Ford's new Saleen S7 vs. RF / CAV/ERA GT40

Knighton · 05-22-03, 07:32 PM

Just saw an article in one of the major auto mags on the Saleen S7. Here are some of the specs:

3000 lbs
7.0 litre V8
550 bhp
0-60 mph - 3.3 seconds
top speed 220 mph
Price? $395,000!!!!!!

Talk about pricey!

Compare it to a Turn-key RF GT40, CAV, or ERA GT40 (or other) for a quarter of the price and you are in the same league or even more performance.

A 550 bhp 3000 lbs Saleen is the equivalent to a 422 bhp 2300 lbs GT40 (hp to weight ratio).

Throw in launch control, traction control, ABS (and all the other neat fixin's), a Levy Racing 500+ bhp stroker (331 or 347 for more off the line grunt), and a new ZF to handle the torque and you have an equally impressive off the line acceleration and 0-60 times, not to mention better handling and braking from having 700 lbs less to contend with.

It would be really great to allow the major auto mags to test drive a present day GT40 (RF or CAV) and publish it for comparison against the modern supercars a la Lambo, Ferrari, and the S7 etc.

I wonder what the mark up is for the $395,000 S7? If guys like Robert Logan can make a living building and selling a product with more performance and at 25% of the price, it makes me wonder just how much hand Ford has in the cookie jar? [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

Cheers!

[ May 22, 2003: Message edited by: Knighton Warbeck ]

[ May 22, 2003: Message edited by: Knighton Warbeck ]

[ May 23, 2003: Message edited by: Knighton Warbeck ]

[ May 23, 2003: Message edited by: Knighton Warbeck ]

Rick Muck- Mark IV · 05-23-03, 08:45 AM

Fords fingers are not in the jar at all. They have no direct connection to the Saleen S7. The engine is based on a Ford block but no parts in it are Ford.

Other tham perhaps a little emissions engineering advice I understand Ford had NO part in the development.

I would assume the price is based on the development cost and Steve Saleen's belief that the car is a "premium" piece over the other exotic supercars. I disagree, back in the late 80's whoever had the most expensive piece was the "hot" setup, today I think these buyers are more value oriented. Just MHO.

Rick

gt40ford@juno.com · 05-23-03, 10:37 AM

I can appreciate other cars but the GT40 will always take pecedence with me. It has a look all its own. The above posts are great compliments to those that build them.

Have fun!

John

mlhereford · 05-23-03, 11:28 AM

I noticed you didn't mention the ERA cars in your comparison. Is there a reason? Just curious because I have one. Give it to me straight....thanks. I love this forum.....

Hershal Byrd · 05-23-03, 02:01 PM

Mark,
There is nobody on this board that will argue against the ERA cars. They speak for themselves when you see one up close. Those guys have been around long enough which indicates a quality product.I haven't found a single person yet that has a complaint about these cars. Their 289 FIA is a piece of art. It's put together better than anything I've seen. I think it's that way with everything they build.

Hersh [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Knighton · 05-23-03, 02:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zander1:
I noticed you didn't mention the ERA cars in your comparison. Is there a reason? Just curious because I have one. Give it to me straight....thanks. I love this forum.....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Zander1,

My sincere apologies. It was not my intention to exclude ERA in my post. It was an oversight and I regret this. My apologies also extend to the folks at ERA. The quality and craftsmanship of the ERA is second to none. I am guilty of a brain fart and as such, will limit my food intake to bread and water for one week. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

Check the original post now...

Sincerely,
Knighton Warbeck

[ May 23, 2003: Message edited by: Knighton Warbeck ]

mlhereford · 05-23-03, 06:00 PM

You guys just crack me up. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] There was no harm taken. I just wanted to know if there was something I was missing because I do have to tell you, my 40 is just awesome. Everything is just, well, perfect. The body fit, the finish, everything. Even the paint, and I'm an absolute fanatic about paint. I received the car as a roller and will do the finish work myself.

So, thank you for your honesty. I'll put some pics on the forum as soon as I get my digital camera working.

Gordon Levy · 05-23-03, 06:24 PM

Mark, Are you the same person that owned one of the Bud moore T/A cars?

mlhereford · 05-23-03, 08:45 PM

Gordon,

Yes, I was. The last body in white from Bud Moore. Great car. I also owned 6S316, a '66 GT-350.

I currently have a 1992 Phillips 66, Cale Yarborough Motorsports, Winston Cup Thunderbird and an ERA 427.

Your name sounds awful familiar. Have we crossed paths at some point before?

Mark

Robert Logan · 05-25-03, 11:43 AM

I was fortunate to see th S7 Saleen at Le Mans last year and was VERY impressed with the engineering quality, performance and the TOTAL proffesionalism of the team. They did the "stars and striped" proud and I am sure that our RF40 would need considerable development just to stay with the car.

hese people have almost unlimited funds and unfortunately MONIES win races. They have sent more monies in the last year in development than RF have ever spent. They are leaps ahead of us and so are Panos and the rest.

This does not dampen the desire to play with the big boys but you must always remain reasistic or you will be disapointed. It is always to set atainable short term goals and still have the dream.

Best wishes,

Robert

Rob00GT · 06-16-03, 07:31 AM

I understand the carbon fiber body panels cost US$100,000. That's pretty pricey even if it weighs almost nothing.

Gordon Levy · 06-16-03, 11:46 AM

Mark, It has been about 12 years since we have seen each other. I used to live in Fresno and used to do a lot of work with Don Hodges. I also did the resto on Dick Smiths Cobra.

Gary Gibbs · 06-16-03, 11:58 AM

One difference between the cars is the aero technology which has come along way since the mid-sixties. The S7 has a nice aero package which should provide more grip (e.g. cornering speed) at high speeds (~~125 mph and up). There is nothing wrong with the GT40 as it has proven itself in high speed competition, but cornering speed can be added with aero down force. This is a non-issue for street driving and really only comes into play on very high speed road courses.

The S7 has a nice under body diffuser and front splitter. I have been talking with some aero guys here at NASA concerning under trays and diffusers for the CAV. Their is certainly room to fit a tray (considering the respectable ground clearance) and keep the car looking relatively stock. One nice thing with the CAV (and I would presume others) is that it is starting with a clean (flat) underbody. Most OEM cars are far from clean underneath and typical track preparation of these cars centers around cleaning up the underbody flow.

I think the weight difference is a big advantage for the GT40. I also think the S7 is a decent value when compared to the other (non-GT40) supercars.