Dodge SRT10 Viper vs. Ford GT

i agree with you that the gt40 has had a great heritage and all. but what does that matter. are you going to go to the track and be like, "yeah, this car has an extra 50 horsepower because of it's heritage." i am not saying that the heritage is a big part of it, but when it comes to comparing cars, i don't really look at the heritage.

Um... why would I need to claim that it will have 50 more hp because of it's heritage? It already out performs most of the cars you have mentioned...

It seems your basis for comparison is not based on heritage, since the GT has that, and it's not based on performance, since the GT has that too, it's merely based on personal preference. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but at the very least you could admit that and stop pretending like there's something inherently wrong with the Ford GT.

Um... why would I need to claim that it will have 50 more hp because of it's heritage? It already out performs most of the cars you have mentioned...

It seems your basis for comparison is not based on heritage, since the GT has that, and it's not based on performance, since the GT has that too, it's merely based on personal preference. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but at the very least you could admit that and stop pretending like there's something inherently wrong with the Ford GT.


It's now official the GT will be rated at 550hp (still underlisted by the way) My vote GT excellent beautiful machine, I always wanted an original and want a new one even more.

i never said there was anything wrong with the gt. i personally think the gt is an okay car. there are a few reasons i don't like it a lot and i have already mentioned a couple of them. but another one is the engine. it is a supercharged 5.4L V-8 and makes 550hp, well, ferrari's next 360 is probably going to have a N/A 4.0L V-8 with 500hp. that is one way i don't like many american cars is because they have to use big engines to get a lot of power.

"that is one way i don't like many american cars is because they have to use big engines to get a lot of power."

Yet, you side with the Viper that needs a 8.28L V10 to get 500hp. Hm...

Not to mention you forget that Ferrari and Ford is almost opposite in their methods of getting their power. Ferrari, being very active and drawing a lot of what they learn from F1, will almost always build engines that are meant to rev very high. High revving engines will almost always have more efficient max power when compared to an engine Ford would make which is probably meant more for low-end torque and mid-range rev horsepower. This is nothing new, if Ford really wanted to do that, I'm sure they could, mainly they just have to shorten the stroke, it's not that the Americans don't know how to do this, it's just a difference in methods. Personally I've always favored low-end power for the quick initial accelerations, which is one reason why I would favor an American supercar over a european one. As good as high-revving engines are at putting out horsepower with considerably less displacement, it's just not my cup of tea.

Comparing the two isn't exactly a good comparison, I compared two American built engines when comparing the Viper engine and the GT engine, so that is a bit more equal, if you really want to argue numbers, let's talk about torque. The 360 Modena has less torque than my car, and my car is pretty crappy compared to anything we discuss here. Not to mention compared to the GT, the amount of torque from the 360 is almost laughable, but the performance of the 360 isn't so laughable. So really, these numbers mean very little, how it's applied means a lot. And performance-wise, the Ford GT can stand up against just about anything you throw at it, and for the most part, at a much lower price.

i never said there was anything wrong with the gt. i personally think the gt is an okay car. there are a few reasons i don't like it a lot and i have already mentioned a couple of them. but another one is the engine. it is a supercharged 5.4L V-8 and makes 550hp, well, ferrari's next 360 is probably going to have a N/A 4.0L V-8 with 500hp. that is one way i don't like many american cars is because they have to use big engines to get a lot of power.


Yeah but why invest in another family of engines, Ford just used engines from their truck family of engines it's more of a logical thing. I understand what you're saying though and you are one of those people here that make logical arguements. It's all good I love the GT because of it's timeless design and beauty. I like the Viper as well but between the 2 I'll take the GT.

i never said there was anything wrong with the gt. i personally think the gt is an okay car. there are a few reasons i don't like it a lot and i have already mentioned a couple of them. but another one is the engine. it is a supercharged 5.4L V-8 and makes 550hp, well, ferrari's next 360 is probably going to have a N/A 4.0L V-8 with 500hp. that is one way i don't like many american cars is because they have to use big engines to get a lot of power.
More likely a tuned version of the 4.2 V8 found in the Maserati Coupe ;)

They don't have to use anything, they choose too. And its not a supercharged 5.4 stupe!

Well, I'm talking about the 60's, to my knowledge, Americans never ever won one of those high-profile races against the likes of Ferrari and Porsche, and if there was a win before, it was probably not like what Ford dished out with the GT40.

Basically, if my memory doesn't fail me, this was during a time when those races were normally dominated by the Europeans, and then Ford came out of nowhere and surprised the hell out of everyone.

Yes, with a European car with an American engine. The GT-40 is no more a Ford than the Shelby AC Cobra or the Shelby Daytona.

Its a ford, no excuses.. Hell, that didn't take long. I was wondering how people would avoid stating that us Ford boys could compete with anything including vipers and other exotic cars...Its stamped Ford, thats all that matters.

Yes, with a European car with an American engine. The GT-40 is no more a Ford than the Shelby AC Cobra or the Shelby Daytona.

The original GT40 body and chassis were made in England however the new GT is completely in house motown produced.

Its a ford, no excuses.. Hell, that didn't take long. I was wondering how people would avoid stating that us Ford boys could compete with anything including vipers and other exotic cars...Its stamped Ford, thats all that matters.

OK MACH I have a 65 mustang but I'm not bragging about FORD like some irational redneck argues pro chevy. I get just as excited about a focus as I do a civic all front drive trash. However if it came down to the 2 I'd take the focus being a Detroit boy. Leave the obnoxious flag waving to the pro-chevy guys. I agree though that there's a lot of FORD bashing at this site namely from pro-chevy mullet sportin' rednecks and the ricers, but put them in their places with intelligent words. Oh yeah 69 MACHs are beautiful cars brother.

Theres alot of nice, fast cars out there, but I have been a ford guy all my life, and all my family works for Ford. But, not to say I don't love Camaro SS, WS6, and all those cars that look just like each other..lol..

Again, and I've already said this, to my knowledge, the GT40 that was designed by Lola was creating over 300 pounds of LIFT at the nose, and it needed to be redesigned. So the configuration and original idea for the GT40 was a Lola thing, but the car that actually won at Le Mans had a lot more Ford in it than the original did. Either way, Lola was contracted by Ford, and many European companies also contract other companies to design and supply a lot of their parts, so stop making it seem like only Ford did that and it wasn't Ford that won those races, because it was, live with it, a company other than the one you like most did something good, live with it.

The original GT40 body and chassis were made in England however the new GT is completely in house motown produced.

I know that, which is why I said GT-40, and not GT.

Again, and I've already said this, to my knowledge, the GT40 that was designed by Lola was creating over 300 pounds of LIFT at the nose, and it needed to be redesigned. So the configuration and original idea for the GT40 was a Lola thing, but the car that actually won at Le Mans had a lot more Ford in it than the original did. Either way, Lola was contracted by Ford, and many European companies also contract other companies to design and supply a lot of their parts, so stop making it seem like only Ford did that and it wasn't Ford that won those races, because it was, live with it, a company other than the one you like most did something good, live with it.

Live with it, that is rich.

I don't have a problem with the GT-40. I happen to like the GT-40, but it isn't a Ford. It is a Lola with a Ford engine and some minor aerodynamic tweeks. My problem is with people like you touting Ford with creating this Supercar when they didn't.

They don't have to use anything, they choose too. And its not a supercharged 5.4 stupe!

okay, then what is it?

Okay, I've done this before but I will do it yet again for the sake of historical accuracy. The MkI and MKII Ford GT's were based on a design originally done by a British engineer. Ford liked his design so they bought his company and hired him. Ford then heavily revised the car and it became the GT.( btw they are all technically named GT...GT40, Mirage, J Car were all semi-official nicknames..MkII, MkIV were designations of which generation of GT your were looking at)

The most succesful Ford GT by far was the all-American MkIV. This car was a scratch-built car by Ford Motor with no outside influences whatsoever. It's development was by order of Henry Ford II to prove yet another point. From 1967 on if you see a win in international sports car "prototype" racing it was by this car. (I think there is one exception) Ford won one of their two international championships with this car and three of their four LeMans victories.

The new Ford GT indeed looks very much like the MkII GT40. However, it also looks very much like the "Mirage" variant of the GT40 MkIV so please feel free to mention the MkIV when discussing the new GT. As a matter of fact, some people feel the new car looks more like the "Mirage" GT than anything else.

Ford won the manufacturer's championship in 1966 and 1968. It is of note that Ford's 427ci V-8's were outlawed after it's dominating 1967 Lemans win which partially explains Ford's lackluster 3rd place showing in chamionship points that year. The 427ci V-8 was outlawed due to it's sheer dominance of the rest of the field, Ferrari included, so the small block had to be readied in a hurry.

If it were not for late-race wreck in the 67 LeMans Ford would likely have swept 1st through 6th, and the International Racing body was having none of that. It is of note that the rules change only affected one major competitor, Ford. However, Ford still managed to win 5 out of 14 races running only a partial schedule. The 67 season proved the same thing 65 did..Ferrari tended to beat Ford only when the rules were changed to suit them.

Ford won the championship again in 68 with the smaller 302ci V-8. Makes you wonder what would have happened if the 427 was still being used? Actually, you don't have to wonder. Barring mechanical failure or a wreck Ford would have likely won every race as a new 3 valve per cylinder 427 was being readied before the rules change limiting displacement to 5.0L came into being. As it was, Ford won 6 out of ten races that year in route to the chamionship while Ferrari finished a dismal 7th in points

From 1966 through 1969 the GT dominated the endurance racing schedule. And, it dominated intenational racing in general from 1966 through 1968. Ford left international racing after 1969 largely because it seemed that every time they started winning somebody changed the rules. (surprise, surprise) And, Ford had already proven their point anyway.

Ford created the original mid-engined American supercar and they have done it again with the 05 GT. Vipers everywhere beware. Ferrari's too for that matter.

They don't have to use anything, they choose too. And its not a supercharged 5.4 stupe!The GT is too supercharged.. Reseach more before you throw around fact's.


IMO the GT would "Chew the Viper a new asshole"...

Yah, the GT's engine is definitely supercharged. Some people don't think it is because they don't see the typical supercharger setup. It's a newer style screw-type supercharger, that actually replaces the upper intake manifold and directly forces the air in, I believe.

Again polygon, you quote me, but didn't seem to have read any of it. The original GT40 that was designed by Lola wasn't the one that actually won in Le Mans. The only thing that really stuck from the original was a few of the dimensions and the engine configuration. The body was completely redesigned from the original Lola design. If you want to actually learn anything, why don't you actually look at photos of the original Lola design and the ones that were winning in Le Mans and tell me if they have ANYTHING in common, because they really don't. They look completely different, and everything that matters, was engineered by Ford. Other parts that could be supplied by third-party contractors were done that way, but a lot of other people do that too, so if you really want to be that technical, then technically none of the other cars were really Porsches or Ferraris.

Also, read syr74's post.

I know that, which is why I said GT-40, and not GT.



Live with it, that is rich.

I don't have a problem with the GT-40. I happen to like the GT-40, but it isn't a Ford. It is a Lola with a Ford engine and some minor aerodynamic tweeks. My problem is with people like you touting Ford with creating this Supercar when they didn't.


Whatever brother, of these 2 cars I like the GT. For those that complain it only has 550hp and it's supercharged etc. Know this there was a lot done to the engine to hold back it's numbers as well even at 550hp it's underrated. The design is timeless and I've always loved it in GT40 or GT form. Oh yeah and I'm sorry you have a problem.

They must have a support group for this somewhere. There are plenty of Ferrari fanboys that got their panties all in a bunch about the Ford GT.

There's a love/hate relationship with the Ford GT, people either love it, or they hate it. Guess it must have hit a nerve...

Hey guys, I found an old thread comparing SRT with SVT while doing a search on google, and didn't realize that it was a really old thread, and I ended up digging it back up by replying to it. Well, I guess i'll officially do an actual comparison between the cars that I was interested enough to speak about, and that is the new Ford GT and the Dodge SRT-10 Viper.

The current specs might be a little different than what you might remember, so I'll reiterate them here:

Dodge SRT-10 Viper
Engine: Naturally Aspired 8.28L V10
Configuration: Front Engine/Rear-Wheel Drive
Power: 500hp @ 5,600rpm
Torque: 525lbs-ft @ 4,200rpm
Acceleration (0-60mph): 3.9 seconds (C/D 01-2003)


Ford GT
Engine: Supercharged 5.4L V8
Configuration: Mid Engine/Rear-Wheel Drive
Power: 550hp @ 6,500rpm
Torque: 500lbs-ft @ 3,750rpm
Acceleration (0-60mph): 3.3 seconds (C/D 01-2004)

Alright guys, what's your opinion?


Ok,

Ok,

Ok, darn laptops. Do I sense something fishy going on. Has anyone ever owned a Viper? I have and its a 94 RT-10 and I have had its since 95. Look
at the stats between the Viper and the Ford GT. Are these apples for apples. Absolutely not. The Viper gets its power from raw horsepower, not souped up horsepower as is apparent in the GT. Now the GT is at its maximum power curve whereas the Viper hasn't even begun yet. May I explain. If one chose to upgrade the Viper and add the supercharger and a few other small items, the Viper would produce approximately 1068 hp at the flywheel and around 875 at the rear wheels. Why doesn't Dodge just do that, well, the car would not be street legal. The Viper V-10 is the most powerful engine in raw horsepower ever put into a production sports car and is the most popular engine exported to Europe to soup up for racing cars.

My first generation, (first jenny) Viper now boasts 875 hp at the wheels and let me tell you, I would gladly leave in the dust any Ford GT any day. The GT is kind of out of options in increasing its power curve, whereas the Viper's huge engine has just started. Add nitrous and they are producing over 1300 hp, but who wants to do that.

Besides, everywhere I go I get more looks and thumbs up driving this RT-10 even from those in Ferrari's. I have had admirers walking around this black RT-10 while in a parking lot during shopping as it is a show stopper in the looks department. I have had people photograph it while traveling down the freeways and people stop and turn their heads when this beauty drives by with that distinctive sound of the V-10.

And for the record, I did race a friend of mine with a GT against my 94 Viper and yes with 800+ HP, I blew it away in the quarter mile. My Viper has 21k miles on it so is in good shape.

Talk apples and apples... currently the stock Viper without the turbo's ect. is basically the same power configuration of the GT. Add the extras to the Viper like the GT has and bye bye GT.

You might want to consider the Viper Venom at 675 hp or the supercharged Viper and take them for a spin. Your comments about the Ford GT which I think is ugly, will soon disappear.

I hate to close this after you posted a long post but please don't bring up threads more than three months old this one is about two years old. If you want to discuss it start a new thread.