I dont know if it hs been posted, but the October MT issue has the Enzo vs Ford GT vs Carrera GT. Enzo ran off a 11.0 @133.9, and the carrera did 11.1 @ 133.4. But the Ford weighs 200 more pounds and has 50 less advertised hp then the carrera and 100 less then the Enzo, and it runs right with them. Just thought that was cool. A lot better then the 11.7 they got earlier with the preproduction version. Just thought I would pass that a long
11.2 @ 131.2
- Thread starter rollin68
- Start date
Wow thats movin.
Did you read the article man?:lol1: All they talk about is how it hit 200.
It's in big bold letters that it hit 200.1 mph, the Carrera hit 201.5, and the Enzo 211. It's obvious the track didn't have enough room for the three cars.
It's in big bold letters that it hit 200.1 mph, the Carrera hit 201.5, and the Enzo 211. It's obvious the track didn't have enough room for the three cars.
What a lot of people don't take into account is the width of the powerband, and the power curve in general. And the comparisant 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.
And this is stock. Wait til it gets modded.
Very true. I know that the GT isn't intended to be a quartermile car, but since this thread is dealing w/an 11.2 second pass laid down by a stock GT, then I'll make mention of the fact that this car comes with 3.36 gears in the rear. I don't know what rear ends the car comes with. Something tells me it isn't the Ford 8.8" rear. But if there are ring & pinion gear sets available for whatever rear it does have, then I'm sure that if you were to install a set of 3.70 gears, the car would still easily top out at 180 MPH, while at the same time it would then get into the 10's on the dragstrip. Being a mid-engine car, I'm sure that it's cabable of a 1.3, or 1.4 second 60' time, because of the increased traction that a mid-engine design affords.
Re: Re: 11.2 @ 131.2
I agree with all of that. Also the GT has more torque then both. I was more hinting at the fact that it is severly underrated. Still impressive I think.
As for modding it, I wouldnt change the gearing. I'm sure it would help some, but I'm sure the bottom end is built more then the 03 cobra bottom end. So just up the boost till the blower is out of its effeciency range, then if thats not enuf, twin T72s would do the trick just nicly
I agree with all of that. Also the GT has more torque then both. I was more hinting at the fact that it is severly underrated. Still impressive I think.
As for modding it, I wouldnt change the gearing. I'm sure it would help some, but I'm sure the bottom end is built more then the 03 cobra bottom end. So just up the boost till the blower is out of its effeciency range, then if thats not enuf, twin T72s would do the trick just nicly
The gearing on the car is much more suited to road course use than drag strip. That's why the car doesn't feel nearly as fast as it is. You have to actually watch the speedo to get a sense of how quickly the mph pass by, because the feel of the motor and the length of the gears make it seem more tame than it is. You figure 1st and 2nd gear take you up to 100 almost...
When I say "past" 200, I mean like 212 or 213 reported at Nardo! I know the straights aren't long enough to stretch its legs, so thats why it didn't post its best known top speed.
Yes, later I went back and read the whole article with relish! Runs with the world's best, and makes me proud! Showed it to my wife, just to keep the dream alive. My time will come!
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, (and not exit speed) 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?
Did you catch that?
Last edited:
haha, holy geez. Apparently you did read the article. Thoroughly!
Send that to MT, it'll probably get published.:beer:
Send that to MT, it'll probably get published.:beer:
tommyhil4_6
Buh Bye
I ordered 2 
This is just speculation but I read in the article the GT pulls harder in 5th at topend, which was used to achieve the 200mph. I'm assuming there must be alot left in her for 6th, otherwise the 6-speed is useless. Top Gear did claim 212, but I don't know where they got the info from.
Last edited:
I know what article you're refering to (Motor Trend, right?). And where they tested those three cars didn't sound like it offered unlimited space to acheive the absolute top end of each car since it spoke of the driver having to hit the brakes hard before getting on top of a turn. So the "200.1" MPH figure that the driver acheived w/that Ford GT wasn't it's absolute top end. Not that really matters anyway, since where are you going to do 200 MPH on a public road? That would be insane to even seriously consider doing that. You can have a whole lot of fun w/any car on a public highway well below 150 MPH. But like you've stated, your question was simply speculative.
Yep, it would be psychotic to attempt it on any local streets. On a purely performance measurment though, I'm thinking the Carrera would top out sooner then the GT, and it would pull away from there. Probably due to downforce or gearing I guess.
Another interesting fact brought up in the test was the downforce. It seems the Carrera had the most suprisingly, and the Enzo the least.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
