again and do I drop 1 or two gears for this corner! My shifter kart is the same way, and the shifting is genuinely distracting from trying to keep something that fast on course!

 

And that's exactly why I want a GT40.

The FORD looks like raw sex, and the 430 looks like a clownshoe.

 

These numbers don't mean anything any more. A GenIII MR2 Turbo (245hp- out of the factory in 1995) had 122.5hp/liter. And that's a car that can go 200,000 miles before a rebuild. I'm not sure what the Supra TT was putting out.

I had the opportunity to go to the ART Center Design School this year for their annual car show. http://motortrend.com/autoshows/events/112_0408_artcenter/

During the panel discussion the question of what makes an exotic an exotic these days came up. No one could really answer. All agreed that performance alone (or posting good numbers/ratios) was no longer the main criteria to judge what makes a "Super-Car." There's more too it these days. Anyone can go out and hot rod certain cars these days and make them perform as well if not better than the cars being discussed here. What makes these cars special are the way the driver interacts with not only the car but also his environment. The way the car feels on the road. The sound it makes. The touch and placement of gauges and controls. And what the design and implementation of all of these things means to the driver. This is what goes into making a modern day "Exotic-Super-Car." Numbers don't mean as much unless they're way below what the market segment is producing.

I'm guessing that the GT's supercharger could produce a little more boost than what they have it set at. For reliability reasons I'm sure they backed off of what the max is. Don't forget this engine is basically the same that they've been running in the Jaguar XJR. It's a good solid high mile high HP engine.

 

First off, Ford didn't merely "slap on" a supercharger onto an existing engine. The GT's block is specially designed for its purpose; can the same be said of the F430? Only the architecture is really shared in common with other Ford modular engines.

Secondly, hp and hp/l figures. How many V8 Ferraris in the past have been dynoed and found to be as much as Ferrari claim? How many weren't? On the flip side, how many supercharged SVT Cobras have put out more than the claimed 390 crank hp? (Answer: A helluva lot.) Point being, Ford is probably being conservative with GT hp numbers again. How else to explain that a heavier, taller-geared, ostensibly 550-hp car can almost go toe to toe with the Enzo to the 1/4 mile?
Yea, so the F430 gets 112-116 hp/l. Didn't the old S2000 get 120 hp/l? This coming from a $35K car...(And the '04 S2000 actually has less hp/l on paper than the old one; there's a lesson there). But nevermind, Honda's own superbikes put out far more than that. A decade ago. Breathing through carburetors.

GT vs Viper in that Motor Trend test...they weren't tested head to head for that article. The Viper's stats came from an earlier test, done on grippier pavement. When tested at this same venue, the Ford's figures were much, much better than the Viper's.

 

Looks are always in the eye of the beholder, and 50% of observers will disagree with you, maybe more, about the Ford looking like raw sex, and 99% will disagree about the 430 comment.

Gary

 

Your statement that Ford looks like raw sex and 430 a clownshoe is silly.Both cars are appealing.

 

Not "better", just more fun. And I agree with 355Flyer that it IS more fun. The large displacement, huge torque, low revving motor certainly gets the job done on the track and at the strip, but it is not as much fun as a high revving motor, just for sound alone if nothing else. And I wouldn't call the 430's powerband narrow and high. It actually seems to have the best of both worlds.

Gary

 

You *bought* a GT? What did you pay for it?

Gary

 

Less than the price of an F430

 

No, I didn't say that Ford was slapping on a Supercharger on to one of their engines. I'm saying they're using the same approach that they've been using on the Jag XJR: The XJR and Super V8 models are powered by a supercharged version of Jaguar’s 4.2-liter V8. The supercharged engine with twin intercoolers yields 390 horsepower at 6,500 rpm and a massive peak torque of 399 lb.-ft. from just 3,500 rpm

Ford owns Jag, you do know that... right? That power plant has been very reliable for them and a good performer. It's a perfect fit to up the displacement and drop into the GT. Just as they used an upgraded production engine back in the 60s for the GT40.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Senna21, I think you're a little confused. Or you've confused me.
I think you're saying the GT's 5.4 is related to the Jag V8, but it's not. It's a part of the mod motor family introduced in the mid 90s; 4.6, 5.4 & 6.8L. I think the Jag 4.0 V8 might be based on the 3.0 Duratec V6, and I know the 12 cylinder is.