Ford's GT40 -- Horrible Aero

[Big Dave]

I know a guy on Ford's Ford GT design team.

He told me they started with the GT 40 (the 1960s race car). In the wind tunnel the car was trying to fly at 190 MPH. This is why the Shelby Cobra GT with a 289 engine could outrun a GT40 down the Mulsanne straight atLe Mans. The GT40 driver had to lift but the Cobra stayed down.

The Ford GT had a design goal of being stable at 205 MPH. That meant downforce (negative lift). Negative lift is like positive lift in that it generates drag. As pointed out, air intakes needed for cooling also generate drag.

Some interesting trivia.

The GT40 designation referred to the fact its roof stood 40 inches above grade. The production GT required thedriver had to be able to get in easily. Race car drivers are athletes and could easily squeeze into the GT40, but normal human beings could not, so theGT had to be a little taller and have the "Sting Ray" doors.

When they started, they found two guys in Cincinnati somehow owned the name "GT40." William Clay Ford personally called them and offered them a million bucks each and one of the first 25 cars off the line for the rights. These morons turned him down, so the production car is the Ford GT and the old race car is the GT40.

A million bucks and a paid-for Ford GT in the garage? Where do I sign?

[trikkonceptz]

Here's one more bit of trivia for ya ... the hump on the roof of the original GT40 was not aero related but the space where the drivers helmet would fit. Many drivers would complain about their heads hitting the roof, therefore each car was cut open and the roofs were custom glassed to accomodate the drivers helmet ..

[Big Dave]

Only the GT40 driven by Dan Gurney had the hump. Gurney stood 6'4".

Ford GTs - horrible aero and all - still bring 150 large on flea-bay.

[red91sit]

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz

Here's one more bit of trivia for ya ... the hump on the roof of the original GT40 was not aero related but the space where the drivers helmet would fit. Many drivers would complain about their heads hitting the roof, therefore each car was cut open and the roofs were custom glassed to accomodate the drivers helmet ..

Wow!

can you imagine it in a roll over?! I'd want a bit more than fiberglass and a helmet (unless I'm on my bike, than a helmet is enought haha)

[DifferentPointofView]

^and thats why the aero was so bad, to keep the car from ever getting into a roll over.

[jthistle]

A little high Cd doesn't seem to keep them from being fast cars. Matech clinches FIA GT3 title with Ford GT, developing GT1 contender - Autoblog

[NachtRitter]

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz

Enjoy the Pics ..

Awesome pics... Thank you!!

[Christ]

Of course aero doesn't stop it from being fast... when you boast enough horsepower to beat frictional and aero drag @ idle, it's a non-issue.

It also boasts 14mpg average. - Edmunds - Ford GT 2006 Consumer Review

[Christ]

Oddly, according to Edmunds, the most common complaint about the GT was it's lack of luggage space... 1.1 cu-ft is apparently not enough.

[metromizer]

That's the tough thing for most to understand about road racing cars... they spend such little time at sustained high speeds. You are either accelerating or braking, either coming out of or going into a corner. An increase in cornering speed of only a couple mph is worth the trade off for several top speed mph. The time those cars spend cornering is significantly more than the time they spend at the the end of a long straight away.

It's been said that an Indy car, with all it's road holding ground effects, could run inverted. Same for a Top Fuel Dragster. Meaning the areo package generates significantly more down force than the car and driver together weighs, allowing it to run on the roof of a tunnel <I'd pay to watch that> I wonder what the Cd of an Indy car is, .75? LOL All that downforce come at the expence of a higher Cd number.

great pics btw, maybe they'll let you take it to lunch some day? I've seen the an old GT40 next to a new Ford GT, it was a real 'old meets new' treat.