All hail the 2003 GT40.

Thank you God, Santa, or whoever is responsible for this...

http://www.motortrend.com/gt40/

-Adam

Pricing just over 100K, yeah right. I'll take two please

Too bad it is a Ford.

Fords are reliable.

I own a Chevy and have to carry on the tradition of knocking Fords every chance I get.

Yeah, I've been brainwashed that Ford is better, as I'm sure you've been brainwashed Chevy is better.

No brainwashing needed. Chevy is better
But it is a cool looking car.

See, you are brainwashed.

Umm.. The ONLY thing that is worse than Ford is GM (that includes "Chevy") I think anyone that is stuck on any of the big-3 is more than brainwashed.

Oh, and Chevy just happens to be one of GM's worse sub-brands, IMO. Don't let this start into a US vs. The World war. The big three have proven model year after model year that they produce crap. This isn't something anti-US. The fact the companies are American is just an unfortunate fact.

Bruno

What is it with all the anti US attitudes on this bbs? It's kinda silly don't ya think? Anyway I drive an Audi, but used to drive a Chevy S-10, it was one of the only vehicles I've ever owned that didn't break down on me. Just my 2 cents.

That was and wasn't in response to you (about the anti US stuff), you mentioned not to make it a US vs the world thing, I'd just read the thread about Pizza, so that was more of a "whats up with that?" kinda thing. I will add one more thing to that... I drive a 99 Audi A4 Quattro 1.8 T... With 42000 miles, I bought it because every one I know that had a VW or Audi told me how great they were and how much better than american cars they were. Since I've owned it it's been in the shop at least once every two months. I've owned Mitsubishi, Toyota, Isuzu, Chevy, Ford, Audi (I was spoiled as a teenager).... The only one that never gave me probs was the Chevy (except in snow man did that thing suck in snow), the Mitsubishi would be next in line on my most dependable list.

I won't post. I won't post.. I won't post. I won't post. I won't post.

oops.

So you're saying that Ford and GM (and, I assume, Chrysler) are worse than Hyundai, Trabant, Yugo, Kia, Merkur, and AMC? Sure, some of those are no longer in business, but many are.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I think you need to at least qualify on what criteria you're basing this judgement. (BTW, I've only ever owned BMWs, but my wife has, I"m sorry to say, an older Chevy S-10 Blazer (at least she was actually hauling stuff around in it) which is a real piece. Things are always breaking. But my folks always owned American cars, even during the 70s, and they were fine even then. Maybe it was just good luck.)

I realize that you already pointed out the fact, but you are comparing an entry-level, work-based truck with a European luxury brand. That's not fair!

One thing I love about BMW's is that they look great the day they are introduced (you don't need to warm up to them) and they look good for years to come (they age well!)

I'm talking purely about how the car holds up physically and mechanically. I've owned my current BMW (an 87 325e) for almost ten years and the only remotely major thing I've ever had done to it is to replace the clutch, which happened less than a year ago. That Blazer has been a nightmare since she got it. Everything breaks, from the radio to the power windows, to the power locks, to the engine (it's been totally replaced), interior stuff, etc. It's just awful. The only minor stuff I've ever had done on the BMW was to replace the antenna, one of the power window motors went bad after the window was smashed, and the power steering pump currently has a leak. But after ten years, that's nothing.

Point taken, nonetheless.

I'm not a fan of the Blazer either. I'm just doing that defensive Detroit thing!

Well, my aunt was a big-wig VP at GMIC (GM Insurance), and was real big into promoting American, if not solely GM, cars. I'm intelligent enough to see beyond that type of jingoism, but we always had GM cars anyway (we got them cheap).

You know, it ain't that pretty.

I mean, place it against a Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lotus etc, and I think it loses on looks.

Whether it's handling / reliability is great remains to be seen - maybe Ford have pulled one out of the hat here.

Personally I'd rather have one of these

i all against american cars.. i owned one once.. and i went jap.. and i am not ever going back

Do you see more old american cars still on the road or more old import cars still on the road?

By the way, you pretty much get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy. If you buy a $15,000 car and a $50,000 car, the latter is going to be made with higher quality parts, better craftsmenship, etc. You can't compare an american fast food joint with a japanese gourmet restaurant and simply conclude that japanese food is better.

If you buy a $15,000 car and a $50,000 car, the latter is going to be made with higher quality parts, better craftsmenship, etc.

Generally you are right. However, in my experience a $9,000 Hyundai is better built than my grandparents $40,000 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham. Before it was discontinued, they bought a new white Fleetwood every 2 years. Their current Fleetwood and previous Fleetwoods probably had more vertical miles than horizontal miles (get it?... from going up and down on the lift). Another example of crappily built expensive cars is Jaguar before Ford bought them.

Another example of crappily built expensive cars is Jaguar before Ford bought them.

..only since their British Leyland assimilation - they were fine before then.

Rob

I'd agree that your generally right, but as I've learned from experience the more fancy lil toys you put in a car, the more things there are to break down.

Don't get me wrong, I love Ferrari, Lamborghini, McLaren, and the rest. However, all those cars have the same general European Sports car look (not a bad thing). What I love about the Gt40 is that it looks like a streamlined Detroit muscle car. There's a certain segment of the population, myself included, that loves the brute force styling of the old Chargers, Hemis, and the like. That's what I love about the GT40, it looks different, and it looks like a muscle car. Plus that yellow w/ black racing stripes paint job is sweet.

-Adam

Yep, nothing like the old muscle cars.

Lemme add a couple more to the notorious list that are owned by Ford:
Land Rover & Volvo. I guess Ford tried to *buy* lineage, but man, what a couple of turds. I don't own a Land Rover, but a good friend of mine has had nothing but trouble. Not sure if Ford had anything to do with it (actually my friend tells me the BMW fouled things with their engine in the Disco I), but I don't have much faith in Ford to make improvements.

Volvo, another Ford aquisition, IMHO has really gone down hill in quality and reliability. I bought a Volvo V-70 XC Wagon (Estate for you Brits) for the safety factor and peace of mind. Rides just great and its built like a tank, but geeeze, everything else goes caddywampus. Windows and electric side mirrors stopped working a couple of weeks ago. Before the recalls on the headlamps and directional signals I was replacing light bulbs by the 6-pack at the dealer. And the "check engine" idiot light turns on and off randomly. You call that "peace of mind"?? What's the point of having idiot lights when then come on when they are not supposed to. The inside panels from the rear hatch were falling off. The dealer told me "plastic fasteners were used at the factory; we have replaced them with metals ones." Bloody hell! WTF Volvo?!? Never again...

--end of rant--

--Andrew

Ford has only owned Land Rover for a few years. I think 2 or 3. Volvo was early that same year, so MAYBE 3 or 4. You have to realize that the cars on the road today were probably developed at least 5 to 6 years ago. AT LEAST. So Ford has nothing to do with any gripes you may have yet.

Ford bought Land Rover from BMW because BMW could not make any money off of Land Rover. BMW only developed one Land Rover - and it is not on the road yet. I forget the name, but it is really nice. The first high tech Land Rover in decades. When Ford bought Land Rover from BMW, they got to keep this vehicle. BMW then sold the Rover car brand to a newly former company of investors and kept the Mini for themselves. BMW had been losing money on that range for a while. In fact, when BMW finally got full control of the Mini, they had to spend millions to re-work most of it.

Likewise, no Volvo is on the road today that has anything to do with Ford. Ford bought both of these brands because Ford isn't doing too well in Europe and also, these brands carry some prestige in the US. Volvo safety technology will also be used throughout the Ford product range.

Neither of these companies could have survived a few more years on their own. It is too expensive to make cars now. With safety testing, government testing, emissions etc, you need to sell tons of cars to survive. Just look at Lotus (a car that survives on its REPUTATION for good handling despite tests to the contrary - but that's another thread!). They have been wanting to sell the new model in the US for years, and will finally do so. But they couldn't afford it until now. They knew they'd never sell enough cars to make up the costs.

Doesn't GM have a stake in Lotus? Does that mean that Bruno hate Lotus now?

> Likewise, no Volvo is on the road today that has anything to do with Ford.

Its not the technology that I'm griping so much about, its the overall quality and reliability. Even Consumer Reports said in theire 2000 Annual Auto Issue, "Recently reliability has taken a turn for the worse, and we no longer recommend this model," commenting on the S70/V70. In the 2001 edition they said the same thing about the S80. The online message boards echo the same message about declining reliability. So if Ford has nothing to do with the Volvo's on the road they better start getting involved mighty quick before Volvo loses more customers.

--Andrew

Point taken. I guess I was say that I doubt Ford has gone in and sourced different suppliers and changed factory procedures.

About message boards, they are kinda like this one. People don't post to say "my car is perfect!" The VW, Audi and Subaru boards that I frequent are riddled with complaints. So are the DSM (Mitsubishi) boards from what I hear. I think it is just human nature to only visit boards when experiencing problems.

That S80 is a hot looking car in coupe trim! droooool

Yeah, Volvo has really kicked it up notch in the stylish department with the S80; I agree!! For that matter, I hope Audi follows suit and kicks it up a notch in style. For example IMHO, I always thought the S4 had impressive statistics, but was a little ho-hum on looks, not at all differentiated from the A4. Maybe the "sleeper" look was the whole strategy. Anyway it seems things are changing with RS platforms they have coming out.

As far as bashing goes, here's a great example. Many hardcore BMW fans are ready to commit hari-kari over this new concept car, the BMW CS1 . Neoprene interior trim??? Vleaaackh! What are they thinking?? BTW, I love this Piston Heads website, especially with all the car news from Euro-land.

--Andrew

I don't know about the neopreen, but that Bimmer looks pretty damn good to me. Maybe I would have to own one to be offended by this one?

I almost thought it was an X-Type when I clicked on it!

HA! You mean like the X-5 Pickup?? (see attachment). BMW's version of the SUC (sport utility car)?

--Andrew

I wish I had never seen that.... :P IS that photoshopped??

The worst I saw was (in person) a mini-van w. a pickup bed. An actual concept car that was stopped before the anyone got to see it. Thankfully!

Alright, that's it. No more tranvestite vehicles.

Perhaps. I swiped it from the mother of all futuristic BWM websites at bmw2002.co.uk . Looks like the ultimate state of chaos at BMW this year...

--Andrew