Ford GT40

ford gt40

i'm all the way impressed, i just found out not only did it rape the modena on the test that evo did, but the people who got together on this car amazes me, they had john colletti (director of svt) jack roush and saleen. that makes me like the gt40 even more now.
there were other people involved also like metro technologies, who made the chassis

i wonder if the car would be any diff if they would have got shelby in the mix :naughty:

ford gt40

i'm all the way impressed, i just found out not only did it rape the modena on the test that evo did, but the people who got together on this car amazes me, they had john colletti (director of svt) jack roush and saleen. that makes me like the gt40 even more now.
there were other people involved also like metro technologies, who made the chassis

i wonder if the car would be any diff if they would have got shelby in the mix :naughty:

It's not called the GT40 anymore. It's just the GT now. The GT40 moniker was bought by the company that supplied GT40 parts to Ford tuners after the car went out of production. They were going to give the name back, only after a HUGE amount of money, which Ford wasn't willing to pay, so there.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0303_fut_gt/

well thats gay, car is still tight though, regardless the name.

Nice car, WAY too expensive though for my tastes!

Yeah - considering the price tag on that bad boy, it better perform like a champ.

Not too expensive for my tastes.... just my wallet! :iceslolan

Not too expensive for my tastes.... just my wallet! :iceslolan
How it always goes for some odd reason. :icon16:

well from what i read its well worth the price considering its priced along with the nsx and viper, and would own either of them and less then the modena, wich it already owned. its nasty, that car pumps fear into alot of super cars.

I have absoultely no respect for the GT until Ford puts it on the race track to challenge for the GTS class title.

Real sportscars race. Pure and simple. Ferrari races. Lamborghini FINALLY races. Audi races. Porsche races. Maserati races. Tiny little TVR races. What's the matter Ford? Blew too much money dying Eddie Irvine's hair?

do you know about the history of the new GT?

first, it's in the 150K price range. far less than the ferrari, but more than the viper/nsx, which it dominates.

second, the car is superior than the 360 on many levels, mainly b/c ford bought a couple 360's to take apart and study so they could build a car that was not only competitive, but superior to, to the modena.

so that's no surprise that it's better in nearly every aspect.

it's not your typical ford, that's for sure.

i'd take one. without a doubt, if i had the money, i'd have bought and paid for it a while ago.

Do you really think Ford is scared of Ferrari or Lamborghini?
You do know what the original GT40 was designed for?
Ford did it once if they are motivated they'll do it agian.

i love that car. normally i would pick a skyline GT-R over any other car except maybe a F40 and a tommy kaira ZZII, but this one is another amazing machine. i'm in love with this car. i can't help but go look at the official website atleast once a day. its gorgious. its very weird for me to gwark at a U.S car like htis. but this is just a amazingly car.

let's not get into the "what's better than a skyline gt-r" argument.

there's far more superior machines than the 2 you mentioned, the Ford GT included...

for what it is, there is nothing that can top the GT really...

and that's not b/c i'm a supporter, but simply b/c it's true... you're not going to find much, especially for that money, that's as well designed and as good a car as the GT is.

let's not get into the "what's better than a skyline gt-r" argument.

there's far more superior machines than the 2 you mentioned, the Ford GT included...

for what it is, there is nothing that can top the GT really...

and that's not b/c i'm a supporter, but simply b/c it's true... you're not going to find much, especially for that money, that's as well designed and as good a car as the GT is.


i know those cars will absolutely destroy a GT-R and that includes a modded one. but since i'm very biased torwards nissan. that is suppose to my dream car. but since i'm soo much in love with the GT that is why i said that. i know a F40 or any other super cars can take a GT-R. hell even a viper GTS and a F360 Modena can take the GT-R but just becuase the GT-R is not the fastest car in the world how come it can't be my favorite car?

i didn't say it couldn't be.

but the simple fact is that there are tons of cars that are at the very least, comparable, or better, than the gt-r. i'd love to have one, but i'd rather have quite a few other, less expensive (in the US right now) cars...

that's my point.

oh i just found out, shelby was involved
shelby
jack roush
saleen
and director of svt john coletti

Ford made the first GT40, but it sucked. They gave it Shelby basically saying *durr i dunno why it not go fast?" Mostly cause it had a small ass v8. Shelby took over the project and by the time he was completely done, it had a 429 in it.

Why is Saleen helping with a car that might be able compette with there S7?

Ummm.... No.

Shelby DID work on the engine tuning of the MkI GT40's and their 289's. That was really the extent of his involvement (recall that by 1968, Ford and Shelby absolutely hated each other, and by 1969 dissolved their partnership)

And no, Ford DID NOT build the first GT40's. The GT40's were LOLA projects, more or less outgrowths of the then dated T70. Ford did much of the development work on the cars (The infamous J car that got the great Ken Miles killed, for instance) but was NOT responsible for the initial build. The GT40 did not become entirely Ford's baby until the MkIV, whereupon they computerized chassis development, spent countless hours in the wind tunnel, and THEN used Ford's classic 427 side-oiler for power.

And now you know, the rest of the story.

Ummm.... No.

Shelby DID work on the engine tuning of the MkI GT40's and their 289's. That was really the extent of his involvement (recall that by 1968, Ford and Shelby absolutely hated each other, and by 1969 dissolved their partnership)

And no, Ford DID NOT build the first GT40's. The GT40's were LOLA projects, more or less outgrowths of the then dated T70. Ford did much of the development work on the cars (The infamous J car that got the great Ken Miles killed, for instance) but was NOT responsible for the initial build. The GT40 did not become entirely Ford's baby until the MkIV, whereupon they computerized chassis development, spent countless hours in the wind tunnel, and THEN used Ford's classic 427 side-oiler for power.

And now you know, the rest of the story.

My understanding was LOLA's involvement was purely in the chassis design.

Exactly. The chassis began as the replacement for the Type T-70 Spyder and the basis for the Type T-70 coupe.

http://files.conceptcarz.com/img/m&l%20auto/lola_t70_wg_blue_02eight.jpg

However, after Il Commendatore laughed at HFII and told him to get the f*ck out of his office, HFII stormed off to beat Il Commendatore at his own game.

To do this, he went to Lola to ask them to build a chassis for him to beat the Ferrari 330P2 (the P3's and P4's had not been developed at this time). What they did was build up their prototype for the T-70 coupe only now based around a Ford engine (Lola based the T-70 around Aston Martin and Chevy powerplants).

After turning over the rolling chassis (deemed the J-car at Ford) Lola continued with their planned evolution of the T-70 and produced the T-70 coupe seen above in Penske Can-Am colors.

Ford made the first GT40, but it sucked.

by far, one of the most ignorant posts i've read in a while...

octagon has it nailed. i don't need to expound more.

a car that out did ferrari, but it sucked :screwy:

Ok there's no question that a Ford GT is a sweet and superfast car.....but some people in here seem to think that car is the god of all cars. While it is extremely fast can can take most other cars it better not try a Porsche GT2 and for sure it better not try to run with a Ferrari Enzo because that thing will make the GT run home crying. Now I know a lot of people are gonna tell me that they could buy like 4 or 5 Ford GT's for the Price of an Enzo but that's not my point. My point simply is that the Ford GT is not unbeatable like some people in here seem to think.

Ok there's no question that a Ford GT is a sweet and superfast car.....but some people in here seem to think that car is the god of all cars. While it is extremely fast can can take most other cars it better not try a Porsche GT2 and for sure it better not try to run with a Ferrari Enzo because that thing will make the GT run home crying. Now I know a lot of people are gonna tell me that they could buy like 4 or 5 Ford GT's for the Price of an Enzo but that's not my point. My point simply is that the Ford GT is not unbeatable like some people in here seem to think.

Ok let's see if the Enzo makes the GT cry:
All numbers are from C&D


Enzo: 0-60:3.30 1/4:11.20 Skidpad:1.02 Price:$643,330

GT: 0-60:3.80 1/4:11.80 Skidpad:1.00+ Price:$150,00


I'll let everyone decide on thier own who will be crying. And the GT was designed to compete with the Modena :evillol:

Ok there's no question that a Ford GT is a sweet and superfast car.....but some people in here seem to think that car is the god of all cars. While it is extremely fast can can take most other cars it better not try a Porsche GT2 and for sure it better not try to run with a Ferrari Enzo because that thing will make the GT run home crying. Now I know a lot of people are gonna tell me that they could buy like 4 or 5 Ford GT's for the Price of an Enzo but that's not my point. My point simply is that the Ford GT is not unbeatable like some people in here seem to think.

Just so you realize, it's supercharged, so MORE hp is simply a smaller pulley away...

The way Ford has been underrating their products lately, the 500HP rating is probably a lowball figure.

Ok let's see if the Enzo makes the GT cry:
All numbers are from C&D


Enzo: 0-60:3.30 1/4:11.20 Skidpad:1.02 Price:$643,330

GT: 0-60:3.80 1/4:11.80 Skidpad:1.00+ Price:$150,00


I'll let everyone decide on thier own who will be crying. And the GT was designed to compete with the Modena :evillol:

I read Motortrend so I get my numbers from there. They tested the Enzo and compared it to a Kawasaki ZX9 (I think), whichever one was the fastest motorcycle in 94. The Enzo took out the bike in acceleration and braking. It took the Enzo 6 seconds to 100 mph and 10.6 seconds through the 1/4 mile. So since it can do the 1/4 mile more than a second faster than the GT 40 I would say it would make it cry. I'n not debating either that the Ford GT was designed to compete with the Modena because I knew that. I'm just simply stating an opinion about the car and letting other people know that there are faster cars out there (which some people don't seem to think) I'm not talking about you though.

I agree with 92teggsr (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/member.php?u=63354).

I like the new GT. It looks great and so far the perfomace aspects of the car are great. I can't wait to see a finished product. This is the first car from Ford in a VERY long time that I respect this much. However; I can't compete with a car like the Enzo, but granted the Enzo is almost three times the price.

I also agree with Octagon that they need to put that GT in some Gran Touring races, not only for its history and it namesake, but for the pure fact that the GT was designed for that sort of thing. The Vettes need some stiffer competion besides with the Vipers out of the way.

yeah, i agree with the 2 guys above me, but the enzo running 10.6 :uhoh:
that is gonna be hard for me to believe,
everytime i look at its specs it says 11.1

yeah, i agree with the 2 guys above me, but the enzo running 10.6 :uhoh:
that is gonna be hard for me to believe,
everytime i look at its specs it says 11.1

I direct you to exhibit A: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=145182

;)
2003 Ferrari Enzo
6.0L V12
660HP
10.8 @ 135 1/4

I know there are cars that are faster than the GT but $500,000 for a second quicker.... That hurts..... I knew time was money but ouch!.

Ahem, to paraphrase Road & Track Magazine; "The Prancing Horse comes standard."

That's why you pay more for a Ferrari. Ferrari is one of only THREE post-war marque's whose cars have the pedigree to command collector pricing and insurance over the $1,000,000 mark. The others being 6 particular Shelby American cars; the Cobra Daytona coupes and Jaguar (the lightweight E-Types, the D-Types, and the XK-SS's). No Porsche has crossed that threshold, neither has any Toyota, Nissan, or Ford. Yes, GT-40's are still well under the magic million. Guess what, the cars they "beat" (Ferrari still claimed the manufacturer's championship during those years, GT-40's only had Le Mans and occasionally Sebring) the Ferrari 330 P3's and P4's are two to three million dollar cars. To this day, $41,000,000 in 1988 remains the absolute highest amount of money ever paid for a post-war automobile.

A Ferrari 250GTO.

Only Ferrari has earned the right to stand alongside proud makes such as Duesenberg, Alfa Romeo (from whence Enzo Ferrari learned his craft and his knighthood under the Countess Baresca, who granted him her family's crest to proudly display upon his automobiles; the yellow Shield of Modena with a prancing black stallion upon the center) Mercedes-Benz, Bugatti, Talbot-Lago, Isotta-Fraschini, Auburn, Packard, Maserati, Delahaye, Bentley, and Rolls-Royce.

Why do you pay more for the Ferrari? For the same reason you pay less for the Ford. Because the Ferrari IS a Ferrari, and the Ford is still a Ford.

You can pay $500,000 extra for a name if you want, but you pay the money cause that name is suppose to mean the pinnacle of performance, design and style. The Enzo has too many close competitors for far less money to try to be this precocious.

You can pay $500,000 extra for a name if you want, but you pay the money cause that name is suppose to mean the pinnacle of performance, design and style. The Enzo has too many close competitors for far less money to try to be this precocious.
My sentiments exactly. You're payin for the "Prancing Horse" on the hood and for the status you automatically recieve. LOL, the "increased status" package is included.

Ugh, prestige is lost to you gentlemen. :loser: j/k

I understand that there ARE better performance bargains out there. Heck, how many times have you guys caught me hollering at kids buying Integras that they can buy old Porsche 928 S4's at about the same cost?

But Ferraris are different, just like buying a Bugatti (the prewar Bugattis, like Type 57SC Atlantics and Type 35 Gran Prix cars) or Duesenberg SSJ's. When purchasing any top line Ferrari, you're investing in a collectible which will be sure to appreciate in value as the years go on. Even Lamborghini Diablos and Countachs, once gods amongst supercars (even with their ridiculously incompetent handling, pathetic reliability, and circumspect ergonomics, and my cousin owned a Miura SV at one point so I can say this easily) have begun to depriciate. However, the Ferrari 288GTO, Ferrari F40, and even the admittedly lackluster F50 (slower in a straight line then a Jaguar? For shame, Il Commendatore would never have allowed that) are either holding their purchase value (in the case of the F50) or rapidly appreciating (as the 288GTO and F40 are doing).

The Ford GT, in my humble opinion, in ten years will become just as valuable in the marketplace as a 1994 Viper RT-10, a 1996 Acura NSX, or any other such entry-level exotic. They will become stylish and competent relatively inexpensive alternatives to the next generation of entry-level exotic.

The Enzo, however, will be parked at Pebble Beach alongside its peers or driven up onto the Christie's auction block at its owner's profit.

It is status. It is prestige. It is the benefit of driving automotive royalty.

To put it another way, Ford wouldn't build the GT until they saw enough waving checkbooks and now they'll build as many as can be sold. Ferrari would've built the Enzo even if no one was in the showrooms, and even once there was interest Ferrari still only built as many as they planned to. No more. No less. And no profit margin was going to change that.

It's two different philosophies. Ford is Ford. Ferrari is Ferrari. And no 500+ horsepower mid-engine super coupe styled like a classic race car is going to change that.

Not to mention that they ensure exclusivity by selling their most special of editions, like the F40 or the Enzo, only to proven Ferraristas that have been loyal Ferrari owners for a while.

No amount of celebrity or bribes changes that list that is handpicked by Ferrari executives. They're usually dealing with pretty powerful entities, and they have to be fair to everyone.

The only way a non-list enthusiast can get these cars is by buying it off someone or some entity (corporations) that were sold the car.

Lastly, these are cars are all usually spoken for before production is complete...and they don't do financing;)...

there are those who buy jordan basketball shoes for the name
and there are those who by shoes because of the quality.

IMO if you look back and want to buy a classic, and you look at the ford gt40, it still, till this day holds its crown.

i personally would buy the enzo over the gt, but i personally would buy the gt over the modena,


Whats Best Is Best.

It's two different philosophies. Ford is Ford. Ferrari is Ferrari. And no 500+ horsepower mid-engine super coupe styled like a classic race car is going to change that.

no doubt...

but remember that ford almost bought ferrari. and when they didn't, they designed a car to beat them. and did.

everyone is comparing the gt to the enzo.

wrong ballgame.

the gt is direct competition to the 360. end of story. and it destroys it.

and it's not simply a "look alike" car for the gt40. it was designed, from the start, to be just as good, if not better than the other cars in, and above, it's price range. and it is.

i'd take it over any ferrari any day. i'm not a big ferrari fan. too much upkeep, and too much expensive upkeep...

but that's just me

i think the gt is awsome much better than the modena with a close base price...the viper is not that much of a worse car and cheaper. Im a ford guy though.

a viper shouldn't even be spokin in this convo,
no comp, gt wil annihalate the viper

car and driver checked out a pre production version but did not do any real tested 0-60 is not that much faster, ford does not even need a new car to compete with the modena it only has 5 more horses than the svt mustang lol!