Car & Driver: Ferrari 430

[philios55]

http://img52.exs.cx/img52/4066/a0q08rtf4301.th.jpg (http://img52.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img52&image=a0q08rtf4301.jpg)
http://img42.exs.cx/img42/889/h7sbfrtf4302.th.jpg (http://img42.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img42&image=h7sbfrtf4302.jpg)
http://img14.exs.cx/img14/669/p2n1artf4303.th.jpg (http://img14.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img14&image=p2n1artf4303.jpg)
http://img67.exs.cx/img67/9127/u5z27rtf4304.th.jpg (http://img67.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img67&image=u5z27rtf4304.jpg)

[dingo]

umm...you have the same page twice. :wink:

EDIT: not anymore. :D

[HoboPie]

I just took a look at the C&D Murcielago test. It is kind of scary how much quicker that F430 is than the Murcielago.

At 150mph it has the Lambo by 3 seconds. Of course the Enzo has the F430 by 3 seconds.

[SilviaEvo]

the Ferrari owns all! kinda ironic that an American Car has the best gas mileage out of the three.

[allanlambo]

I just took a look at the C&D Murcielago test. It is kind of scary how much quicker that F430 is than the Murcielago.

At 150mph it has the Lambo by 3 seconds. Of course the Enzo has the F430 by 3 seconds.

If you really think the ferrari will beat the Murcielago, you are crazy. read the article, and you will see that the track is going downhill where they test it. Also, the straight at Fiorano is not long enough to do a full 1/4 mile test, so they get those figures by using their computer.

[FordGTGuy]

looks like another ferrari that the ford gt has under it so now the ford gt is between the 430 and the enzo. I wonder will ferrari make a v8 super car to go agaisnt the ford gt that would be kewl.

[SFDMALEX]

Allanlambo you are an idiot.

The Galardo will beat the Murc. A 360CS will beat the Murc. Murcielago is a big, a fat automobile with a lot of power. Very American. If you actually think that F430 wont beat the Galardo, then I'll say it again. You are an idiot.

[SFDMALEX]

looks like another ferrari that the ford gt has under it so now the ford gt is between the 430 and the enzo. I wonder will ferrari make a v8 super car to go agaisnt the ford gt that would be kewl.

The F430 is the V8 supercar that will throw the GT a beating!

[allanlambo]

Allanlambo you are an idiot.

The Galardo will beat the Murc. A 360CS will beat the Murc. Murcielago is a big, a fat automobile with a lot of power. Very American. If you actually think that F430 wont beat the Galardo, then I'll say it again. You are an idiot.

You are an Idiot. The Gallardo will not beat the Murci in any shape or form. A 360Cs will beat a Murci? Hmmmm lets see:
Auto Motor Sport Nurburgring:
Murci=7.50
Gallardo=7.52
Autocar achieved 7.43.5 in a Murci

360CS on race compound tires=7.56 by Auto Motor Sport.

Hockenheim, both the Murci and gallardo beat the the 360CS. Its not even in the same league.

Also, notice how Ferrari makes the testers use Ferraris controlled conditions to test their cars. When you see real tests, the 430 will be significantly slower.

And as for showing the Gt a beating........lol, you wish.

[FordGTGuy]

looks like another ferrari that the ford gt has under it so now the ford gt is between the 430 and the enzo. I wonder will ferrari make a v8 super car to go agaisnt the ford gt that would be kewl.

The F430 is the V8 supercar that will throw the GT a beating!

by the stats its not plus the ford gt still hasn't harnsed all its power.

[ice]

First, the slope of the track means nothign, in fact, the slope is so gradual it makes no difference. The Enzo, in the so called controlled testing got a best time of 3.39 seconds to 60 on the journalist day, while most magazines either tied it or bettered it, and thier 0-150 mph were all faster then ferrari's quoted numbers.

Also, the Enzo's mfr numbers were 0-60 in 3.7 while it always got 3.3 or better. The F430's is 4.0, so a 3.5 is entirely likely.

And all that nurburgring and hochenheim stuff is crap. Ferrari's arent built with those types of tracks in mind, and all the new lambo;s are essentially built on those tracks, in the Audi tradition. You need only look at the best motoring test of a stock 360, gallardo and murc on the track, where the gallrdo narrowly loses, and the 360, not even a CS, is less then 3 seconds behind.

And this isnt the only example. Lambo's already taken a lot of heat because the Gallardo and Murc are so close in looks and performance, in fact most in the industry believe that they are canabalizing sales from eachother. Why spend such more money on a Murc when u get the nearly the same speed, better hanlding and to some a better looking car, all from he same manufacturer. Are scissor doors responsible for that hike in price?

In the end, lambo, ford and the liek would kill to have a car liek the 430, and it is already the benchmark. The Gt narrowly beat the CS in most competitions despite being much faster in a straight line, and much cheaper too. Now comes a better looking 360, with more torque, more hp, better handling and overall an even more focused driving experience. The GT's lack of character and its overall more relaxed demeanor will cause it to not come close. C&D isnt the first magazine taht has compared the F430 to the F40 and F50, and so maybe the performance difference betwen them and the F430 isnt so big.

Now, when the 600 IMOLA comes, it will have more then 600 hp, or around there. Expect 0-60 in about the same as the F430, but a top speed in the 210's.

[FordGTGuy]

Ford GT with no character?? the ford gt does handle good and the ford doesn't need to kill to have a car like the 430 because they have a better one :P

[allanlambo]

Omg, you have lost your mind. Downward slope makes no difference? LOL, then why wouldnt Ferrari let them do the test in the other direction? Ferrari's arent made for tracks like the nurburgring and Hockenheim? LOL Then what tracks are they made for? Only Ferraris track, where they can be tested under the strictest of Ferraris rules, with their test drivers, so that they can get the absolute best numbers which no one else can achieve.

Then you bring up best Motoring? A totally made for entertainment scenario at best, and even then the Ferrari got killed by just about everyone, and you say only 3 seconds behind? LOL

My guess, is that when real tests hit, the 430 will be a 4 second 0-60 car, 0-100 in 9 sec, 1/4 in the low 12's at 118-119 mph. Quick, but not that quick.

As for the Gt, i love lamborghini, and am not a real fan of the Gt, but the Gt cannot be denied its performance crown, as it will not beat, it will DESTROY a 430. Shouldnt even be mentioned in the same breath.

[sameerrao]

I think I agree with Allanlambo here (Oh boy! am I in trouble :D )

I am always suspicious of C&D numbers - they always seem to be half a second or so quicker than anyone else. And yes the slope on the circuit will make a difference but it might be about 2 tenths max. Lets get some numbers from Road & Track or Autocar or someone else first before commenting.

I think the Murcie should beat the F430 but the Gallardo might be neck and neck.

And remember this is a pre-production car so I will wait till the production one comes out and a proper test before commenting too much on this.

Besides the difference between 3.5 0-60 and 4.0 0-60 is marginal at best.

Peace y'all

[SilviaEvo]

Ferrari is better period. haha my prejudice mind agrees with Jeremy Ferrari is a scaled down version of God. but the Lambos are nice but they just cant compare. but obviously the Ford is the best but keep in mind the Ferrari is only a V8 but if you put a V12 against a V12 (Murci) then you have teh Enzo which blows everything away

[FordGTGuy]

Ferrari is better period. haha my prejudice mind agrees with Jeremy Ferrari is a scaled down version of God. but the Lambos are nice but they just cant compare. but obviously the Ford is the best but keep in mind the Ferrari is only a V8 but if you put a V12 against a V12 (Murci) then you have teh Enzo which blows everything away

the ford is only a small block v8, but what kind of block is the ferrari?

[SilviaEvo]

i meant like a Murci but it is Aluminum Block

[SFDMALEX]

You all are a bunch of wankers! :D

Sammerrao sorry. There is no bloody way the F430 and the Galardo will be neck to neck. The 360CS will beat the Galardo. The F430 is definetly faster then the CS.

Allanlambo- your a wanker and stop talking shit :D

[HoboPie]

Omg, you have lost your mind. Downward slope makes no difference? LOL, then why wouldnt Ferrari let them do the test in the other direction? Ferrari's arent made for tracks like the nurburgring and Hockenheim? LOL Then what tracks are they made for? Only Ferraris track, where they can be tested under the strictest of Ferraris rules, with their test drivers, so that they can get the absolute best numbers which no one else can achieve.

Then you bring up best Motoring? A totally made for entertainment scenario at best, and even then the Ferrari got killed by just about everyone, and you say only 3 seconds behind? LOL

My guess, is that when real tests hit, the 430 will be a 4 second 0-60 car, 0-100 in 9 sec, 1/4 in the low 12's at 118-119 mph. Quick, but not that quick.

As for the Gt, i love lamborghini, and am not a real fan of the Gt, but the Gt cannot be denied its performance crown, as it will not beat, it will DESTROY a 430. Shouldnt even be mentioned in the same breath.

Yes the downhill will make a difference, but if you consider the Enzo times at Fiarano every single time was replicated or beaten by the R&T test except for the 0-60 where it was off by about a tenth.

There is no reason the F430 shouldn't be able to essentially replicate those numbers. There will be variance obviously, for examply Murcs get 0-60 times between 3.5 and 3.9 when tested. If it isn't it isn't, but right now the F430 seems noticably quicker than the Murcielago so even if these are at the extreme maximum end of 430 performance it could still match the Lambo.

[SilviaEvo]

Ferrari and Gallardo arent neck and neck i am not a wanker i love Ferrari but AllanLambo is a wanker!

[ikon2003]

I would eagerly jump at any opportunity I had to acquire any of the aformentioned cars. (Sorry guys, just trying to stay non-partisan.) I respect both Lambos and Ferraris, and until I can get myself to make a first hand judgement/comparison (yup, still dreaming...) I"m gonna refrain from taking sides as best i can. Gotta say though, I really like the job Ferrari has done with the 430. Beautiful car.

[allanlambo]

Well since i own both a Ferrari and a Lambo, i can tell you there is no comparison. lambo is far far superior. Murcielago is quicker than the 430, no doubt.

That being said, im glad Ferrai is getting back into the game. They have been very dissapointing since the F40.

[HoboPie]

You know I would take you as the authority on that, but apparently there are one or two other people out there that have a Ferrari and a Lamborghini who disagree with you.

How can you be so sure about the Murc being quicker than the F430. The Murc isn't much quicker than the Gallardo when tested on the same day. If the F430 is quicker than the Gallardo, which by all reports statistical and subjective it is, why couldn't it be quicker or at least as quick as the Murcielago?

You have both a Ferrari and a Lambo which barring Jabba gives you a fairly unique perspective, but it is purely a perspective. Especially considering you don't actually own either a F430 or Murcielago.

[ice]

I cant understand you allanlambo.

Regardless of whether u actually own both of these cars is meaningless, my father drives a BiBi 512, but it doesnt make me an expert on Ferrari's, especially one as new as the F430.

Second, no lambo has existed better then a Ferrari. Some will say the muira, which understeered like a Civic as the gas gauge lowered, and overall was an inferior driving car then its Ferrari compeototr.

Also, Ferrari has been off their game since the F40? In that case, Lambo didnt have a game UNTIL the murc. Since the F40, the 355, 360, 550, 575, F50, Enzo and now the F430 comes out. These cars not only dominated their respective times, but they also remain the most desired cars in the world, bar NONE. Hell afetr SIX YEARS, the 360 has a one year plus waiting list, and in automotive comparisons still WINS!

And what is hard to belieev about the F430 being so quick. AS already mentioned, the "downward slope" advantage means nothign, as magazines have replicated and beaten the times set on those slopes, so that argument has no bearing. Sure, give or take a tenth, but regardless is posts a 7.9 100 mph time, which is only 2 tenths off the slightly more powerful, but heavier Ford GT. The Murc and GAllrdo both outweigh the F430 significantly, and not only that, the torque advantage against the 360 is all but neautralized now in the 4.3 litre F430.

Also, the Gallardo is no drivers car. It understeers at the limit, has AWD which, as any motoring journal has said, dulls the experience and makes it less excitintg. This is why it still is outsold by a SIX YEAR OLD 360 modena, and why the 360 is already a better sports car. By no means am I saying th GAllardo isnt a GREAt car, but it isnt a 360 killer, and it definetely isnt an F430 killer. What is it? Some competition. Driving dynamics straigt line performance, sound and, obviously, heritage, the F430 dominates.

As much as journalists are trying to play up the Ferrari/Lambo war, we all know deep down Ferrari's real competitor is Porsche, as both Enzo and Montezelmo have stated. The Gallardo was already beaten, before the F430 came out. The 360 did that on its own.

[ice]

Oh, and about the Ford Gt. I think it is an amazing machine, incredible speed, value and even looks. BUT, as most who drive it says, including the press, it lacks soul. The engine lacks character, the steering is lifeless compared to those of Ferrari and Porsche, and still doesnt have the passion of those two. Regardless of this though, i think it overall is the strongest threat to the F430, and until we see the new hardcore 997's, it will probably stay that way.

[SilviaEvo]

to Ice and AllanLambo me and the rest of the JW community would like to ask for pics and a custom pic to back it up! :P

[allanlambo]

I cant understand you allanlambo.

Regardless of whether u actually own both of these cars is meaningless, my father drives a BiBi 512, but it doesnt make me an expert on Ferrari's, especially one as new as the F430.

Second, no lambo has existed better then a Ferrari. Some will say the muira, which understeered like a Civic as the gas gauge lowered, and overall was an inferior driving car then its Ferrari compeototr.

Also, Ferrari has been off their game since the F40? In that case, Lambo didnt have a game UNTIL the murc. Since the F40, the 355, 360, 550, 575, F50, Enzo and now the F430 comes out. These cars not only dominated their respective times, but they also remain the most desired cars in the world, bar NONE. Hell afetr SIX YEARS, the 360 has a one year plus waiting list, and in automotive comparisons still WINS!

And what is hard to belieev about the F430 being so quick. AS already mentioned, the "downward slope" advantage means nothign, as magazines have replicated and beaten the times set on those slopes, so that argument has no bearing. Sure, give or take a tenth, but regardless is posts a 7.9 100 mph time, which is only 2 tenths off the slightly more powerful, but heavier Ford GT. The Murc and GAllrdo both outweigh the F430 significantly, and not only that, the torque advantage against the 360 is all but neautralized now in the 4.3 litre F430.

Also, the Gallardo is no drivers car. It understeers at the limit, has AWD which, as any motoring journal has said, dulls the experience and makes it less excitintg. This is why it still is outsold by a SIX YEAR OLD 360 modena, and why the 360 is already a better sports car. By no means am I saying th GAllardo isnt a GREAt car, but it isnt a 360 killer, and it definetely isnt an F430 killer. What is it? Some competition. Driving dynamics straigt line performance, sound and, obviously, heritage, the F430 dominates.

As much as journalists are trying to play up the Ferrari/Lambo war, we all know deep down Ferrari's real competitor is Porsche, as both Enzo and Montezelmo have stated. The Gallardo was already beaten, before the F430 came out. The 360 did that on its own.


Your opinion is obviously swayed by your fathers Ferrari ownership, and that is understandable. But you are kidding yourself. Since Lambo introduced the Muira, they have dominated Ferrari roadcars, barring the 288Gto, F40, F50 and Enzo. The words Daytona, shouldnt even be uttered in the same breath as Muira, The words Boxer and Testarossa, should never be uttered in the same breath as Countach, and the same holds true for the 550/575, along with the Diablo and Murcielago. Did you know the a 1970 Muira, can outaccelerate, out brake, and hold more mph through the skidpad then a TR?e we are on the subject of the TR, its another Ferrari i am very familiar with, having owned both it, and a Countach at the same time. I sold the TR within 6 months. The Countach could run circles around, was built better, and far more reliable.

You are now calculating what the difference a downhill slope makes without even knowing what it is? What about the fact that the straight is not long enough to do a 1/4 mile run? Just try and use reason for a second, a realize that an F40, cannot duplicate those numbers, and has just about the same amount of power as the 430, but weighs substantially less.

The Gallardo is not a 360 killer? Are you kidding? The Gallardo will run circles around the 360, not to mention the 360 CS. Nurburgring and Hockenheim times dont lie. Now, Pirelli has made the same race compound tires used on the 360CS, available for the Gallardo, which will further improve its time. The Gallardo wins every performance comparison also.

The Murcielago is also SIGNIFICANTLY faster than a Gallardo, especially at speeds over 100 mph.

It is true that i dont own a 360 (i hate the look), but i have owned countless Ferraris, and have driven thousands of miles in others, including 360's. INMO, they are not comparable to Lambo in any shape or form. Personally, id take a Porsche GT2 over any current production Ferrari, barring an Enzo.

Ferrari does have Heritage, but that means squat to their roadcars. Alfa Romeo has heritage, they even have cars worht millions of dollars, but myslef personally, would never drive an ALfa. Hell even Honda has racing Heritage, and i could careless.

[Vansquish]

The Countach could run circles around, was built better, and far more reliable.


That's probably because the guy who started the company made tractors before he made cars.

As for your laptime claims, I've seen numerous 360 v. Gallardo and 360CS v. Gallardo head-to-head tests and in the case of the standard 360 the Gallardo will outrun and outcorner that car with relative ease. The 360CS however more than compensates and is able to turn the tides even though the Gallardo is still
a bit faster in a straight line. As for the F430, Autocar magazine did a head-to-head comparison of the F430 with the Gallardo and gave the F430 a glowing review as well as making it clear in no uncertain terms that it was indeed the faster of the two vehicles thanks mainly to its power-to-weight advantage over the Lambo. I won't argue that the Lambo is a poor vehicle, far be it from the truth, but the Ferrari is the better drivers car and the quicker of the two, end of story.

I'd love to see some pics of your cars too, it's not too often we get to see member's own exotica (except for scale models at any rate)

ice-
Not sure where you're getting your performance numbers, but the 7.9second 0-100mph time is something that the Jaguar XJ220 pulled off, the Ford does it in around 8.8

[aarhead]

I loved the countach untill i watched them test drive it on top gear. i kinda wish i didnt see how bad it really is

[aarhead]

I loved the countach untill i watched them test drive it on top gear. i kinda wish i didnt see how bad it really is

[Vansquish]

Use the delete button next time eh?

[mclaren_Gt]

ooooo great, beauty car

this is one of my favorite ferraris
0-60mph only 3.5 seconds its amazing

what is the top sepeed and the price??

thanks for the scans

[mclaren_Gt]

oo sorry
i see
$190,500 dollars
and 186mph, is the top speed

i prefer this than gallardo

[dingo]

to Ice and AllanLambo me and the rest of the JW community would like to ask for pics and a custom pic to back it up! :P

I believe AllanLambo's Diablo can be seen on Racing Flix, not sure about the Ferrari. As for Ice, some pics would be nice to see. :wink:
I don't think I'll enter this argument since no one is going to back down anyway, and none of us really know the truth (until we do a comparison with the cars side by side). :wink:

[Guibo]

If you guys step outside of this forum (and venture into the Ferrari/Viper/Lambo owners' forums), you'll know allanlambo isn't your typical BS artist. I think apologies will be in order in short time. :wink:

Let's take a look at some figures:

From Sport Auto*
0-100 kmh / 0-160 / 0-200
360CS (3.3 kg/PS): 4.4 / 9.7 / 15.5
Gallardo (3.2 kg/PS): 4.0 / 8.4 / 13.0
Murcielago (3.4 kg/PS): 3.9 / 8.9 / 12.8

From Autocar
0-60 / 0-100 / 0-150
360 CS (360 hp/tonne): 4.4 / 9.7 / 23.5
Gallardo (324 hp/tonne): 4.1 / 9.0 / 21.3
Murcielago (314 hp/tonne): 4.0 / 9.0 / na

From C&D*
360 CS (297 hp/tonne): 4.0 / 9.5 / 23.9
F50 (367 hp/tonne): 3.8 / 8.5 / 18.3
Gallardo (305 hp/tonne): 4.1 / 9.2 / 21.4
Murcielago (310 hp/tonne): 3.8 / 9.5 / 21.4

*figures for curb weights verified by scale
And now we have the F430 (333 hp/tonne, going by Ferrari's wt claim**) recording a noticeably quicker 0-60, and then on top of that undercutting the F50 to 100 by 6/10ths of a second? Going by Ferrari's own statements, the F430 is heavier than the standard 360, which itself is already heavier than the CS. This is reflected in the differences in official power/wt ratios: 360 hp/tonne for the CS, 333 hp/tonne for the F430. Meaning in actuality, the F430 will have a lower real-world power/wt ratio than the 360CS, and thus lower than the Gallardo.
Seeing how the CS is slower than the Murcielago to 150 by 2.5 seconds, I find it hard to believe the F430 "has the Lambo by 3 seconds." Unless this is another of those very "special" Ferraris...

**As has been shown in numerous tests in the past where Ferraris have been put on the scale, Ferrari's curb weights are notoriously optimistic.

Regarding lap times, the case can be made that the Gallardo is better suited to the Nurburgring, as it received considerable development time there. To my knowledge, Lamborghini doesn't test at Hockenheim (most companies rarely do), so that can be considered a level playing field for both cars. It's already ahead of the 360CS by a comfortable enough margin there. What would happen if it had the CS's P Zero Corsa's? (And the Ford GT, for that matter.)

[LotusGT1]

Regarding lap times, the case can be made that the Gallardo is better suited to the Nurburgring, as it received considerable development time there.

I wonder how you can get a setup more suited for the Nordschleife, when we're talking about a 22 km track with 150+ corners ?

[FordGTGuy]

ice-
Not sure where you're getting your performance numbers, but the 7.9second 0-100mph time is something that the Jaguar XJ220 pulled off, the Ford does it in around 8.8


8.8 was the est. thw was back when they said the car had 500 hp

ford gt with less heritage than the f430 what kind of bullshit is that? the engine has no character whenever you read a magazine or video they won't stop talking about the cars character. Lastley have you ever seen jeremy clarckson when he got his hands on the Ford GT he talked about how much soul the car had for 5 minutes!

[ice]

allanlambo,

IM glad you have a passion for Itlian cars, but do not think that having owned botha lambo and a ferrari makes you any less likely to be bias.

First, Lambo didnt have a competitor to the 360 till last year, so in fact they ddint outrun it. And the fact is that the countache was never the same type of car as the Ferrari's it ran against. It got attention for its looks and power, but it handled liek a boat, and although the TR isnt much better, it did handle better, if by a small bit.

Since then the diablo was their only car. The 550 was not its competitor, it was a GT car and only that. Teh diablo was far more comparable to an F50, which even if the braking and acceleration numbers r close, was a far faster car on a track.
And wasnt it the Diablo that had water leaks when it rained? I have a few family firend who opened up his door after it rained and had water come out, and i know that you know he wasnt the only one.

Again, the downhill point has no merit, becuase times on the slope have been beaten by independant testers.

The Gallardo is STILL beaten by the 360. The Gallardo, as Tiff put it, is not the drivers car the 360 is. Although a great car, it doesnt have the dynamics a small supercar should have. Sure, its faster, but its newer and has 100 plus hp on it. The CS effectively nulified this peformance deficit. And those numbers posted above? What about R&T's numbers? And the other magazines? Some of those CS numbers are not any faster then proven base 360 numbers. A 4.4 to 100? Cmon. An 8.4 for the Gallrdo to 100 mph? Sure, on what planet. I havent seen one other test below 9 seconds. The Gallardo is not the same type of car, and on a loong, flowing track that depends on straight acceleration and long swooping corners, or on a track where the AWD forgiveness will allow u to make less mistakes(ie; the nurburgring), the GAllardo will be faster. But when you look at just about any other publication, including all the Brits, the CS is just in a different league then the GAllardo. Its not as comfortable, but its lighter, and its more hardcore, less forgiving but infinately more exciting. Its a race car, the Gallrdo a fast roadcar more long the likes of a 911 turbo. FAst, powerful, but not as exciting, not as fun. The perfect article to exemplfy this is in EVO when they pit the GT3 RS vs the CS. He states exactly why the Gallrdo isnt in the test, and hes absolutely right.

And against the 430, the Gallardo is staright beaten. Every mag thats compared them so far gives the 430 the nod, despite only have driven it for less the one day. They didint even need to see the number if it is faster, or even if it was faster on a track.

So does the 6 year old base 360 pose a staright line threat to the Gallrdo? No, you are right. But as a package it is the better sports car, from its looks to its sound to its handling. I mean, the sales speak for themeselves. My dad couldnt pay his way into getting a new 360 earlier, but the lambo dealer told us we could have a Gallardo in a week. And what journal has actually said theyd have the Gallardo over the 360? It does things faster, yes, but not better.

[allanlambo]

Ice, i think the problem with you, is that you read too much. And need to make up your own mind.

Also Aarhead, do not take Top Gears test on the Countach to heart. I know people who have had theirs for 20 years and wouldnt sell them for the world. They are great cars. It is true you dont want to be stuck in one in bumper to bumper traffic, but then again, you dont want to be stuck in any supercar, in bumper to bumper.

The Countach was not the same car as a TR? It is exactly the same sort of car. The TR does not handle any better than a Countach, nor does it accelerate faster, or brake better. Do you know who Derek Bell is? Do you remember the Supercar compro he did a few years back with Evo? It included the Countach, F40, Mclaren etc? He said the only car that actually shocked him, was the Countach, as to how good it really was. Virtually ever road test of a Countach vs TR, put the Countach ahead.

Anyway, you keep saying so and so said this, and so and so said that, so that makes it the better car. Will let me ask you, if Tiff tells you that Vanilla Ice cream is the best, will you also agree?

The Gallardo is miles better than a standard 360. They are not even close. The 360Cs is closer, but everyone will tell you, that the 360 is TOO track oriented, and the Gallardo will still win, it wins on Hockenheim, it wins on the Ring, it wins in acceleration. I have driven both cars extensively, the Gallardo is more satisfying to drive.

Lastly, saying that the downhill slope has no merit, really takes away any credibility you may have built, because that is idiotic. Using your logic, you must believe the car would be just as fast going uphill as down.

And btw, my uncle walked into a Ferrari dealer, and bought an 04 360 Spider, red/black 6 speed, brand new, no waiting.

And pulling that baloney about the Diablo, thats laughable. Visit my site, and ask anyone who owns a Diablo, if that is the case. I have had 2.

Now let me tell you about what youll see on the Fcars, interiors fall appart, leather shrinks, the black coating they use on the air vents, center console turns to mush, the cars are very finicky, my cars check engine lights always come on, my buddies 360 Cs, has been waiting for a switch for 2 months, and has temp sensors, and warning lights go on and off, F1 tranny failures are common place, my 355's temp climbs dramaticly in traffic. Ferraris paintwork is very shoddy, when they showed the 612 at an early show, the magaiznes all noted that. 612 Btw, what a horrible car. New Imola, pathetic also.

[JoeHahn]

I think two points to make are:

1) Allan Lambo has owned both the likes of Lamborghini and Ferrari and he shows favour to Lamborghini simply because in his experience Ferrari hasnt lived up to its name.

2) When the Gallardo was released it was quite some time after the 360 Modena. Obviously you cant directly compare them because of the age difference. But the Gallardo did make mince meat of the 360 Modena when it was released, the thing that is odd though is that the F430 doesnt do the same to the Gallardo. Yes the 430 does beat the Gallardo, but not by the amount the Gallardo did to the 360. This taken into consideration, all Lamborghini really needs to do is add a 'Sport' pack with Carbon Ceramic brakes, 550bhp and maybe the addition of Carbon panels and then the Gallardo has restored its former Ferrari beating athleticism.

[allanlambo]

Oh and Ice, thought you might like this, it is posted here, under the Lambo topic section also, but i found it interesting, since of course everyone likes the Ferrari best. :D


Further Award Wins for Lamborghini in Germany - Double Win for Gallardo at the Essen Motor Show.
_______________

Automobili Lamborghini was presented with two important awards at the Essen Motor Show in Germany, both for its 10-cylinder 500 PS Gallardo sportscar.

Readers of the German magazine „sport auto“ voted the Lamborghini Gallardo as the „Sportiest Coupé over €90,000“ as part of the magazine’s „Sportiest Cars of 2004“ awards.

The Gallardo was voted into the top spot ahead of strong competition from the Aston Martin DB9, the Ferrari Challenge Stradale and 612 Scaglietti, and the Porsche 911 GT2. The „sport auto“ award was presented to Luc Donckerwolke, head of Lamborghini Design.

The Essen Motor Show also marked the occasion at which representatives from the German magazine „Auto Bild Test & Tuning“ presented Lamborghini with its award for the Gallardo. The magazine named the Gallardo as „Supercar of the Month“ for the month of April 2004.

These are not the first awards that Lamborghini has won in Germany. Earlier this year, the Murciélago was voted „Imported Super Sports Car“ by the readers of „Auto Zeitung“ magazine in the „Auto Trophy 2004“.

The Lamborghini Gallardo has won awards throughout the world this year. It was named as „Performance Car of the Year 2004“ by „Motor“ magazine in Australia, it received a British „Design and Art Direction“ (D&AD) award for product design, and in Canada it won a "Golden Key Award" (Clé d'or) from the editors of the reference book "L'Annuel de l'automobile 2005".

[twboy1999]

360cs will beat gallardo and murcilago on track

straight line speed.. gallardo and cs should be around the same performance
murci will beat 360 cs in a straight line for sure

[Guibo]

Regarding lap times, the case can be made that the Gallardo is better suited to the Nurburgring, as it received considerable development time there.

I wonder how you can get a setup more suited for the Nordschleife, when we're talking about a 22 km track with 150+ corners ?
The Nordschleife has a lot of elevation changes, drastic drops, off-camber turns, etc. Not to mention it's very rough in some sections, a situation compounded by portions of pavement interrupted by hard concrete (as in the Karoussel, I think?). Here, a heavier car may need more compliance and more suspension travel to do well. Witness von Saurma complaining about the SRT-10's skittishness and actually going airborne in the bumpy sections. That car does relatively poorly at the 'Ring, 3 seconds slower than old GTS. But at the smoother Hockenheim circuit, it's a full second ahead of the old car. On a flatter, shorter track with billiard-smooth surfaces, a car with limited suspension travel and rock-hard settings might get away with a stellar lap time.

[Guibo]

What about R&T's numbers? And the other magazines? Some of those CS numbers are not any faster then proven base 360 numbers.
Instead of casting doubt on these numbers which illustrate a very clear trend, why don't you submit numbers that would suggest otherwise? Here's a wonderful idea: how about showing us what R&T got for the Challenge Stradale? I'd love to see that.
These figures aren't faster than proven base 360 numbers? What are you talking about? C&D's 360 Modenas are some 3-4 seconds slower in getting to 150. Sport Auto's standard 360 was 3/10ths slower than that CS to 100 kmh and 8/10ths slower to 160.

[allanlambo]

360cs will beat gallardo and murcilago on track

straight line speed.. gallardo and cs should be around the same performance
murci will beat 360 cs in a straight line for sure

I dont think so.

http://www.track-challenge.com/comparison1_e.asp?Car1=70&Car2=68

http://www.track-challenge.com/comparison1_e.asp?Car1=70&Car2=51

[ice]

well, I do liek that post about the awards, but hey, 2 years ago Volvo won best looking car, in Italy, as voted by the italian motoring press. Great.

So Lambo's are built perfectly? Only the bad Lambo;s are sent to Canada? Or I have to be lying about it. Yea, Ive heard about the paint problem of the 612, the imola ive never heard. But then again when has ferrari ever advertised good build quality? Besides, theyve gotten better witht the 550's and 360's.

Oh, and this slope business. Im not doubting, in any way, that a significant enough slope has an effect on times. No one can argue that. But the slope at Fiorano isnt significant enough. Why is it every independant tester has equaled or bettered the times set in firoano? Is it they all have slopes, that only work for the Ferrari's, in each of their respective countries? Or is it the fact that the slope at fiorano is small enough to have a negligable difference in times. Say what you want, but the fact is that the slope just doesnt have an effect. All we can do, anyways, to settle this is wait for the independant test.

And i bet you your uncle didnt get the one he wanted, i bet he picked one up right off the lot. They said, well, this one hasnt sold, it was a demo, or a cancelled order, or even had a 1000 km's, and that if he wanted one according to his spec, the waiting list is 1 year. Two years if he wants his own spider.

Guido, Id love to give u the numbers, but im at school right now, and it will be 2 or 3 weeks before i can get home to get all my magazines. Call it convenient, or whatever, but it only takes one second for someone to open up their motor trend, R&T and others. Autosports times are a joke.

Oh, and it will take more then brakes and panels for the Gallardo. Its not critisized, ever, for not being fast enough, or not having strong enough brakes. Its numbers are impressive. But thats not what makes it second best, even to the 360. Its the way which it delevers its speed. Reading EVO, or CAR, or C&D, or Sports car INTL, or whatever, they all use the 430 as a model to promote how the Gallardo is dull in comparison. Understeering too much, AWD which dulls the experience, a more refined exhaust note, and less sharp steering, among other things, make its style of delievery just differnt(relatively, to the 360/430) enough to be noticed. If thats what you want, fine, then it will be perfect for you. But when people, or journalists, get into an italian supercar they want to be thrilled, they want to be scared almost. Thats why the diablo is so great, the F40 so great, an so on. They do what an italian supercar should do. Talk to ANY Gallardo owner, any journalist. they are all impressed most by the Gallardo's ease of use, its practicality, its civility. Not by its intensity. hell, C&D said its an exotic striving to be a good car. I dont want that, ill keep my 6 series for that. And thats why its not the car the 360 is. When compared to nearly any other car, its better. Better then any aston, or most porshes, but it doesnt beat the ferrari at its own game. It takes a different route althogeher. DOes it make it les of a car, no, but it makes it less of an exotic supercar. And the fact is, from the sales, and articles putting 360's first, depstie being slightly slower in a straight line, or taking longer to brake, or even being more expensive, people agree with that.

So how much better is the F430? Well see when a mag gets thier hands on it. No doubt in my mind exists that it will beat the gallardo in every comparison, and will beat the Ford Gt as well. Thats no gaurentee, but merely a prediction im confidant in. If you disagree thats fine, but jugding form the early response to the 430, i dont think its that far off.

[twboy1999]

360cs will beat gallardo and murcilago on track

straight line speed.. gallardo and cs should be around the same performance
murci will beat 360 cs in a straight line for sure

I dont think so.

http://www.track-challenge.com/comparison1_e.asp?Car1=70&Car2=68

http://www.track-challenge.com/comparison1_e.asp?Car1=70&Car2=51

sorry never seen any mags that test the cs out and did 0-100 in 4.4 sec

[dons5]

lol the CS does 0-100km in 4 seconds flat, max 4.2,
and supposedly around Ferraris test track the 430 does the same time as a CS (rememebr the CS is almost like a race version while 430 is normal) that means that an 430 is about 3-3.5 seconds faster then the regular 360 and thats on a small track. Lol and ford gt?? lol give Ferrari the same size engine as the Ford Gt and give Ferrari a spercharger like the Ford Gt and ull be makin 800 horses lolol

[Guibo]

Guido, Id love to give u the numbers, but im at school right now, and it will be 2 or 3 weeks before i can get home to get all my magazines. Call it convenient, or whatever, but it only takes one second for someone to open up their motor trend, R&T and others. Autosports times are a joke.

"Autosports"? "Guido"?

OK, here are MT's times for you:

360CS / Gallardo
0-30: 1.6 / 2.0
0-60: 4.3 / 4.3
0-100: 10.1 / 9.6
1/4 mi: 12.5 @ 114 / 12.5 @ 117
30-100: 8.5 / 7.6

http://motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0404_race/index11.html
(360CS - 8/10ths slower than the GT3 from 30-100)
http://motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0408_fordlambo/index7.html

The Gallardo pulls harder than the 360CS by the specs of 4 different mags:
Car & Driver
Autocar
Motor Trend
Sport Auto

So, that leaves only R&T. Do you seriously think the results of 1 out of 5 mags is going to definitively prove that the 360CS is quicker than the Gallardo? Yes or no? But I will wait for you to get to your mags. In the meantime, you and (anyone else) can search R&T's site. Just type "Stradale" into their Search box:
http://www.roadandtrack.com
Their site is updated to the current issue. I've had a continous subscription for years now. Have not yet seen a road test on the 360CS, but I suppose in a world where an F430 runs with F50's and F40's, anything is possible.

[JiggaStyles09]

actually if you read the MT article it states on this page (http://motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0404_race/index3.html) that they suspected that somehting wasnt right with the stradale they tested (something about the clutch). and if "all had been right" it would probably be a 3.9-4.0 sec 0-60 car.

anyways i just thought i would point that out. personally i would take a gallardo any day over a regular 360 and possibly over a stradale just because i dont think the stradale is something i could deal with on a day to day basis and the gallardo is pretty similar performance wise.

edit - also if you check car and drivers web site the road test they did with the stradale yielded a 4.0 s 0-60 and a 12.4s 1/4mile.

vs.

a 4.1s 0-60 and a 12.4s 1/4 mile for the gallardo. so i dont think it is fair for you to say that the gallardo pulls harder in C&D either, i would say thats pretty even so please try to read more in depth before you post "facts."

[Guibo]

lol the CS does 0-100km in 4 seconds flat, max 4.2,
and supposedly around Ferraris test track the 430 does the same time as a CS (rememebr the CS is almost like a race version while 430 is normal) that means that an 430 is about 3-3.5 seconds faster then the regular 360 and thats on a small track. Lol and ford gt?? lol give Ferrari the same size engine as the Ford Gt and give Ferrari a spercharger like the Ford Gt and ull be makin 800 horses lolol
What makes you think Ford can't get 800 hp from the Ford GT? Besides, a 5.4L V8 making 148 hp/l...The Porsche GT2 making 134 hp/l out of a smaller engine (remember, all else being equal, it's more difficult to maintain specific output at larger displacements) and based on a fairly mass-produced (among exotics) steel shell already costs $192K. How much would such a Ferrari (much more handbuilt, and with an aluminum body and considerably more bespoke components), with a transmission, brakes, and suspension to cope with that output, cost?

Around Gingerman Raceway, on the same day with the same driver, the Ford GT is over 2 seconds a lap quicker than the CS.

http://img62.exs.cx/img62/1750/t4ylaptimes.jpg

FWIW, the Ford GT also slightly quicker than the 360CS on the TopGear track, which was designed by Lotus and favors handling prowess as much as power (if not more so).

You guys talk as if Ford really made the GT a priority. It wasn't. It was just a relatively small group of people who made a production reality out of a car that was meant in the beginning as merely a concept car to celebrate an anniversary. They didn't even target the 360CS (which hadn't even yet been released), the regular Modena was the benchmark. Yet, the GT beat the CS on the track, and is only a bit slower in a straight line than the Enzo in a same-day, same-driver test. Imagine if Ford had put the kind of effort into the GT that Ferrari does for the 360/430 or Enzo. (lolol.) Hell, just give it some serious track-type tires like the 360CS's treadwear-60 P Zero Corsas...
In case you've forgotten what the tires for these cars look like, here's a reminder:
http://img40.exs.cx/img40/4685/u6p08.jpg

In an issue of Evo, Ford engineers said their GT was 5-7 seconds quicker around Laguna Seca than the 360 Modena. In a show on the Discovery Channel about the Ford GT's development, they had an early prototype GT with only 400 hp outlapping their 360 test car by a few seconds at Road Atlanta. Even with two different test drivers, the results were largely the same. So if Ferrari says the F430 is 3.0-3.5 seconds quicker than the 360 at Fiorano, and Ford says the GT is 5-7 seconds quicker than the 360 at Laguna Seca, and the GT is already 2+ seconds quicker than the 360CS in a head to head test at Gingerman, how do you guys figure that the F430 will blow away the GT? I think it will be close, and could come down to the driver/track.

[Guibo]

actually if you read the MT article it states on this page (http://motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0404_race/index3.html) that they suspected that somehting wasnt right with the stradale they tested (something about the clutch). and if "all had been right" it would probably be a 3.9-4.0 sec 0-60 car.

edit - also if you check car and drivers web site the road test they did with the stradale yielded a 4.0 s 0-60 and a 12.4s 1/4mile.

vs.

a 4.1s 0-60 and a 12.4s 1/4 mile for the gallardo. so i dont think it is fair for you to say that the gallardo pulls harder in C&D either, i would say thats pretty even so please try to read more in depth before you post "facts."
Ah, so this is the second test where "something's not right" with the 360CS? There was another one, done by Autocar, which had glitches. (Out of fairness, those aren't the figures I posted earlier.) So much for Ferraris being more reliable, I guess?

They also said: "It's also worth mentioning that we've tested standard 360 Modenas to slightly quicker times than this."

To my knowledge, they've only tested one other standard 360 Modena to slightly quicker times. And that car was tested at Ford's Arizona Proving Grounds, which they've suspected before as being more grippy than their usual test site. Indeed, the best times ever in terms of 1/4 miles recorded for the following cars were done at Ford's APG:
SRT-10 Viper
Murcielago
Ford GT
Carrera GT
Ferrari Enzo
360 Modena (which did 0-60 in 3.92 seconds; have you got a documented test of a Modena being quicker than that anywhere else?)

edit - also if you check car and drivers web site the road test they did with the stradale yielded a 4.0 s 0-60 and a 12.4s 1/4mile.
vs.
a 4.1s 0-60 and a 12.4s 1/4 mile for the gallardo. so i dont think it is fair for you to say that the gallardo pulls harder in C&D either, i would say thats pretty even so please try to read more in depth before you post "facts."
Considering 0-60 is largely a function of available traction and these are 190 mph supercars, those figures don't amount to shit. It's much the same for the quarter mile, although one has to look at the trap speed to see which car is really pulling (again, ET's can be largely a function of grip): the Gallardo is going 3 mph faster, despite giving up a tenth in getting to 60.
The FACTS show that the Gallardo gets to 150 mph 2.5 seconds quicker than the 360CS. 150 mph = 220 fps, 220 fps X 2.5 seconds = 550'. That's ~37 carlengths. Tell me again how the Gallardo doesn't pull harder??

[JiggaStyles09]

where does it say that the gallardo is 2.5s faster to 150? im not trying to be a smart ass or anything i just didnt see the stradale's 0-150 time anywhere. the only numbers i saw posted about the stradale on C&D were the 0-60 and 1/4 mile.

[findleybeast]

150 mph = 220 fps, 220 fps X 2.5 seconds = 550'. That's ~37 carlengths. Tell me again how the Gallardo doesn't pull harder??

not that I want to seem like I'm taking sides on this, because I'm not, but that argument doesn't really hold any water. it would be true if the gallardo was traveling at a constant 150mph, and the 360CS was standing still. of course that's not the case, so even if you do figure out the accelleration for both cars up to a point in time, you'd have to subtract the distance covered by the 360CS from the distance covered by the Gallardo.

your point that the gallardo hits 150mph 2.5 seconds faster is valid, just the math you used to emphasize it is wrong :wink:

anyway, back to it :D

[dons5]

umm Fiorano is smaller then Laguna maybe on Laguna the 430 would be 5 or 6 seconds faster then 360. And if Ferrari makes 110 hp/L out of a 6 litre engine and about 115 out of a 4.3 litre then the Ferrari would probably get around 700 - 800 hp with a 5.5 litre engine with a supercharger

[FordGTGuy]

dons5 your forgeting that the Ford GT has a small block if it did have a Ford Big Block like maybe a newly designed cammer 427 which creates over 600 hp by itself then add a bigger bolt on supercharger better pulleys, belts, pistons, spark plugs, and suspension and this car would almost be unstoppable and surely faster than any ferrari enzo on the road. And if you want proof check out a lil car I like to call the Ford GT-40 MKII.

[Vansquish]

dons5 your forgeting that the Ford GT has a small block if it did have a Ford Big Block like maybe a newly designed cammer 427 which creates over 600 hp by itself then add a bigger bolt on supercharger better pulleys, belts, pistons, spark plugs, and suspension and this car would almost be unstoppable and surely faster than any ferrari enzo on the road. And if you want proof check out a lil car I like to call the Ford GT-40 MKII.

Where are your numbers coming from man?!?! The newly designed Cammer crate engine isn't a 427, it's a 5.0L (302 roughly) and it makes 420bhp.

[Max Power]

http://img62.exs.cx/img62/1750/t4ylaptimes.jpg
....the ford gt was a preproduction one in the article and C&D says that the CS is faster than the Gallardo...Top Gear also established CS faster than the lambo
All these numbers say nothing cause if u wanted to compare these cars than u would need some sort of 'rules' ... like same engine size, rwd and etc, otherwise u only compare them because of prices

[Vansquish]

http://img62.exs.cx/img62/1750/t4ylaptimes.jpg
....the ford gt was a preproduction one in the article and C&D says that the CS is faster than the Gallardo...Top Gear also established CS faster than the lambo
All these numbers say nothing cause if u wanted to compare these cars than u would need some sort of 'rules' ... like same engine size, rwd and etc, otherwise u only compare them because of prices

Don't really agree with that. The Gallardo was designed with 2 cars in mind as competitors, the Porsche 996TT and more importantly the Ferrari 360. Ford obviously benchmarked the 360, and since the Gallardo has come out in the interim, it's obviously (at least theoretically) in the same marketing envelope as the others. The 996TT is of course quite a lot cheaper, so it falls in a lesser pricing bracket, but the GT, Gallardo and 360 are definetely intended to go head-to-head.

[dons5]

ok if the ford had better pistons, better pulleys, better suspension blah blah blah i can go and say the same thing about a honda, if it had a bigger engine and better pulleys etc etc it would be faster too, so would every car genius

[SFDMALEX]

Here it goes:

First of all why are people comparing the Ford GT to the 360? Is it because the 360 is the only Ferrari Ford can beat?

Good move by Ford, lets hype up our brand new car by putting "FORD IS BACK. FERRARI DEFEATED" on every american magazine cover with a little disclaimer *the ferrari 360 is a 6 year old vehicle.

Its like watching Holifield getting beat by some young wanker. Give it a break, the old man is retired.


Now the Galardo. Again competition for the 360?Hmmm the FGT story again.


That source alanlambo provided is tottaly irrelivant. If they got 4.4sec 0-60 on the CS then how can I even look at the rest of the stats? that 4.4 contradicts every single magazine outhere(only thing some of the are good for...numbers)


Now when people say that Galardo will be on par with the F430 or whatever it just makes me laugh.

This car outaccelerates the F40 for Chirst sake....and any of you ever seen those BM vids with the F40 always reaching the first corner before the last car crosses the start/finish line? Well think about something even faster then the F40.

Now Im sure that the F430 is faster then the CS. Might not corner as fast(and thats a big MIGHT) but it will definetly pull away in a straight line.

The F430 doesnt have the 360s signature twitchiness. If you watch the 5th gear test then you'll see how smooth its is with the tail out and TC off. The 360 could never do that.


Anyway......the F430 will be the benchmark car, just wait and see.

[Guibo]

Good move by Ford, lets hype up our brand new car by putting "FORD IS BACK. FERRARI DEFEATED" on every american magazine cover with a little disclaimer *the ferrari 360 is a 6 year old vehicle.
That source alanlambo provided is tottaly irrelivant. If they got 4.4sec 0-60 on the CS then how can I even look at the rest of the stats? that 4.4 contradicts every single magazine outhere(only thing some of the are good for...numbers)

Show me one American magazine that has that on the cover. Only mag I recall with a similar cover was CAR. And
1) that's not American, and
2) Ford doesn't dictate what goes on car magazine covers

360 is the only one the Ford can beat? Err...no, the Ford GT also beats the 360CS. How do you think a 575M would fare against the GT? 612?
In the recent MT comparo, the GT was 2/10ths and 2.7 mph slower in the quarter than the Enzo. Wow, congrats. Now go and build 4500 of them.

Autocar also got 4.4 for the CS. How is that irrelevant to the discussion? So what if the 360CS should be good for 4.0. Don't you guys get it? If the Ferrari gets to 4.0 (likely the result of optimum traction), AND its 0-150 is slower than the Gallardo, then it's even slower than expected once off the line. You shave 4/10ths off the 60 time, but what about the 2.5 second-gap at 150?

[Max Power]

Don't really agree with that. The Gallardo was designed with 2 cars in mind as competitors, the Porsche 996TT and more importantly the Ferrari 360. Ford obviously benchmarked the 360, and since the Gallardo has come out in the interim, it's obviously (at least theoretically) in the same marketing envelope as the others. The 996TT is of course quite a lot cheaper, so it falls in a lesser pricing bracket, but the GT, Gallardo and 360 are definetely intended to go head-to-head.


Well BMW Williams F1 was also designed with the F2004 as competition, but it doesn't have a V12 displacing 5 liters, although maybe it should........and as already said 360 is 6 yrs old

[FordGTGuy]

ok if the ford had better pistons, better pulleys, better suspension blah blah blah i can go and say the same thing about a honda, if it had a bigger engine and better pulleys etc etc it would be faster too, so would every car genius

except a honda doesn't have the engine space or design to keep up with a supercar. good luck putting a v8 in a s2000

the 427 cammer i was talking about is the 60's version and by redesigned i meant new materials, bigger cylinders.

[dons5]

oh ok thanx so your saying a huge engine can make huge horsepower, thanx i didnt know that

[Guibo]

where does it say that the gallardo is 2.5s faster to 150? im not trying to be a smart ass or anything i just didnt see the stradale's 0-150 time anywhere. the only numbers i saw posted about the stradale on C&D were the 0-60 and 1/4 mile.
Where does it say it? It says it in the data panel of the actual article. You DO have the actual article, don't you?
http://img73.exs.cx/img73/34/0028bg.th.jpg (http://img73.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img73&image=0028bg.jpg)

Reference with the Gallardo's 21.4 second 0-150 time here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=7699&page_number=5

Simple arithmetic takes care of the rest...

[JoeHahn]

I think a big area the Ford has over the Ferrari (360, Stradale and F430) is the huge amount of torque produced. The Ford (as much as I dont like it) has what it takes to beat the F430. Obviously people can argue otherwise and thats the point of an opinion, we will have to wait for tests I guess.

Also I think it is quite irrelevant to bring cost into the equation simply because the Ferrari is imported into the USA and the Ford isnt. I dont live in the USA but I pretty much work off the british pound which pegs the Stradale at 133k and the Ford at 120k, but... (and this is a big one) has anyone seen the Top Gear episode where JC is having problems with his Ford and currently paying over 130k for his car? While the F430 will come in at about 117k I personally think you cant go wrong with that. Cheaper than the Ford, even though slower you have to be content with driving a F430. I am not a Ferrari man and I quite hate most of their new models but to have a Ford costing more or less a similar price to a Ferrari while being a tad quicker is lunacy to me. Thats me, others have different views obviously.

[Guibo]

umm Fiorano is smaller then Laguna maybe on Laguna the 430 would be 5 or 6 seconds faster then 360. And if Ferrari makes 110 hp/L out of a 6 litre engine and about 115 out of a 4.3 litre then the Ferrari would probably get around 700 - 800 hp with a 5.5 litre engine with a supercharger
If the 430 is 5-6 seconds faster than the 360 at Laguna, and the Ford GT is faster than the 360 by a similar margin at Laguna, then how are we to assume that the 430 will beat the Ford GT??
And it would likely cost far more than it already does...Do you honestly think it would be cheaper than a Porsche GT2? Yes or no?

[Guibo]

....the ford gt was a preproduction one in the article and C&D says that the CS is faster than the Gallardo...Top Gear also established CS faster than the lambo
All these numbers say nothing cause if u wanted to compare these cars than u would need some sort of 'rules' ... like same engine size, rwd and etc, otherwise u only compare them because of prices
And how does that preproduction Ford GT differ from production ones? Tell me exactly how. You mean how Ford claimed it would top out at 200, yet much later it went 212 at Nardo?
When did Top Gear establish the CS is faster than the Lambo? What were the documented acceleration times?

[JiggaStyles09]

where does it say that the gallardo is 2.5s faster to 150? im not trying to be a smart ass or anything i just didnt see the stradale's 0-150 time anywhere. the only numbers i saw posted about the stradale on C&D were the 0-60 and 1/4 mile.
Where does it say it? It says it in the data panel of the actual article. You DO have the actual article, don't you?
http://img73.exs.cx/img73/34/0028bg.th.jpg (http://img73.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img73&image=0028bg.jpg)

Reference with the Gallardo's 21.4 second 0-150 time here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=7699&page_number=5

Simple arithmetic takes care of the rest...

no i didnt have the article i was going by the online version on C&D.com which didnt have that page thanks for posting it up (thats why i was saying that the only times i saw for the stradale were 0-60 and 1/4 mile).

i do see any you have a fine point here, that the gallardo pulls slightly harder, at higher speeds but as someone pointed out before its not nearly as drastic as 37 carlengths and when talking of speeds at 150+ 2.5 seconds faster isnt that much (compared to like a 0-60 time difference of 2.5s).

there are a lot of factors that go into a road test of the car, track conditions, driver, temperature, and the car itself. i really think the acceleration differences between the gallardo and the stradale minimal at best.

for example the trans am WS6 and the camaro SS are almost identical cars yet in this test here on edmunds.com they got slightly different times for this road test (http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43923/page009.html). still its not recognized whatsoever that the WS6 "pulls harder" than the SS. on a given day one of the cars can outpreform the other.

and i think the same about the lambo and ferrari, on any given day depending on conditions one car can beat the other.

and hey i still agree with you that i prefer the gallardo better than the ferrari. :wink:

[Guibo]

150 mph = 220 fps, 220 fps X 2.5 seconds = 550'. That's ~37 carlengths. Tell me again how the Gallardo doesn't pull harder??

not that I want to seem like I'm taking sides on this, because I'm not, but that argument doesn't really hold any water. it would be true if the gallardo was traveling at a constant 150mph, and the 360CS was standing still. of course that's not the case, so even if you do figure out the accelleration for both cars up to a point in time, you'd have to subtract the distance covered by the 360CS from the distance covered by the Gallardo.

your point that the gallardo hits 150mph 2.5 seconds faster is valid, just the math you used to emphasize it is wrong :wink:

anyway, back to it :D
Hey, that's a good point. However, it would also be true if both cars were traveling at a constant 150 mph; the 360CS wouldn't have to be standing still. Of course, at 21.4 seconds when the Gallardo is traveling 150 mph, the Modena isn't quite at 150. But what you're saying makes sense.


For the others...
Here's how these cars compare throughout various tests:

http://img87.exs.cx/img87/5505/114lm.th.jpg (http://img87.exs.cx/img87/5505/114lm.jpg)

The trend is pretty clear: it would take a miraculous road test of the 360CS to definitively prove that it is faster than the Gallardo. Even then, it's hard to argue that 1 test disproves 4 others. For anyone else saying the F430 is faster than the Ford GT, well, that would put it in Enzo territory, wouldn't it?
Who's got C&D numbers for the F40? I've only got the 0-170 time (which is faster than the F50 by .5 second). By R&T numbers, the F430 is noticeably quicker to 60, but that's it. After that, the F40 is quicker.

[Guibo]

there are a lot of factors that go into a road test of the car, track conditions, driver, temperature, and the car itself. i really think the acceleration differences between the gallardo and the stradale minimal at best.
and i think the same about the lambo and ferrari, on any given day depending on conditions one car can beat the other.

That might be true. But if you look at the road tests between C&D, MT, Autocar, and Sport Auto, they all have the Gallardo consistently faster above 60 mph. Even if you pick the quickest 360CS test to 150, it's still not as fast as the slowest Gallardo test to 150. If these two are truly evenly matched, we'd expect that there would be some swapping of positions. Sport Auto's times indicate that as speeds increase, the 360CS only loses ground to the Gallardo. Not purely by coincidence, I think.
Agreed, a 2.5 second difference at 150 is not like it is at 60. But it's still fairly significant. If you look at individual road tests for cars like the Viper, 550 Maranello, Porsche GT2, Vanquish, even across continents, the differences in 0-150 times aren't that great. I mean the difference between Autocar's time and C&D's time for the 360CS is only 4/10ths. The difference for the Gallardo is only 1/10th. The difference between Autocar's time and C&D's time for the GT2 and 550 Maranello is only 2/10ths. Between 3 different mags (Autocar, C&D, and TopGear), the Murcielago shows a 1.9 second spread to 150. Sounds like a lot, for one car. That's about a 9% difference. Then you realize that the difference in their 0-60 times was 11%. Meaning even with differences in conditions, traction, drivers, timing equipment, etc, the faster the car goes, the less these factors impact the outcome (particularly traction from a dead stop). And thus the smaller the margin. IMO, it's a better test for what these cars are truly capable of.
(One also finds that the Murcielago's slowest time to 150 is 21.4 seconds. Still clear of the Stradale's quickest by 2.1 seconds. The Murcielago's best 0-150 undercuts the Stradale's best by 4 seconds.)
And C&D has gotten a 0-150 time of 22.5 seconds for 3 different GenII Vipers.


for example the trans am WS6 and the camaro SS are almost identical cars yet in this test here on edmunds.com they got slightly different times for this road test (http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43923/page009.html). still its not recognized whatsoever that the WS6 "pulls harder" than the SS. on a given day one of the cars can outpreform the other.
Hmmm...that would be the second same-day test I've seen where the WS6 beats the Camaro SS, then. Here's another:
http://popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars_trucks/1999/7/comparison_test_13_quickest_cars/index7.phtml
They are mostly identical, except that the SS is about 100 lbs heavier...



and hey i still agree with you that i prefer the gallardo better than the ferrari. :wink:
I'm actually more inclined to go with the 360CS, personally. (But not because it's quicker. :wink: )

[JiggaStyles09]

That might be true. But if you look at the road tests between C&D, MT, Autocar, and Sport Auto, they all have the Gallardo consistently faster above 60 mph. Even if you pick the quickest 360CS test to 150, it's still not as fast as the slowest Gallardo test to 150. If these two are truly evenly matched, we'd expect that there would be some swapping of positions.


i will agree with you here


I'm actually more inclined to go with the 360CS, personally. (But not because it's quicker. :wink: )


haha well then fine then i guess we are both trying to defend cars that we dont really prefer :lol: :wink:

[Max Power]

And how does that preproduction Ford GT differ from production ones? Tell me exactly how. You mean how Ford claimed it would top out at 200, yet much later it went 212 at Nardo?

...Exactly and the GT has 550bhp instead of 500 :P

[Guibo]

You mean it has 550 hp at a minimum. From what I've seen, it's closer to the Enzo's output. It would need to be, in order to weigh that much and be so close to the Enzo in acceleration, especially considering the Enzo's gearing advantage, lightning-quick shifts, fatter rear rubber, etc.

[FordGTGuy]

if anyone wants to know about the cammer i'm talking about here it is:
http://www.me.mtu.edu/~prater/cammer.html

roughly a 302 hah thats funny.

[mv]

Considering the performance of the f430 I can't really imagine what the CS version will be like as an insider claimed its engine would be uptweaked to 530hp/490NM...Not mentioning the weight will drop significantly which might be even more crucial to the performance.But that's still a few years ahead of us.