Lambo vs. Ford GT

[Jim Rosenthal]

I think it's funny that anyone would criticize the new Ford GT for having a 'cheap' motor, although it doesn't fit my definition of cheap. One of the attractive things about the idea of the original Ford GT was the use of a production motor that could be tuned to get good power and life for its' weight and cost. I don't think that's such a bad idea, although I do agree with Ron that the pushrod engines are better- lighter and smaller.
what IS irritating about Ford, and Jaguar run by Ford, is that virtually their entire new product lines consist of designs recycled from previous eras, clothed in a thin veneer of nostalgia. Every damn Jaguar they make now is a recycled version of a previous car, unless I have missed something. Ford seems to be going down the same path.
By comparison, Mercedes-Benz, who invented the motorcar, turned 100 a few years back and made far less fuss about it; they just continued to produce innovative designs and some of the world's best cars, as they always have. Essentially, they looked forward, not backward.
I agree that the new GT by Ford is an advertising ploy. I suspect it is not going to win any races, I think it may not even be a particularly good car, and the idea of the average Ford dealer servicing it makes me laugh. What are they going to do, farm out the service to Ferrari franchises? I could be wrong, but I think the car may be a flash in the pan with no bullet and no real smoke. We'll see.
And regarding the above debate about prices and the trade- hell, if people are foolish enough to pay inflated prices because they're in a hurry, I'd take their money too.

 

[Ron Earp]

[ QUOTE ]
Not the Enzo guys. 0-100-0 in 11.2. The Gallardo will probably be a bit faster as well but

[/ QUOTE ]

No doubt, but the Enzo is in a different league of performance, and, most definitely, price. Too bad Ford couldn't build something that could compete with Ferrari's finest, but it appears they're more concerned about image than anything else. And even the image aspect of the car is slipping.

R

 

[ QUOTE ]
The problem for dealers are as follows, a customer agrees to buy a car for list and keep it, he then turns it for a quick profit to someone the dealer could have sold it to! This is what happens over and over, morals? Most of the customers have the problem with that! I promise I won't resell it, then that's just what he does!

[/ QUOTE ]

I know a Ferrari dealership that contracts with its buyers. If you sell your car, you have to give them the option to buy it back at MSRP. Otherwise you don't get on their waiting list. They sell new cars for MSRP and used cars for more than MSRP. Works for me.

 

[Brett James-McCall]

[ QUOTE ]

what IS irritating about Ford, and Jaguar run by Ford, is that virtually their entire new product lines consist of designs recycled from previous eras, clothed in a thin veneer of nostalgia. Every damn Jaguar they make now is a recycled version of a previous car, unless I have missed something. Ford seems to be going down the same path.

[/ QUOTE ]
You may say this, but at the same time if you look at all car manufacturers, they have somthing called brand DNA. i.e if you look at the car then you can tell the brand. This is particularly true in Europe.

Talking on the Jaguar front, I personally thought the apparence of driving a Jag was something loved by people when they got behind the wheel of a leaper. Maybe I'm wrong.

[ QUOTE ]

By comparison, Mercedes-Benz, who invented the motorcar, turned 100 a few years back and made far less fuss about it; they just continued to produce innovative designs and some of the world's best cars, as they always have. Essentially, they looked forward, not backward.

[/ QUOTE ]

However, Ford is still the largest family owned car business in the world... as they can say, the names over the door. I have to disagree with MB though. Maybe a few years back this was the case. Certainly here in Europe they used to set the bar for interior trim... no longer, others have caught up and gone past. For me it is when they hand the cars over to AMG, when you see something special... but then you see this with M Power, SVO, Audi's S dept to name a few.

Anyway on a final note, I still think the front of Merc's E class looks like an updated Scorpio /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Brett

 

[ QUOTE ]
Say what you will my friends but I would take the new Ford GT over the Lambo any (and every) day of the week! This goes for the MKI through MKIV's also! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Have fun!

John

[/ QUOTE ]


I re-read my post and it appears to have said the wrong thing. I'll clarify.
I would take the new Ford GT over the Lambo because I love the GT40 body. But when I mentioned that it goes for the MKI through MKIV, I meant that I would take those GT40's over the Lambo too. As compared to the new Ford GT, I would take the MKI through MKIV over it. To me, the original style will be the ultimate forever.


Have fun! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

John

 

[ChrisL]

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think there are no more Fiats sold in the U.S.? Why do you think Ferraris and Lambos have the "expensive to maintain" reps?

[/ QUOTE ]

Manufacturing has come a LONG way within the last decade. It IS cheaper to mass-produce a reliable car than an unreliable car these days. Given the automated manufacturing techniques, each car comes out pretty much the same as the previous car at exacting tolerancesand at a much lower cost. The cars that are unreliable are those still using old expensive technology. Ask most long mileage owners of a modern Alfa Romeo, or a modern Triumph motorcycle and you will find that history is just that... history. There is no such thing as a bad car these days... as long as its built using today's technology.

 

[TimB]

Along with the mass production thought just brought up if you look at the modular Fords the motors with the most problems are of the hand assembled SVT variety while the mass produced units will run forever. Check out this 215K mile 4.6 cylinder....note the cross hatch pattern still visable and no ring groove

 

[ QUOTE ]
Manufacturing has come a LONG way within the last decade. It IS cheaper to mass-produce a reliable car than an unreliable car these days. Given the automated manufacturing techniques, each car comes out pretty much the same as the previous car at exacting tolerancesand at a much lower cost. The cars that are unreliable are those still using old expensive technology. Ask most long mileage owners of a modern Alfa Romeo, or a modern Triumph motorcycle and you will find that history is just that... history. There is no such thing as a bad car these days... as long as its built using today's technology.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't considering manufacturing methods. I was concerned about design, quality and maintenance. There is no way any Italian exotic will cost less to maintain than the Ford GT.

 

[Jim Glickenhaus]

Bart
My Maser has a 5 year 50,000 mile warantee. You think the Ford GT will come with one of those? You think your local Ford Dealer's gonna be able to fix it? Lambo, for all intents and purposes is a german co. It's a new day. I'm not saying F car's don't have issues but having driven them over 265K miles in the last 32 years I can tell you they can be driven and if they're driven they do pretty well.

 

[Brett James-McCall]

[ QUOTE ]
You think your local Ford Dealer's gonna be able to fix it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are right, I know it was some time ago, but a good example of this is the XJ220. They still ALL need to go officially back to Brown's Lane in Coventry for servicing.

As for Lambo being owned by VAG, I still doesn't think it will matter if the part comes from a Golf, Lambo will still want their pound of flesh /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif However, will be interesting how this willbe handles latter this year in Europe with the block exemption ruling. If a link can be proven to from a Golf to Lambo and they are charging more... could reprucussions for the whole exotic industry?

Brett

 

[Howard Jones]

The bottom line for ME is this. If I was told I had $125,000-$150,000 to spend on a supercar I am certain I would do another GT40 Replica with all finest stuff to be had. We all know the list. 600Hp with gearbox to match, brakes, you know all the good stuff. Oh and you could bet I would'nt be sanding down my own bodywork trying to save a couple of thou. ERA,RF,CAV, etc, all these cars are supercars if put together with the right parts. On second thought it just might be hard to spend that much money on one. My guess is that about 100K would build more car than I can handle. Just trying to put this supercar thing back on this planet.

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

Hi Brett:
I agree that brand DNA/appearance is important. I thin what I am trying to say is this: if you look at Mercedes or BMW, both makes I admire for engineering and styling, you see that their designs evolve through time in a somewhat linear way, but still resemble themselves. My 6.3 Mercedes looks a lot like what they build now in terms of general demeanor, although none of the parts or dimensions match. But, Ford and Jaguar are knocking off their old designs, I think because they are unable to come up with new ones.
Of course, the designs belong to them (well, the GT40 shape doesn't, but that's another story) and they can knock off what they do own to their heart's content. But, covering up a lack or originality and a lack of a clear corporate direction and sense of mission with a layer of cheap nostalgia does not, in my book, make for memorable automobiles such as Ford used to make.

 

[ChrisL]

[ QUOTE ]
covering up a lack or originality and a lack of a clear corporate direction and sense of mission with a layer of cheap nostalgia does not, in my book, make for memorable automobiles such as Ford used to make.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is the new GT40 just a one-off or is it part of a true effort within Ford to take a change in direction? From where I sit Ford is going through a similar mindset at the moment to that which lead to the development of the original GT40. Ford has been in the motorsport wilderness for decades with regards to the ultimate motorsport categories. However in recent years they have introduced a full-on campaign in both Formula 1 and World Rally (LeMans unfortunately does not hold the same ground as it did in the 60s). Then in this climate along came the new GT40 road car to remind us that Ford does have a pedigree. This would have been almost unimaginable just ten years ago. This, to me, is a massive change in direction.

The word is, however, that Ford is currently battling internally between the bean-counters and those who recognise the importance of motorsport success... so we may see yet another change of direction.

 

[Mike Dozier]

My understanding is that Henry II decided he wanted to beat Ferrari BAD once Enzo declined to sell out to him.
So Henry essentially gave the boys a blank check to regain
his pride, and any other benefits that come out of the GT40
program were secondary.

Today is different. Before committing big bucks to a new car
or any substantial racing effort, Ford execs have to show
expected benefits to the Board. My understanding is that
the new GT is supposed to prove "quick development"
techniques that Chrysler supposedly learned making the Viper, and now applies to it's future vehicles.

MikeD

 

[ChrisL]

MikeDD,

You are correct in saying that there was a response in the Ford camp when they failed to buy Ferrari. However, Ford's desire to buy Ferrari came AFTER the decision to go racing (following a long absence from the sport as the result of a self-imposed ban) which in turn led to the decision to buy Ferrari. This was a conscious decision within the organization to change the image of the company - and was even given the name “Total Performance”.

With regards to the desire to beat Ferrari, Ford's official stand was to beat the world, and in those days, that meant beating Ferrari.

With regards to convincing the execs of the benefits of motorsport… its probably now well accepted that the “Win on Sunday sell on Monday” rule is a myth. The true showroom benefits come many years later as buyers begin to associate the brand name with excitement and success, rather than shopping trolleys and insurance salesmen - appologies to all insurance salesmen.

 

[Mike Dozier]

The motorsport racing world today seems to be very well
and growing (NHRA/NASCAR/F1/etc). What is interesting is that it's mostly corporate sponsor money (not auto companies) that are funding this. And one gets the feeling
they are buying TV time as much as caring about how many
races won. Much different than the Total Performance theory.

MikeD

 

Absolutely it's tv time! It's one big long commercial for products. Plus, when you consider how brand loyal NASCAR supporters are of sponsor's products, it makes sense. I know I buy products from companies that support racing.

 

[Ian K]

Yep, which is exactly why Toyota is prepping a
truck for the Craftsman series.

I wonder how much longer until we see an Avalon
at Daytona /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Oh the heresy /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Ian

 

[ChrisL]

I won't even pretend to understand the complex structures that make up the elite race teams... funding verses ownership verses control verses development... its just all too difficult! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif After-all Cosworth (read Ford) is now designing and building race engines for Chevrolet. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

But if you look at the world's highest profile and highest budget race categories... World Rally is totally dominated by factory race teams. Puegeot, Suburu, Ford, Mitsubishi, Seat, Skoda. F1 has Jaguar(Ford), Ferrari, Renault and Toyota.

Ford have gone into both of these categories boots-and-all as factory teams. This, compared to their fringe involvement just a few years ago.

 

[Brett James-McCall]

Chris,
Don't forget Mercedes (McLaren), BMW (Williams), Honda (BAR) /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

As for Ford, they have always been a player in World Rally and F1 for years - i.e. Schumacher's Bennetton was powered by a Ford engine when he first won the world championship in 94.

Also, be very careful when you say Cosworth... if it is Cosworth Racing designing the engine, then yes it is Ford. If it is Cosworth Technologies designing the engine (read Audi ).

Also, Ford are not the only people to spread their brands into motorsport - VAG (read VW) up until this year ran 2 factory Le Mans teams in Audi & Bentley. Plus you have both Seat and Skoda in WRC. Also, PSA run Peugeot and Citroen in WRC. You could go on forever /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Brett