Will Ford build it I HOPE SOOO!!!!!
- Thread starter SuperGT4D
- Start date
Peter Delaney
GT40s Supporter
I just read that Ford is going to "shed" some 35,000 workers & close down 5 plants. Given this, I really doubt that anything will come of a production GT40.
However, the publicity from the GT40 at the Detroit show can only do us some good in terms of public awareness.
Many years ago, I got near to buying a De Tomaso Pantera for AUD$25k - missed out by half an hour. By the time another one came up for sale, some guy opened a showroom here in Sydney & was selling late model Panteras. The result was a great leap forward in terms of public awareness, & what a surprise, the cheapest Pantera around was up for AUD$50k.
My guess is that this is what will happen with the GT40's, although on a much bigger scale than just one showroom in Sydney.
If Ford hypes up the GT40 & then doesn't go ahead, we will all be laughing (big increase in value/recognition/etc). However, if they do go into production, there are probably 2 scenarios :
1. Sensible = Leave the replica makers alone as they would hardly have an impact on sales to people who have US$150k to spend (plus there would be more GT40's around to inspire sales to people who would never consider building one).
2. Stupid = Do a Ferrari "spit the dummy" & attack the replca makers. All that happens here is that people who could not afford the "real" car still could not afford the "real" car, but then could not even buy a replica = less presence on the road, car mags, etc. = less pulic awareness = less sales of "real" cars.
Maybe the threat of Scenario 2 will prompt a lot of waverers to place orders now, as a "sale" would normally be considered to have occurred on the date of order.
Having thought about this for a minute, maybe this presents us all with an opportunity - if we all order another car, perhaps we could create a GT40 futures market !! We could on-sell the rights to the car (ordered before the Ford "shut-down", but yet to be built).
Any lawyers out there ?
Kind Regards,
Peter D.
However, the publicity from the GT40 at the Detroit show can only do us some good in terms of public awareness.
Many years ago, I got near to buying a De Tomaso Pantera for AUD$25k - missed out by half an hour. By the time another one came up for sale, some guy opened a showroom here in Sydney & was selling late model Panteras. The result was a great leap forward in terms of public awareness, & what a surprise, the cheapest Pantera around was up for AUD$50k.
My guess is that this is what will happen with the GT40's, although on a much bigger scale than just one showroom in Sydney.
If Ford hypes up the GT40 & then doesn't go ahead, we will all be laughing (big increase in value/recognition/etc). However, if they do go into production, there are probably 2 scenarios :
1. Sensible = Leave the replica makers alone as they would hardly have an impact on sales to people who have US$150k to spend (plus there would be more GT40's around to inspire sales to people who would never consider building one).
2. Stupid = Do a Ferrari "spit the dummy" & attack the replca makers. All that happens here is that people who could not afford the "real" car still could not afford the "real" car, but then could not even buy a replica = less presence on the road, car mags, etc. = less pulic awareness = less sales of "real" cars.
Maybe the threat of Scenario 2 will prompt a lot of waverers to place orders now, as a "sale" would normally be considered to have occurred on the date of order.
Having thought about this for a minute, maybe this presents us all with an opportunity - if we all order another car, perhaps we could create a GT40 futures market !! We could on-sell the rights to the car (ordered before the Ford "shut-down", but yet to be built).
Any lawyers out there ?
Kind Regards,
Peter D.
If you want to hear a little about the new GT40 and see the engine and hear it go here and scroll down a little bit to see the video http://www.motortrend.com/autoshows/detroit02/index.html
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
The idea that Ford might want to discourage others from making a car that looks like a GT40, essentially IS a GT40, presents some interesting opportunities for thought...
As I (no lawyer) understand it, there are two entities at least who have a legal right to the GT40 name/trademark. One is Lee Holman and Holman Automotive, who have a historical link to the original racecar program and who have documentation thereof. The other is Safir GT40 Spares, who purchased the tooling etc for the Mark V cars and who have continued to make spare parts etc many of which will fit original GT40s. The last original chassis mfgr, Tennant, evidently stated they didn't want to be in the chassis business anymore and sent the tooling to Lee Holman, according to Legate's book.
Ford has used the GT40 name lots of times since then, but I think mostly on engine parts and not in a way that necessarily maintains any continuity of use apropos of the original car. Were this issue to come to any legal question, I think it is doubtful that their naming of engine parts "GT40" would preserve any of the claim they might have on the name or image of the car. Moreover, Ford et al went to some trouble in the sixties to distance themselves from the car itself as a Ford, in order to protect themselves from litigation in the event of racing-related injuries or fatalities. They might have trouble reversing themselves on that historical maneuver.
The shape and design of the GT40 have been copied and used so many times over the past thirty years that they would have quite a bit of difficulty, I suspect, in NOW deciding that all of a sudden they wanted to keep anyone else from using the name or shape of the original car. Putting the shoe on the other foot, if someone else had designed and built the car recently introduced by Ford, and Ford had not protected their original design and name by their own use of it, that person or company would have a legitimate case in claiming that the new car, while embodying some elements of the old ones, is sufficiently different that it does not constitute a theft of any trademarked design or name. (much to my chagrin, I now sound like a lawyer. I assure all I am not)
Fortunately, all of us in the GT40 hobby group constitute such a small number that we are not an economic threat to anyone except perhaps our own bankbooks and spousal redecorating plans. And, with their current money woes and downsizing, Ford has bigger fish to fry than automotive hobbyists keeping the image and culture of the world's greatest sports-racing car alive.
Jim R
As I (no lawyer) understand it, there are two entities at least who have a legal right to the GT40 name/trademark. One is Lee Holman and Holman Automotive, who have a historical link to the original racecar program and who have documentation thereof. The other is Safir GT40 Spares, who purchased the tooling etc for the Mark V cars and who have continued to make spare parts etc many of which will fit original GT40s. The last original chassis mfgr, Tennant, evidently stated they didn't want to be in the chassis business anymore and sent the tooling to Lee Holman, according to Legate's book.
Ford has used the GT40 name lots of times since then, but I think mostly on engine parts and not in a way that necessarily maintains any continuity of use apropos of the original car. Were this issue to come to any legal question, I think it is doubtful that their naming of engine parts "GT40" would preserve any of the claim they might have on the name or image of the car. Moreover, Ford et al went to some trouble in the sixties to distance themselves from the car itself as a Ford, in order to protect themselves from litigation in the event of racing-related injuries or fatalities. They might have trouble reversing themselves on that historical maneuver.
The shape and design of the GT40 have been copied and used so many times over the past thirty years that they would have quite a bit of difficulty, I suspect, in NOW deciding that all of a sudden they wanted to keep anyone else from using the name or shape of the original car. Putting the shoe on the other foot, if someone else had designed and built the car recently introduced by Ford, and Ford had not protected their original design and name by their own use of it, that person or company would have a legitimate case in claiming that the new car, while embodying some elements of the old ones, is sufficiently different that it does not constitute a theft of any trademarked design or name. (much to my chagrin, I now sound like a lawyer. I assure all I am not)
Fortunately, all of us in the GT40 hobby group constitute such a small number that we are not an economic threat to anyone except perhaps our own bankbooks and spousal redecorating plans. And, with their current money woes and downsizing, Ford has bigger fish to fry than automotive hobbyists keeping the image and culture of the world's greatest sports-racing car alive.
Jim R
If you haven't already heard enough about the car, you can go to http://media.ford.com for more information. Click on the Blue Oval on the top of the page, and it will take you to the GT40 section.
As for whether or not they'll produce the car, I was speaking to David E. Davis,Jr. today, and the word is that it is a 'go'. They plan to build 100 cars at a projected $150,000 per car. It seems none other than Jackie Stewart has been lobbying for only 50 cars at $250,000 each, but the higher production is likely to win out.
As for whether or not they'll produce the car, I was speaking to David E. Davis,Jr. today, and the word is that it is a 'go'. They plan to build 100 cars at a projected $150,000 per car. It seems none other than Jackie Stewart has been lobbying for only 50 cars at $250,000 each, but the higher production is likely to win out.
If Ford only builds 150 cars, and/or prices them at $150,000 each, it will indeed be a shame. Ford built 300 Cobra Rs in 2000, and dealers were gouging the $53,000 sticker price upwards of $80,000; I can only imagine the field day dealers would have with a GT40. Worst of all, most of the cars would sit idle in collections, and would not be driven like a GT40 should be. On second thought, being familiar with Ford's horrific build quality and modular engine reliability, perhaps the best thing Ford could do would be to sell them and build their image while making sure nobody actually drives the car.
MN12, my 99 Cobra grenaded the driver's side cam sprocket at 15,000 miles. After haggling with Ford for over four months I was finally able to have an objective root cause analysis performed which identified an improperly torqued sprocket bolt as the culprit (Ford tried valiantly to blame my underdrive pulleys). My second brand new engine started acting like it had head gasket problems and after haggling with Ford for several more months it was finally determined that two of the head bolts were only finger tight.
After that episode I made a stink and ended up with my current 2001 Cobra, which has been fine so far.
I know of at least five other 99 DOHC engines that threw a driver's side (oops, that would be left side for the Brits) cam sprocket.
I think the DOHC modular engine reliability problem lies with the fact that these engines are hand assembled, more than any inherent design flaws. However, the pot-metal oil pump gears and crank position sensors are known weak areas.
I think the DOHC modular engine reliability problem lies with the fact that these engines are hand assembled, more than any inherent design flaws. However, the pot-metal oil pump gears and crank position sensors are known weak areas.
