Curious on peoples' opinions

Jonathan · 05-09-02, 04:53 PM

I'm curious as what people on the forum would choose between given the choice of a GT40 replica and the new Ford GT40 remake. Assume completed price and build quality for the two cars is equal.

Steve Toner · 05-09-02, 05:09 PM

Ah, but the pricing will not be equal, so you might as well ask whether people would prefer an original or a replica if the prices were equal.

According to my (unnamed) sources, Ford is not going to be able to hit the $100K target price for the new car, and it's now in the "supercar" class with expected production of about 100 cars a year instead of the couple of thousand they were originally shooting for. Expect the price to be more in the $200K range...

I admit I had to stop and think for awhile when Ford showed the new car -- maybe I should get one of those instead of a replica -- but when I heard the news about the numbers, it made my decision pretty easy.

Steve Toner · 05-09-02, 05:27 PM

Another factor: Id on't know how Ford can keep the new cars from being more about the money than the history or anything else.

Replicas are for enthusiasts, people who truly appreciate the car for what it is and are willing to put up with its quirks. Many build the complete car from a kit. Even the folks like me who don't have the time to look at anything less than a "turnkey-minus" version have to have a true appreciation for the car and go out of their way to acquire one.

The new car, well if you have enough money I'm sure you'll be able to get one. There may be wild speculation like when Mazda introduced the Miata and people would pay way over sticker to a dealer and then turn around and sell them to someone else for even more becuase those people just had to have the newest greatest thing even if they had no idea what they were really buying...

05-09-02, 05:49 PM

Make mine a replica.

JayT · 05-09-02, 05:55 PM

The new GT 40 looks great, but the translation between show car to production can be very hard on a show car. What Ford does will be based upon money, because they already have spent lots of production money on immage (Jag, Range Rover, A-M). That means the new GT 40 will be a major compromise (T-Bird) or expensive ($US 150K+). I bet expensive, and they will sell everyone, because there is a lot more money than sense. But, in this contest this will be a case where Ferrari beats Ford.

Brian · 05-09-02, 05:55 PM

I'm with Ben, make mine powder blue with marigold stripes..

chip · 05-09-02, 06:54 PM

Replica! I never thought I could afford my ultimate car; The GT-40. The new GT40 got me thinking: Raid te retiement fund-what the hell! Really! Hit me driving home after I saw the releases in my car mags. Then found great turn key replicas for $70-75K. That was $25K less than the early announced price quotd in Autoweek.! And the new GT40 will be HEAVY And now the price of the new car will not be the $100k first reported. The replicas represent a great value and more true to the original with modern updates.

Ian K · 05-09-02, 07:19 PM

I'll take a replica reagrdless of price.

To me, the new 43.5 doesn't have the look.
The interior isn't as inviting -- it doesn't
say "Come on in and see what I'm about" as
much as the replicas do. And Ron's
link says that it will weigh just under
3300lbs. If it can make the 1/4 mile in
under 12 sec. at 120 mph with that weight,
then I'm sure I can coax like numbers with
a well setup replica. Then, take into account
modern engine management, smog controls ...
not a car I want to wrench myself. Plus,
with a replica, you get to say you built
some/most/all of it yourself, and can be
pretty certain that there is no other replica
exactly like yours. Can't say the same for
the 43.5. And, if I want to go to the track,
the new one isn't properly equipped -- no
rollcage or fire suppression.

I think if you park a well built replica next to the new car, the replica will draw more
faces.

Ian

norman falkiner · 05-09-02, 08:08 PM

The new 43.5 reminds me of a story i heard many years ago. There were these tons of tinned sardines being traded over and over until one buyer tried a tin and it was rotten. When he went back to the last vendor he was informed that "These are for trading not eating" I think the new 43.5 will be for trading not consumption. Regards.

Mark Worthington · 05-09-02, 08:38 PM

All things being equal, especially the price, I'd take the new one. Ford did an excellent job with the design in my opinion, and the upside also includes a wider track, new-car warranty, air bags, ABS, and more interior room and comfort. Downside is the unreliable blown 5.4 DOHC with the ridiculous bore/stroke ration, the high CG associated with that engine/blower combo, the skinny wheels/tires, and the fact that it may weigh close to 1,000 pounds more than a well executed replica.

As much as I like them both, I'm afraid that the new one will cost at least twice what a replica would. Advantage: replica.

Hershal Byrd · 05-09-02, 09:34 PM

You know, it really amazes me that a company like Chrysler who was saved from extinction can build a sports car like the
Viper. It obviously is a big success in sales and on the race track. Now Ford comes along and builds a car that to me is in the same class as the Viper and the Z06. I can't
see where the price will be that high for that car even on a limited production. The dealers may gouge people but Ford knows the market and I think they would be foolish to produce this car and try to clasify it as a super car. It is not in the same class as an
XJ220 or a F-50 . Most of the super cars are hand built with a lot of exotic mechanicals.
Chevy can build a Z06 for under 100K and
Dodge can buid a Viper for under 90K. Now
Ford can't afford to build a new GT40 for under a 100k. I'm sorry but I don't believe it.
All I have read about the pricing has been some car magazine editors or writers opionion. So far I haven't seen any statements relating a firm price from Ford. Limited production for the first couple years will cause the price to be higher, just like it did when the Viper hit the market. Then more were made and the price has been pretty stable since.
Well that just my lopsided opinion. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

I would like one of the new GT40s so
I could use my Replica for racing events. [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

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

MK -IV J6 · 05-09-02, 09:38 PM

As Bob Dylan said:"She know's what you need but I know what you want..."

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: MK -IV J6 ]

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: MK -IV J6 ]

jimbo · 05-10-02, 12:44 AM

I would take the replica, any day, any way, I think. I just can't imagine my local Ford dealer supporting a product like the new GT40. If I wanted a Ford built supercar I'd buy an Aston-Martin. The new car is successful in design and execution only where it emulates the original; where it departs, it isn't as good. I think the replica builders have actually done a better job of updating the old design and making it into a usable modern car. And it looks better. No one on this forum, unless I've missed it, has felt that the new car is a visual improvement on the old.

Redcat · 05-10-02, 01:23 AM

Hey Jim,

I guess I'll be that guy.

The main improvement that the new GT40 has is that they have simply refined the Mk1's lines. They made the front just a bit cleaner but retained it's classic beauty.

They improved the amount of room in the car. Making it much more liveable for long trips.

And made the sills smaller by moving the gas tanks inboard.

All improvements.

But, because they moved the tanks inboard (to make it easier to get in and out of the car) they made it bigger. Making it heavier.

They gave it the questionable modular engine for a powerplant. And then strapped a supercharger to it.

They gave it a very expensive tranaxle.

And, they made it very expensive as a whole.

If some one made something that combined the best of both the original and the new and made it for about the same price as the reproductions... I'd get it in a heart beat. No doubt. (well... maybe a little doubt. I am married [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

JMHO,

Doug

p.s. the original was actually 40.5" tall. they just rounded down to 40. Hence, the name GT40. The new car is 43.5". only 3 inches taller. Not 3.5". If you followed the original numenclature it would be a GT43.

Just thought it was funny.

;D

[ May 10, 2002: Message edited by: Doug Barry ]

GT40 MKII · 05-10-02, 03:58 AM

Well, my wife asked me the same question, "Why not get the new one?". Here is my response, "If im gonna pay areound $150k for a car, it better have the engine I want, and I want the big block.".
It doesnt have the same sound and or feel of that 427. That brute force of a motor, gobs of excess horsepower, yea, that what I want.
For me, all things being equal, they are not, casue there is no big block, no deep rich throaty obbligato from the exhaust. Nothing but the whine of the supercharger.

Steve Toner · 05-10-02, 11:33 AM

Heh-heh heh-heh. Jim said "Aston-Martin"

Here's an excerpt from an email I sent a friend in early March, a couple of days after talking to [source], when it was all still fresh in my mind:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> Original plans called for a price target of around $100K and 2000 units per year, but they're not going to be able to hit that price point so now they're positioning it in the "supercar" category and looking at a price of $150K-175K with production of 200 per year. [Source] also said that Pinafarina
(spelling?) and Aston Martin will be involved in some way in the production... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mark Worthington · 05-10-02, 01:37 PM

At the risk of coming off as a heritic, I think the new one looks as good as or better than the original MK I, particularly the single-nostril variety. I saw the car on display at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and it is simply stunning. Regarding Aston Martin's involvement, the new GT40 may very well end up with the Aston-Martin V12, as there have been reports of several Vanquishes parked at the Rousch facility in Dearborn where GT40 development is ongoing. An American V8 may be "heritage", but the Aston-Martin motor could easily yield 500+ hp in normally aspirated configuration. I'd take that engine over the blown 5.4 any day.

Bill D · 05-10-02, 07:28 PM

a GT40 replica without a second thought

jimbo · 05-10-02, 10:00 PM

Well, this is what makes horse races, as they say. Of course, it's nice to have these sorts of choices. I think some of the design features of the new car are good; the protected gas tank for one, and the improved headlights, which I notice on the latest photo seem to be back to the rectangular ones like on the original car. And I would put up with a longer wheelbase to get at least some luggage room to lug enough stuff for a trip someplace. But I still think the old one looks better. If I get the chance to do a comparison drive I will be a very happy man, I assure you.

RD40866 · 05-10-02, 11:09 PM

OK, so they are both enviable, but the original is still the original. I'll take one MK1 replica to go, please, and can I please have that with the Wyer rear flares?