In this thread, Madd Maxx expressed his opinion that the Ford GT was the coolest looking damned thing on wheels.
I certainly agree it is a way cool car. But as 2-seater rockets have never really been my cup of tea, I have a hard time seeing why someone would think a Ford GT significantly cooler looking than - say - a Viper. Or a Ferrari. Or any number of other 2-door, 2-seat, close to the ground screamers.
Can someone help me out and see the differences that I currently do not appreciate?
The differances seem to me to centre around cost, exclusivity, impracticality, power and image.
Short service breaks, lack of comfort, expensive maintenance, poor fuel economy, poor fuel tank range mean these things are not for the humdrum suburban life - which is exactly the sort of thing that the owners are trying to escape from.
However, some of them do make some reasonable nod in the direction of practicality, not the Ford GT though.
Try again, Sparky.
“Coolest-looking car” is an entirely emotional concept. There are features that most sports cars have in common, and which features are most important will vary from person to person. Some people can’t imagine an American car being cool; others won’t consider anything else. Some will love an upswept back end; others will swear that the fastback is the apex of rear end design. Some folks like the classic “bullet” shape of the early British sports cars; others delight in a wedge-shaped or flared design.
This doesn’t help the designer one bit, but it does explain why one man might prefer the vaguely nauseating Ford GT over the utterly perfect 1974 Corvette Stingray.
I can’t speak in general and as others have already said, the coolness factor has a lot to do about reputation, performance, history etc.
But speaking specifically about the Ford GT, I’d say that you have to see it up close because the pictures do no justice to that car.
I’ve seen one at a historic car sprint and it is simply terrifying, even when it sits on the parking lot. The roof is not higher than the height of your hip and it is as wide as a Hummer. And it is LOUD. A Viper looks and sounds like a Toyota Prius in comparison.
If you could come down from your judgment cloud to read your own post, you’ll notice that these cars aren’t intended to be used by suburban soccer moms loading groceries outside Cosco. A Civic is nice for lots of people, but it’s not very practical if you want to scream around a track at 150 mph. And neither is practical for towing a boat, going off road, housing Jewel, or repelling bullets.
I saw a Ford GT parked outside a Home Depot around suburban Atlanta, and I nearly plowed into a few parked cars. I’m a fan, and it looks gorgeous in person. That being said, even if someone gave me one, I’d probably sell it and pick up something a little more economical, like a lightly used 911 Turbo.
The original GT-40 was named that because it was exactly 40 inches high.
Galpin Ford had one of the last Ford GTs on their showroom for a quite awhile. They had it painted in the Gulf Wyler team colors. You are correct the pictures absolutely don’t do this car justice.
Pure testosterone and raw sexual energy.
If I ever hit the lottery…
BTW Nametag every other middle aged CPA drives a Vette, big whoop.
Nawp, too fussy. Try the clean lines of an E-Type Jag: the only modernist sculpture that will do 140mph.
I agree with the poster who said its’ a guy emotional reaction. Sometimes in the heart, sometimes in the penis.
My wife would love to have a Ferrari 430. I told her there may not be room in the driveway because my Aston Martin(s) would be in the way. I love the Lamborghini Gallardo; she calls it an idiotic wedge that tries too hard and is very, quote, “pathetic.” She DESPISES the Bugati Veyron, which I think looks like what Satan would drive (thus making it awesome).
It’s all about when gets you going. There’s no science or sense to it.
Because in it’s time it totally dominated. It was the product of the union of American muscle car and British tech. It was made to be able to go out and pound around regular streets at full tilt for 24 hours straight. And it looks badass. I entirely want a Superformance GT40 Mk II.
The Ford remake from a few years ago, on the other hand, is simply an abomination in my mind. It looks like they took the old car and gave it reverse liposuction. It wasn’t made to race, and it fell apart upon delivery. It’s like fat old Las Vegas Elvis compared to the young Elvis.
Seems some folks emotions are rather tied up with image, something I touched on very slightly.
These cars are all about escapism, and all the disadvantages I mention are there, they are real, and this is not a personal judgment call.
How can it be judgemental to state the practical disadvantages of these cars? What it does is to show that whatever the appeal is that these vehicles hold, it sure is not based on anything resembling day to day living.
For some people, the ability to take themselves out of that humdrum life is all the reason they need to own such a car.Some folk drink too much, others go watch the local sport, for some its the chance to ride around in a car such as this.
Aesthetics are only an opinion, nothing else, the curves and shape of a vehicle are only prettty if we decide they are, the technology to make those lumps and bumps on cars is largely the same wether we are talking Ford GT or Renault Espace.
My opinion is that these cars are a waste of money and resources, which is often the case with pretty objects.
I had an E-Type. It might have done 120 downhill. The 140mph was, essentially, just a lie in a time before the trade descriptions act.
Yup, for 90% of folks a Haybusa or similar for the weekends and a shopping trolley for everything else is a much cheaper and much better option.
The current GT40 is a remake of a body shape of a race car from the mid 1960s. If you were a 8-15 year old boy then and into cars, then that shape probably epitomizes what a sports-car racer should look like.
Now that boy is age ~50 and is armed with serious spending money. So they look awesome to me, er, him.
I’d expect very few to be sold to 23-year old MLB stars, despite them having the income where that car is pocket change. Why? That style / shape / maker doesn’t resonate with them.
I completely agree. I was trying to figure out why the GT40 has a hold on me, being ten years too young for your theory to apply, but I realized that it is probably because my grade school library hadn’t bought any auto racing books since some point in the mid- to late-60s.
I know two guys with original GT40s and it’s all I can do to not stand there all day and drool on them.
Because that’s completely missing the point of such vehicles. You know it, too.
Except for the very slight fact you ignored the reasons that they do exist, which is for escapism - and you know it. I even went to the trouble of stating that its not the only form of escapism, and even that it is one of the less harmful forms of escapism.
Sports cars are all about escapism, about fun, that they cannot be taken objectively. Sports cars are trivial, meaningless, its also part of what makes them attractive.
I agree - the E-Type is officially a work of art, displayed in MoMA, NY.
Sweet Sassy Molassey! Get out the checkbook and pay grandma for the rubdown as this discussion is headed to the pit!
Yeah - I love that E-type! Saw one driving today - looks like no other car I am aware of. Also kinda partial to the look of old MGs.
I understand that it is an emotional thing. 60s and 70s American cars do it for me. Part is also comfort. I’m 6’3" and prefer not to drive sitting that low. The sports car I was most comfortable in was a Lotus.
And I can certainly tell a Vette from a Triumph. But there is a whole family of low-slung multi-scooped wedges that many guys seem terribly fanatic (and opinionated) about, which really look pretty similar to me. Several Lambos and Ferraris, the GT, the Viper…
Thanks for your thoughts.
In modern cars, Lambos are jagged and bold, Ferrarris are smooth and refined, Vipers are wide(the engine is also in the front), and the GT is the only car of its kind. There are several semi-obscure high-end cars like the Koenigsegg or the Pagani Zonda, but those aren’t must-recognize cars. If you really do some studying, watch a few seasons of Top Gear.
