Ford GT - Page 4

svxistentialist · #46 02-11-2004, 02:19 AM

The best selling sportscar in the world is the Mazda MX5, called the Miata in some markets.

This car is a copy, but not a clone, of the pert and pretty Lotus Elan from the seventies. It is many things the Lotus was not. It is heavier, slower, more robust, with better interior and build quality. But having reverse engineered the Elan, what the Mazda people retained from the Lotus was the handling, the shape and soul of it, the parts that made it a good car. And they get a million seller for their trouble.

It is normal practice in engineering terms to borrow or use technology developed for racing. It ensures our cars improve year on year.

Maybe your problem with American auto makers is caused by trucks and utes? The American public are buying so many trucks, the car makers don't need to design so many new cars any more.

No?

Joe

wawazat?? · #47 02-11-2004, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by drivemusicnow

what car did Ferrari tear down when making the 360? I just think that using someone else engineering feat, and merely improving on it, without paying ferrari, other than for the actual vehicle, is like cheating. (I actually do plan on going into the automotive industry as an engineer also) I understand that they are just setting a specific target to beat, but it still seems to me like Ford can't fully design there own car to beat the ferrari. Its like looking at the solution to a crossword puzzle as you try to solve it. Sure its easier, but how much pride can you take in it when you solve it?

No one except a Ferrari or Fiat (their owner) could say for sure, but a number of vehicles were fully evaluated before Ferrari released the 360 (and the 550, 465, 348, etc). As an engineer who works in the auto industry, it happens with every new car regardless of the manufacturer. It may be interior evaluations, powertrain evaluations, structural evaluations, NVH comparisons, etc. Pride is a small part of the picture. Financial strength and continued viability as a company are much more important to the company and its stockholders than pride in doing the job with no outside influence.

Enjoy your education Grasshopper

Todd

Mr. Pockets · #48 02-11-2004, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by drivemusicnow

what car did Ferrari tear down when making the 360? I just think that using someone else engineering feat, and merely improving on it, without paying ferrari, other than for the actual vehicle, is like cheating. (I actually do plan on going into the automotive industry as an engineer also) I understand that they are just setting a specific target to beat, but it still seems to me like Ford can't fully design there own car to beat the ferrari. Its like looking at the solution to a crossword puzzle as you try to solve it. Sure its easier, but how much pride can you take in it when you solve it?

But it's not the same car!!!

It'd be one thing if they took apart a Ferrari, and then built a Ferrari, but they didn't. They built a completely different car.

Hell, they didn't even reverse-engineer it! They share little to nothing in common with eachother!

I still just completely fail to understand how this is 'cheating' in your mind. The cars are built in completely different ways, their drivetrains are laid out differently, they use different materials and processes - just what about it is cheating??? Do you think Subaru don't take a good hard look at the Evo and Mitsubishi the Impreza?

I have to be honest with you - I have no idea how much Ford analyzed a 360. If it's documented anywhere, I'd be totally surprised. If it is, and you can show me where Ford claims to have outright copied a part of the 360, then you'll have a point in my book. But as far as I can see, they used it as a benchmark and that's it.

I guarantee you that Ferrari buys Porsches.

shelfy · #49 02-11-2004, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wawazat??
They saved engineering dollars and time and according to a recent Car & Driver test against Ferrari and Porsche, effectively created a world beater.

Todd

why would someone spend so much money for a "beater"?

WestCoastSVX · #50 02-11-2004, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets

I would go so far as to praise Ford

Holy smoke!

Does this mean hell could now be a host city for the Winter Olympics?

WestCoastSVX · #51 02-11-2004, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by greg
I have not paid too much attention to the Ford GT (being that it is slightly out of my price range) But just looking at it does absolutly nothing for me. I guess I am not a fan of that style. But as it goes for retro look, I think they are on to something there. Not the retro thing as much as finding something that works and sticking to it!

For example: look at the porsche of yesteryear and look at the Porsche of today, there is not too much difference in the stlye. Yet the new ones are more sleek, the "look" is still there.
(IMO) something that I like to see is a company that has an image. I mean a stlyle image. Pontiac is the best example, for a long time I have seen new pontiacs being produced, even all new designs but the front of each has a distinc Pontiac look. Even the Aztek, though not the most beautiful vehicle ever built, has a distinct Pontiac look. Cadillac is going for that look too. Mercedes seems to try to have their line-up with a distinguished look although for sometime they were unsure which direction to go but if you will notice now they are going to the four round look that was a classic image of the 60's 70's and I think 80's it may have been before that too. The new cars are not "retro" but in fact that have cues from their heritage and I think that is what makes a company. Distinguishing itself from just being a "car" or just transportation.

That is whats wrong with the Japanese car companies. There is no distinguishing factor. From years past a Honda and a Toyota looked like just another car. There was nothing there that said "I AM A TOYOTA" like other german and american companies.

Just my $.02..
-G

All true. Don't forget probably the best example of them all, BMW. I can't think of any Beemer of any year going all the way back that didn't have the trademark "double kidney grill" or whatever you call it.

drivemusicnow · #52 02-11-2004, 03:31 PM

http://www.ai-online.com/issues/arti...tail.asp?id=54 Thats pretty much the article that I recieved most of my information. I am wrong on a couple things, because it had been a while since i had read it, but its a great article and contains a lot of useful info. I mean, the title kind of reflects my original opinion ("Class Clone") But it HAS been a year since i read that article, and my original opinion has probably been slightly twisted by an overall bias against Ford... But there it is.

Mr. Pockets · #53 02-11-2004, 04:29 PM

And it doesn't sound like they did anything out of the ordinary. As for the torsional rigidity - they bested the Ferrari by 40%. That's a hell of an improvement and hardly copying somebody else's notes.

The GT is a totally different car.

But what does bother me is that Ferrari logo on the side of the car. Why would they do that???

#54 02-11-2004, 04:59 PM

I thought that was a STEBRO logo and not a Ferrari logo...

That's kinda funny!

Mr. Pockets · #55 02-11-2004, 05:44 PM

No, the caption claims it's a Ferrari logo. I don't get it. That's the sort of crap Ricers do.

Actually, I've seen a C5 around here with big (6" tall) Ferrari badges in the same place. What kind of crap is that? The guy could have bought a 308 for the same price if he really wanted a freakin' Ferrari...

#56 02-11-2004, 06:24 PM

Maybe it has Ferrari wiperblades!

drivemusicnow · #57 02-11-2004, 08:08 PM

its not a ferrari badge. its the "rabbit" or something, a letter to the editor was sent in the next issue correcting them, but i guess they didn't fix it on the website. can't remember exactly what its called though

WestCoastSVX · #58 02-12-2004, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets
No, the caption claims it's a Ferrari logo. I don't get it. That's the sort of crap Ricers do.

Actually, I've seen a C5 around here with big (6" tall) Ferrari badges in the same place. What kind of crap is that? The guy could have bought a 308 for the same price if he really wanted a freakin' Ferrari...

Maybe they put those badges on their cars to symbolize one Ferrari "kill".

You know, the way WWII fighter pilots painted on a Japanese or German symbol on the front of their plane for every one of the enemy they shot down.

svxistentialist · #59 02-12-2004, 11:55 AM

What's a C5? Is it a Corvette?

I can't see the Citroen C5 over here picking up too many Ferrari scalps.

Joe

Mr. Pockets · #60 02-12-2004, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MacGyver

Maybe they put those badges on their cars to symbolize one Ferrari "kill". You know, the way WWII fighter pilots painted on a Japanese or German symbol on the front of their plane for every one of the enemy they shot down.

Okay, that would be even more lame.

Anyway, you're optimistic (in an odd sort of way), but the placing and the sheer size of the logos is significant.