PDA

View Full Version : NEW Photos of the GT



kinan.f
07-07-2003, 09:52 AM
New images of the FORD GT are now available @:
http://www.highresautoimages.com/ford/gt.html

Supra-Devil
07-08-2003, 06:39 AM
man this suxs ok......

motorhead
07-08-2003, 06:59 AM
Originally posted by Supra-Devil
man this suxs ok...... actually it is quite a nice car but i do not find it beautiful - performance aint that great either but just remember this car thought Enzo ferrari something - his ferraris are not the best in the world

Innotech
07-09-2003, 08:52 AM
this new GT is a serious threat to Modena and Gallardo. Id say it has adequate performance! Even CAR magazine tested it and loved it, and that was a development prototype!

gtface
09-12-2003, 12:30 PM
I absolutely love this car. I will have one some day, no matter what it takes. The performance is absolutely mind-blowing for the price, which is rumored to be under 100 grand. This car is still, and will always be, the Ferrari killer.

crisis
09-14-2003, 10:42 PM
Im not a Ford fan but it is impossible for me not to like this. It is hugely impressive for Ford to retain what I assume is the original styling and a credit to the original design that it is dated so well.

Falcon500
09-15-2003, 04:49 AM
Well im loving it! i cant wait to see them hit the nations cup circut here :D And i must say i never thought ford would go past the prototype stage.

Motorer1
09-15-2003, 10:45 AM
Seriously, they are usually really conservative, but recently with the new five-hundred sedan and thunderbird, they are going all out.

Prowl
09-17-2003, 02:13 PM
now, this is by far one of the greatest cars ford has ever mede, but why put a blower on it? awesome it may seem, but a friend of mine whose dad owns the oldest ford dealership in indiana told me that the block is off a lincoln navigator. if so thats sad. i mean this is my fav car ever, but it was rushed. 18 month to make it and they could've done better.i think in 5 years it will be up to Murcielago standands, or at least have a version that is.

more-boost1555
09-18-2003, 12:01 PM
The 5.4 is used in LOTS of vehicles first off. Among them, yes the Navigator, the F-150/SVT Lightning, Mustang Cobra R, and the Expedition. It's a damn fine engine which can be fit with all kinds of heads. A two valve as seen in the old F-150 and Lightning, three valve as in the new F-150, and four valve like in the new GT, Lightning concept, and Cobra R. Not sure which head the Navigator and Expedition use. But naturally aspirated the engine can make up to 390hp as seen in the Cobra R, which had a 5.4 block with 4 valve cobra heads. Supercharged the engine makes that same number with a two valve head, as in the old Lightning. Blown with 4 valves? 500 horse/500 foot pounds. Or in other words, BAD ASS.

So what if it's block has it's roots in trucks? Who cares? It kicks ass, and the use of it as opposed to a specially developed engine unique to the GT (as I feel you would prefer) is a big reason why the price is being estimated around $100,000 to $150,000 U.S.
Where as a more exotic all new engine design would have probably raised the price to the range of most european supercars.

Besides a blown small block V-8 is just about as american as Apple Pie.

kennyknoxville
09-26-2003, 12:04 AM
if its 100k youre getting a lot for the money (relatively). knowing ford tho, the interior will probably suck

Misho
09-27-2003, 03:01 PM
I think that Ford, along with most american car companies, are starting to put more money and effort on issues like quality, materials, fit and finish . . . its probably due to globalisation effects and that stuff.

I think they better come up with a good interior for this car ,after all its gonna cost around 100k !!

By the way, the new F-150 has a pretty upscale interior look.

Batmobile_Turbo
09-27-2003, 05:11 PM
if ford would have built the GT90 they would have a better reputation by now as a super-car maker. even though i dislike most fords, the GT is definately awsome. they're beingmore conservative, with cars like the '02 thunder bird and the GT, maybe they'll bring the GT90 back.

pato
10-08-2003, 04:26 AM
for value it beats the Enzo and Murcielago but outright performance? i doubt it and most people with that kind of money to spend on a car wouldnt mind paying the extra for a lambo or ferrari

Ham 'N' Eggs
11-02-2003, 05:56 PM
GT-40s are the best all these fags with their forign cars (some Italian cars are nice along with porche) GO AMERICA:D

Falcon500
11-03-2003, 02:10 AM
Originally posted by pato
for value it beats the Enzo and Murcielago but outright performance? i doubt it and most people with that kind of money to spend on a car wouldnt mind paying the extra for a lambo or ferrari
Yeah and the gt-40 would be a hell of a lot cheaper to service using an engine that shares the same origens with even the basic mustangs and thats a hell of a lot extra the cars are worth $50,000 and up and it also get a little better fuel ecconmy so better up right price and cheaper in the future and sure its slower but not by much and its so far been proven to be as good as a handeler as any lambo or ferrari.

fpv_gtho
11-03-2003, 03:08 AM
Originally posted by pato
for value it beats the Enzo and Murcielago but outright performance? i doubt it and most people with that kind of money to spend on a car wouldnt mind paying the extra for a lambo or ferrari

when its gunna be up against the 360 and gallardo, does it really matter if it doesnt beat a murcielago or enzo?

Falcon500
11-04-2003, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by fpv_gtho
when its gunna be up against the 360 and gallardo, does it really matter if it doesnt beat a murcielago or enzo?
Well that is a good point the GT40 is targeted at a diffrent class of cars our car mags seem to get their jollys off by comparing it to the enzo and other such cars when its not actually targeted at them.

fpv_gtho
11-04-2003, 10:30 PM
it isnt that slow though, wheels on their test quoted 0-100km/h in 3.8 seconds, although that was someone elses claim, we all know wheel's performance method wouldnt get an RS200 cosworth under 4.0 seconds 0-100km/h

Falcon500
11-06-2003, 03:31 AM
Originally posted by fpv_gtho
it isnt that slow though, wheels on their test quoted 0-100km/h in 3.8 seconds, although that was someone elses claim, we all know wheel's performance method wouldnt get an RS200 cosworth under 4.0 seconds 0-100km/h
Wouldent suprise me if they done it on a slight incline on a rainy day with some of the shit times they have gotten they had a te50 going slower then an xr8 one time ford quoted motors times which were much faster.
I wasnt saying it was slow just people were looking at it the wrong way.

fpv_gtho
11-06-2003, 03:34 AM
yeah its definately getting into murcielago and 575M territory with those times, even the carrera GT only does 3.9, although that has heaps better aerodynamics, body construction and top speed

megotmea7
11-07-2003, 01:32 AM
another good thing about it using the small block is mod ability, if you bought a ferrari would you even think about touching the engine? well beyond mabe a challenge exhaust... HELL NO, with this chassis and that engine with the HEAPS of mods already available for it i say bring he enzo or whatever you want....
<also not a for fan either but for this car i have to say bravo

Falcon500
11-07-2003, 02:04 AM
And on the press release of the final model they clocked 200mph in it Holy shit on a stick! 200 mph i had very high expectations of the car but...shit if i ever win lotto i know where my moneys going.

fpv_gtho
11-07-2003, 06:53 AM
although 320km/h is higher than what ford originally wanted to limit the GT to, its still 20 shy of what the originals could do at lemans with similar powered engines. it might use the 5.4 which has a lot of mods on the market, but its still a pretty big engine

gtface
11-07-2003, 06:17 PM
motor trend said this thing will go 0-60 in 3.5
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

fpv_gtho
11-07-2003, 06:21 PM
thats pretty damn fast, but did they do anything to the car to achieve those times?

Falcon500
11-08-2003, 04:42 AM
Apparently not because thats what i read in motor as well. And that was an enginerr driving not a professional driver. They did have gurney driving (the reson behind the gurney bubble) but hes not the young racer he used to be either.

fpv_gtho
11-08-2003, 05:19 AM
im sure those times then are causeing quite a stir at st agata and maranello then. imagine if ford coudve kept the weight under a tonne like the original

Falcon500
11-09-2003, 04:15 AM
well their expecting the car to be 1500 kilos they could make it lighter heaps lighter but they dont wanna.

fpv_gtho
11-09-2003, 04:18 AM
the official figures 1540kg, so i'd expect the extra .6 of a tonne over the original, apart from the bigger body, went into strengthening it to give it a decent crash test rating for todays standards, and possibly into frontal aerodynamics. its good though that ford have kept it at a fairly reasonable price on the supercar scale when during development they [ractically didnt care what they made it from or how expensive it was, they just wanted a pre production model ready for june this year

Falcon500
11-09-2003, 05:35 AM
You also forgot all the other mod cons like air con central locking and carpets and body deadener and so on that all adds up too.

fpv_gtho
11-09-2003, 05:52 AM
true, old performance cars like that og the GT40's and AC cobra 427's werent much to sit in, they just flew down the quarter. especially today, things like that can either contribute alot or not very much dependant on the technologies used

16-4Veyron
12-21-2003, 02:21 PM
i like the new gt40 much more than the old ones... or it could just be because most the old ones were baby blue/pink lol. this looks like a really great car, it was gonna be $100,000 but i heard its gonna be around $150,000+ in the real world :mad:

fpv_gtho
12-21-2003, 06:25 PM
i like the new one more i think because its a cleaner looking body, possibly something though that could be fixed up on an old one with a quality paint job in a decent colour

Falcon500
12-22-2003, 03:00 AM
I like the older one mainly because it works better for its intended purpose (well for the time) But the nwer one does have its advantages like being more drivable and not being suqashed in.

fpv_gtho
12-22-2003, 03:10 AM
i dont like the look of the new interior, it looks cheap and i think a conventional looking interior with say black leather wouldve gone better

Falcon500
12-22-2003, 04:19 AM
Well ive read stories there going to offer a lot more inteior ways they also want to make one with quite retro gear and are planning on making the colour choices quite large.

fpv_gtho
12-22-2003, 04:22 AM
i think the whole metallic look that ive seen in all of the interior shots looks a bit lame and overdone, but just as long as thats not the only option

DiabloGTR
12-22-2003, 07:52 PM
actually it is quite a nice car but i do not find it beautiful - performance aint that great either but just remember this car thought Enzo ferrari something - his ferraris are not the best in the world
Performance isn't that great? You don't know what the hell your talking about.
Heard Ford will re-do the interior before they put the car on sale. Also, I just love the old school looks.
For it's $150,000 price, the Ford GT performs very well, as a matter of fact it out-performs the Ferrari 360 Challange Stradale.
Hope Ford releases the car in one color, the two tone looks stupid.

fpv_gtho
12-22-2003, 07:56 PM
ive heard theyre even going to offer the car in the classic blue and orange gulf colours

Falcon500
12-23-2003, 04:10 AM
They are even thinking of making a guerny bubble in the roof. For those who dont know one of the drivers who raced them in Le Mans was a very tall lad by the name of guerny(spelling?) and they had to make a little lump in the roof so he could fit his head in,they had him in a new one when they were made and he fit in perfectly with out the aid of the bubble. I persoanlly like the 2 tone especially the black with white stripes of course they should offer solid colours.

fpv_gtho
12-23-2003, 04:30 AM
well having that would be an interesting link to its original days at LeMans, i personally dont like the wheels they ended up choosing, on the front they look too shiny and bulge out too much, the concept wheels were much better IMO

Falcon500
12-23-2003, 05:14 AM
Well imglad its an option it spoil its lines a bit too me.
And yes a fully agree on the concept wheels being better.

eyebrows
12-28-2003, 05:39 AM
the ford gt 40 is a dead set legend winning le mans i think it was 3 or 4 years in a row, but i think they will have the same problem knoe as they did when they first brought them out and that was they lost there tails. So my peice of advice always get the rear spoiler. It sounds like a load of shit but thats what they did for le mans after crashing out all three of the ford racing teams gt 40's 2 years running. So just get the spoiler and every thing will be sweeeeeeeet i mean wow what a car...

fpv_gtho
12-29-2003, 08:04 PM
it was 4 years in a row, between 1966 and 1969, but i think it was 1964 the cars entered so they didnt have instant success.

i think the story goes, when the engineers were working on the aerodynamics of the car, they stuck an old GT in the wind tunnel and cranked it up to about 300km/h. they started cracking themselves up laughing, because the front aerodynamics were that bad and the rear's were that good, that at those speeds, the slightest little bump couldve sent the car doing backflips, yet the cars had done 340km/h done LeMans. they apparently brought the front up to a more respectable level but i think its still nowhere near as good as the rear

eyebrows
12-30-2003, 12:27 AM
it was 4 years in a row, between 1966 and 1969, but i think it was 1964 the cars entered so they didnt have instant success.

i think the story goes, when the engineers were working on the aerodynamics of the car, they stuck an old GT in the wind tunnel and cranked it up to about 300km/h. they started cracking themselves up laughing, because the front aerodynamics were that bad and the rear's were that good, that at those speeds, the slightest little bump couldve sent the car doing backflips, yet the cars had done 340km/h done LeMans. they apparently brought the front up to a more respectable level but i think its still nowhere near as good as the rear

thanks for that i new it was around that but i wasn't sure, but i was sure that the car was losing it ass because it didn't have enough down force on the rear, anyway thanks for that.

fpv_gtho
12-30-2003, 05:05 AM
well i havent heard of any cases of such a thing, but to me it makes sense if the rear aerodynamics of the car were too great for them to tear away at the body, especially when the cars maxed out at 340km/h

SHAKER
01-01-2004, 10:38 PM
New images of the FORD GT are now available @:
http://www.highresautoimages.com/ford/gt.html
theyre awsome cars as they were in the 60s when they blew everyone away at the lemans 24 hour 3 times. Someone should bring one to australia to race in the 24 hour bathurst race to blow away those $550000 427ci hand built v8 supercars on steroids they call monaros.

SHAKER
01-01-2004, 10:40 PM
they won lemans 4 times! hehe