2017 Ford GT, now. . . with specs

[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy

That's what happens when people keep accusing someone of something when they aren't impressed. To me there is nothing to be impressed by or blown away by about the car other than its looks.. Now, maybe it drives way better than the McLaren, maybe it is way more comfortable.. I'll personally never know so all I can go by is the spec sheet and what others say.

Things that bug me is when people or companies state what they will do or what they are gunning for and then don't execute. So, that's where my disappointment comes from.

Yes, it weighs more than McLaren so they failed. It also gets significantly worse fuel economy.. Go figure. Just don't see how it's an engineering marvel that many tried to make it out to be.

And fuel economy is one of those things the uber-rich are very concerned about.

[ChefBorOzzy]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

And fuel economy is one of those things the uber-rich are very concerned about.

You apparently miss the point.

[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Then I admit that I do.

What is it?

[ChefBorOzzy]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

Then I admit that I do.

What is it?

They have been seriously out engineered.. They didn't put out a lighter car and the McLaren absolutely destroys it from a fuel economy standpoint. So, what did this turbo six get them over the turbo 8 in the McLaren besides being all about marketing ecoboost? How the hell did McLaren get such better mpg? Ecoboost does put our decent torque though.. Not sure what the engine revs to.

[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy

They have been seriously out engineered.. They didn't put out a lighter car and the McLaren absolutely destroys it from a fuel economy standpoint. So, what did this turbo six get them over the turbo 8 in the McLaren besides being all about marketing ecoboost? How the hell did McLaren get such better mpg? Ecoboost does put our decent torque though.. Not sure what the engine revs to.

Fair enough, but fuel economy is not a metric I would include in deciding who out engineered who.

Worrying about fuel economy in a car like this is like going on a date with Olivia Munn and worrying about how much food she's going to order.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

Fair enough, but fuel economy is not a metric I would include in deciding who out engineered who.

Worrying about fuel economy in a car like this is like going on a date with Olivia Munn and worrying about how much food she's going to order.

You have to admit, though...it does speak to an engineering standpoint...An "Ecoboost" engine, that doesn't stack up to a tried and true application of a V8 in terms of efficiency.

[enzia35]

I want to touch it.

[Camaro_Corvette]

Your first failing is thinking that Ford was going to come out with something exciting.

[Snoman]

Originally Posted by Camaro_Corvette

Your first failing is thinking that Ford was going to come out with something exciting.

Debatable, the first factual failure was creating a super car that weighs nearly 1,500 kg.

[frenchsquared]

Seems to me this car funded the research for what Ford can really do with V6. It helped fund the raptor and I bet your going to see lighter V6 Mustangs. To me this car has nothing do to with its actually sales. Companies think globally. If they sell just enough of these to pay for the research for the V6 then Ford can put the V6 in a Mustang and keep the cost of the Mustang down. You have to see these cars as part of the overall business plan for Ford and not just a one off car looking to dominate the world.

The Big V8's are a dying bread.

Ford sold 100% of them. That means Ford doesn't care what GM guys think. Ford made there money. I just hate to see the V8 die. These kids like the small displacement engines. They grew up in a different time and don't care about the thought of a big V8 verse a baby V6.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by frenchsquared

The Big V8's are a dying bread.

People've been saying that for the last decade and a half, and while we're seeing more Turbo 6s, hybrids, etc...we're also seeing more V8s that do the same sorts of things, or better. I think Ford chose the 6 as a marketing stunt or for R&D like you suggest...not because it was the best option available to them.

[frenchsquared]

I would bet on the GT funding the V6 in the Raptor.

I never felt the V8's were dying. I think they got strangled in the 80's and it took a while to get around EPA. I do think the big V8's are dying now. There all getting smaller with a blower. More HP does not mean a bigger engine. Hope I am wrong... but that thought is why I have an 427 in a Camaro.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by frenchsquared

I would bet on the GT funding the V6 in the Raptor.

I never felt the V8's were dying. I think they got strangled in the 80's and it took a while to get around EPA. I do think the big V8's are dying now. There all getting smaller with a blower. More HP does not mean a bigger engine. Hope I am wrong... but that thought is why I have an 427 in a Camaro.

As far as I'm concerned...they can get smaller if that's what creates a better engine....just so long as they continue to have 8 cylinders, and sound awesome.

But perhaps, with the EPA under scrutiny (not starting a new topic on that...), we may see a few more years of big engines, and old-fashioned automotive performance than anyone thought.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

People've been saying that for the last decade and a half, and while we're seeing more Turbo 6s, hybrids, etc...we're also seeing more V8s that do the same sorts of things, or better. I think Ford chose the 6 as a marketing stunt or for R&D like you suggest...not because it was the best option available to them.

Ford chose the V6 because of racing regulations. The EBV6 allowed them to meet their power requirements with existing tooling. That, and it's great advertisement for their Ecoboost engine line.