![]() |
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Black Rock, CT
Posts: 4,345
|
Ford GT- vs Ferrari Stradale vs GT3
For those who aren't subscribers, Car and Driver just did a comparo, and chose the GT over the other, established kings.
They seem to base it mostly on the track results, where, interestingly, the GT whupped the others. By 2 seconds! Now I know this is blaspheny, but I would have selected their #2 finisher, the Ferrari, as my choice....even if it wasn't as fast. The GT3, obviously, finished, ummmm........ third. Tough crowd!!
__________________
Jake Gulick, Black Rock, CT. '73 yellow 911E , & 2003 BMW M3 Cab. Ex: 84 Mazda RX-7 SCCA racer. did ok with it, set some records, won some races, but it wore out, LOL[/B] |
||
![]() |
|
Back in the saddle again
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Central TX west of Houston
Posts: 56,063
|
I think I'd have a hard time picking between the Ford and the GT3, but I think I'd end up with the GT3, then the Ford, then the Ferrari.
Don't get me wrong, I like Ferrari's, just the 360 just doesn't do it for me, the 550 and 575 are nice, and several of the old/older models, but the Ford and the GT3 are much sexier.
__________________
Steve '08 Boxster RS60 Spyder #0099/1960 - never named a car before, but this is Charlotte. '88 targa ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Warren Hall Student
|
Apples and Oranges.
I read the article. The Ford GT is a for real bare bones sport car. The GT3 on the other hand, although being more sparse than a 996 Turbo, is still a touring car. It's not the fairest comparison in my view. Car and Driver said the GT3 would be the closest car that Porsche makes to compare but I don't think it's anymore fair than running the Ford GT against the Carrera GT which would obviously be unfair to the Ford GT. Don't get me wrong. I would still love to have a Ford GT. My hats off to Ford on this one. Porsche should take notice. Isn't about time for Porsche to build that retro 917?
__________________
Bobby _____In memoriam_____ Warren Hall 1950 - 2008 _____"Early_S_Man"_____ |
||
![]() |
|
Schleprock
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Frankfort IL USA
Posts: 16,639
|
Ford took a full-on race car from the days of old, redesigned it to make it streetable, and dropped a supercharged big displacement motor in it for added measure.
The GT3 is a street car that's tuned for seriously fast motoring. That's what all of the 911 variants have been. How about we test a GT-1 against the Ford GT? ![]() I dunno what the Ferrari is because that car is just plain weird. I guess it's a street car tuned for racing, since that's what the 348, 355, 360 challenge cars have always been. Doesn't seem like a completely fair fight to me. There's no substitute for cubic inches and monster rubber. Well, there's the lightweight approach. But the GT3 is no featherweight by any means. I agree that it's great Ford built this car. The GT40 is one of my favorite vintage race cars. That car looks wickedly fast sitting still.
__________________
Kevin L '86 Carrera "Larry" |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 372
|
I haven't seen the magazine or read the article yet but it does sound like a somewhat biased comparison. Isn't the Stradale a +$180K very low volume special from Ferrari? And I have to admit, I like the Ford GT quite a lot, but it's sticker price is supposed to come in at around the $150K mark. The Porsche GT3 is "only" a $100K car. It would have made a lot more sense to include the GT2 which is priced right up there next to the Ferrari. Yet, it goes to show that a Ferrari of nearly twice the price can only best the Porsche by 2 seconds.
__________________
Brian 1981 930 |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
where would the carerra gt rank? hmmmm?
|
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The new GT40 is in a class of its own in my opinion. Why? Because it offers something that no other car of today (except maybe Morgan) offers.
The Ferrari Challenge Straldale is the "RS" of Ferrari's. An awesome car no doubt. The GT3 is of course very nice, but it could benefit from a bit more classic brutality. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 125
|
In european magazines lots have been written about the stradalle being faster and more vicious than the gt3... when here it costs (factory price, not including local taxes) more than twice what the gt3 costs. Some magazine (can't remeber which) made some comment that for the price of the stradalle, you could buy a gt3, tune it so it will crush the stradalle like a tin can (GT3 racing engine, anyone?), and still have enough cash to buy another very good car as a daily driver...
earache at half-throtle... And a GT3 racing engine will probably be more reliable/more streetable/less loud than the stradalle's... |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
Did anyone notice the comment about lifting when turning in with the GT-3, and how that caused the tail to be happy . . .
I thought, from my training and limited track time, that you are on the gas once turning in from the brake point . . . . at least that is what I have done, with the exception of one turn at VIR . . . . the result was agricultural ![]()
__________________
'94 CMC Firebird Trans Am '86 951 LS1 (C-2) Gone ![]() ![]() '77 911 3.2 (C-1) Gone but not forgotten. http://www.pelicanparts.com/MotorCity/marcesq1 http://www.youtube.com/user/958Fan#p/u |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
It's really no more than a simple comparison of pounds per horsepower:
GT40 = 6.9 Stradle = 7.4 GT3 = 8.5 Not surprisingly, that's the order they finished in the testing. ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
When you get down to 4 lbs/HP you're in the right area.
My old 67 Ford Fairlane was in that category with the cammer in it (427 SOHC). Cars like that should never be on the street...but mine was...as well as the drag strip...LOL I pity the young drivers today that will never know the pure thrill of having 700+ HP under the foot. Of course..finding fuel for it now would be tough. Bob
__________________
Bob Hutson |
||
![]() |
|
Schleprock
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Frankfort IL USA
Posts: 16,639
|
Another reason why the Ford put a hurtin' on the other two at the track is the huge torque advantage the Ford has.
Ford - 500 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm and i'll venture to guess that high torque lies just about everywhere in the rpm range (it's a supercharged, intercooled 5.4L 32V 8 cyl.) Ferrari Stradale and Porsche GT3 have - just under 300 lb-ft @ 4750, 5000 rpm respectively. That's a peak difference of over 200 lb-ft! A side-by-side look at the torque curves would show an even bigger advantage for the Ford. Supercharged motors usually have a flat torque curve. High revving motors like the Ferrari's and the Porsche's look like a mountain (peak somewhere with slopes on either side). More area under the flat curve = more available torque for faster corner exit speed. Test said that's where the Ford really stood out. Here's another way to look at it the advantage. My 3.2 is rated at 195 lb-ft peak torque from the factory. So the Ford GT has the added amount of torque sorta equivalent to what my whole car has! Yep. That Ford GT is one baaaaaaad mofo.
__________________
Kevin L '86 Carrera "Larry" |
||
![]() |
|
Moderator
|
I've always loved the GT40. I would certainly take one over a GT3 now as well.
Wasn't this test done on comparably priced cars. Using that criteria the Carrera GT is a bit out of the catagory.
__________________
Bill Verburg '76 Carrera 3.6RS(nee C3/hotrod), '95 993RS/CS(clone) | Pelican Home |Rennlist Wheels |Rennlist Brakes | |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Black Rock, CT
Posts: 4,345
|
Interesting responses....
Question: If the GT2 is a fairer comparo, and based on price there is a good case for that ((perhaps one wasn't available for testing), how much faster would it be over it's brother, the GT3 at Gingerman? Power to weight ratio and finishing position are aligned, but not proportionally. Ford GT: 1:32.13 Porsche GT3: 1:34.15 Ferrari Stradale: 1:34.19 The Ferrari and the GT3, were, once standard error deviation is factored in, identical. The one factor that would change things would be the deletion of the GTs supercharger. The Ferrari is clearly the overacheiver among the crowd. 1.94 hp per cubic inch!!!!! That's incredible! Emissions compliant! The GT2 is extremely respectable too:1.73 hp per cubic inch is a great output. The Ford gets it's 1.52 by supercharging.... Swap in the GT2 for the GT3, take away the GTs supecharging, and you might have had a reversal of finishers. But the Ferrari is still the sexiest by far! As is, the Ford brings an Uzzi to a knife fight. Perhaps a better contender would have been the Carrera GT, and the Enzo? Still, sitting here in New England, with an 18" blizzard dumping, daydreaming about this stuff is fun! Time to go shovel...........again!
__________________
Jake Gulick, Black Rock, CT. '73 yellow 911E , & 2003 BMW M3 Cab. Ex: 84 Mazda RX-7 SCCA racer. did ok with it, set some records, won some races, but it wore out, LOL[/B] |
||
![]() |
|
Schleprock
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Frankfort IL USA
Posts: 16,639
|
Quote:
![]() You're right Bill. The GT2 was left out of the test because of cost and they also didn't think the outcome would be much different. Maybe, maybe not. So the Carrera GT at $600-something large is certainly priced far out of this battle. Fun test to read. Would have made the trip to Gingerman to watch it had I known it was happening! ![]()
__________________
Kevin L '86 Carrera "Larry" |
||
![]() |
|