This topic came up on LamboCars.com and I figured I would ask all of you. What car would you pick, the Ford GT or the Lamborghini Gallardo and why? Some said they would choose the Gallardo over the GT just because its a Lambo.
My choice would have to be the GT. I've now seen both in person and both are beautiful cars, but I love the retro styling of the GT. Also, although the Gallardos interior is nice, it looks cheap (especially the middle of the dash where the stereo is) in comparison to the GT. One other thing, the Gallardo sounds good, infact sounds better then I thought it would, but the V8 of the GT sounds wonderful! I think until an aftermarket exhaust is made available for the Gallardo, the GT will take the cake on exhaust note. Overall I believe the GT is probably a better car. They both have their good and bad qualities, but I think the best "bang for buck" (when in the $100k-$180k bracket) value goes to the GT, when everything is compared.
i call the new gt the gt-44 magnum. why? because it is 44 inches tall whereas the old gt-40 was 40 inches tall. also the new gt has a supercharger and the old one didn't, hence the magnum reference. in fact when i get my gt, the liscense plate will probably say just that - 44 mag
anyway, as u can see i will be buying a gt-44 before i buy a gallardo or anyother lamborghini for that matter. one reason is the fact that the gt-44 has a top speed of 205 mph bone stock verified by independent testing last week in italy, whereas the gallardo only tops out at 190 mph. all u have to do on your gt-44 is just turn up the boost if you wanna go faster and 220 mph becomes a reality. even lamborghinis murcielago and diablo become a speck in your rear view mirror at that speed. given the fact that a new lambo murci costs 2x as much as a ford gt-44 magnum there is no doubt which car i will be buying next.
Actually, it doesn't. Thew new GT is not the GT40, although it may share styling. I'd still pick it over the Gallardo, but i'd take a Miura over both.
MM
To even suggest that I am not aware that this is not the same car is rediculous. Yes I know it's not the same car howeve the one it is based upon has more of a racing heritage in about a week than lamborghini does in however many years it has been building cars.
Racing heritage, yet it's contected by shape alone? Stretching it thin. Ford of today has nothing connecting it to Ford of yesteryear, except new cars which couldn't come up with designs on their own.
It's not the same chassis, body, engine, trans, interior, wheels, tires, fuel system. It's not the same car, never will be reguardless of who makes it and what they call it. Ford/Shelby does pretty good at buying british cars and putting their names on them.
Why is it that everyone goes back to Lamborghini making Tractors? Honda made mopeds, so do you say they don't belong in F1? I don't buy into the "pedigree" bullshit that people regurgitate every time a thread like this comes up.
i call the new gt the gt-44 magnum. why? because it is 44 inches tall whereas the old gt-40 was 40 inches tall. also the new gt has a supercharger and the old one didn't, hence the magnum reference. in fact when i get my gt, the liscense plate will probably say just that - 44 mag
anyway, as u can see i will be buying a gt-44 before i buy a gallardo or anyother lamborghini for that matter. one reason is the fact that the gt-44 has a top speed of 205 mph bone stock verified by independent testing last week in italy, whereas the gallardo only tops out at 190 mph. all u have to do on your gt-44 is just turn up the boost if you wanna go faster and 220 mph becomes a reality. even lamborghinis murcielago and diablo become a speck in your rear view mirror at that speed. given the fact that a new lambo murci costs 2x as much as a ford gt-44 magnum there is no doubt which car i will be buying next.
Racing heritage, yet it's contected by shape alone? Stretching it thin. Ford of today has nothing connecting it to Ford of yesteryear, except new cars which couldn't come up with designs on their own.
It's not the same chassis, body, engine, trans, interior, wheels, tires, fuel system. It's not the same car, never will be reguardless of who makes it and what they call it. Ford/Shelby does pretty good at buying british cars and putting their names on them.
MM
Hell they improve them. The only thing the english have accomplished in terms of making cars is bloated electical nightmare POS's that look good and that's about it.
So the GT of today doesn't share the same parts as the old car. Do you really think that's feasable? Do you not think that in 40 years parts havn't been improved upon? You can bet ford will go racing with this car. What series does lambo back?
I'm sure a few lambos have won county fair ribbons [img]/images/graemlins/laughing.gif[/img]
They did produce the first mid-engined V12 road car that would do 180 and 0-60 in 5 seconds in the 1960s. Lambo hasn't been focused on racing, they're a road car company. Ferrari builds better race cars than they do road cars, lambo is the opposite.
I'm not suggesting Ford use 40 year old parts (except for their engines [img]/images/graemlins/laughing.gif[/img] ) but at the same time, you can't compare the new car to the old one too much. The Viper wasn't a race car first, it was a road car that went racing. Dodge hasn't had much racing history other than NASCAR, and even it died down heavily after 1972. So, does that mean a Viper isn't worth anything because it "just a dodge"?
Yes, modern lambo is waaay to german. I don't like anything that has come out of lamborghini's stable past 91, but that's just me.
I've always liked the lambo because it was the underdog. I tend to like the odd-ball cars too (Lotus, Triumph, Maser, etc)
I'm sure a few lambos have won county fair ribbons [img]/images/graemlins/laughing.gif[/img]
They did produce the first mid-engined V12 road car that would do 180 and 0-60 in 5 seconds in the 1960s. Lambo hasn't been focused on racing, they're a road car company. Ferrari builds better race cars than they do road cars, lambo is the opposite.
I'm not suggesting Ford use 40 year old parts (except for their engines [img]/images/graemlins/laughing.gif[/img] ) but at the same time, you can't compare the new car to the old one too much. The Viper wasn't a race car first, it was a road car that went racing. Dodge hasn't had much racing history other than NASCAR, and even it died down heavily after 1972. So, does that mean a Viper isn't worth anything because it "just a dodge"?
Yes, modern lambo is waaay to german. I don't like anything that has come out of lamborghini's stable past 91, but that's just me.
I've always liked the lambo because it was the underdog. I tend to like the odd-ball cars too (Lotus, Triumph, Maser, etc)
MM
The Viper has proven itself on the track. The lambos havn't. Simple as that. Yeah the lambos are nice but they are overpriced one dimensional cars with mediochre handling. Great for top speed runs and curb appeal but not much else.
The Viper has proven itself on the track. The lambos havn't. Simple as that. Yeah the lambos are nice but they are overpriced one dimensional cars with mediochre handling. Great for top speed runs and curb appeal but not much else.
No shit, but you're whole argument was that lambo has a lack of racing pedigree. So you contradicted yourself now saying you think the Viper has proven itself, judging it NOW rather than Dodge's history. Hmmm... going by a cars actions rather than it's history? Boy that sounds familiar......
Ferrari is overpriced with great handeling, but no balls. So is your point still the same? Are you now comparing the cars actions rather than company history? Get your stance right man, you sound like Kerry [img]/images/graemlins/toothy[/img]
Diablo = Italian muscle car. High looks, high price, heavy for sure. Does it have it's place? Sure does.
