Ken,

You getting one?? I love them, but I would not pay more than sticker. And it would have to be an addition to my turbo not in replacement of!

 

It looks interesting but two things..............

1. It is a Ford
2. I would have expected all of the allotments are spoken for.

Great to see you here Buddy!!

 

Unlike the guys on the car shows in America, I think Jeremy Clarkson and Tiff make quite a bit of money doing what they do. They're closer to celebrity's than say the clowns on Autoweek.

Plus, remember that they make their money in Pounds Sterling, so the car may not be as expensive for them relative to their income.

- KJ

 

i waited a bit to post my impressions so here they are...

I'm not impressed. The car looks like a real pig in the corners. It seems to exhibit pretty bad understeer. Ford missed the boat having it weigh just shy of 3500lbs.

The engine is less than impressive. How will you feel in your $150-225k car when a $30k old model Ford Lightning pulls up next to you and has the exact same engine.

The GT40 is my favorite car ever. I was unbelievably excited for this car and have been on the list for one for a long time. The fact is that other than the looks, it is just not that special. Top Gear track times are really just for fun, they are in no way scientific. Plus it seems just a bit of a conflict of interest that Clarkson is reviewing the car and he is also getting one of 28 of them to make it to the UK.

The bottom line is that for the same price, a GT2 will at least equal the performance, in my opinion it will spank it. All this while being able to take your car to your Porsche dealer instead of down to the local Ford idiots.

Pretty soon the Viper Coupe and the C6 Z06 will come out. Both will be considerably lighter with about the same output and both will crush the GT for half and a third of the price respectively.

I just don't see where the $150 grand went in this car? Nothing seems very sophisticated or revolutionary. It looks to me like you're paying $70,000 for a GT40 body. I think it does the original GT40 an injustice.

 

In what performance categories does the GT2 spank the Ford GT?

A little too soon to tell, correct? And by what I've read thus far, the Ford GT will most likely put down quicker lap times than the GT2. A reverse spanking.

 

lets just look at it objectively. we have the GT2 at just shy of 500hp and right around 3100lbs. The Ford GT has 550hp and weighs about 3500lbs.

So the GT2 has about 6.45lb/hp and the GT has 6.36. Pretty much a wash in that category.

Now, the GT2 has a suspension that is very much optimized for the track. Ford has obviously set their car up for much more of a compromise of track and street. You cannot have both. This all leads me to believe that the GT2 should at least equal the GT in most every way and probably beat it in many. The point is that whoever comes out on top they are VERY close. So why would a Ford with equal performance to a Porsche sell for more money? It's really just because they made it look like the coolest car ever, the GT40.

 

Although I agree that it's not as prestigious as a Porsche and the fact that it shares the engine with a Ford Lightning is kinda cheezy. I do have to say that Jeremy Clarkson used to ridicule the new GT40 before he had a chance to drive it (1 year ago). After driving it, he said that it was so much fun to drive, that he changed his mind about the car and now he was buying one.

Also, in response to your post below, I believe the Porsche GT2 is on that lap time board, and it's well below the time of the GT40.

But I'm sure once the car comes out, some magazine will do a shootout with all the aforementioned cars on the same day and on the same track and we can find out first hand which car is faster.

- KJ

 

the Top Gear lap times are complete bull****. Please do not believe those lies.

http://www.topgear.com/content/misc/TV/lap_times/

look there. do you really believe that the Lotus Exige is a second quicker than a GT3 and 5 seconds quicker than a turbo? do you really think the murci and CS are faster than the Zonda and Koenigsegg? And mostly, do you think the SLR is actually that quick??? It's a 3600lb car.

I'm sure if you look at that list you will realize that those times are really nothing more than fun, they mean absolutely nothing. Also you'll notice there's no GT2 on the list.

again, the GT is a cool car. i'd like to have one. but it's not worth anywhere near $150k and Ford could have made it MUCH better at that price point.

 

I love these guys video's - really the most entertaining car videos out there

 

The car does nothing for me. The interior is butt ugly, and I wouldn't have a sports car built by Ford.

 

Well, in 2003 Autocar did a BBHC(Britain's Best Handling Car) with 32 cars around the Rockingham Motor Speedway which is a tight 1.7 mile infield circuit. Guess what the Lotus Elise 135R beat both the Murcie and Pagani with a time of 1:21:0 over the 1:22:2 and 1:22:7. Why? They said that the Pagani(which is why I was very amazed that the CGT and SLR turned in such a good time at TG) was simply too powerful for such a tight handling track(without the Murcie's AWD) very much like the one developed by Lotus for Top Gear. Sure if this was at the 'Ring where you can really get up to speeds then no contest(GT3 time was 1:20:2 btw).

 

sure it's possible that an Elise/Exige can beat a GT3 around a super tight track. however, if that were the case then the SLR shouldn't be anywhere near the top of that list. If you can't look at that list and see a bunch of contradictions then you're blind.