Refined GT40 Replica?

The new GT40 concept looks great but I think it lost some of the raw edge of the orginal in the way it looks.

But one thing that's great is how refined the interior is.

Has anyone built a replica that has roll up side GLASS and more high-end, refined interior work?

A GT40 that looks like the original on the outside, looks like the concept car on the inside and has a 500hp, carburated 351 Cleveland would be the greatest!

 

[Steve Toner]

It's not supposed to be a practical car.

 

[Guest]

REFINED, ITS NO LONGER A GT40 BUT SOMETHING THE WIFE DRIVES TO WAL-MART.

BEN

 

I agree this new intro has lost its bite. And Ford Motor Co. has lost its touch. One hundred years ago Henry Ford introduced a mass produced car that a large amount of the working class could buy. For its 100th anniversary they plan to dedicate a car that only the rich and golf buddies of this Ford heir can aFord. I really think due to their current market loss and profit loss, they should reintroduce the 1963 Mustang. By returning to their founders wisdom they would be able to see history repeat itself!
Bill B.

 

[Jack Compton]

I am sorry, but I disagree. Ford's modern GT40 is a nice blend of the original's timeless styling, with a fresh, technologically current powertrain. This car was the absolute hit at the Detroit Int'l Car Show. There was no other car on display with a crowd 6 people deep all around. This is not a car for the masses, although the masses will surely wish for one. I give Ford a ton of credit for being aggressive, not only building a concept car, but then going to production with a car which gets significant print and personal attention. This is the kind of car Ford needs to help get it back on top. And, yes, you are right. If they reintroduced the 1963 Mustang, they would have another hit on their hands. But the car would cost over $40,000. One person's opinion...

Jack

 

[Steve Toner]

I'm a little confused by the reference to 1963 Mustang. The original Mustang prototype was created in 1962 and was a rear-engine 2 seater. In 1963, Ford created the Mustang II which was a front-engine "two plus two" with a removable hardtop and a front end that looked rather more like a T-bird than the production models. The first production Mustang was a "1964 1/2" model year car.

So when you say 1963 Mustang, are you saying that Ford should revive the prototype Mustang II, or create a modern replica of the first production (1964) Mustangs, or even go back to the original 1962 prototype?

 

[Fran Hall RCR]

[ November 18, 2002: Message edited by: Fran Hall ]

 

I agree with Jack on this one. I give Ford alot of credit for having the guts to produce a car such as the new Ford GT. I myself and torn between the new GT and a replica. I am going to wait until this summer when the new Ford GT is 'officially' released to see what its stats are. I think if Ford plays its cards right, it will move from the bottom of the Big 3 to the top in terms of domestic performance cars with Chrysler falling from the top to the bottom with the new viper redesign.

 

[Mike Dozier]

I think the question many of us are still asking is whether Ford shouldn't try to sell more than a handful of GT44s, since Chrysler sells 2,000 Vipers a year.

That's a tough one to answer. If manufactured
"in volume" could Ford get the price down
near Viper territory (now $ 80k)?
And if so, would they want to have to service
1,000's of these beasts instead of a handful?
Would several thousand add any more "halo"
effect to the Ford product line?

If I'm running Ford I'm not sure I wouldn't
make the same decision.

As to whether Ford could do a better job bringing an affordable "sporty" car to the
masses, that's another question.
I tend to think it could. But the problem
is that the market is somewhat fractured
between the rear wheel drive fans and front
wheel drive fans.

We will never see a "runaway" best seller
like the early Mustang again. Too much
market fragmentation and too much competition. That's why the PT Cruiser was
such a shock to the Industry. It showed
that a fresh/successful/INEXPENSIVE/profitable
small car was still possible.

Sorry to ramble on...

MikeD