Go Back  AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community > Automotive Discussion > Automotive News
Reload this Page >

Ford: GT News **Next Generation Revealed (page 7)**

Notices

Ford: GT News **Next Generation Revealed (page 7)**

 
Old 10-04-2003, 02:46 PM
  #41  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by agui
holy carp, ford may have done it again. they built a car to beat all ferraris. Wow, i'm impressed
They only wanted to beat the Modena. And up to now, it looks like they have accomplished that.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:03 PM
  #42  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
!

Originally posted by zeroday
it's a ford...ferrari has been building exotic sports cars for years. a ford just can't be in the same league as a ferrari. No matter what the numbers say. I'd still take a modena or gallardo over this thing any day of the week.

It'd be like seiko making a 15k$ watch....i'd still buy the 15k$ rolex. A Ferrari is a piece of rolling art. Ford has built its brand name around mass produced cars built for general consumption. Ford just can't all of the sudden decide it's going to build exotics and expect me to get all excited about it.

With that said, the performance numbers look great..for a ford
Why cant you let go off of BRAND PERCEPTION? So what if it's a Ford and so what if Ferrari has been making exotics since their inception?

Hold on a sec here cos I think this can be a hot topic.

Let's see:

What do you guys think? That Ford and GM cant make cars on par or better than Ferraris? If yes, then think again.

What makes an Enzo? Hiring the right people above all. One step down. Money spent in R&D and racing. Then you make a name of it. That's what makes the brand perception aspect of the whole deal. So. Why do you think Ford and GM dont do that? What do they lack that Ferrari has? Money? No way. I dont think I need to bring numbers here to prove that. We all know it.

The reason GM and Ford (and others) have not been aggresively investing in exotics is because THERE IS VERY LITTLE MONEY TO BE MADE IN THAT MARKET SEGMENT. Period. It's not BECAUSE THEY CANNOT MAKE THE CARS!

Though, things have been changing in the markets lately. All auto makers realize that it is now imperative they had at least one exotic to BETTER THEIR IMAGE.

Let's look at the NSX and our beloved Acura/Honda.

Whay do you think that it's been there, basically in its first generation for all these years. What is it now? Almost 15 years. You think Honda has made significant money selling the NSX? Absolutely NOT! Though the NSX makes money for Honda INDIRECTLY. It betters the image and people say WOW! A Honda NSX (around the world except here), or WOW! an Acura NSX for our market.

The NSX also helps in other ways like technologies used there passing down to much less expensive cars in the lineup. So it's a win-win situation.

So now. Ford among others, are using a legendary name, which KICKED SOME SERIOUS ITALIAN ASS DURING THE 60s (totally proven that if Ford wants and focuses on it, they can eat Ferraris for lunch on any track, in any race event around the world-all it takes is money and the right people which is still money....) and uses that name for their ultimate Ford. That ultimate Ford WILL BETTER FORD's IMAGE. It already has in my case since I have been following their efforts with the GT since news went public or rumors came out.

So that's what Ford is trying to do. They are not trying to make Ford, Ferrari. That's absurd and it does not make economic sense. Ford does not give a shit about Ferrari. They are too small to make a difference where Ford plays (which is everywhere). The only reason Ford cares about Ferrari is when Ford talks and thinks about Aston. That's it.

I am convinced that the GT will be eating Modenas (even after the facelift and new engine it will get for 2004) for lunch and people who dont give a shit about names and brands will be saying, "look at a Ford kill that Modena for the same money".
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:12 PM
  #43  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
A Ferrari is a piece of rolling art.
I dont disagree but why is that? What makes a Ferrari...rolling art? The way the car is built and materials used and techniques used to put the car together. Also the way it's built (hand built within factories where there is NO hurry whatsoever for engineers, etc).

Now. Read as much literature as you can find about the GT and what's coming in next and then you come and tell me, what does this Ford have to be jealous of, when compared to the Modena.

The correct answer is NOTHING. If anything, the Modena has a lot to be jelous of, when it's compared to that GT. And something tells me that the more we'll know about the GT, the more the Modena will be jelous of it.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:14 PM
  #44  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
By the way, here you can find my edited video of the Ford GT when it was introduced at the Chicago Auto Show earlier this year. It starts withe Mustang concept and then the GT is next:

http://24.221.29.240/Videos/Chicago%...D_DiVX.mpg.avi
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:15 PM
  #45  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by CL P Diddy
A $100K + Mustang? I guess. They did sell those limited production Shelby GT 500E's "Elenor" for $80K and $120K.
And they sold every one.

Is this going to be "The Mustang" or is Ford going to have a regular, say $30K 2005 Mustang based on the current model in the line up.
This car has nothing to do with the Mustang. And the next Mustang will not start at $30K. It will be way cheaper than that. It will reach 30K+ but in Cobra trim.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:17 PM
  #46  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by TypeSAddict
No way the Gallardo stops from 60 in 150 ft......maybe from 70. 60-0 in 150 is like 1976 Chevy Suburban territory:P :P :P Where did you hear that from, its gotta be 150 from 70...
Breaking for the Gallardo from 60 was 114 feet. MotorTrend's test.

http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...hreadid=116277
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:18 PM
  #47  
The Creator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Age: 37
Posts: 37,962
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
zeroday this ISNOT a FORD it is a FORD GT

this thing has more heritage than any ol Modena.
soopa is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:24 PM
  #48  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by soopa

this thing has more heritage than any ol Modena.
Exactly!


Maybe a drive on memory lane about what the GT40s really did to those poor Ferraris in the 60s and 70s would be helpful for some here.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:26 PM
  #49  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Charlotte
Age: 36
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A k-car with a rocket connected to it can go faster than a Modena, does that make you want the k-car more? So stop comparing the GT, which is an awsome car in its own right, with a Ferrari.. come on "Ferrari"
lebleucl_30 is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 03:51 PM
  #50  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by soopa
zeroday this ISNOT a FORD it is a FORD GT

this thing has more heritage than any ol Modena.
It's a ford. How can you possibly argue that it's not? Just because it's an expensive ass ford doesn't change the shitty company that sells it. When you buy a car, you don't only buy the car, you buy the company too....service...quality....etc. Brand means ALOT to me. Would you buy a 130k$ hyundai if it outperformed the modena? I know my answer.

Just because the concept of this thing was based on the Gt40 doesn't make it a GT40. The original GT40 that raced lemans has history...this thing doesn't...the car seems to actually have very little in common with the original. My problem would be giving Ford that kinda loot knowing how often they screw over people that buy their products. I couldn't do it in good concience. Sorry...but I hate Ford. They build shitty cars. Maybe this one's not but the one I had in 1993 was a pile of worthless doo. The company treated me poorly. I wonder if you have to call the same lame 800 number everyone else who bought a ford has to if...sorry...when you have problems. I know a Ferrari isn't exactly problem free....but they stand behind their cars...and if you have problems you won't be talking to some minimum wage 'sorry that's company policy' parrot...you'll be talking to an executive at the company. I know because my neighbor had a 328 GTS...Ferrari treated him like a fucking king.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 05:18 PM
  #51  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
It's a ford. How can you possibly argue that it's not? Just because it's an expensive ass ford doesn't change the shitty company that sells it. When you buy a car, you don't only buy the car, you buy the company too....service...quality....etc. Brand means ALOT to me. Would you buy a 130k$ hyundai if it outperformed the modena? I know my answer.

Just because the concept of this thing was based on the Gt40 doesn't make it a GT40. The original GT40 that raced lemans has history...this thing doesn't...the car seems to actually have very little in common with the original. My problem would be giving Ford that kinda loot knowing how often they screw over people that buy their products. I couldn't do it in good concience. Sorry...but I hate Ford. They build shitty cars. Maybe this one's not but the one I had in 1993 was a pile of worthless doo. The company treated me poorly. I wonder if you have to call the same lame 800 number everyone else who bought a ford has to if...sorry...when you have problems. I know a Ferrari isn't exactly problem free....but they stand behind their cars...and if you have problems you won't be talking to some minimum wage 'sorry that's company policy' parrot...you'll be talking to an executive at the company. I know because my neighbor had a 328 GTS...Ferrari treated him like a fucking king.
Zero, I am only going to tell you that your opinion above is....at least...skewed and biased and I am gonna leave it at that.

NOte: I am in no way a Ford-backer nor a Ferrari hater.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-04-2003, 05:40 PM
  #52  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
Zero, I am only going to tell you that your opinion above is....at least...skewed and biased and I am gonna leave it at that.

NOte: I am in no way a Ford-backer nor a Ferrari hater.
Gavrill, my opinion about the car isn't skewed. It looks pretty badass in its own right. Mechanically. It's the company that backs it/built it. My opinion is based on experience dealing with this company and insight into their original charter as a company. Ford is not a world class company that caters to, for lack of a better word, 'ballers'...Ferrari is. Ford was created with a vision of affordable transportation for the masses...Ferrari was created with a vision of racing...then street legal race cars. Like a fine italian wine, or suit, a Ferrari is in a class of its own. Ford can't compete with this. No matter what the technical merits of their car may be. Maybe if they spinoff an exotic car devision and get 30 or 40 years under their belts..but not now.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 02:01 AM
  #53  
Senior Moderator
 
mattg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: OR
Age: 43
Posts: 22,900
Received 377 Likes on 190 Posts
there is some ignorance in this thread. the gt is in ferrari territory, in technology, handling, you name it.

i hope the gt kicks some ferrari ass, just like the original gt40 did.
mattg is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 06:30 AM
  #54  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 06:40 AM
  #55  
The hair says it all
 
Python2121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Manhattan, NYC
Age: 32
Posts: 7,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by TypeSAddict
No way the Gallardo stops from 60 in 150 ft......maybe from 70. 60-0 in 150 is like 1976 Chevy Suburban territory:P :P :P Where did you hear that from, its gotta be 150 from 70...
hahaha i dunno where the hell i got that number from but in retrospect it was compleatly wrong, i dunno what i was thinking with my 103 fever

Braking was at 114 feet (from 60mph) for the galardo hahaha my bad
Python2121 is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 07:43 AM
  #56  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday


Gavrill, my opinion about the car isn't skewed.

Not skewed yet you wrote it yourself, "I hate Ford". I think that qualifies for being biased about this particular company. Which is the main problem. We are not comparing companies here, we are comparing the Modena with the Ford GT. That's where you fault.


Originally posted by zeroday


It looks pretty badass in its own right. Mechanically. It's the company that backs it/built it.
Again. We are comparing 2 cars. Or even all Ferrari cars (which are not many) with the GT if that makes you feel better.

But let's talk about this on a company level too, since you seem to like it that way.

Ford is no Lexus or Saturn when it comes to customer care. But what makes you think that Ferrari is?

For one, to find a Ferrari dealer you probably have to take a small trip. But I am sure not all Ford dealers will be able to service GTs either. So this is the character of the segment. Low production cars have these...issues. It comes with the territory.

But what makes you think that when you buy a Ford GT, you will get the typical Ford Escort/Focus customer service levels? I am sure Ford is not that stupid and they have thought of that. No way you will pay 150K for a car and you will go to the guy who services Tauruses to get service.

Finally, I never ever heard of Ferrari dealers being super nice to customers. On the other hand, I have never heard the opposite either. So...I just dont see how Ford is the devil here and Ferrari the angel. So I dont see a valid point.

Originally posted by zeroday


My opinion is based on experience dealing with this company and insight into their original charter as a company.
Again. Look above. Your experience is not based upon purchasing a Ford GT and lived with it and then purchasing a Modena and lived with it. Mine neither. BUt I never talked about service levels. I am comparing the cars themselves.

Originally posted by zeroday



Ford is not a world class company that caters to, for lack of a better word, 'ballers'...Ferrari is.
Ballers? What does that mean? People with...balls?

Originally posted by zeroday


Ford was created with a vision of affordable transportation for the masses...Ferrari was created with a vision of racing...then street legal race cars.
Not exactly. Ford is not just Ford. Ford is Ford, Lincoln, Volvo, Jaguar, Land Rover, Mazda (partially) and oh yeah!...a total Ferrari direct competitor, the so called... Aston Martin! Of course the GT is no Aston. It's got a Ford plate on it. And that, I find as a big advantage for Ford and a big minus for Ferrari. Why? Because Ford can use, their "cars for the masses" nameplate to go against a Ferrari offering. Totally justifiably. How? Because of the fact that GT40s were killing the best Ferraris on the track and the road a few decades back consistently as SPITE because Ferrari would not sell to Ford (actually he said YES to selling, the problem was about who would control the racing arm of Ford/Ferrari). So Ford execs said back then...."you know Mr Ferrari, let me show you that money talks and Italian suits and cars WALK" - and out of spite and with absolutely no money making opportunities went out and in 2 years of research and development had a car that was 10 years ahead of any Ferrari ever built.

I think that's enough of a reason for Ford to BE ABLE and appropriately so, use the legendary Ford GT name to go against the Modena on the road (and not the track) this time. In my opinion, it's totally justifiable. It''s got nothing to do with Focuses and Tauruses. It's got to do with the legendary GT40.

Originally posted by zeroday


Like a fine italian wine, or suit, a Ferrari is in a class of its own.
You know, California makes some kick ass wines too. As fine as any Italian wines. And for suites, you find a substitute for something USAmerica makes that Italians cant even dream. Where should I start from? You pick the sector and I will bring the example.

So please. Dont make Ferrari look like something untouchable. They are WAY touchable. If GM and FOrd see that there is money to be made in that segment, get ready to start seeing Ferrari being second, third, etc. As long as there is nothing significant there, USAmerican comapanies dont give a rat's ass about what Ferrari means and how fine it is.

To be..."fine", to USAmerican companies, means to be number one in the segment. To control the market from a market share perspective. To be making the most money, to be the VOLUME LEADER. And that they have been ruling since...what? The inception of the Automobile if I am not mistaken?

Ferrari my ass

Originally posted by zeroday


Ford can't compete with this.
Aston Martin. And as I said above, obviously, they can. The GT is reality you know.

Originally posted by zeroday


No matter what the technical merits of their car may be. Maybe if they spinoff an exotic car devision and get 30 or 40 years under their belts..but not now.
Ah....

1. Aston Martin
2. Forget Aston Martin. You know....you really need to do some reading about Ford's racing experiences throughout the years. Ford has raced AT THE LEAST 50 TIMES MORE THAN FERRARI HAS.

It really bothers me when the efforts of companies that are no "brand names" (whatever that means to people) are not recognized and they are burried inside the negative perceptions that people have for that name.

You know zero, "greatness" does not wear a fine Italian suite. It coule be many things to many people, but for sure GM, Ford and their subsidiaries are....great companies in their sector. Looking down on them is...at the least...faulty.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 08:27 AM
  #57  
The Creator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Age: 37
Posts: 37,962
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
exactly... i dont think gavrill could say it any better.


and for your win comparison... i agree with Gavril... I prefer Pinot Gris to Pinot Grigio heh heh heh
soopa is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 08:32 AM
  #58  
The Creator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Age: 37
Posts: 37,962
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
Maybe if they spinoff an exotic car devision and get 30 or 40 years under their belts..but not now.
lol... there is your ignorance shining through right there.


The GT is a car with a history at least 40 years long...


The GT spent its life eating Ferrari's for lunch.



I think your looking at this not from the `race car` angle you spout but more from the `lifestyles of the rich and famous` `mtv cribs`... uber luxury image POV.

the ferrari sure... its foreign... were americans... we covet everything foreign as superior... i dunno why.


but if you are truly talking in the respect of EXOTIC SPORTS CAR... like all Ferraris and Lamborghinis pre-dot com boom WERE... then the GT has them trumped. Just like it did 40 and 30 years ago.
soopa is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 08:40 AM
  #59  
Moderator Alumnus
 
SiGGy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lenexa, KS
Age: 42
Posts: 9,260
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by soopa
lol... there is your ignorance shining through right there.


The GT is a car with a history at least 40 years long...


The GT spent its life eating Ferrari's for lunch.



I think your looking at this not from the `race car` angle you spout but more from the `lifestyles of the rich and famous` `mtv cribs`... uber luxury image POV.

the ferrari sure... its foreign... were americans... we covet everything foreign as superior... i dunno why.


but if you are truly talking in the respect of EXOTIC SPORTS CAR... like all Ferraris and Lamborghinis pre-dot com boom WERE... then the GT has them trumped. Just like it did 40 and 30 years ago.

Thank you, took the words right from my mouth.

...

Isn't zernoday driving a legacy datsun anyway
SiGGy is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 08:49 AM
  #60  
Pit Stop?
 
Minch00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orlando FL
Age: 33
Posts: 13,526
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Very well said, Gavril and Soopa! Long live the GT!
Minch00 is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 10:02 AM
  #61  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
ok first off Gavrill, the way you quoted each sentence I wrote and responded individually makes it REALLY difficult to respond to each of your comments and keep this dialouge readable. I'll give it a shot, but minus the tags.

you wrote:
Not skewed yet you wrote it yourself, "I hate Ford". I think that qualifies for being biased about this particular company. Which is the main problem. We are not comparing companies here, we are comparing the Modena with the Ford GT. That's where you fault.

my reply:
Bias is ignoring facts and basing your opinions soley on your past personal experiences or feelings about something. I am not basing my opinions soley on my own experience. Ford is a company with major customer service problems. Just do a search on the net. This is not just my experience I am speaking from. There is no bias. Fact: Ford has *alot* of unhappy customers.

you wrote:
Again. We are comparing 2 cars. Or even all Ferrari cars (which are not many) with the GT if that makes you feel better.But let's talk about this on a company level too, since you seem to like it that way.Ford is no Lexus or Saturn when it comes to customer care. But what makes you think that Ferrari is?

my reply:
Read my last post again. I said my neighbor dealt with them and had an EXTREMELY positive experience. They flew him out to Italy to tour their facilities as compensation for some trouble he had with the car. I'd say that's pretty damn good customer service wouldn't you?

you wrote:
Again. Look above. Your experience is not based upon purchasing a Ford GT and lived with it and then purchasing a Modena and lived with it. Mine neither. BUt I never talked about service levels. I am comparing the cars themselves.

my reply:
You cannot seperate the car from the company. It can't be compared without comparing the companies that made it. Again, a car without a good company backing it is of little value to me.

you wrote:
Ballers? What does that mean? People with...balls?

my reply:
You know exactly what I mean unless you've been hiding under a rock for 10 years. Realizing it wasn't an ideal word to use, I wrote "for lack of a better word". Maybe you missed that.

you wrote:
Not exactly. Ford is not just Ford. Ford is Ford, Lincoln, Volvo, Jaguar, Land Rover, Mazda (partially) and oh yeah!...a total Ferrari direct competitor, the so called... Aston Martin! Of course the GT is no Aston. It's got a Ford plate on it. And that, I find as a big advantage for Ford and a big minus for Ferrari. Why? Because Ford can use, their "cars for the masses" nameplate to go against a Ferrari offering. Totally justifiably. How? Because of the fact that GT40s were killing the best Ferraris on the track and the road a few decades back consistently as SPITE because Ferrari would not sell to Ford (actually he said YES to selling, the problem was about who would control the racing arm of Ford/Ferrari). So Ford execs said back then...."you know Mr Ferrari, let me show you that money talks and Italian suits and cars WALK" - and out of spite and with absolutely no money making opportunities went out and in 2 years of research and development had a car that was 10 years ahead of any Ferrari ever built. I think that's enough of a reason for Ford to BE ABLE and appropriately so, use the legendary Ford GT name to go against the Modena on the road (and not the track) this time. In my opinion, it's totally justifiable. It''s got nothing to do with Focuses and Tauruses. It's got to do with the legendary GT40.

my reply:
Ford bought alot of car companies. True they bought Aston Martin. Is Aston Martin building this car? No. Aston Martin is still for the most part, Aston Martin, even though they are owned by ford. They build Aston Martins. Yeah the GT40 was killing ferraris at lemans for a while. Performance is not what I'm arguing here. Obviously the GT is going to be a performer. Never argued it wouldn't be.

you wrote:
You know, California makes some kick ass wines too. As fine as any Italian wines. And for suites, you find a substitute for something USAmerica makes that Italians cant even dream. Where should I start from? You pick the sector and I will bring the example.So please. Dont make Ferrari look like something untouchable. They are WAY touchable. If GM and FOrd see that there is money to be made in that segment, get ready to start seeing Ferrari being second, third, etc. As long as there is nothing significant there, USAmerican comapanies dont give a rat's ass about what Ferrari means and how fine it is.To be..."fine", to USAmerican companies, means to be number one in the segment. To control the market from a market share perspective. To be making the most money, to be the VOLUME LEADER. And that they have been ruling since...what? The inception of the Automobile if I am not mistaken? Ferrari my ass

My reply:
Ferrari is a designer car brand. Ferrari is to Ford as Patek Phillipe is to Timex. If you can't understand this concept, or don't agree, then that's your right. I can't convince someone that loves Franzi box wine that there is any merit to shelling out 10k$ for a bottle of hundred year old bottle of Chateau d'Yquem. I don't think that all fine things have to be foreign. It just happens that alot are. Never said that so don't put words in my mouth.

The fact that Ford is a volume leader is not relevant to this discussion. Ferrari is not about volume obviously..and are not trying to be. I also never said they were untouchable. Just not by Ford Motor Company. Not now. Oh and Ferrari my ass? Now you sound biased.

It is clear that we are not going to change anyones opinions here, and I'm not trying to turn this into a pissing contest. I'll agree to disagree with you guys. I don't appreciate being called ignorant either. I happen to know alot about cars in general and automotive history. Just because a car performs well on the track doesn't mean it can automatically be put on a pedestal above a Ferrari with somewhat lesser performance. There is so much more to a fine exotic car than track performance.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 11:50 AM
  #62  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
OK Zero, I could re-reply to the above but it wont go anywhere (Ferrari my ass, went to how pathetic Enzo himself looked in the 60s when he saw the GT40s do the 1-2-3 at LeMans again and again when he thought his cars were untouchable. If you call that biased, we need to reconsider the definition of the term biased).

So I will only stand at this last comment of yours:

"Just because a car performs well on the track doesn't mean it can automatically be put on a pedestal above a Ferrari with somewhat lesser performance. There is so much more to a fine exotic car than track performance."

And now I ask you Zero:

What does the current Ford GT MISSING THAT THE MODENA HAS and so the Modena is a Ferrari (fine Italian suite) and the GT is not that?

What?

PS: if I wanted to kick the Enzo's and Modena's ass from a speed perspective only (USAmerican style), I would have brought you all the example of a funy car or a top fuel dragster which in Europe they only dream of or watch on TV. The GT is not JUST faster than the Modena. The GT from this early review and the other info we have, looks to me as a "complete exotic" that's missing nothing to go against the best from Italy and the rest of the world (for the money).
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 12:59 PM
  #63  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Gav, I already addressed this question in my last post:

"Ferrari is a designer car brand. Ferrari is to Ford as Patek Phillipe is to Timex. If you can't understand this concept, or don't agree, then that's your right. I can't convince someone that loves Franzi box wine that there is any merit to shelling out 10k$ for a bottle of hundred year old bottle of Chateau d'Yquem. "

You obviously don't get this concept...asking me to list better features etc... It's a Ferrari Gavrill and a Ford is what it is. A Ford. My Z is more technically advanced, faster, and handles better than a Ferrari 328 GTS but I'd take the Ferrari any day of the week. To ask me to explain why I would...well if ya have to ask, you will never understand. Gavrill while I respect you and your opinion, i'm done with this discussion. It's going nowhere.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 01:14 PM
  #64  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
Gav, I already addressed this question in my last post:

"Ferrari is a designer car brand. Ferrari is to Ford as Patek Phillipe is to Timex. If you can't understand this concept, or don't agree, then that's your right. I can't convince someone that loves Franzi box wine that there is any merit to shelling out 10k$ for a bottle of hundred year old bottle of Chateau d'Yquem. "

You obviously don't get this concept...asking me to list better features etc... It's a Ferrari Gavrill and a Ford is what it is. A Ford. My Z is more technically advanced, faster, and handles better than a Ferrari 328 GTS but I'd take the Ferrari any day of the week. To ask me to explain why I would...well if ya have to ask, you will never understand. Gavrill while I respect you and your opinion, i'm done with this discussion. It's going nowhere.
OK. Let me ask you a different way:

If the Ford GT had an Aston Martin plate but it was identical to the Ford GT, would it have a higher praise from you? Would you accept it easier as a Ferrari competitor?
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 02:52 PM
  #65  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
OK. Let me ask you a different way:

If the Ford GT had an Aston Martin plate but it was identical to the Ford GT, would it have a higher praise from you? Would you accept it easier as a Ferrari competitor?
OK, I'll humor you with one more response. NO!!. If it was designed by Aston Martin, it would not be the same car. Obviously Callum and team did not design this car...I mean look at it..cmon now it's no Aston Martin. Living legends studios at ford have NEVER designed an exotic car before so they are relatively green to this endeavor....I don't think it looks refined enough to be considered an exotic, but that's just my opinion of course. Looks more viper-esque. But that's what one would expect from the design team that works on the thunderbird/mustang etc.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 04:25 PM
  #66  
Disproportionate Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Age: 52
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
<snip>But that's what one would expect from the design team that works on the thunderbird/mustang etc.
I don't think Ian McCallum reports to J. Mays; and therefore, has anything to do with Aston Martin styling (J. Mays being the head of Ford design, the guy who really is behind Thunderbird and Mustang styling.

With regards to the whole "Ferrari is just better" argument, I think simple economies of scale alone are enough to explain away the difference in customer service. If Ford built cars that had an average cost of $200,000, trust me, anyone going into a Ford Dealership would have their butts polished and kissed. There's even a difference as to how SVT owners are treated. I was treated very well with my Mustang Cobra from both the dealership as well as by SVT, despite all the problems it had. The manager of the dealership came out to talk to me on more than one occasion (not on my request), feeling remorse about the issues I was having. The SVT engineers themselves monitor the Mustang boards (they don't post, but when you call them they tell you they monitor it, and they even knew my screenname). When the 99 Cobra HP debacle was happening, SVT handpicked some 300 Cobra owners nationwide for a trial-run of the fix. I made a joking post on the Mustang boards asking "Who do I have to sleep with to get the fix in Austin?" The very next day I had a message on my answering machine, making me the first person in Austin to get the HP fix. Eventually, every single 1999 Cobra owner got an extrude-honed intake and less-restrictive mufflers to get them up to their advertised 320hp.

It's just unfortunate that car-loving guys like the people from SVT got saddled with a 25+ year old chassis design of the current generation Mustang. Based on my experiences, I have no doubt in my mind that Ford GT customers will be treated like gold at Ford dealerships...
Aquineas is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 04:56 PM
  #67  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by Aquineas
I don't think Ian McCallum reports to J. Mays; and therefore, has anything to do with Aston Martin styling (J. Mays being the head of Ford design, the guy who really is behind Thunderbird and Mustang styling.

With regards to the whole "Ferrari is just better" argument, I think simple economies of scale alone are enough to explain away the difference in customer service. If Ford built cars that had an average cost of $200,000, trust me, anyone going into a Ford Dealership would have their butts polished and kissed. There's even a difference as to how SVT owners are treated. I was treated very well with my Mustang Cobra from both the dealership as well as by SVT, despite all the problems it had. The manager of the dealership came out to talk to me on more than one occasion (not on my request), feeling remorse about the issues I was having. The SVT engineers themselves monitor the Mustang boards (they don't post, but when you call them they tell you they monitor it, and they even knew my screenname). When the 99 Cobra HP debacle was happening, SVT handpicked some 300 Cobra owners nationwide for a trial-run of the fix. I made a joking post on the Mustang boards asking "Who do I have to sleep with to get the fix in Austin?" The very next day I had a message on my answering machine, making me the first person in Austin to get the HP fix. Eventually, every single 1999 Cobra owner got an extrude-honed intake and less-restrictive mufflers to get them up to their advertised 320hp.

It's just unfortunate that car-loving guys like the people from SVT got saddled with a 25+ year old chassis design of the current generation Mustang. Based on my experiences, I have no doubt in my mind that Ford GT customers will be treated like gold at Ford dealerships...
Callum is not a direct report to Mays, but is definitely under his cadre. Callum is also very much responsible for what I feel are some of Aston Martin's most notable designs...he has for a few years now worked exclusively on Jaguar design. Henrik Fisker is now responsible for Aston Design but i'm not a big fan...he outsourced design of the v8 vantage to an Indian design team. I guess it came out ok but ehh..

Regarding your experience with Ford...they only act when something becomes a publicity nightmare for them.. ref. Firestone...99 Cobra...
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 05:09 PM
  #68  
Disproportionate Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Age: 52
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
<snip>

Regarding your experience with Ford...they only act when something becomes a publicity nightmare for them.. ref. Firestone...99 Cobra...
Possibly, but I think that's a good thing for Ford GT owners. Do you think Bill Ford will tolerate bad publicity on a car that he personally signed off on? Not likely. He's a moron in all other counts, but I have a feeling he's got a personal vested interest in the GT.

I just wished they'd stuck the V10 they put in that Cobra Test Mule that Motor Trend tested this summer in the GT. That would have been bad-assed. It was basically the 4.6 DOHC V8 with 2 extra cyllinders (Hel-LO torque!!)

A tidbit of info that many don't know: Did you know that the aluminum block used in the 5.4 DOHC and the 4.6 DOHC engine (Cobras prior to 2k3; the 2k3 block is iron) is cast in the same plant as Ferrari engines in Italy?
Aquineas is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 06:34 PM
  #69  
Homeless
 
chef chris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern DEL-A-Where?
Age: 46
Posts: 9,210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
Gavrill, my opinion about the car isn't skewed. It looks pretty badass in its own right. Mechanically. It's the company that backs it/built it. My opinion is based on experience dealing with this company and insight into their original charter as a company. Ford is not a world class company that caters to, for lack of a better word, 'ballers'...Ferrari is. Ford was created with a vision of affordable transportation for the masses...Ferrari was created with a vision of racing...then street legal race cars. Like a fine italian wine, or suit, a Ferrari is in a class of its own. Ford can't compete with this. No matter what the technical merits of their car may be. Maybe if they spinoff an exotic car devision and get 30 or 40 years under their belts..but not now.
Zero...this is the way I feel about the Viper...well put.
chef chris is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 06:43 PM
  #70  
Moderator Alumnus
 
SiGGy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lenexa, KS
Age: 42
Posts: 9,260
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I wish Chrysler still owned Lamborghini so we could quiet zeroday.


Basically Zeroday believes ford cannot make a good exotic And a limited production car.

Even though they have done it before, AND BEATEN Ferrari hands down. And they were banned from racing for awhile because of their technology superiority....

Gavrii: you can't change someones mind who isn't listening
SiGGy is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 07:15 PM
  #71  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by SiGGy
I wish Chrysler still owned Lamborghini so we could quiet zeroday.


Basically Zeroday believes ford cannot make a good exotic And a limited production car.

Even though they have done it before, AND BEATEN Ferrari hands down. And they were banned from racing for awhile because of their technology superiority....

Gavrii: you can't change someones mind who isn't listening
quiet down zeroday? i'm not listening??? Thanks for the great input Siggy!! I would address your comments about Lambo and Chrysler but since you obviously only like to hear opinions from people that agree with you, I see there is no point. Have a nice night.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 07:20 PM
  #72  
Moderator Alumnus
 
SiGGy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lenexa, KS
Age: 42
Posts: 9,260
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by zeroday
quiet down zeroday? i'm not listening??? Thanks for the great input Siggy!! I would address your comments about Lambo and Chrysler but since you obviously only like to hear opinions from people that agree with you, I see there is no point. Have a nice night.
LOL, dude... Gavriil and I have banged heads many times before... BMW, GM...

please...

Your ignorant to the fact Ford can make a car that competes with a Ferrari... Sorry but thats about it.

How much did you really know about the Ford GT40 prior to this thread? I'm sure you didn't know it's heritage or anything related to it's inital design. Your replys give that away...

Sorry, no, your not listening. Your merely stating what you believe and ignoring some facts in the commentary from what I read.

It's one of the few cars Ford has made in short production. And NO I don't mean a limited production of a Mustang, no comparison. The car was designed for racing from the get go...

All of this is thanks to Carol Shelby... But thats an entire other conversation.

Lets here your feedback, instead of the copout.

EDIT:

have a nice night too, enjoy your Datsun.

oh ya, ford did start into an "exotic car" divison. Readup when Carol Shelby was involved with fords design. He was shot down on some things rather quickly... But some good reading none the less...


So I suppose NSX isn't exotic to you either? Since it's really a honda, and produced by a vehicle manufactuer who intends on making affordable, small, effiecient cars... Err not exotic enough to be compared...

Of the Ferrari's I've been in, they really aren't that nice inside. But they are fast and handle well...
SiGGy is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 07:45 PM
  #73  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by SiGGy
LOL, dude... Gavriil and I have banged heads many times before... BMW, GM...

please...

Your ignorant to the fact Ford can make a car that competes with a Ferrari... Sorry but thats about it.

How much did you really know about the Ford GT40 prior to this thread? I'm sure you didn't know it's heritage or anything related to it's inital design. Your replys give that away...

Sorry, no, your not listening. Your merely stating what you believe and ignoring some facts in the commentary from what I read.

It's one of the few cars Ford has made in short production. And NO I don't mean a limited production of a Mustang, no comparison. The car was designed for racing from the get go...

All of this is thanks to Carol Shelby... But thats an entire other conversation.

Lets here your feedback, instead of the copout.
Address things I wrote that you take issue with specifically instead of making general satements. I am admittedly not a nuts to bolts GT40 expert, but I know quite a bit about the current GT and the gt40's role in racing history. The mistake you, Gavrill and Soopa make is assuming that because the GT40 beat Ferrari up a bit on the track in the 60's, and the new GT has exceptional performance, the aggregate of these two seperate issues somehow autmatically qualify the new GT as an exotic that surpasses Ferrari in all respects. But as I stated several times before, there is much more to an exotic car than performance alone. It is you that has not been listening. As for your copout comment, stop acting like a know it all pompus ass and I will be happy to discuss things further.
zeroday is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 08:10 PM
  #74  
Moderator Alumnus
 
SiGGy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lenexa, KS
Age: 42
Posts: 9,260
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by zeroday
Address things I wrote that you take issue with specifically instead of making general satements. I am admittedly not a nuts to bolts GT40 expert, but I know quite a bit about the current GT and the gt40's role in racing history. The mistake you, Gavrill and Soopa make is assuming that because the GT40 beat Ferrari up a bit on the track in the 60's, and the new GT has exceptional performance, the aggregate of these two seperate issues somehow autmatically qualify the new GT as an exotic that surpasses Ferrari in all respects. But as I stated several times before, there is much more to an exotic car than performance alone. It is you that has not been listening. As for your copout comment, stop acting like a know it all pompus ass and I will be happy to discuss things further.

I don't know it all. But on specific subjects I have a very strong opinion/background. Especially ones I have been reading about for many years... I have been interested and reading about Carol Shelby for many years now.

If you feel like carrying this conversation out without making personal insults I will continue to reply. I don't see any of my comments being directed towards you in a personal manner. Sarcastic as they may be, personally insulting they are not. I won't lower myself name calling...

Actually, I am stating it will compete performance wise, and be just as exotic... And actually quite a few of Carol Shelby's cars are worth more than many vintage ferrari's to counter your "fine wine" analogy. People pay close to $1m for some of his cars he designed. More for some of the odd models...

I honestly see your perspective in this. I have that outlook inside of me too. My arguments differ though. I would argue can Ford today produce another GT equal to the GT40. I would think with the advancements they have made for assembly, not to mention better materials available today. Ford can pull it off.

Granted I personally believe the Sound of a Ferrari is the equivalent to Harley in Motorcycles. I really don't find all of their cars so exotic. And actually most of them are not. Ferrari has not produced only Exotic cars. Actually a lot of their mid 80's to mid 90's cars were directed to family owners (4 seats)... and some of their interiors

It's a toss up... I'm not taking anything away from ferrari for some of their designs. But they can be dethroned occasionally...
SiGGy is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 08:23 PM
  #75  
Moderator Alumnus
 
SiGGy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lenexa, KS
Age: 42
Posts: 9,260
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Really, the question is...

Can Ford do it again without Carol Shelby... (I'm not sure if he has had any input on this GT) I haven't read squat about it... Just talk to the Ford rep at the Chicago auto show...

I just read this... soo.. I'm still at a toss up...

Most recently, Shelby served as a technical adviser to the team that designed the Ford GT, the automaker's newest high-end speedster that goes into production early next year.
SiGGy is offline  
Old 10-05-2003, 11:27 PM
  #76  
Senior Moderator
 
mattg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: OR
Age: 43
Posts: 22,900
Received 377 Likes on 190 Posts
the exotic manufacturers should be worried.


ford GT
mattg is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 05:56 AM
  #77  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday
OK, I'll humor you with one more response. NO!!. If it was designed by Aston Martin, it would not be the same car. Obviously Callum and team did not design this car...I mean look at it..cmon now it's no Aston Martin. Living legends studios at ford have NEVER designed an exotic car before so they are relatively green to this endeavor....I don't think it looks refined enough to be considered an exotic, but that's just my opinion of course. Looks more viper-esque. But that's what one would expect from the design team that works on the thunderbird/mustang etc.
Zero that was a hypothetical question, which you dodged

Finally, the reason the GT looks the way it does is because it very closely resembles the GT40 from the 60s. And it's rediculous to think that the same team that designed the Bird and the Stang, designed the GT. "Come on"...goes to you sir.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 06:08 AM
  #78  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by zeroday


The mistake you, Gavrill and Soopa make is assuming that because the GT40 beat Ferrari up a bit on the track in the 60's, and the new GT has exceptional performance, the aggregate of these two seperate issues somehow autmatically qualify the new GT as an exotic that surpasses Ferrari in all respects.
Now you're putting words in my/our mouth/s. I said the GT is going agains the Modena from a direct competition standpoint. Not all of Ferrari. What's the matter with you? That much hate for Ford?

Chill chief

Originally posted by zeroday



But as I stated several times before, there is much more to an exotic car than performance alone. It is you that has not been listening.

And to this moment/post, I dont get what that is. To you that is.

Originally posted by zeroday


As for your copout comment, stop acting like a know it all pompus ass and I will be happy to discuss things further.

Zero, come one. You wrote 10 posts ago that you would stop conversing about this topic. In any case, I am glad you continue answering though...


ZERO, I was thinking about this last night and I think the confusion from your part is here:

Ford came out with the GT to comemorate (rekindle, you pick the right term) the legendary GT 40. They also said that this new GT car goes against the Modena which we wish to beat in all respects.

When you hear Ford GT, you concentrate on the first part. The "Ford" part. When I hear Ford GT, I hear Ford GT40 and all its history. Which them makes me think, this car deserves the plate....Ford.

By the way, then I am thinking of the name Modena and I am thinking, "what does the name Modena have that makes it more important than the GT40 - hands down the latter is way more legendary than the former". But you are stuck with the Ferrari vs. Ford plate comparison. That's beside the point though.

In other words, what do you want Ford to name this thing? If they are to rekindle the GT40....craze/legend, they HAVE TO call it a FORD. THAT 'S WHAT THE GT40 WAS CALLED!

Stop thinking of the Ford GT as a Thunderbird/Mustang cousin! It aint one.
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 06:11 AM
  #79  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
What makes a true exotic car?

Performance
Design
Heritage
Legendary Name which has won races under that name

Why to the above I have to list: "it has to be built by a manufacturer which makes exotic cars ONLY" ?

I dont understand why.

Like Siggy said, so to you, the NSX aint an exotic. Especially when in the rest of the world it goes under the Honda plate (not that Acura is a legendary name for that matter).
gavriil is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 06:24 AM
  #80  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 17,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by gavriil
Zero that was a hypothetical question, which you dodged

Finally, the reason the GT looks the way it does is because it very closely resembles the GT40 from the 60s. And it's rediculous to think that the same team that designed the Bird and the Stang, designed the GT. "Come on"...goes to you sir.
Actually it's you GAV who doesn't seem to have his facts straight. I was referring to Ford's living legends studios; the design house that worked on the original stang and thunderbird. That SAME DESIGN HOUSE created the GT concept. Their current TEAM designed the new thunderbird/mustang AND the GT. Just because it resembles the GT40 doesn't mean it's not a total redesign...which it IS.

Oh and thanks for letting me know why the GT is styled the way it is. I had no idea it was based on the original GT40.
zeroday is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Ford: GT News **Next Generation Revealed (page 7)**


Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.