ford gt application

Did you not understand that i'm exploring OTHER areas than power-to-weight? And i'm certainly not talking about top speed, either

Let's try again : it's a given, that LaFerrari slaughters the new Ford GT in power-to-weight.

The NEW question (i tried to explore previously, in post #120) is : what OTHER areas of performance, will the Ford GT so outperform LaFerrari, that it can overcome a serious power-to-to weight disadvantage in order to be competitive on a track?

Does the Ford GT have a lower center-of-gravity? NO.
Does the Ford GT have a better weight balance, or lower polar moment of inertia? NO.
Does the Ford GT have a lower coefficient of drag? Don't know Ford GT's numbers ...
Can the Ford GT apply power better or faster on corner-exit? NOT A CHANCE ... the way LaFerrari 'loads-up' the combustion engine during cornering, and applies electric motor torque under throttle application, is positively unmatched. By any car. Ever. A turbo V6 won't even come close.

How about braking? Well, it seems like the Ford GT may have an advantage, because it has lower weight. HOWEVER ... LaFerrari recovers energy on braking So even though LaFerrari has a weight disadvantage (less than 20%), if it recovers at least 20% of its kinetic energy under braking, then the Ford GT must actually dissipate more heat under braking ... even though it weighs less. So the answer is : NO advantage to Ford GT in braking.

See what I'm saying ? The Ford GT has NO OTHER performance advantages, compared to LaFerrari, to overcome the serious power-to-weight shortfall.

CONCLUSION : When you consider ALL performance parameters, there's no reason to believe that the Ford GT will be even close to competitive with LaFerrari on a track. And it shouldn't be ... these cars are not only in different leagues, performance-wise ... but cost/price-wise, as well.

 

Um, yes, we know that. No one said or even thinks this is a move by Ford into the exotic market. Never has anyone said this is the launch of Ford's exotic line-up and efforts. It's a once-a-decade halo car for the brand.

The last FGT wasn't a move to be in the exotic market and this one isn't either.

 

So it's purpose is.......

PR to beef up the Ford brand image????

 

So your conclusion is that the Viper ACR (a last generation $150K road car) uses magic to best the 918, right?

 

Yes. Everyone has been saying that from day 1. That's all it is. It's a marketing exercise to say "Look, this crazy race car has an ecoboost engine and so does your Focus! Your Mustang was developed by the same guys who developed this car! Look, Ford has the best engineers in the world and that's why your Focus ST is the best hatchback in the world!"

 

Convince me that you can read, and understand my last post ... including ALL the performance areas i'm trying to explore and compare ... and maybe i'll answer your question.

OR ... just tell me, tell us all ... EXACTLY what performance metrics or parameters lead YOU to believe that the Ford GT can be competitive with LaFerrari on a track. Is it any of the areas I've explored ... multiple times? Or, will the Ford GT beat LaFerrari on a track because ... because ... it's just so damn cool ???

 

Build something cool. Race the nuts off it.

Quite simple.

 

Um, what? The LF doesn't just get to recover energy and turn that energy isn't any force or dynamic it wants. If it doesn't brake as well, it doesn't brake as well, period. 100 ft vs 90 ft, or whatever, is still 100 ft vs 90 ft, regardless of how much energy you converted to electricity.

The LF could be 100% efficient with regenerative braking and all that would do is charge the batteries. Well, if the batteries weren't low in the first place, then nothing was really gained.

 

Basic physics : traditional brakes work by converting the car's kinetic energy (proportional to mass times velocity squared) to heat. Ask the brakes to dissipate too much heat, and the brakes will fade. KERS offers something new (absent in the Ford GT) : the possibility to convert some of the car's kinetic energy to electrical energy, rather than waste it as heat. The 20% mass disadvantage of LaFerrari (compared to Ford GT) is, quite likely, more than compensated by asking the car to convert & dissipate less energy as heat.

Sure ... there may be a corner or two where the batteries are full. Under these conditions, a KERS car needs to behave like a standard car, and waste all the kinetic energy as heat. LaFerrari brakes are sized appropriately.

Bottom line : no real advantage to Ford GT in the braking department, given the KERS present in LaFerrari.

 

Aero, tires, suspension, electronics, and braking are all good candidate for improvement.

Aero looks pretty extreme to me, tires can be whatever they want, suspension can be entirely track focused if they want even if it's not great on the road, braking could be better since tires could be better and the car will be much lighter, electronics improve constantly with better resolution, sampling, and speed. And, well, the programming/algorithms could be superior as well.

Dodge has already proved that for less than $150K using components long since available and not even cutting edge/new, you can have LF/918/P1 track performance with far worse power to weight.

Hell, a 10 year old 430 race car with much worse power to weight and older technology than an LF will wipe the floor with the LF on a track. Why? Well, it's a race car with super aggressive everything and it weighs a lot less.

 

Aero : I've already discussed, and asked more than once, what's the coefficient of drag (c/d) of the new Ford GT ??

Electronics : why expect the Ford GT to be superior to a state-of-the art KERS car, in electronics?

 

Um, we're talking about hot laps, not a GP. If you want to take about brake fade over the length of an entire race, you might as well talk about the fuel efficiency of the V12 in the LF vs the TT V6 in the FGT. But then you have to also consider the size of the fuel tank. But then you...

My bet is that brake fade on the GT vs the LF is meaningless.

 

I thought it was a great looking car and I applied. I sent some track videos and some photos of my car at work on the track. I would like to have one. It took ten minutes of my time. If they allot me a car, I will buy one and be happy. If they don't, I will find something else to make me happy. Right now I am happy with a 458 Challenge car, hell, I'm easy!!

 

I'm not hearing anything (other than vague suggestions about possibilities) that would lead one to believe that the new Ford GT could actually be competitive with LaFerrari on a track.

The Ford GT suffers a serious disadvantage in not only power-to-weight, but also power delivery on corner-exit (turbo vs KERS), height of center-of-gravity (battery pack placement in Ferrari), etc ... and we don't know enough about aero (c/d) differences, production tire differences, dynamic suspension control algorithms, etc to become convinced that the Ford could possibly dominate in these areas SO MUCH, as to overcome the serious power-to-weight disadvantage.

My point is, and has been, simply this : based on all available info, LaFerrari wins on a track. Easily.

 

Why wouldn't you expect that? That's like the nature of electronics and digital technology. Suppliers have teams working on products currently in production, a year out from production, two years out from production, three years, etc and usually have new stuff ready to go year after year.

The LF electronics are not state of the art, they are YEARS old. A manufacturer has to commit to a spec at some point and they don't just improve/change stuff constantly as production goes along.

If the GT starts design and engineering 2 years after the LF, which is probably quite likely, then it most likely has newer technology.

 

Question: Is the new ACR competitive with the LF on a track?

 

The baseline electronics in a KERS car are MUCH more advanced than a non-KERS car (i'm an electrical engineer, and have actually done a bit of consulting in this area). The algorithms are more sophisticated, because the number of variables under observation and control are more numerous. Furthermore, all of the cars we're discussing allow for software/firmware updates ... to just about any system that impacts the dynamic control of the car.

It's just to vague to suggest that the Ford GT "might" offer an advantage in electronics ... an advantage that "may" help a lap-time, on a track ... simply because it's 2 years newer.

 

Answer : IF the answer is yes, THEN the reason why can be quantified ... along the lines of ALL of the performance metrics i've been discussing in this thread:

Power-to-weight
Aerodynamics
Brakes
Chassis dynamics (including weight balance, center of gravity, polar moment of inertia)
Gearing
Power-delivery on corner exit
Tires
etc etc

I'd continue to invite (well, it's not my thread), as i've attempted to do for several pages, a comparison of the Ford GT ... in ALL these areas ... to any current Ferrari I wouldn't be surprised to see the Ford GT dominate in a few of these areas compared to the 488, but it loses in almost every one to LaFerrari.

EDIT : by the way, i happen to have a new Viper ACR as well as a LaFerrari but neither has seen a track yet

 

It's vague but highly logical. Technology moves forward and the new GT is not a parts bin car. It doesn't have to use or adhere to anything in Ford's road car pipeline, and it's unlikely anything they had would be useful anyway.

Is the V12 in the LF the ideal engine for it performance-wise? Honestly, probably not. I doubt it's a coincidence that the FF/Lusso/F12/TDF/LF all use a 6.3L V12. The GT engine is derived from the LMP2 car.

 

ahh but the engine in the LaFerrari is NOT the same old Ferrari V12 ... nor is it the same engine used in other current V12 Ferraris. It is VERY much optimized, for use in the KERS LaFerrari.

At the very least, the cam profile is significantly changed (as well as air induction, and perhaps fuel timing as well) to allow for higher-rpm performance, given the massive, complementary torque boost at low RPM from KERS.

You won't find much from Ferrari's "parts bin" in LaFerrari, either.

 

So that begs the question: Why would you expect the new GT, which will probably be 400 lb lighter than the ACR, to be inferior in those respects when we know it's designed as a race car before a road car?

And speaking of the ACR, being that we already has seen many laps from it and seen that it can hold it's own against way higher powered cars, check out the acceleration differences. It's 3s slower to 100 mph than the LF/918, and it's over 20mph slower in the 1/4 mile than the LF/918. The power to weight is like 40% worse that the others, and yet without any KERS it brakes better than both from 60-0. And we pretty much know the LF/918 are very, very close to each other on a track.

There is no reason that the new GT shouldn't be able to do the same. Everything the Viper has is available to Ford or even Hyundai. The reason the GT is $450K is because it's a Ford and not supposed to be a money maker. The car would be $1.5M if it had a Ferrari badge.

Dodge Viper ACR (Mk V)
654 ps (645 bhp)
1548 kg (3413 lbs)
422 ps / tonne

Ferrari LaFerrari
963 ps (950 bhp)
1585 kg (3494 lbs)
608 ps / tonne

Porsche 918 Spyder
887 ps (875 bhp)
1640 kg (3616 lbs)
541 ps / tonne


Viper ACR LaFerrari 918 Spyder
Top speed 285 kph (177 mph) 350 kph (217 mph) 345 kph (214 mph)
0 - 100 kph 4.0 s 2.7 s 2.5 s
0 - 200 kph 11.8 s 6.9 s 7.3 s
0 - 60 mph 3.5 s 2.4 s 2.2 s
0 - 100 mph 7.4 s 4.7 s 4.9 s
1/4 mile 11.5 s @ 127.3 mph 9.7 s @ 149.1 mph 9.8 s @ 148.5 mph
60 mph - 0 27 m (87 ft) 29 m (95 ft) 29 m (94 ft)

 

So the FF/Lusso/F12/TDF/LF all just happen to make about the same amount of torque, and the TDF just happens to get within spitting distance to the power output of the LF, and they're all 6,262 cc with bore/stroke of 94 mm x 75.2 mm?

I don't doubt each has it's own optimizations for the given model and that it's a phenomenal engine, and that components will be different, but I'd say it's a far cry from the RSR derived 918 motor or the LMP2 derived GT motor, and I have trouble believe the V12 in the LF is the best motor for it performance-wise. I think there is a good reason you don't see Aventador GT3s or F12 GT3s -- the V12 is not ideal for racing.

 

I don't know why you keep going around in circles on this point.

YES. We both agree that the LaFerrari has a significant advantage in power-to-weight, compared to the new Ford GT. We both agree that, as a result, the LaFerrari will undoubtedly slaughter the Ford GT in a quarter-mile drag race.

YES. We both agree that, on a track, there are OTHER things that matter, besides just power to weight. Agreed.

WHERE WE DON'T AGREE : I maintain that all those "other things" that matter, on a track, can still be quantified ... and when we try to do so, based on currently available info, the Ford GT still comes up short, compared to LaFerrari ... on a track. It seems that you just want to toss up your hands, and believe in all manner of un-quantifiable vagueries, once we get past power-to-weight.

I honestly don't know how to make this any more clear : Track performance is quantifiable. I've listed MANY significant factors, besides power-to-weight. Power-to-weight ratio is a significant performance metric, but it is not the ONLY performance metric. I haven't seen any real data ... across any and all metrics, including (but not limited to) power-to-weight ... to convince me that the Ford GT will competitive with LaFerrari on a track.

The only other thing i can do, is ask for specifics :

What SPECIFIC performance measures do you see in the new Ford GT, to lead you to believe that it will be competitive with LaFerrari on a track? We know it loses badly in power-to-weight, but we ALSO know that power-to-weight is not the only thing that matters, on a track. So ... among "all those other things that matter", where does the Ford GT dominate LaFerrari, specifically?

 

Based on how it looks, I'd say aero is going to trump it, I'd say it's going to weigh massively less, I believe the suspension is going to very aggressive being that someone who has ridden in it not long ago said it didn't feel that great on the street (though it was a prototype,) possibly a very aggressive tire option or at the very least Cup 2 tires and lightweight CF wheels. Interior looks small. Looks like scrape-city with the overhand and how low the prototypes seem to sit.

Everything about this car looks like no-compromise. It looks like it will be a beast on the track and possibly ****ty on the road.

And yes, it's just simply newer so everything about the technology is going to be better than an LF. Knowledge is gained and automotive technology isn't developed in vacuum, nor solely by a manufacturer. I'm pretty sure everything developed for the LF by suppliers already has a better version ready to go.

 

My Speciale is 3490 lbs. and has 597 hp. So I guess the extra 3hp
puts it in "the next time zone" BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA!


Look I had 2 Ford GT's - they are great cars - the last one I had was with a Whipple 4.0 and exhaust and pulled 700 hp. Guess what? It didn't feel anywhere near as quick as the Speciale.

I suspect this car will be a beautiful car, but the difference between it and the Speciale will be minuscule (unless you call .3 second difference in 1/4 mile HUGE).

Get real.