SRT vs Ford GT

[SylvanSRT]

150 is a 60k mark up sticker is 139k

 

[Vic]

Here is an insightful perspective from a Ford fan-

"What a lot of people don't take into account is the width of the powerband, and the power curve in general. And the comparison of the Ford GT w/these other two cars is a typical example of what I'm talking about. The Ford has a twin screw type S/Cer which yields a very broad RPM range of power. So the Ford GT engine is going to make more HP at both the midrange RPM and the low RPM levels. You can't just pay attention to peak HP numbers. That only tells a small part of the story. There's a guy on the marauder board who's car is making 76 more PEAK HP at the wheels than my Marauder is, however, our ET's are only one tenth of a second apart since he has a centrifugal S/Cer, and I have a roots S/cer. So my car is making more low end power than his, and atleast as much (if not more) midrange power. And it isn't peak HP that gets your car down the track. So that's just one of the reasons why I much rather have the Ford GT than those other two cars. It would be more fun to drive since it offers more useable power on the street." Hmmm, broad torque band, lots of torque down low, sounds like the right stuff!

God willing, I'm gonna get me one of those GTs. Looks far more attractive than a Gen3 Viper, in my opinion. I would have stayed loyal to Vipers, until the Gen3 body style crushed my desire to own another one. SRT owners, please don't take offense, I wouldn't say the SRT is ugly, it has its own edgy style and stands on its own, but it just doesn't capture my imagination and excite me like the GTS did when I first saw it. And since the Gen3 coupe will likely look similar to the SRT10+Comp Coupe, I've got a hunch I won't be thrilled. Of course, PVO/SRT will at some time come out with more power for the coupe, and it will maybe do better than the GTs performance, so it will be harder for me to choose between a GT and a Gen3 coupe. Assuming the performance is equal, (and it may not be), I'd take the GT based on its looks.

 

[Supra]

That Ford fan doesn't understand HP at all. I bet his friend with the Maruader that makes 76 more peak HP is only going about a tenth quicker but his MPH at the end of the 1/4 mile is much higher. Also you can't compare a HEAVY automatic car like the Marauder (which will require more torque to get rolling) to a much lighter manual transmission car.

When you calculate the HP of the 3 cars on the test of the Ford GT assuming a 200 pound driver the Enzo's HP number comes out to be 647 HP (right on with it's 651 HP rating from Ferrari), the Carrera GT works out to 641 HP (36 HP higher than Porsches rating) and the Ford GT comes out to 646 HP (96 higher than ford claims).

There is NO way a 3468 pound car with 550 HP at the crank will do 131.5 MPH in the 1/4 mile, ask any drag racers. I bet when they dyno test a Ford GT that runs #'s like that it will make 540+ RWHP 100% stock.

Here is an insightful perspective from a Ford fan-

"What a lot of people don't take into account is the width of the powerband, and the power curve in general. And the comparison of the Ford GT w/these other two cars is a typical example of what I'm talking about. The Ford has a twin screw type S/Cer which yields a very broad RPM range of power. So the Ford GT engine is going to make more HP at both the midrange RPM and the low RPM levels. You can't just pay attention to peak HP numbers. That only tells a small part of the story. There's a guy on the marauder board who's car is making 76 more PEAK HP at the wheels than my Marauder is, however, our ET's are only one tenth of a second apart since he has a centrifugal S/Cer, and I have a roots S/cer. So my car is making more low end power than his, and atleast as much (if not more) midrange power. And it isn't peak HP that gets your car down the track. So that's just one of the reasons why I much rather have the Ford GT than those other two cars. It would be more fun to drive since it offers more useable power on the street." Hmmm, broad torque band, lots of torque down low, sounds like the right stuff!

God willing, I'm gonna get me one of those GTs. Looks far more attractive than a Gen3 Viper, in my opinion. I would have stayed loyal to Vipers, until the Gen3 body style crushed my desire to own another one. SRT owners, please don't take offense, I wouldn't say the SRT is ugly, it has its own edgy style and stands on its own, but it just doesn't capture my imagination and excite me like the GTS did when I first saw it. And since the Gen3 coupe will likely look similar to the SRT10+Comp Coupe, I've got a hunch I won't be thrilled. Of course, PVO/SRT will at some time come out with more power for the coupe, and it will maybe do better than the GTs performance, so it will be harder for me to choose between a GT and a Gen3 coupe. Assuming the performance is equal, (and it may not be), I'd take the GT based on its looks.

 

[Andy 98 RT/10]

God willing, I'm gonna get me one of those GTs. Looks far more attractive than a Gen3 Viper, in my opinion. I would have stayed loyal to Vipers, until the Gen3 body style crushed my desire to own another one. SRT owners, please don't take offense, I wouldn't say the SRT is ugly, it has its own edgy style and stands on its own, but it just doesn't capture my imagination and excite me like the GTS did when I first saw it. And since the Gen3 coupe will likely look similar to the SRT10+Comp Coupe, I've got a hunch I won't be thrilled. Of course, PVO/SRT will at some time come out with more power for the coupe, and it will maybe do better than the GTs performance, so it will be harder for me to choose between a GT and a Gen3 coupe. Assuming the performance is equal, (and it may not be), I'd take the GT based on its looks.

Vic: I pretty much agree with everything you said. I hope the Ford GT gives DC a basis for what the next viper coupe should perform like and, especially, look like.

 

[GR8_ASP]

Vic: I pretty much agree with everything you said. I hope the Ford GT gives DC a basis for what the next viper coupe should perform like and, especially, look like.

But please not a direct copy of a 60's vintage car. There is room to be original and exotic/good looking without duplication.

 

[SilverBlueGTS]

OK, lets do the economics:

New SRT10 = $79k street price or less.

New GT = $139k list plus current dealer mark-up of 100k minimum = $239k. If you want to wait a few years, who knows maybe you can get one with miles for $175k. So let's just call the GT a $200k car.

So if you buy a new SRT10 for $79k and have $141k left over you can buy:

Twin Turbo, wheels, suspension for $50k and have a much faster car.

Ram SRT10 for $43k

Hemi Magnum SRT8 Station Wagon for $40k

and for the $8k left over take the whole family to Maui for a week.

 

[Vic]

That Ford fan doesn't understand HP at all. I bet his friend with the Maruader that makes 76 more peak HP is only going about a tenth quicker but his MPH at the end of the 1/4 mile is much higher. Also you can't compare a HEAVY automatic car like the Marauder (which will require more torque to get rolling) to a much lighter manual transmission car.

When you calculate the HP of the 3 cars on the test of the Ford GT assuming a 200 pound driver the Enzo's HP number comes out to be 647 HP (right on with it's 651 HP rating from Ferrari), the Carrera GT works out to 641 HP (36 HP higher than Porsches rating) and the Ford GT comes out to 646 HP (96 higher than ford claims).

There is NO way a 3468 pound car with 550 HP at the crank will do 131.5 MPH in the 1/4 mile, ask any drag racers. I bet when they dyno test a Ford GT that runs #'s like that it will make 540+ RWHP 100% stock.

Hmmm, ok, time will tell...That 5.4 Ford is using may be very underated. So, what kind of 1/4 mile times does 826rwhp get you? If peak HP is so important, you must be turning 8s or something? I dunno, I'm just asking, 'cause I'm not a drag racer, and I don't even know how to crunch the numbers. Thats why I don't quit my day job.

I think he was merely pointing out that the GT has a wide torque band starting down low, thanks to the twin screw s/c'r, which helps it accelerate off the line, and not trying to justify Ford's HP numbers per se. Anyway, its all good, and I want one so bad now, its like all I think about!

Did anyone read the article in Hot Rod magazine about all the stuff Ford did to the GT's 5.4 to make it last? The block is made from a stonger alloy than the regular 5.4 V8, its got better rods and pistons, the list of upgrades is extensive. Its not just a truck engine with a blower stuck on it. They really built it well.

Kudos to SRT for beating the GT in the Motor Trend figure 8! 23.9 sec, and .86 avg Gs, to the GT's 25.2 sec, 0.77 avg Gs. Knowing that, how come the SRT runs 70.4 mph through their slalom, while the GT runs 71.8 mph through it? Must be the SRT's superior brakes, shaving time in braking in the figure 8. Because if it was just due to the SRT's transient response, then the slalom speed would be closer, right? So its likely mostly due to the SRT's fantastic brakes, that account for its quicker figure 8 time. Either that, or differences in test conditions, drivers, etc. Its also notable that the SRT beats the Enzo in the figure 8, both in time and avg Gs. Keep up the good work!! With performance like that, you would think the world-wide automotive press would be crowning the SRT king of sports cars! But you don't hear much from them, probably because the real money is in the masses of Corvettes, Mustangs, and Mini-vans, so they cater to cars that appeal to this demographic.

 

[Makara]

OK, lets do the economics:

New SRT10 = $79k street price or less.

New GT = $139k list plus current dealer mark-up of 100k minimum = $239k. If you want to wait a few years, who knows maybe you can get one with miles for $175k. So let's just call the GT a $200k car.

So if you buy a new SRT10 for $79k and have $141k left over you can buy:

Twin Turbo, wheels, suspension for $50k and have a much faster car.

Ram SRT10 for $43k

Hemi Magnum SRT8 Station Wagon for $40k

and for the $8k left over take the whole family to Maui for a week.

I've heard the mustang and vette guys rattle off the same thing but to justify why their cars are better than vipers. Give respect where respect is due.

 

[Supra]

ET at the track can be an indication of HP, but mostly it's an indication of traction. MPH at the end of the 1/4 mile is a HP.

I have not run my current Supra at the track (no cage and battery relocated to the trunk without a shut off switch). But I had a previous Supra (I have owned 12 different Supras) with the same turbos minus the upgraded intake that dynoed 786 RWHP. That car weighed in at 3780 pounds with me (this was weighed at the track, I'm 6'5" ~240 pounds) in it and it went 143.2 MPH (the sad thing is that the pass after I went 143.2 MPH I was going 2 MPH faster in the 1/8th but missed fourth gear so I know the car had 145 MPH potential in it) in the 1/4. Best ET however was "only" (I say "only" because a properly set up drag car with a good launch can go low 9's at 143+ MPH.) a 10.41 on 17" BFG drag radials, on slicks I am certain the car could have gone quicker. As it is I only made about a half dozen passes in the car.


At any rate, the GT is definitely making far more HP than Ford is claiming. I am also certain it has a very broad powerband, but that's not what gets it's 131+ MPH capability, you need lots of HP to do that. And you are right, that is one bada$$ motor. All the upgraded components you mentioned (forged crank, pistons, rods) as well as a larger Supercharger unit than the Lightning's. That car is AWESOME!



[/QUOTE]

Hmmm, ok, time will tell...That 5.4 Ford is using may be very underated. So, what kind of 1/4 mile times does 826rwhp get you? If peak HP is so important, you must be turning 8s or something? I dunno, I'm just asking, 'cause I'm not a drag racer, and I don't even know how to crunch the numbers. Thats why I don't quit my day job.

I think he was merely pointing out that the GT has a wide torque band starting down low, thanks to the twin screw s/c'r, which helps it accelerate off the line, and not trying to justify Ford's HP numbers per se. Anyway, its all good, and I want one so bad now, its like all I think about!

Did anyone read the article in Hot Rod magazine about all the stuff Ford did to the GT's 5.4 to make it last? The block is made from a stonger alloy than the regular 5.4 V8, its got better rods and pistons, the list of upgrades is extensive. Its not just a truck engine with a blower stuck on it. They really built it well.

Kudos to SRT for beating the GT in the Motor Trend figure 8! 23.9 sec, and .86 avg Gs, to the GT's 25.2 sec, 0.77 avg Gs. Knowing that, how come the SRT runs 70.4 mph through their slalom, while the GT runs 71.8 mph through it? Must be the SRT's superior brakes, shaving time in braking in the figure 8. Because if it was just due to the SRT's transient response, then the slalom speed would be closer, right? So its likely mostly due to the SRT's fantastic brakes, that account for its quicker figure 8 time. Either that, or differences in test conditions, drivers, etc. Its also notable that the SRT beats the Enzo in the figure 8, both in time and avg Gs. Keep up the good work!! With performance like that, you would think the world-wide automotive press would be crowning the SRT king of sports cars! But you don't hear much from them, probably because the real money is in the masses of Corvettes, Mustangs, and Mini-vans, so they cater to cars that appeal to this demographic.

[/QUOTE]

 

[DBK1]

I've heard the mustang and vette guys rattle off the same thing but to justify why their cars are better than vipers. Give respect where respect is due.

Exactly...hehe. Never thought I'd see the day

 

[Fast Freddy]

the ford gt has a dry sump oiling system

 

[Vic]

Did anyone else have trouble with the way the data from the October Motor Trend is presented?

There seems to be a little error in their chart on page 74. They show the banked curve on the left side of the page, with a dotted line going up to the tri-color chart. This would indicate the GT was going less than 180, maybe 178 or so at that point in the turn. But in the text on page 69, last paragraph, Herta reports he was "over 190 mph coming off the banking". The far left side of the chart is described as "exiting the corner and acceleration", which is synonymous with "coming off the banking" (-Herta). (and NOT consistent with the dotted lines, which seem to reference mid-corner speed) But there is a vast difference between the two speeds, of 190 "off the banking", and 178 "exiting the corner"!

If it could be construed that the chart is showing mid-corner speed on the far left side, (and not exit speed as the label above says) then there still is a problem, because if so, then the mid-corner speed according to the chart and its little dotted lines is about 178, but the sidebar on the right side of the chart says the GT did 186 in mid-corner. So that is not a plausible explanation for the divergence in the speeds reported in the article. I think they just made some goofy graphics, and its 186 mid-corner, 190 at corner exit. But if so, then where did it do the 178 shown on the left side of the chart? Can't be mid corner, cause the side bar says 186 in mid corner. Can't be coming off the banking, cause Herta says he was doing 190 coming off the banking. It does dip down, at its slowest spot on the track, to about 178 or so in braking, but thats at corner entry, farther over on the right side of chart. I'd also have to say that the right side of the chart is labled wrong, because after the peak speed is reached, they brake for turn in, then the speed starts to rise again, which obviously isn't "braking", as the label says at the chart top. The line runs off the right end of the chart when the car is done with braking, and accelerating out of the turn. Mid-corner speed is not shown on the chart, according to the labels in the grey area at the top of the chart. Herta couldn't have done 178 at the end of braking, accelerated to 186 by mid corner, up to 190 at the end of the banking, then stepped on the brakes at corner exit to get it back down to the 178 shown on the left side of the chart where it is described as "exiting the corner and acceleration" Of course not, that would be ridiculous. But the numbers don't wash. The chart should show 190 mph on the left side at corner exit, coming off the banking, like Herta said. It should look more like the Enzo and the P-car, with the red line starting at the left side of the chart at 190, not way down low at apx 178 as shown. Something smells fishy here. Maybe Swap Shop had some influence, so the GT wouldn't look as nice as the Enzo in the graphics?

Gotta give credit to the Enzo, for its lighter weight, and higher HP, giving it the 211 top speed on that size track. The Ford GT has been reported to go 212 at Nardo, but who knows how much space it had to get going that fast.

*edit* So if the far right side of the chart is "mid-corner speed", and not "braking" as the chart label maintains, then Herta's 190 mph off the banking looks right on the chart, and squares with the sidebar's claim of 186 mid-corner. So there seems to be two errors, (1) The right side of the chart where the "braking" label covers both braking, AND acceleration, AND mid-corner speed, and the other error is (2) That the red line on the left side of the chart should be shown up around 190 to square with Herta's 190 comment on page 69, and the 186 mid-corner speed stated in the chart's sidebar. To sum up, its just some silly innacurate graphics. But it irks me, because it shows my next car (God willing) performing worse than it actually did.

Still awake?

 

[01LightningGal]

Just a note on "preproduction pilot car."

A preproduction pilot car is a production spec car. Pilot cars are the first ones they run down the assembly line to check assembly processes, fit and finish issues, and any other issues that may occur on the assembly line.

Thus, the car should be the same performance wise as the true production car, as it is running the same calibrations and parts (the only way the production car would be different is if the pilot did NOT perform the way expected. In this case, a fix would be found.

Fit and finish may not be up to par, however, as this is the purpose of the pilot cars.

One other point. The comparison of the GT and SRT-10 that was done some time ago was with a true preproduction car that was not up to spec (note the hp rating in the magazine of 500hp).

An interesting thing about the latest test. This was conducted at the AZ Proving grounds in the summer. It would be hot. While any car will run worse in high temps, a supercharged car is affected the most. It would be interesting to see some numbers in good air.

PS, I really liked the part about them topping off the gas in the GT and heading off to TX......... right after this test. Guess there are no concerns about reliability. Supercars have really come a long way through the years.

 

[viper585]

Well, check this out. It really doesn't matter if they can't get a car out thats built right.

HOT OFF THE PRESS 05 Mustang stop shipment
Ford Orders Stop Shipment Of 2005 Trucks, Mustang Due To Defective Engines -
Ford GT "40" Alleged To Have Defective Cylinder Heads
07 September 2004
Dearborn, Michigan.
Robert Lane

Sources at one of Ford's engine plants told BlueOvalNews that Ford Motor Company has instructed assembly plants to stop shipping certain 2005 model year vehicles because they can contain defective 4.6L or 5.4L engines. BlueOvalNews was first altered to the problem after we received a news tip at the end of August.

The products that can contain the defective engines include the 2005 Ford Mustang GT, 2005 F-Series, 2005 F-Series Super Duty, Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator. Ford has instructed the assembly plants to stop shipping vehicles until they are screened to see if they contain the defective engines. It is not known if any products were shipped to consumers before the problem was noticed.

The 2005 model year 4.6L and 5.4L engines in question were built with defective cylinder heads. According to sources, the defective cylinder heads will have an adverse effect on performance and will cause the engine to fail to meet Ford's specifications.

It's not immediately clear if Ford will replace the entire engine at the assembly plant or just replace the defective cylinder heads and approve the vehicle for shipment to customers.

A Team Mustang source told BlueOvalNews that a stop shipment order means that Ford won't ship GT Mustangs to dealers, but it doesn't mean that Ford will stop building Mustangs - they can still build V6 powered models until problems with the 4.6L engines are corrected. Further, even though Ford officially launched JOB1 of the Mustang today, shipments don't occur immediately. "Somewhere within two weeks after Job #1 we have an OK to ship meeting where all the upper management on the program proclaim the vehicle is OK to ship. . . .launching a new vehicle in a new plant can have its issues. That's just part of what a launch is all about.", said our source.

In what could prove to be the most devesting news; however, is that the Ford GT "40" is alleged to have cylinder heads that contain defects in the combustion chamber pocket area. According to sources, Ford is allegedly making design changes to the cylinder head and will create a new casting which is targeted for release by 01 January 2005. Rather than issue a recall for the Ford GT, Ford would most likely issue a TSB (technical service bulletin) and repair the vehicles only as needed. Look for an update on the GT heads at a later date.

You must be registered for see images

 

[01LightningGal]

That is from BON (Blue Oval News). The owner of the site is a disgruntled ex Ford employee. His "articles" usually contain just enough "fact" to keep him from getting sued (again. Ford has sued him before and won).

After much berating on the BON forums, he revised his take, saying that the story on the F150 and Mustang heads is "true" (don't know if he really knows what that is), and the one on the GT is just a rumor at this point.

A Ford employee posted that the problem with the stop of the production line was actually caused by a parts shortage for the heads. Nothing more, nothing less. That the article could actually have merit is really silly considering this.......... The 3-valve 5.4 and 4.6 heads are not the same at all. The GT's heads are 4-valvers that are subcontracted out. What are the odds of all of these very different heads, coming from different places, having problems at the same time??? Also funny is stating that there is a stop sale. Both the '05 F150 and the '05 Mustang just stared production. There are no vehicles released to stop a sale on, yet.

BON is the National Enquirer of the automotive world. Most people take his articles as interesting jibberish, and nothing more.

 

[Kelly06]

I agree with Makara and don't need to do any vette rationalizing

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Gawd, I need to visit this forum more often to keep you posers and one-track-mind quartermilers at bay.

When and if we ever see a GT going up against a SRT or better yet, a Comp Coupe at a track (I'm talking road, not dragstrip), the GT best get some better braking and fatter wheels.

I agree with ViperD, I think the following article is going to be more realistic of actual numbers. Unfortunately this entire debate will be moot since the GT will be stuffed into garages and driven for maybe 500 miles a year. Shame.

TAKE A LOOK

VIPER WINS

VD..

 

[Guibo]

I agree with ViperD, I think the following article is going to be more realistic of actual numbers.

TAKE A LOOK

VIPER WINS

VD..

The problem with that chart is that the Viper's numbers were from Ford's Arizona Proving Ground, which Motor Trend has noted is stickier than their usual test site (which is where the GT figures in that article come from). MT alludes to this again, in comparing the WRX STi's preliminary acceleration to the Evo's (the Evo's was done during the same test with the SRT-10, at Ford's APG). To limit variables in surface conditions, we should compare the SRT-10's figures with the GT's figures on the same surface: at APG. The Ford GT has been clocked at 0-150 in ~17 seconds twice already (C&D and Britain's Autocar). The SRT-10 can't live with this (it's about 5.4 seconds slower).


Vic:
I looked at the chart the other day, and I can kinda see your point. I think Herta's comments were a result of his reading the speedo (which can be inaccurate, especially at these high speeds). In any event, if you look at the left part of the chart, and follow the car's path as it comes completely off the banking (not at the midpoint of the curve), it does appear the GT comes onto the purely straight part of the track at ~190 mph. The strange part is that in the text of the graph (to the right) it says the Ford and Porsche were within 1 mph of each other in the turns (186-187 mph), but in the actual graph, the Ford is slower and the Porsche is much higher, closer to the Ferrari's corner exit speed. Another possibility here is that the graph shows the data for one particular lap, while the text is for another lap (they did about 2 sessions consisting of 2 laps for each car as I recall). So yeah, pretty confusing overall. But it appears to convey very well the accelerative surge of the Enzo at elevated speeds, once its active aerodynamics kick in to reduce drag. Very steep acceleration curve, especially considering it's already carrying more speed than the others. Curiously, in the graph shown, the Ford GT's acceleration slope is steeper than the Carrera GT's. If what they said is true (about the Ford being within 1 mph of the CGT in the corners), then that points to some very impressive chassis and aerodynamic work by Ford.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

The problem with that chart is that the Viper's numbers were from Ford's Arizona Proving Ground, which Motor Trend has noted is stickier than their usual test site (which is where the GT figures in that article come from).

I meant to emphasize the GT numbers being more realistic in the article and not so much the comparison to the Viper numbers.

I suppose all this is fun to discuss, but it would be so much more fun if Ford would commit to a long term program for the GT so we could have some track competition...finally.

 

[Guibo]

Ah, I see. Getting tired of stale Porsche and Corvette vittles? You may have a better chance of coming across the GR-1, if Ford decides to build that.

 

[dirk989]

Viper D:
I've had a copy of that motor trend article that I've carried around for quite awhile. The facts and opinions in that one are a little different than some of the opinions stated by others on here. In that test, the SRT-10 lagged behind the GT a tiny bit all the way up to 1/4 mile where the SRT-10 nips the mighty GT. The GT had a very slight advantage in the slalom and the SRT-10 had an enormous advantage in breaking. MT claimed that the GT, in production form, would probably be more comfortable. They had to guess on this one since the test car had CF seats.

If you read the article in its entirety, the SRT-10 has advantages in several areas over the GT and vice versa. MT's opinion was that the Viper offerred essentially the same performance at 40% of the cost. They couldn't pick a winner in the comparision saying it was so close that preference would be decided by cost and brand loyalty.

By the way, I'm the proud new owner of an 04. It is having a blemish on the front fender repaired before I take delivery. I drove it briefly for about 30 miles and it is an incredible car. I like it so much that I've let my Lotus Esprit TT go. Those of you who have been in a newer Esprit know that it is terribly underrated and an amazing car with mongoose like handling. I prefer the Viper.

Can't wait to start spending my life savings on modifications

Dirk

 

[Viperfreak2]

The first GT test in MT was a very early car before the 550hp rating. 11.3 @130+mph in the recent tests is simply way out of the SRT's league. The GT in that test must have been close to 600 hp because it had numbers right on top of the other two 600+ hp cars. If someone is going 10mph faster than you at the end of a 1/4 mile, you might as well shut it down, or hit the NOS button.

 

[dirk989]

The first test used a car that was supposed to be the same as the production car. I think the bump up in hp was a direct result of some of these comparos. I also don't doubt that the one used in the most recent tests has probably been massaged a little bit. I don't disagree with your estimate that the recent test car was pushing closer to 600. The 11.3 @ 130 may be out of the SRT's league, but it probably is also out of the league of a GT that you could actually buy. (as opposed to one that was jacked up so that tests would look good.)

Other than straight line acceleration, all of the numbers from the first MT test are still relevant. Handling, braking etc. show that the bone stock Viper is in the same league as the GT.

As others have said, turning up the hp in the SRT looks like a fairly easy thing to do. I'm pretty happy about my purchase.

Dirk

 

[SRTJOE]

In the latest Motor Trend the GT ran the 1/4 in 11.2 at 131mph! It ran right with the 400,000 Porshe GT I am impressed. The SRT ran I think 11.8 at 123 so the GT is faster. I think the GT is underrated at 550hp. I still love all Vipers but I respect what Ford has done.

Incredible....Tied with the 440k CGT and 4mph off the 600k-1 million dollar Enzo..Lets not forget faster then the SLR..all for around 150k....Its thee performance bargain in the hyperexotic realm....I agree its seriously underrated at 550hp...Its probably making that to the wheels...131 is moving...

I just got my copy of MT and am very impressed with the FORD GT.

But MT has this figure-eight track test they do its in short a race that takes everything into account and here are the numbers.

TIME AVG G

PORSCHE GT 23.8 SEC @ .86 G
ENZO 24.5 SEC @ .82 G
FORD GT 25.2 SEC @ .77 G
SRT-10 23.9 SEC @ .86 G

Let the numbers tell the story but to me the SRT-10 is the KING
Thank god I own one.

I will try this again in the MT mag if the GT and the SRT-10 were to race on the MT figure-eight race track the SRT-10 would beat the GT buy 1.3 seconds!!!

 

[Yellow32]

I was considering the Ford GT but recently purchased a Viper ('05 VCA Edition). Why? A few reasons:

* The Ford GT will be a "first generation car", Ford has not manufactured a car like the GT in a very long time and I do not believe has the ability to "pull it off". After all, look at the production, it has been promised for about a year now and is still not happening. As a comparison, in the computer biz, we always skip "first generation" products as they have too many headaches to be worth the trouble.

* I am in touch with several dealers who "now" have a VIN, but no delivery date, and they cannot get their respective area reps to give them more details. The dealers says "car could be here tomorrow or next year, I just don't know!". I have heard from dealers that production is on "material delay"..yeah, right, more like "still trying to engineer things delay".

* The '05 Viper is the result of 12+ years of "trial and error" and refinement - Remember, the Viper was first discussed in February 1988 and the first 6 Viper's for customer shipment sent from the factory May 20, 1992. This period of time roughly overlapped with Dodge's ownership of Lamborghini (another marque I can speak of highly). Even "first generation" Lamborghini Diablos were to be avoided, it took them about 3 to 4 years to get things right, and that was with Dodge/Chrylser's money.

* Ford Dealer's want between a $100,000 and $125,000 premium on the car, in the end that might be worth it if Ford only ends up making a few hundred GTs before cancelling production...

All in all, I believe the Viper to be the superior choice, and not just for "raw performance" numbers.

There are other benefits too...it is very likely you will never have the fellowship amongst owners as you have with the Viper - the extended Viper family is an excellent benefit. The Viper has a trunk...the GT has none...and it's called a "GT", how can that be? I have to put my overnight duffle bag in the passenger's floorboard? Even my Lambo has a trunk with room for a few racing helmets!

Go Viper!

JT

 

[onerareviper]

I was considering the Ford GT but recently purchased a Viper ('05 VCA Edition). Why? A few reasons:

* The Ford GT will be a "first generation car", Ford has not manufactured a car like the GT in a very long time and I do not believe has the ability to "pull it off". After all, look at the production, it has been promised for about a year now and is still not happening. As a comparison, in the computer biz, we always skip "first generation" products as they have too many headaches to be worth the trouble.

* I am in touch with several dealers who "now" have a VIN, but no delivery date, and they cannot get their respective area reps to give them more details. The dealers says "car could be here tomorrow or next year, I just don't know!". I have heard from dealers that production is on "material delay"..yeah, right, more like "still trying to engineer things delay".

* The '05 Viper is the result of 12+ years of "trial and error" and refinement - Remember, the Viper was first discussed in February 1988 and the first 6 Viper's for customer shipment sent from the factory May 20, 1992. This period of time roughly overlapped with Dodge's ownership of Lamborghini (another marque I can speak of highly). Even "first generation" Lamborghini Diablos were to be avoided, it took them about 3 to 4 years to get things right, and that was with Dodge/Chrylser's money.

* Ford Dealer's want between a $100,000 and $125,000 premium on the car, in the end that might be worth it if Ford only ends up making a few hundred GTs before cancelling production...

All in all, I believe the Viper to be the superior choice, and not just for "raw performance" numbers.

There are other benefits too...it is very likely you will never have the fellowship amongst owners as you have with the Viper - the extended Viper family is an excellent benefit. The Viper has a trunk...the GT has none...and it's called a "GT", how can that be? I have to put my overnight duffle bag in the passenger's floorboard? Even my Lambo has a trunk with room for a few racing helmets!

Go Viper!

JT

Hmmmm.... So your brain tells you SRT. What does your heart say? I know mine yells Ford GT over a SRT10 any day of the week. Exactly why DC/PVO needs to make the GTSR concept a reality.

 

[Viperfreak2]

My heart screams Ford GT too! My wallet screams YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS! For $250K I can think of quite a lot of 'rather haves'

 

[Yellow32]

Hey onerareviper, excellent question.

My initial reply was loaded on the logic side of the house as I tend to be, but, as for the heart of the matter, I truly lusted after the Viper. The main issue I had with past Vipers was their road handling ability (suspension setup in the non-competition chassis) and the SRT-10 resolves that for me. The Ford GT is a significant car, but it does not have my heart whatsoever. Allow me to explain.

I have never been a Ford man and that goes back to my early days as my father was a GM man all the way. And, I always encountered evidence along the way that job one at Ford was not ensuring quality.

In the end, the GT is a beautiful engine cover (and there in lies my current attraction to the GT), but, the engine and its manufacturer are not something I would ever really want. Even the Saleen S7 is a turn off, being based on a Ford block that's been recast in aluminum. As an aside, my attraction with Lamborghini (NOT the Gallardo), is their fantastic 12 cylinder motors, nothing like them, they are awesome. I say not the Gallardo as its motor is an Audi 'one off' V8 that has 2 more cylinders added on.

I love the **** lines of the Viper (all editions) and the 'honest' setup of the power train (meaning not full of electronics). Being a convertible is so much the better. By the way, I think DC has done a fantastic job with the suspension as even with the top down it feels great (not a simple feat).

And, in case you are wondering, I am not a Ferrari guy at all, though I do fancy the F50 and Enzo.

Bottom line, I smile every time I think of the Viper and love driving it!

JT

 

[cratica]

I too agree with Vic...

Ford GT, hands down.

I think the SRT has a better powerplant but the styling (or lack of) of the SRT does nothing for me. It's just like many other cars on the road now.

The FORD GT, well that's something to drool over. It's beautiful, just like the Viper Gen I/II's are...

 

[Vic]

cratica,
Now if I can just scrape the money together before they quit making them!

I wouldn't mind having both the GT and my Viper! Is that sacreligous? 8^)