[syr74]

Well, I figured out fairly early on that you believe the Ferrari is best. Which is fine as people like what they will. But, your reasoning leaves a little, okay a lot, to be desired.

First response: Ferrari was taking auch an a#$ whooping from Porsche and Ford in the late sixties/early seventies that soon after Ferrari decided to abandon every factory backed racing effort except Formula One. Not exactly a never say die attitude IMO.

Second response: The new Ford GT is much faster than the Ferrari 360 for significantly less money. Straight line acceleration is no contest, the GT exits corners much better (And it does this with more power which is very uncommon) and delivers power to the ground better out of corners. The GT also corners better than any 360 except the "stripped to race car spec" Stradale. Which is merely the GT's equal in cornering, not it's superior.

And, however old the 360 may be it is by far the fastest car Ferrari builds outside of the Enzo. A 360 will leave the much more expensive 550M or a 456GT like they are tied down. The only car Ferrari builds that is faster than the GT is the nearly one million dollar Enzo..And, the Enzo is barely faster than the GT.

Third response: People always cite peak hp specs with no consideration given to how or where it makes that power. Yep, the 360 makes a lot of power way up high in the rpm range. And, this is fine as it is classic Ferrari and many people like this style of power delivery. However, it is far from the "only" way to build an engine or the best IMO.

The Ferrari makes all that hp in a tiny rpm range that you have to work to keep the 360 within to extract maximum performance. The GT engine produces low end torque the Ferrari can only dream about and has a power curve that is as flat and as wide as Kansas.

This could be why in a run to 150 mph the Ferrari loloks like it has a boat anchor tied to it compared to the GT. Check the specs. People who constantly cite peak hp and act as though it were the end all obviously do not understand torque/horsepower/or their ratio to one another.

Put simply, the GT obliterates the Ferrari in acceleration and the faster you go the worse the 360 looks. Slap a supercharger on the Modena if you want.....the Ferrari would just lose by less unless you seriously reworked engine specs.

If all you did was the prerequisite cam and C/R adjustments their just isn't enough potential for a factory type supercharger to overcome that kind of acceleration disadvantage. Not to mention, the Modena is already a good bit more expensive than the GT. Why make it even more expensive only to lose in the end anyway?

And, as for Ford "tearing apart" a 360, you are aboslutely correct. This is something smart companies do to see what the other guy is bringing to the party.

It is of note that Ford said they thought they could do a muich better job on a chassis design than what they found in the Modena and the chassis use cery different techniques in a lot of areas. In other words the GT is far from a 360 copy.

And I will gladly compare the GT to Ferrari's most expensive car. The GT has generally been called a much better road car than even the 360, so I hold little hope for the Enzo in that comparo as it is "set on kill" compared to the 360.

The Enzo is a faster car, but not by much and I would bet not in every respect. Look at a GT's 0-150 time and I would bet by those speeds an Enzo would be looking at two big round tail lights .The GT seems to go faster the faster you go.

Oh yeah.......... For the price of an Enzo I can buy a GT, an Aston Martin BB7 GT, and a very nice house in the hills.

Definately...victory Ford IMO.