When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Homologation used to mean actually produced. Not just sold on paper. That was quite an exemption Ford got. I get it they wanted to see the car compete again for its 50th anniversary.
The GenII was in fact a very complicated build for the time including the way in which the panels were formed, stir friction welding special fasteners for the body panels even the space frame chassis.
You are also misinformed that the 5.4 in the Ford GT is the same 5.4 in the GT500. It is not. It is based on that block but it is quite a different piece.
I'm pretty sure the V8 M3 GTR competed before the extremely low quantity of road cars were sold - 15 years earlier than the GT. The E92 M3 GT & 991 RSR have a crazy amount of "waviers" to compete including replacing the front struts with proper A-arms. And now the RSR is mid engine for crying out loud. I know Corvette should have a MR Vette soon but I wouldn't be surprised if BMW lobbies to throw their TT V8 in the rear seats. Lol.
The spaceframe chassis isn't special and the suspension (control arms, knuckles, etc...) Are pretty simple. The GT500 engine is very similar. There wasn't nearly as much development turning the GT500 engine into the GT as there was turning a 3.5 Ecoboost into the NGT.
[QUOTE=Guest89;13885320]
You are misinformed. Ford could neither engineer nor build the car, as they don't have the resources or personnel to do so, as they don't consistently build cars of this nature. Multimatic in Canada designed the car on the low in concert with very, very few senior Ford engineers; Multimatic is also building the car. Ford lacks the capability.
****
Ford could build / sell 4000 all sold thru dealerships let demand determine the amount of production Ford is not building a new product line it's just another car. This is where their ego will bite them it's not if it's when it always does. The Ford GT ownership and following is strong for a reason they should follow that pattern of success.
Multimatic is what it is - they could be reproduced in a minute if Ford wanted to do so. Ford senior engineers aren't capable of manufacturing the new Ford GT ... no offense but that's naive. A mold body panels engines produce 4000 pretty simple stuff when you have a company called Ford.
I understand the entire project and it's excellent but for the resume to the factory for customers. Ford made another mistake with the production numbers and improvements will both be ongoing - increased output and length of the project the only thing consistent in the auto industry is change.
Time will tell - it's a beautiful design let's see how it runs.
Last edited by nuvolari612; 01-15-2017 at 06:30 PM.
I'm pretty sure the V8 M3 GTR competed before the extremely low quantity of road cars were sold - 15 years earlier than the GT. The E92 M3 GT & 991 RSR have a crazy amount of "waviers" to compete including replacing the front struts with proper A-arms. And now the RSR is mid engine for crying out loud. I know Corvette should have a MR Vette soon but I wouldn't be surprised if BMW lobbies to throw their TT V8 in the rear seats. Lol.
The spaceframe chassis isn't special and the suspension (control arms, knuckles, etc...) Are pretty simple. The GT500 engine is very similar. There wasn't nearly as much development turning the GT500 engine into the GT as there was turning a 3.5 Ecoboost into the NGT.
Incorrect; no waiver required to move the flat 6 forward for the latest RSR.
The salient pieces of GTE regulations:
Location - Must be "as original"
Position - "Free"
Inclination - "Free" (But must match longitudinal / transverse positioning of homologation car)
Position is free, and the engine is still located behind the driver and the firewall.
[QUOTE=nuvolari612;13885378]
Originally Posted by Guest89
You are misinformed. Ford could neither engineer nor build the car, as they don't have the resources or personnel to do so, as they don't consistently build cars of this nature. Multimatic in Canada designed the car on the low in concert with very, very few senior Ford engineers; Multimatic is also building the car. Ford lacks the capability.
****
Ford could build / sell 4000 all sold thru dealerships let demand determine the amount of production Ford is not building a new product line it's just another car. This is where their ego will bite them it's not if it's when it always does. The Ford GT ownership and following is strong for a reason they should follow that pattern of success.
Multimatic is what it is - they could be reproduced in a minute if Ford wanted to do so. Ford senior engineers aren't capable of manufacturing the new Ford GT ... no offense but that's naive. A mold body panels engines produce 4000 pretty simple stuff when you have a company called Ford.
I understand the entire project and it's excellent but for the resume to the factory for customers. Ford made another mistake with the production numbers and improvements will both be ongoing - increased output and length of the project the only thing consistent in the auto industry is change.
Time will tell - it's a beautiful design let's see how it runs.
No, they could not do so; which is why the contracted Multimatic to do it for them!
Stuntman: To try and play down the "specialness" of the Gen II Ford GT is like saying the Mona Lisa is just a nice painting.
The Gen II was and is special for a lot of reasons including but not limited to the following:
It marked the celebration of Ford’s Centennial. The Pace Car for an entire company.
Legendary constructors designers, engineers and consultants involved including Roush Industries, Saleen, Inc., Camillo Pardo, Carroll Shelby (this can’t be reproduced and in fact my FGT is signed by not only Camillo but Carroll).
The time in which the car went from drawing board to the road, 15 months. Incredible!
The pure essence of design of the GT40 shape both inside and out carried over faithfully from 1965-1966 to 2005-2006 including but not limited to its rear clam shell, doors with cut away roof, body scalops, scoops, exhaust exits etc..... Classic GT40. Not so much the Gen III although it is a stunning peice in its own right it has significantly strayed from the pure GT40 shape and design. As many Enzo and Aventador cues as GT40.
Pure analogue three pedal American supercar performance.
Extensive aero-dynamic design and development including but not limited to front splitter with diffuser, complete underbody diffuser and rear diffuser; duck tail spoiler with Gurney extension, side air dams.
Every part on the GT was rendered on the computer in 3D.
Unique and ingenious “ship in a bottle” design for the fuel system.
Ricardo 6 speed transmission.
All form followed function.
5.4L V8 muscle. The block although was loosely based on the then existing SVT 5.4L power plant the FGT unit was significantly different. Extra ribbing for strength the block, aluminum block as opposed to cast iron, extra jackets for cooling, forged internals, modifications to oil flow and dry sump oiling. Supercharger cooling was air to water intercooler with dedicated radiator.
Innovative architecture aluminum space frame design with ground breaking construction methods for the time with “stir friction” welding of the frame for tremendous strength over MIG, superplastic formed aluminum panels for lightness and smoothness of complex curvatures, innovative “plus nut” fasteners.
BBS staggered size wheels.
Brembo brakes.
Performance that set bench marks and exceeded its targets.
The support industry built around the car OEMs has been around forever. They support the OEMs for styling, basic design and develoipment, prototyping, testing, race support, and even production. You guys know the legendary names of Pinnifarina (now Mahindra?), Giorgio, ..., Ricardo, AVL, FEV, Cosworth, ..., Roush, Cambric (now Tata), and others.
At any one time the car OEMs flex their resources or change their strategy and insource or outsource any or all parts of this work. Do you recall Ilmor? Or do you recall when Ford bought Cosworth and then sold Cosworth? ...
I am not a historian, but please don't get tangled up in your __ You have no idea any more who does what for whom anymore and what is built by whom and why....
I lost respect for Porsche when I met Dr. Hatz at the Tokyo autoshow and I asked him to not make Porsche become VW and he gave me so BS answer. Prior to that I used to go to Stuttgart and heck half of the people I met were contractors... I still own their cars becasue I like the "911".
I have a lot of respect for Ford and I have met all their folks all the way to top. They are doing their best and sorry if Multimatics is building the FGT. Maybe Ford should buy Mulitmatics? That would make things right?
PS: Waxer's FGT was built in Livonia by Jack Roush that is as American or Blue Blood as it gets.
All the best!
.
No car manufacturer has ever made every part and component in the cars they make.
In fact the original GT40 was produced in the UK by FAV. It was an Eric Broadly designed chassis who was with Lola. Roy Lunn massaged the Lola body design and panels were fabricated in England by Abby and the fibre glass molding made in the UK. A Coletti trans was used also. Out sourced performance shop Shelby American fined turned it to a winner for '66.
The support industry built around the car OEMs has been around forever. They support the OEMs for styling, basic design and develoipment, prototyping, testing, race support, and even production. You guys know the legendary names of Pinnifarina (now Mahindra?), Giorgio, ..., Ricardo, AVL, FEV, Cosworth, ..., Roush, Cambric (now Tata), and others.
At any one time the car OEMs flex their resources or change their strategy and insource or outsource any or all parts of this work. Do you recall Ilmor? Or do you recall when Ford bought Cosworth and then sold Cosworth? ...
I am not a historian, but please don't get tangled up in your __ You have no idea any more who does what for whom anymore and what is built by whom and why....
I lost respect for Porsche when I met Dr. Hatz at the Tokyo autoshow and I asked him to not make Porsche become VW and he gave me so BS answer. Prior to that I used to go to Stuttgart and heck half of the people I met were contractors... I still own their cars becasue I like the "911".
I have a lot of respect for Ford and I have met all their folks all the way to top. They are doing their best and sorry if Multimatics is building the FGT. Maybe Ford should buy Mulitmatics? That would make things right?
It's very, very simple.
The reason that Ford doesn't have the in-house capability to build the GT is because they are not long-term committed to the market segment in which the GT is situated.
When I was turned down for a NFGT I did feel like I was kicked in the ***** by my girl friend who I just asked to the prom. Seems like alot of cars went to celebs, big $$$ guys and guys with real social media reach and presence.
I'm just a "little lawyer" like my wife says. Just a guy. I didn't rate. Felt slighted but over it now. That's life.
I don't get it… If Ford doesn't give an enthusiast like you a GT then who should get one?? Looks like your love for the brand has been around for a very long time and the people that Ford are giving the GT cars to are all newbies. Ford is taking a very shortsighted approach in my humble opinion. Beautiful car but at $525,000 US the car is fully valued. The original GT was a bargain.
An application to be a Ford Ambassador???Had a 66 Mark 1 road car from 69 to 75.Pulled the Gurney Eagle out of it and put a side oiler in it.Twisted it so bad only three wheels sat on the ground.And a divorce!!An 06 that sent me to the other side for an hour and a half.A 66 GT 350-H that was a blast to drive on the streets of Manhattan at 3 AM.If they made me a Ford Ambassador I'd use the car to make a Fiero replica.
The car was built as a homologation special. Some of the greatest cars of all time were as well. The Aventador is not a racecar and that brand is living on thin margins and the investment in mass producing a CF tub is a big decision that they will live or die by. Ford isn't going to make another CHAT anytime soon, nor will they use a CF tub in any future models like the Mustang. So making the same investment in infrastructure doesn't make sense for a limited production car. They are racing the GT for a total of 4 years -same as production. You're looking at things with a far too narrow focus.
I'm not so sure that halo cars sitting in dealerships is as effective as it use to be. Also through traditional means, dealers would NOT sell them or MSRP. I've already made my argument for selling all of the cars directly vs the mess of markups and cars sitting on lots below MSRP. Dealers are quite selfish and opportunistic.
You're still complaining about a handful of "social media" people, not a "few hundred".
I think we should just agree to disagree.
Contrary - looking at Ford and asking why not make 4000 like the prior GT.
Ford can tell dealers the mark up and repeat the process in 5 years or not and close the line.
You view this as a win I view this as a half assed commitment at best. Ford has 4000 GT customers the demand is there as is the dealerships.
Bottom line - the GT does more harm than good complete opposite of the previous GT.
Agree to disagree makes sense - Ford is better than this social media show as Guest 89 stated Ford is not committed - poor image.
By that argument, Porsche is doing more harm than good with the 911R since the demand and market (due to the larger loyal client base and lower price) for them is far greater than for the GT.
Plus the 911R isn't anything special in that they can easily make them by taking more 911s off the assembly line and throwing in the special bits that turn it into an R. It's not as involved as a carbon car built from scratch.
I disagree with the premise of the argument since Ferrari is a highly valued and successful brand and intentionally limits production numbers to around 7000 vehicles per year in order to “preserve the brand’s uniqueness”, -according to Sergio Marchionne. Limiting production from a uniqueness standpoint and from a production capability standpoint (increasing production of a hand built CF car is expensive and I'm sure sinking millions more into a facility that will not be needed in 5 years didn't make sense to Ford) are all justifiable reasons. In addition if the demand is greater than the supply, the value goes up. Simple economics. Although there will always be collateral damage of entitled people who are unhappy they didn't get a GT, 911R, 675LT, LaFerrari, etc... But with the means I'm sure they can all get one second hand.
Value goes up for who - the guys who buy cars to make money.
Dealers and customers want 4000 GT's - Ford should build and sell them thru dealers. If FCA Viper can build 700 cars a year Ford can too.
You keep mixing things - Ford is not Porsche Ferrari Lamborghini whom builds cars to make someone feel exclusive. There are 4000 GT owners all happy as can be.
This exclusive thing is for boutique companies of which Ford is not and trying to be is a mistake and even more important a failed program when one looks at the bigger picture.
Ferrari makes more money selling trinkets than cars they are the worlds best brand if that Ford GT had a Ferrari badge and it was called a Dino limited to 1000 units it would be selling for X MSRP +200k over sticker. In order to buy one you better have bought many Ferrari's prior or a Cali & Lusso to even be considered.
I would love a GT but not a fan of the process and my guess is I would have received one but at 500k V6 it wasn't worth the effort nor is this thread frankly would rather have a Heritage.
Lol, building a Vipers steel frame/chassis is nothing compared to a pushrod, torsion bar equipped, active aero, hydraulic ride height twin turbo, DCT carbon tub. I love the Viper and am glad the Gen V materials are a vast improvement over all previous gens, but it has to have one of the simplest and easy to manufacture chassis of any modern sports car. Yet when the Viper debut (in 92 & the V in 13) production couldn't meet demand. Why didn't FCA invest more into meeting demand those first years? Maybe it was a good idea not to since the demand fell below supply/output capacity. All of these decisions are far larger than the narrow focus of those buyers who want a given car and can't get one. I really wish the Viper was more popular than it was. It was so capable, different, and a fun car to drive.
Lol, building a Vipers steel frame/chassis is nothing compared to a pushrod, torsion bar equipped, active aero, hydraulic ride height twin turbo, DCT carbon tub. I love the Viper and am glad the Gen V materials are a vast improvement over all previous gens, but it has to have one of the simplest and easy to manufacture chassis of any modern sports car. Yet when the Viper debut (in 92 & the V in 13) production couldn't meet demand. Why didn't FCA invest more into meeting demand those first years? Maybe it was a good idea not to since the demand fell below supply/output capacity. All of these decisions are far larger than the narrow focus of those buyers who want a given car and can't get one. I really wish the Viper was more popular than it was. It was so capable, different, and a fun car to drive.
We agree - Vipers only downside is perception.
Ordered the GTS-R received #9 of 100 because the dealer was excellent. Will modify it to make it even more of a beast that's my ROI
FCA knew all along this car would be terminated due to the design - they went out with a huge bang on top fastest track car alive this is a car that everyone with the capability to stroke a check should own.
A hand car build is a hand car build - there isn't anything special but for the products being procured. Viper has as much CF FRP as my SV Roadster and it takes interesting to note the exact time to produce once the order goes into production my SV paint came in pure crap the Viper will be perfect as it's contracted out to one of the best shops in the world.
01-15-2017, 05:53 PM
frankly would rather have a Heritage.
