Lamborghini Gallardo vs. Ford GT

[syr74]

When the full production-spec version rolls out I wouldn't bet against it freak. As an earlier poster indicated Ford has said that the production GT will now be 550hp, not 500hp as previously indicated. And, Ford says it will still be "conservatively" rated at that. That might be the understatement of the millenium as Saleen has been saying that early production-spec GT motors have been regularly dynoing well ABOVE 600hp.

My personal opinion. It looks to me like Ford really, really wants to make a big splash with the new GT, and may be sandbagging to help achieve this. (if claiming 500hp can be called sand-bagging). When the real deal hits the street I am thinking it might be much stouter than the pre-production cars magazines have been allowed to test and drive so far. A GT with a real 600hp and 500+lb-ft tq that is all over the rpm band should handily smoke anything short of an Enzo...and maybe even the Enzo.

This makes a compelling argument really. What if Ford's performance goal all along was to outrun the Enzo (and to a lesser extent the Murcielago) and not the 360 and Gallardo? Given the GT's now apparent enormous power advantage over those two vehicles it makes you think. If Ford really wanted to show Ferrari up outrunning their ultimate car with an under 150,000 dollar car would indeed do that.

BTW, that 550hp rating now puts the GT over 100hp per liter.

[syr74]

BTW, the "word" from Saleen is apparently that production-spec GT's are dynoing at 520hp, at the wheels. Do the math and, yep, thats right....that is over 600hp at the crank.

The Ford GT has come to kick ass and chew bubble-gum. And it is all out of bubble gum.

[crayzayjay]

Interesting post. But even with 600bhp, the Ford GT would still be down in power-to-weight on an Enzo or Carrera GT. Unless it goes on a diet and sheds ~150 kgs...

[moslerporschefreak]

Exactly, Bill Gates didn't argue in court that long just to save himself money, he couldn't careless. He just wanted to maintain his prestige through the power of his company. Oh well, I can't complain too much about the Henry Ford bit. afterall, Ferrari is good as ever right now and Ford got the chance to create the GT40.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

Interesting post. But even with 600bhp, the Ford GT would still be down in power-to-weight on an Enzo or Carrera GT. Unless it goes on a diet and sheds ~150 kgs...

Yes, the Ford GT would still be down on hp, although not by very much. Also, Ford's policy on their ultra high performance cars right now seems to be drastic under-rating in the power department. Now, I know that Porsche and Ferrari don't do this to the same extent, but how close are their numbers from past dyno runs?

The only newer Porsche I have seen dynoed was a standard, naturally aspirated 911, and it basically pumped out exactly what Porsche said it should. But, that doesn't mean Turbo models get the same treatement either as Ford takes two different routes themselves. Any info?

Your post also fails to take into consideration the GT's vastly superior toque curve when compared to either the Enzo or the Carrera GT. It's going to have a large effect on what happens when you put the hammer down. From a torque standpoint I could well say the same thing about the Enzo and the Carrera GT you said about the Ford GT in your post.

Some folks criticise Ford's use of a blower, but all you have to do is look at the torque curve and arguments should stop IMHO.

[moslerporschefreak]

syr74, if what you say is correct, than this argument is in fact already decided. However, let me question Ford's logic should you be correct. Sure sandbagging can help a car once it is released in full production. But, with the GT so many magazines have tested it that do you think Ford would have sandbagged it too much. There's a thin red line between avoiding exageration and downing your product. Considering Ford's precarious position as they revive their market line, I find it hard to believe that they would under rate their flagship car.

btw: When will the full procution model come out? That's when we'll know for sure I guess.

[crayzayjay]

Porsche are famous for understating performance figures, i dont know about Ferrari. I cant say ive seen the Enzo / Carrera GT / Ford GT's torque curves but im sure the Ford's is the flattest. Peak torque isnt that much higher though (particularly over the Enzo), and i dont think the Ferrari / Porsche engines can be described as peaky either. With less weight to lug around i guess that's what makes them quicker in a straight line. At least i think so... apparently one mag got a Ford GT to sixty in 3.5, which is exactly what the Carrera GT has achieved... anyway, there's more to these cars than 0-60...

[Kurtdg19]

I know that the GT can hit over 60 in first gear which is a major benefit in its low 0-60 times. I was wondering if the Enzo/Carrera were the same way. How else would they be able to hit 60 that quick if they required a shift to second?

And as far as the GT actually being marketed against the Enzo and such other competitors I say good luck. Thats a hell of a goal to beat or even par on considering the astronomical price range the Enzo and the Carrera are in. If the GT can prove to stay with these two cars, then it will certainly prove more than it bargained for pushing well into the extreme supercar realm IMO. But till then, I'm going to be skeptic when the GT's compared in their turf.

[moslerporschefreak]

Ok, so we have it narrowed down to this. Assuming that Ford is sandbagging the GT's straigtline, we now have car at 150k that accelerates like the best of Europe but as far as the cornering and intangibles still is around the other cars of its class. So for the dollar, the GT beats the lambo. Right?

[broddie50]

Correct....

[syr74]

Originally Posted by moslerporschefreak

Ok, so we have it narrowed down to this. Assuming that Ford is sandbagging the GT's straigtline, we now have car at 150k that accelerates like the best of Europe but as far as the cornering and intangibles still is around the other cars of its class. So for the dollar, the GT beats the lambo. Right?

Actually, yes and no. IMHO the Ford GT is liable to smoke everything besides the Carrera GT and the Enzo even if there was no sandbagging at all. (I am only considering the more "common" supercars right now....Lambo, Ferrari, Porsche and the like......five car a year producers can wait till another dicsussion). I don't think Ferrari's 360's or any of the production 911's stand much of a chance just from what we have seen already. I also fully expect the Ford GT to trounce either Lambo on a road course as well, again sandbagging aside.

Some may (and will) argue otherwise, but I think it is pretty obvious already that "all around" the Ford GT is the superior performance cars to all the autos mentioned above. It was just a mag comparo, but the GT hammered the 360 Stradale and the 911 GT3 around a road course in the only road course comparo we have to date. On a race track the GT3 is as fast, and truth be told faster than a standard 911Turbo. I have a very hard time believing the 911GT2 is three seconds a lap faster (that is what it would have taken to merely equal the GT's lap times consistently) than the 360 Stradale or the GT2.

BTW, three seconds a lap on the average road course is an all-out massacre. (I previously thought it was five seconds a lap, but checked and saw that it was three..well, we went from seriously hammered the Europeans to just good old hammered I suppose) The track they raced on also didn't give the Ford GT the opportunity to utilize it's insanely better high speed acceleration against the two Europeans either. So frankly, on a lot of tracks the big Ford would have destroyed these two entirely.

I hate to use mag comparos, but as that is all we have so far we kinda' have to. Does anyone seriously think either of the current producton Lambos would have been THREE seconds a lap faster than the 911GT3 or the 360 Stradale? No way guys, uh uh. If you exclude the Enzo and the new Carrera GT (which we still really have no idea about performance wise) the only car from either company that stood a chance at all was a 911 GT2. And, as I said before to claim that it would be three seconds a lap faster than it's slightly better handling GT3 little brother on that twisty track would be a huge leap of faith to say the least.

Next to the Enzo the 360 is easily the fastest current Ferrari on a track. And, next to the GT2 Porsche's fastest track car is obviously the GT3. Both of these were beaten soundly by a pre-production (and possibly slower) Ford GT. It is not difficult to figure out where the chips would have fallen had either Lambos or any production 911 been out there. That says a lot about a sub 150,000 dollar car already IMHO.

[Neutrino]

I think we need to put a few things into perspective here.

True at 150K the ford its quite a bairgain. But lets not forget this. Lambo, Ferrari and Porche have to make a profit from their cars. So they have large markups above the R&D and production costs.


On the other hand ford makes its billions out of selling focuses and mondeos, the Ford Gt is mainly a publicity stunt, an image car for the company. And considering its low production numbers Ford can sell this car at 0 profit or even at a loss.


also the Enzo and the Carrera GT are not the only ultra supercars out there. The Koenisegg and Zonda both trunced the Murcielago when Stig drove them.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Neutrino

I think we need to put a few things into perspective here.

True at 150K the ford its quite a bairgain. But lets not forget this. Lambo, Ferrari and Porche have to make a profit from their cars. So they have large markups above the R&D and production costs.


On the other hand ford makes its billions out of selling focuses and mondeos, the Ford Gt is mainly a publicity stunt, an image car for the company. And considering its low production numbers Ford can sell this car at 0 profit or even at a loss.


also the Enzo and the Carrera GT are not the only ultra supercars out there. The Koenisegg and Zonda both trunced the Murcielago when Stig drove them.

That is one of the better arguments I have heard so far. You are absolutely correct, Ford could indeed sell the GT for 30,000 dollars each and not really "feel it" given the limited prodcution of the car. And, even if Ford is making a profit on the new GT as they claim it does that too is intended more for making a statement than anything else .

However, it is noteworthy that Ferrari and Lambo are both owned by larger companies even if it doesn't give them quite as much advantage as Ford has with the GT. Porsche has no such advantage and the fact that a "base" 911 Carrera is so good and costs no more than it does is amazing IMHO.

I was referring to cars like the Zonda and Koenissegg when I referred to very limited number producers and waiting till later for a comparison. They too deserve their shot at fame and glory.

With all these amazing supercars returning we need a magazine to get as many as possible together in about a year and see what the real deal is. However, I am not holding my breath.

[RedLightning]

id go with the GT, and heres a nice article, that i think some one mentioned earlier.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1