Both of these cars are astounding pieces of dogshit that are dangerous as hell. Here's the comment I just left on the S1:
I owned #45 and put more than 10,000 miles on it, including two autocross seasons and nine trackdays. I have an important caveat to share with any potential buyer, but first:
* Room: This car has more room than any other Seven clone including the Caterham SV.
* Engine: Most of these have been retuned and revamped since they were new. If not, expect to do something because the stock install done by Dynamic and a couple other dealers struggled to break 110hp. I had a prep-track 14.7@92 on the stock engine, which is not great.
* Common problems: The fender supports are weak. The fenders crack. The whole electrical system will keep you guessing. The differential and axle are from a South African market Hilux and in this application you can expect to do frequent maintenance and fillup. The headlights are a suggestion. The roll hoops are sized for Danny DeVito. You will need to do a full nut and bolt underneath and up top every year at a minimum. The transmission does not shift well when it's hot, and in some weather the center tunnel can burn you.
* The top is an absolute piece of junk. The doors are even worse.
* Handling is pretty good, with the major caveat to be listed below. Do not expect to match a Caterham or WCM in terms of raw cornering potential. The truck rear axle and relentless cost-cutting throughout will ensure you don't.
Alright, now the big thing. I've driven about 430 days on track in everything from a 2015 Camry to a full McLaren GT3 factory race car. The Superformance S1 is the only car I've ever driven that had a frame failure at speed. The Mumford links on these break.
I was the first one to experience, because I put more miles on my car than anyone else, but I was not the last.
This can and will get you killed on track, in certain situations. I had a very long discussion with the late Dean Rosen about it; he sent me to Superformance in South Africa. And what they told me was:
DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES PUT DOT-R TIRES ON THIS CAR.
Now, keep in mind that this happened in the year 2001. So that means I was running a Kumho V700. Do you know how a V700 compared to a modern R-compound? It's not close. Do you know how a V700 compares to a modern ****200tw****? It's not close.
Therefore, take the advice of someone who went suddenly backwards at Mosport in Turn Two, and don't run anything stickier than a modern all-season.
Selling mine was the best decision I ever made. GLWS.
"The Superformance S1 is the only car I've ever driven that had a frame failure at speed. And given how low-powered this car is, I should probably mention that my nickname for this car was 'Ralph Nader', as it was literally unsafe at any speed."
"...and don't run anything stickier than a modern all-season."
Woooo hooo, I've finally got a use for those 40-year-old Goodyear Vector tires that have been sitting in my shed all this time.
Fun side note, I remember my dad rushing down to the tire shop to buy a set of these for a 1986 F150 he bought/finagled new off the lot, and during the first huge rainstorm he went to turn left into a Marlow, Oklahoma convenience store without really hitting the brakes, I said "slow down!", he said, "these are the best rain tires in the world!", and then someone suddenly whipped out in front of him, he hit the brakes, the truck slid on those best rain tires in the world some 80 or 90 feet, and then he drilled a curb.
"The top is an absolute piece of junk. The doors are even worse. I don't know if there are any words left in the English language to describe how terrible the rest of the car is in comparison."
This seems to be a direct competitor to the Cayman GT4 RS. By competitor I mean similar cost, and, I assume, similar performance (GT4 RS has almost 500hp). Although the Cayman is street legal and will impress Porsche people. Seems like a large market exists for these cars even though $220k is a lot of money, the hardest part is probably access to a track and time to spend there.
Gt4rs is streetable, but to really work on track seems like you're going to be speeding another 30k on suspension. The comparison might be to a 350K GT4rs clubsport.
The faster you go, the bigger the hit when you go off almost always on a corner, at some point you want properly built track car with crash protection. Plus a track car is far more easily repairable.
Well ok, I know someone tracking a stock GT4 RS regularly so my point is there is a market for $220k “track vehicles”, and this Ginetta is an interesting option.
But you’d need a trailer and tow vehicle for the ginetta and no possibility of road use
You’d be surprised how much $$ people spend on track vehicles. On one hand there can be a sub 20k e36 bmw which is well developed and pretty quick, on the oter some experian mediocre drivers showing up regularly in +500k cars
Manthey Racing make their living out of people that think like this. They'll gladly sell (and fit) you the brakes, little but nontrivially important aero upgrades and wheels to make your GT4RS actually do what Porsche promised you it'd do. And you get to keep your factory warranty.
The big thing (for me) is the warranty you get to keep. I would not want to run a modern Porsche (by that I mean anything watercooled) without Porsche standing behind it. Being a frequent Nürburgring enjoyer, I talk to the Manthey team frequently, you'd not believe how often do these cars break parts, and expensive parts at that. Two years ago a taxi 911 GT2 RS MR (real type) chucked its gearbox. It was probably the well-known problem of metal shavings fouling the shift fork magnets because we were able to push the car out of the car park and it eventually 'found' a gear and limped to Manthey. They didn't bother rebuilding the trans, just put a new one in it, because it was still in warranty.
This is why I don't understand why "Mr JWW" brought his 911, that he binned a few months ago, back to the Ring and continued to push it. With the unofficial rebuild he lost the factory warranty. I don't get why not just sell the car at a loss, and buy a new one if he really wants to drive a low-7 lap. Maybe it's good for youtube views but I don't think they pay well enough to buy a new GT2.
It might also explain the choice of engine in regards to GM pushrod power, depending on who you talk to, a Ford Coyote engine would be an improvement, but easier packaging of the LS goes right out the window.
It's fairly close in weight, oddly enough. The problem is that while this engine is fairly popular in F150's and Mustangs, that's the only thing it's really installed in, as there are other engines in Ford's lineup to compete with the 5.0 Coyote, such as the 2.7 and 3.5 Egoboost engines, so they're nowhere near as prevalent as the 6.0 and 6.2 GM engines, which are in practically frickin' everything in their truck and full-size SUV lineup.
And yes, the Coyote doesn't lend itself well to swaps into smaller vehicles, while it's not very long in flywheel-to-balancer length, it's much shorter than the old 5.0 and 5.8 pushrod V8's, oddly enough, the 6.8 Triton V10 is almost the exact same length as the 5.0 and 5.8, although it fills in a lot of areas where there are normally gaps with the 5.0 and 5.8.
Where the Coyote makes up for it, however, is the width and height of the engine, it's stupid-wide by stupid-tall.
But compared the Gm engines its a rever which imo is a big big plus. I knew it was big but always thought it was significantly heavier than the gm 6.2.
I also always thought the 302 was infinitely superior to the Gm lumps. That 302 had a comparatively great rod ratio and was internally balanced, always fun to wind one out.
will help the looks department, none of the Ginetta product line really stands out from a looks perspective, it's all sort of generic supercar, which is perfectly fine, given what it's used for, you don't need knockout styling to go fast.
" Unlike McLaren’s GT4, this isn’t a converted supercar with the turbo wick turned down to “sleepytime”;" this sums up my 570 GT4 experience in one sentence, well that and nannied so that coming off the apex the right foot is just a suggestion to the computer.
Hired gun Freind raced a 6 cyl ginetta and he was quicker than said 570 Gt4 because the nannies wouldn't let him drive in the Macca. Hes quicker than both ina worked 20 yo lotus exige carrying 200lbs of mandatory ballast at LRP. Nothing like a swb with all the mass centered.
Yeah wings and real aero, ask me about spinning a praga.
I wonder how the gineta compares toa Cayman GT4 Rs club sport which all the "gentlemen" racers and trackers seem to prefer. these days.
In any event seems like a great car with many virtues, but that motor, robust as it may be, hp as it may have is a turn off. Not that i have anything against a pushrod v8, but those 6.2 really don't like to rev and don't feel good doing it. Plus yeah 250K, but then a lesser car will escalate up there over time as you develop it anyway. Way less than the Dallara but light and mid engine is its own school. Still as you point out, with age something a bit more comfy lol.
I was excited about the dallara when it came out and seemed to be in the low 200s. But the “track” version here you wrote about, I looked at their site and it was more like 400k.
Working with someone on maybe restarting g lotus Elise prod but asa component car roller so it would weigh less and a street version witha Honda ctr motor. Then one may do something like the 211 for track guys 1400lbs. The appeal here is almost Miata running cost and requirements ie fluids pads and tires for a car that in practiced hands can hit that 2 min mark at the Glenn. So way off a radical pace but really quick for a small 4 cyl durable car.
Yeah I’d love a dallara. fuck how does one make more no care vaporizeable $. The lottery seems not to be working out
"Working with someone on maybe restarting g lotus Elise prod..."
Do you mean that you're working on this? I REALLY hope so. Knowing nothing about Caterham's business side, I was surprised they didn't jump on the Elise tooling fire sale some years back.
Yes working with someone on it. There was no Elsie tooling fire sale as lotus was too stupid and just wanted to kill their iconic car so they could go ev kumbaya.
The "new" Elise would be a roller, ie shipped to USA sans engine and engine installed here in theory by a third party. It would cost 100k and need to sell globally in the hundreds of untis 2-300.
But imagine an Elsie with a 400hp honda turbo motor, or a very worked na version of the Toyota motor that always came in an elise. Either way without airbags and some other items it would weight 1-200lbs less than the last Elises.
Wow, great news. I read they were searching for a buyer but that was probably just speculation.
I'd like to think 200/yr is manageable. The only real competition to your "new" Elise is an old Elise with upgrades (incl. the S1 now that they can cross the Atlantic). Those are easily $70k -- plus time and hassle -- so $100k doesn't seem too steep to me for the next best thing to a Stradale.
Jack, respectfully, 220K for a car? That, for most of us, doesn't represent just a "substantial purchase," it represents a divorce and loss of wife, home and family!
Lakehouse priority one, if really load of burnable cash, some sort of wakesurf boat. Centurion? Nautique? I can't figure who makes the best and they all seem identical
The dryer has just stopped competing its cycle to dry. Not sure if it’s a sensor or what, but I can’t imagine having a second set of stuff to maintain in a second home. Don’t get me started on the LEDs in the garage. I thought LEDs were the panacea. After 6 years I’ve replaced almost all 10 of them. An an electrician friend of mine said they were the good brand and not Home Depot crap too.
Many smart people have this attitude—easier to rent!
Only problem is in certain zip codes there is simply nothing ideal to rent. If you want to vacation at the elite mountain West lakes you’re stuck in the 80s or overpaying for someone else’s perverse LED-blasted horrorshow.
If you’re really smart and stay out of those zip codes you are a wise man and good to go.
Boats and houses are great, but nothing pulls the mind and imagination like a car, nothing will spool up your brain and express your 17 yo slef like being on track, maybe some young side chick but thats way to expensive complex and wont last. my wifre knows when my mind wanders or Im not around, cars are involved, thats a good compromise. But yeah to just chill a boat is the way to go.
I was not going to bail on my 15 year marriage but wasn't overly happy either .
_SHE_ decided the grass was greener elsewhere and asked me for a divorce .
Because the market was in the toilet and the house was seriously underwater she signed off (Quit claimed) on it and I helped her buy another elsewhere .
She thought she was so very clever telling me " ! and you can KEEP all your beloved cars, Motocycles and trucks !" .
All in all I know she made the right choice for me =8-) .
I simply cannot understand anyone staying in this situation .
My ex wife never even thought about no Motocyles, in the late 1980's I bought a used Kawasaki police Motocycle at the city auction, rode it home and was washing it when she came out and said "nice bike, where do _I_ sit ? " .
At this point she'd not cared to ride with me in close to ten years so I said "it's a _solo_ honey, now you don't have to worry about me riding random women" .
She replied "! you are NOT ALLOWED to have a Motocycle upon which I cannot ride !".
Go figure. right ? My Sweet doesn't like to ride but when I was stuck in that wheelchair saw me looking at bikes on the computer and said If you want another Motocycle I think you've earned it " .
My wife spent too much time in ER departments where squashed street bike guys were constantly being wheeled in to get excited about my owning street bikes.
I got tired of dodging texting-while-driving types while on street bikes.
We romantically met in the middle with me heroically piloting at least a 4000-pound car.
to compare to it's real competitors (a ~220k Huracan),
To think about as a toy (more actual use than a Huracan? When can you flatfloot a Huracan other than a trackday... at which you'd rather be driving this?)
---and many of Jack's readers have this kind of scratch.
They don't comment much, though (part of how they got all that $$$)
I love fast strong cars, but not actually racing them, fastest cars Ive driven are a factory prototype Viper and my stock c5, but I like driving wifes Mazda Miata nc more…
Driving slower vehicles rapidly will also teach you the importance of tires pressures and tailoring them to suit your needs of traction and longer life .
It also helps avoid the pain and embarrassment of wadding something special .
After my last near death Motocycle crash (the one where I was at fault) I was in Beverly Hills to see my lawyer and some kid in a shiny red Ferrari convertible went past me at maybe 30 MPH in first gear, the engine howling in protest at 10,000 RPM or so, the kid looking around to see who was looking at him making such a ruckus .
I can't do that, I have some sort of connection with Motor Vehicles I've had since I can remember, I dislike abusing machinery, prolly why/how I can get away with driving the jalopies I do so hard, far and wide .
No other auto journo could’ve provided that context. Well done, and I suspect precisely what someone who is shopping for those would appreciate. I know it’s a limited audience, but more race platform reviews, please! These are the things I lust after… if I had that kind of money to spend, I’d do so on something that had usable potential rather than a street car cosplaying as a racer.
It can be difficult getting race car reviews because most autowriters aren't comfortable in that sort of vehicle and/or they damage them quite a bit... like when Kim Wolfkill put the NSX GT3 off at the press preview and ruined one of two noses they had in all of North America.
I recall being invited out with a few folks at PIR (Portland International Raceway) to perhaps try out some of their equipment (I had been working on a few of their cars during my comedically-disastrous run at NASCAR writing) during something of a test and tune session for them, my head was jammed into the roof of every car that was out there, it ended up with my visit being an unintentional comedy routine and I didn't even get to make a lap.
This was some years after a JROTC visit to an air force base during another comedic run at another potential career, with my unit "officer" dragging me around and stuffing me into aircraft seats that I clearly didn't fit in because he thought it was funny, the F15E ejection seat generating the most laughs because the hoop section up top that's supposed to go over your shoulders was hitting me mid-shoulder blade.
The track visit was a bit painful on the inside, but nothing like the AFB visit where I discovered that the only thing I fit in the pilot seat of was one of their cargo aircraft, with the JROTC officer saying, "it's not all bad, son, the air force needs cargo pilots too!".
That is something I find fascinating about the odd car or two, cars you would think you'd have no trouble fitting into are hideous with headroom, and then there are some cars which have headroom, but like my 2005 G35 Sport coupe, my left shoulder rests against the door panel. It's okay by myself in the car, but I get a bit claustrophobic when the wife is in it with me...which is probably why it's now her driver and not mine.
I well remember my first day at skippy school, not being able to keep up in a neon powered single seater with he instructor who was in an actual neon.
by day two it was no contest. Then we did lead follow in same single seaters and the gap was massive. A few mionths later came wings and slicks.
but I still remember seeing someone in a mazda 3 going into he bustop so fast that I couldn't believe it, truly in the presence of greatness, it was a art in motion, so smooth. . Those are the times you slow down and follow for a few laps regardless of how quick your car may be, just to learn.
Agreed. Trusted source for me because he is honest in his reviews. Tough gig. Most mfg. want anything but an honest opinion on their product. If you've made something good, suitable for purpose, then you shouldn't be hesitant of an honest opinion. Not enough truth tellers around today. I'll always give more weight to Jack's and Sam Smiths comments not only for their experience and expertise but for the proven guts to say what they really think.
there is a fine line between confident over confident and not in the game.
my secret is having a very good friend with a home Bodyshop who does it for the cause, and a personal ability to track down parts that aren't really produced. Last time i had to find NLA brake ducts in austra. there is so much to be said for acar supported by the manufacturer and with parts in stock that are easily replaceable. Sounds like Ginetta on to something there.
3 d printing is changing the game at least for little bits.
That said...this is on BAT with NO RESERVE and I am very tempted to skip out on a proper farm truck and put this in my barn instead (where it will sit, unused except for car shows and illicit street use, until my nine year old graduates high school):
If I have a 6'4" bike enthusiast friend who track days* a 2014 Shelby GT500 with a half cage, massive wing and dams and splitters, and what I believe is its third complete suspension overhaul by one of those Mustang Racing Engineering Firms... He would be the precise demographic for this vehicle, wouldn't he? If he gets rid of the ridiculous Raptor R he just bought, that would free up a garage slot for the Ginetta. 🤔
*You've made me realize I don't know if he does wheel-to-wheel racing or "just" track days.
At the very least, I'd want to get away from track-day running a car with a roots-blown supercharger generating spectacular, high-score-level IAT temps and adding considerable weight over the nose.
1. Guys with supercharged engines that have half the displacement (someone mentioned a supercharged Lotus elsewhere in here), not so much of a problem (but it's still a problem), but when we're getting into monster-level blowers like you'd find on that Shelby 5.4 DOHC, and also GM's 6.2 LSA cars, then you're running into severe heat soak issues where you're having to get rid of an insane amount of heat and there's not a lot of frontal area on the car in which to run enough of a heat exchanger.
If you want to see a good idea of what it takes just to get rid of forced induction heat soak in a race car with only 500hp, this is what a recent-ish BMW M8 GTE twin turbo 4.4L V8 looks like under the hood, most of what's there is heat exchanger and ducting:
It's not impossible to get rid of all that heat, it's just that with the bigger engines, there's so much to get rid of, and not a lot of room in which to get rid of it, to the point where most businesses that build or work on track cars strongly recommend the "running while screaming" escape away from forced induction if at all possible, simply from a heat management perspective.
2. On a side note, the much-vaunted 2003-2004 Ford Mustang Cobra Terminator was legendary to a lot of people, but it sure looked like it was an already-obsolete, laughably-mismatched Boomer dragstrip toy to me, in that you couldn't go around a road course more than a lap or two (and even then that was pushing it) before the Eaton compressed space heater on top of the engine pushed IAT's to stratospheric highs and into PCM limp mode.
Yeah, great idea, combine a dragstrip-only engine with a clunky-ish 6-speed manual and an independent rear suspension setup that went into wheelhop even if you were merely looking at it from across a parking lot, with the IRS being yanked and tossed in favor of a straight axle rear end, often within minutes of bringing it home from the dealership.
What cracks me up about Ford in 2003-2004 and their two top-tier Mustangs in the Cobra Terminator and the Mach 1, the Mach 1 chassis was actually perfect for the Terminator engine, and the Mach 1's amazing N/A, all-aluminum 4.6 DOHC engine (waaaay underrated btw) would have been perfect in the IRS-equipped Cobra flagship of the fleet, a Cobra that would have been perfect for road course duty, unlike the 700-pound lump of ancient cast iron block (Ford thoughtfully shitcanned the capable Teksid block after the 1999 model year), but even then, the lump on top of the engine didn't help anything.
But that Terminator engine in the Mach 1 would have been an amazing factory drag car. However, Boomers gotta Boomer, so we got two happily-mismatched cars forevermore.
A further aside: GM isn't a stranger to heat-soak-inspired limp modes from supercharged vehicles, either.
3. Oddly enough, I'm more of an air-to-air guy, or liquid-to-air, once again, most racing types I'm familiar with stay away from air-to-liquid or liquid-to-liquid cooler setups, those work somewhat-better in OEM settings, but whatever you're trying to cool off always remains at the same temp as the liquid that's being used to cool off whatever charge, regardless of whether or not the original piece that needs cooling is designed to run at a cooler operating temp than the engine coolant is normally operating at.
"most businesses that build or work on track cars strongly recommend the "running while screaming" escape away from forced induction if at all possible, simply from a heat management perspective"
absolutely agree
na engines are lighter and easier to package as well as needing nowhere near the care and feeding required of forced induction engines like you mentioned
basically why im keeping the miata natually aspirated
"However, Boomers gotta Boomer, so we got two happily-mismatched cars forevermore"
when you spell it out like that the engine mismatch was incredibly stupid
""However, Boomers gotta Boomer, so we got two happily-mismatched cars forevermore"
when you spell it out like that the engine mismatch was incredibly stupid"
I don't know if it was necessarily stupid, it was simply very...Boomer. From an intended-use perspective, my version of "how things should have been" makes a hell of a lot more sense, but then when you put on Boomer beer goggles, try explaining to the most Boomerrific of Boomers when the most powerful car in the Mustang lineup isn't the option package king of the fleet and doesn't have the word "Cobra" on the rear bumper cover, but that the Mach 1 Terminator would actually work better on a dragstrip right out of the box, and they could have a Cobra that could actually go around a road course more than once or twice...a upscale, almost-2000 Cobra R, which was very much not-supercharged.
At the same time that this Boomer forced induction revolution/palace coup was taking place, some Ford engineers were working on an astounding 5.8/351ci V10 engine (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWYCBxTyi8M) that was N/A and could have been a legend very nearly worthy of Viper fame...and would have been lighter over the nose than a Terminator setup.
However, while all that was taking place while all of this was taking place was the fact that the primary, cross-town competition had taken their ball and gone home with the F-body twin-terror-but-in-name-only-and-sure-as-hell-not-in-sales-figures-terror, crosstown competition being canceled after the 2002 model year, so why bother with the Terminator if your reason for being is no longer in existence? It's not like the warning signs weren't there well before the 2001 Cobra came into existence...
We gotta talk. On the lotus it goes from near on 400hp afte two laps losing 50 hp, It needs a motec to keep it all together and were running really rich to keep it off the knock sensor.
Apparently the Aussie solution is to run a bigger blower slower(same blower as on c7 z06 but on a 3,5 toyota) with better intercooling, but thats a liquid intercooler.
ive seen worked motors more like 550 hp, but 450 or so is really what the stock internals can safely handle so its all detuned then, at least thats the theory.
"We gotta talk. On the lotus it goes from near on 400hp afte two laps losing 50 hp, It needs a motec to keep it all together and were running really rich to keep it off the knock sensor."
If this is a Roots-based blower setup (or a screw compressor, I thought it was a roots setup with the Exige if this is what we're talking about), it's the best (along with the screw compressor) for boost off the bottom, but if it's a Roots piece, the rotors play air-based pattycake with the air inlet charge, and the problem is getting rid of the heat produced by the blower, which you've obviously discovered.
The Aussie solution of running a C7 ZO6 supercharger sounds interesting, especially if what I'm recalling of the Exige is correct and it's around a 350hp engine, and you've got it cranked up to nearly 400, you might have exceeded the design limitations of the blower (did you go with a pulley change for more boost?) and you're now just creating a hell of a lot of hot air, similar to what people were doing with the Ford Thunderbird Supercoupe Eaton M90 supercharger, which was the basis of many aftermarket kits, all the way up to a 5.0 V8, never mind the original engine it was bolted to was a 3.8 V6 (the Eaton M90 was also bolted to many other engines, not just Ford stuff).
Ok, here we go. I'll try not to get sidetracked or come off as argumentative or anything of the like. I've quite a bit of firsthand experience here so its just summation of thought or explanatory to reason. Will bullet based on topic.
1. It's not the size of the engine so much that is the issue here. Fact of the matter is that most all factory superchargers are nearly undersized for the application - which includes both the GT500 trinity setups, the LSA and very much the M112 Eaton found on the 03-04 Cobra. I believe they try to maximize an efficiency range that's paired to an overall budget vs a power target. The factory boost threshold is the correct 'limit' here and cars are outfitted JUST enough to make that work. While there is argumentative wiggle room, this all goes away on a racetrack - see C7Zs going into limp mode. In modern years with newer technology you begin to see some legitimately sized power adders on factory cars - ie: The massive blowers topping the new GT500 / GTD, the giant turbos hung off the C8Zr1. While they still require a surmountable amount of airflow and cooling, they can sustain without meltdown unlike trying to turn up the boost in a lesser displacement housing.
This is why vehicles like an intercooled Miata with an M45 or M60 can still get by on the track with so little - the blower to engine ratio is much greater. Anytime you are compressing more, especially into a smaller space - the heat goes through the roof. Its a doable thing, but not without challenges to run WOT for hours (see Hellcat durability testing).
An often unspoken shortfall is the stresses and side / vertical loading that becomes applied to the crankshaft in a non turbo application. This doubles down when you don't have a "caged" or trapped lower pulley design. Pulling apart an engine as such you will see a drastic increase in bearing wear on the top side of the mains, focused closer to the front of the engine. This becomes exponential with boost levels and the draw to turn a compressor.
TLDR - NA wins on a track setting in most cases. Its very cost prohibitive to engineer it all back out, especially in the aftermarket. Cars like the GTD or Zr1 family (to include c6) can get you 95% there but you pay for it.
2. I recommend anyone wishing to learn more about the 2003-2004 Cobra development to pick up the book "Iron Fist, Lead Foot"; which follows the development process through the eyes of the engineer John Coletti.
I'm not sure how familiar you are overall with the Cobra program, but the reason you feel it might be outdated at launch is because it really was both a late product to the table and due to a huge internal failure that begins with the 1999 Cobra Mustang. The 99 was supposed to be the original siren song, retaining an aluminum block, naturally aspirated and high revving with a new IRS out back. Using the lighter T45, 5 speed transmission. In theory this should have checked off most of your boxes. The reality fell furthest from that possible. Rated at 320HP it underdelivered by ALOT, showing most made closer to 260-270HP and sparking a giant lawsuit. This doubled down bad looks against the new LS powered F bodies. The older B head Cobras (96-98) were actually designed for extreme rpm and or boost with their port design (they actually won the EngineMasters contests of the day and managed to get banned in the process). Nevertheless, with a deep gear, you the 96-98 cars could run with the LS.
The 99 cars got shelved. Ford tried to save face by having intake manifolds extrude honed, sending out tune revisions and believe exhaust changes to TRY and correct this problem. It didn't end there. The T45 was not robust enough and would break 3-4 shift forks, the IRS was bunk and axle breaking as it was not the later 28 spline and updated carrier units. I could go on, but you get the idea. Ford had shot themselves in the foot.
There was no 00 model Cobra to follow. The SVT team launched the R. It really is a decent car for the most part - I've had the pleasure of driving them, but was obviously quite one-off and cost prohibitive. Placing the R well above Corvette pricing and launching / competing with the new C5Z which outperformed it for cheaper. This was now well outside the ponycar window. Base Mustangs were fortunately outselling the F cars, at least winning the V6 war.
In 2001 the Cobra was re-released. This is the closest version to a Mach1 style example - using revised C heads, a stronger 3650 Tremec and an IRS with 28 spline axles. It retained the 320HP moniker which followed the fbodies. It was faster, but still not quite enough - scaling in around 140lbs more than the 96-98 cobras and still dealing with traction issues. Ford was still getting rocked in testing. F cars now got factory LS6 intakes, revised 241 heads and different camshafts / computers. Their T56 was unmatched comparatively.
Ford still had cake on the face so they had brought in John to "put an end to it". If you follow any of the aftermarket tuning at the time, you'd know that all of the 4.6s use the same garbage powdered steel rods. They fail around the 450whp mark and are worse so for torque ratings past 375. When the initial idea was to run the Eaton on the 2001 Cobra - the car was windowing blocks left and right. A Teskid or WAP block can be built for boost in itself, but with 2003 era management and the usual greed of customers turning thing up, the expensive and sleeved setups got the boot in favor of the iron - which unlike the GT block is cast without knock sensor provisions. Its roughly 80 lbs heavier than the aluminum. The trans is the real fatty.
This factory rod / aluminum block combo failure is why there is no 2002 Cobra. They still hadn't had the car sorted. The F bodies got swan songed not so much by sales but by government regulations. The C5 was the only vehicle allowed to continue without redevelopment with its pop up headlights and lower, less pedestrian friendly nose. Sloping sales didn't have an F car full rehash in the works and that was that. RIP T tops.
Back at Ford, somehow John managed to get Ford to spend $68 per connecting rod for a set of Manley's and Zolliner did the forged pistons. They kept the compression quite low which is about the only thing that kept them from not wiping up the world at the time - however it ushered in high boost aftermarket blowers and the huge following afterwards. They retained the forged Kellog crank from the 96+ cobras. The combo is good for holding over 1000WHP when tuned properly on the stock longblock, earning them the 'American Supra' moniker.
The cars then got the T56 which while heavier, is the only thing strong enough at the time. A factory 3650 would simply perish in a hurry. Out back the IRS was updated AGAIN, while retaining the 28 spline count while adding carbon clutches and changing bracing etc. The cylinder heads were again revised. Additional cooling was added. Sway bar thickness increased. The interior saw the reintroduction of a Recaro based seat over the absolute trash found in the 99/01 cars. Double wrapped wheel, updated gauges etc. A new fuel system was introduced with a secondary driver and twin factory pumps.
Body wise, the car was actually restyled by Camillo Pardo - the same guy responsible for the FordGT.
It was never supposed to be a road racer outright, so I never really got the misnomer just because it had an IRS. It was designed to be the total package street car that it never got to be, driving that final nail in the historic coffin as the top dog pony car of its day - despite being a year late. Instead of under delivering the car was underrated, sold as 390HP as advertised but laying down 390whp ranges stock on a dyno. The comfort focused IRS hampered some drag times but there have been some impressive numbers thrown down dead stock outside of MotorWeek. By 2004 it got a second cylinder head revision with higher thread count on the spark plugs and lower, final production numbers.
If you've made it this far, you can delve into my half ass part 2 vs a Mach1. I'm a big Mach1 fan but I can effectively say why the 'crossbreeding' wasn't going to happen.
A REAL treat would've been a 10:1 aluminum forged piston setup with the Cobra rods and a BUILT 3650 but that didn't really exist then. I believe its both the transmission option and heritage that saw the Mach1 play out as it did. I never thought it was any question that the Mach1 WASN'T supposed to be the drag racer; the real misnomer being the Terminator for the roadcourse. The Mach1 saves a considerable amount of weight being between the block, trans and SRA - appx 320lbs or so before the non introduction of the blower and its related cooling heft. I believe this was an effort to run out the inventory on leftover 99/01 Cobra engine blocks. They received the same heads as the Terminator.
The extra kicker here is that the Mach1 was offered in an automatic. Thus, a second transmission not holding up to the power. The automatic Mach1s also got a CAST, GT style crank and a lowered redline accordingly - not for crank strength but for trans tuning. The cast crank actually offsets the auto power sapping due to it being around 18lbs lighter.
If the Cobra were to get the Mach1 powerplant, it would effectively become a slightly improved version of the 01 Cobra and not much else. Yes, the Mach makes a LITTLE more power but what made them stand out was the weight difference.
NOW.
I currently own an SRA swapped 2003 Cobra that's more or less setup to go straight. It does an EXCELLENT job of that on top of just being a legit street car.
I have built a lightweight, Mach1 based SRA 98 cobra setup for twisties and street driving. It used a 2003 Mach1 longblock, a cast auto / GT crank, a 14lb aluminum flywheel, 3v windage, canton pan, gt500 oiling, 98 Cobra intake cams in the C heads, a ported 01 cobra lower and cnc billet adapted 98 cobra upper with a built T45 behind it. The car was ALOT of fun. It made high 340s to the tire on a dynojet which isn't bad at all. Aftermarket cams would've seen 380 and more compression a touch over 400. THAT is what id want in my road race Cobra. It revved IMMEDIATELY with that non factory configured setup. It also addressed the oiling issues with drainback and windage that would've killed every Mach1 based Cobra you stuck on a roadcourse.
I know because I've experienced that first hand... becaaause
I also owned an AIX prepped 1997 Cobra that I used to open track with a strung up 4v. They eat bearings until that is addressed. I sold it with a fresh reman engine and a double diamond trapdoor oil pan.
TLDR - It was never a boomer movement problem. It was a Ford fallacy of engineering, an unintended expectation of its last of the breed New Edge Cobras and continuation of heritage (if anything Boomer) in the Mach1.
* The S197 is the true boomer beacon if we making that argument
* Colleti left after 2004 and the next Gen GT500s went back to powdered rods and windowed blocks. This continued until 2014, sealing the legendary powerhouse 03-04 status for a very long time.
* The Terminator is a straight up giggle machine with an SRA and upgraded support system. Its for sure a meet your heroes car even tuned up on the factory hEaton. I want to early KB It for the sound but its just a riot as is.
* The 02 WS6 is still worth driving today... I kinda have a stable of bucket list, history rich early 2000s toys.
Oh yeah! Thomas is back AND he’s itching for a fight!
(Quickly listens to The Prodigy’s “Breathe”, Tool’s “Aenima”, and the entirety of side 1 of “Captain and Tennille’s Greatest Hits” to get psyched up for online battle)
"Ok, here we go. I'll try not to get sidetracked or come off as argumentative or anything of the like. I've quite a bit of firsthand experience here so its just summation of thought or explanatory to reason."
WHAT? You're going to be...civil? Oh geeze...lol.
Okay, that works as well.
1. "The factory boost threshold is the correct 'limit' here and cars are outfitted JUST enough to make that work."
This is probably the most important sentence out of the entire first section, soooo many folks need to have this tattooed backwards on their forehead so that when they see their face in a mirror, that's the first thing that shows up.
"Fact of the matter is that most all factory superchargers are nearly undersized for the application - which includes both the GT500 trinity setups, the LSA and very much the M112 Eaton found on the 03-04 Cobra."
Oddly enough, I'm going to come across like a "get off my lawn!" type, but this is both on the OEM and the customers who buy these cars, I'm a bit clueless as to why anyone actually thinks they need a 350hp-and-above street car, and I'm thinking that the Terminator needlessly opened the doors for these shenanigans.
Beyond that, I'm going to suggest that the idea was, okay, fine, we'll give you a supercharger, but we're doing it entirely on our terms and hope you don't notice that we've throttled how far you'll be able to modify these engines by dint of blower case alone.
"While there is argumentative wiggle room, this all goes away on a racetrack - see C7Zs going into limp mode."
There are times when I wonder if the supercharged cars of this earlier era weren't more intended for the same folks in the Terminator-buying demographic, as there appeared to be a considerable amount of engineering half-assing in regards to keeping IAT's at an acceptable temperature.
"The massive blowers topping the new GT500 / GTD, the giant turbos hung off the C8Zr1. While they still require a surmountable amount of airflow and cooling, they can sustain without meltdown unlike trying to turn up the boost in a lesser displacement housing."
I think of these cars as being something of a second generation of supercharged cars, in that overall vehicle engineering finally caught up with the idea of forced induction, meaning, you can actually go more than two laps without being in danger of melting something.
"This is why vehicles like an intercooled Miata with an M45 or M60 can still get by on the track with so little - the blower to engine ratio is much greater."
I'll be honest with you, I rarely if at all hear of any IAT issues with supercharged Miata engines, unless someone's tried to go smaller with the driven pulley/larger with the drive pulley, or they've done something terrible with the tune.
"An often unspoken shortfall is the stresses and side / vertical loading that becomes applied to the crankshaft in a non turbo application. This doubles down when you don't have a "caged" or trapped lower pulley design. Pulling apart an engine as such you will see a drastic increase in bearing wear on the top side of the mains, focused closer to the front of the engine. This becomes exponential with boost levels and the draw to turn a compressor."
In regards to roots-driven blowers/screw compressors, one other issue is that of the belt drive itself, and more specifically the issue of letting off the gas suddenly at the end of the dragstrip or at the end of a long straight: The supercharger itself has a comparable level of rotating inertia that's in direct competition with the crankshaft, especially when you let off the gas suddenly, the RPM drops, and the supercharger rotors have their own idea as to when they need to be slowing down, thank you very much.
This is also why one needs to upgrade a few additional parts (forged steel crank and the harmonic balancer, for example), as the rotors (especially on KB and Whipple units heading North of 1.5L-2.0L of displacement) are still going several thousand RPM+, and they literally try to kick crankshaft speed back up to match via the belt drive.
Since the engine is doing its thing, something has to give, and it's usually the belt tensioner or the crank snout (this is why there was so much belt tensioner development with Terminators, I've seen stock ones chucked off after owners tossed smaller blower pulleys on).
Listen to a Hellcat when someone's dry-revving it, the IAC function/TB very slooooowly lowers the engine RPM so it's not breaking anything in the accessory belt drive.
"NA wins on a track setting in most cases."
Yes, due to heat issues, or factory supercharged cars being reeeeally heavy to hold up to 800hp, you can only flirt with physics for so long.
(Continued but I don't know where this is going to come out in the list below, this is "Part 2")
2. "Iron Fist, Lead Foot" was in the bookshelf a decade ago, no idea where it is now.
"I'm not sure how familiar you are overall with the Cobra program, but the reason you feel it might be outdated at launch is because it really was both a late product to the table and due to a huge internal failure that begins with the 1999 Cobra Mustang."
To me, anyway, the Terminator engine itself was an antique before it ever showed up at dealerships, for three reasons:
1. It's 700 pounds over the nose of the worst possible car to be bolted into, the SN95. That's 385-series 429/460 engine territory, the all-cast-iron version.
2. Ford is infamous for half-assing their engineering, and for me, given how many times Ford has been bit in the ass because of this (familiar with the old Jerry Mod and the 4R70W?), they really should have embraced some solid form of VVT or VTEC or something similar by this point (and not the crappy 3-valve version which was only an emissions thing) instead of just casually tossing a blower at the 4.6 DOHC.
3. The 4.6 was already long in the tooth, the first year of its use was 1991, I used to know an old machine shop owner who had one of the early prototype 2 valve engines up until several years ago (the shop burned down, he had all kinds of fascinating mod motor parts, several mark 8's, and also supposedly had a set of prototype A heads buried somewhere among what was left of the shop), long and short of it, it was late 1980's horsepower and 1990's technology that was outdated fairly quickly in the torque and HP department.
"The 99 was supposed to be the original siren song, retaining an aluminum block, naturally aspirated and high revving with a new IRS out back. Using the lighter T45, 5 speed transmission. In theory this should have checked off most of your boxes. The reality fell furthest from that possible. Rated at 320HP it underdelivered by ALOT, showing most made closer to 260-270HP and sparking a giant lawsuit."
Ah, yes, the intake manifold fiasco. At one point I knew two or three '99 Cobra owners who refused to get the replacement intakes, a few more were converted and the owners swore that the car became slower with the newer intake.
Aside from the intake manifold fiasco, the few '99 Cobras I've driven felt like the best out of the lot, with the best-shifting 5-speeds in the T45. I'm a bit puzzled with the T45, Kinsler (I think that was the name) Transmission utilized a hell of a lot of T45 transmissions with a bizarre business plan that essentially came up with a new endplate, allowing for different bellhousings to be bolted on and the T45 to be bolted behind different engines.
I drove one car with it, shifted really well.
"The older B head Cobras (96-98) were actually designed for extreme rpm and or boost with their port design. Nevertheless, with a deep gear, you the 96-98 cars could run with the LS."
The B heads were a favorite of old John Veermeersch (if that's the correct spelling, I think he ran Pro-M and related), who built some insane boosted mod motors, IIRC, he built one of the first mod motors to hit 1500hp, and I think it was using those heads and a filled Teksid block.
In addition, my minimum gear for any 1996-1998 Cobra was at least a 4.10, but that was also the maximum streetable gear, 1st gear was already practically gone with that set, with 4.56's I just bypassed it entirely.
"The T45 was not robust enough and would break 3-4 shift forks, the IRS was bunk and axle breaking as it was not the later 28 spline and updated carrier units. I could go on, but you get the idea. Ford had shot themselves in the foot."
A. Oddly enough, it didn't take much to fix the T45, just updated forks, although an updated input shaft also wouldn't have hurt.
B. 1999 was 28 spline axles, 2001 went to 31 spline units (IIRC)
"The SVT team launched the R. It really is a decent car for the most part - I've had the pleasure of driving them, but was obviously quite one-off and cost prohibitive. Placing the R well above Corvette pricing and launching / competing with the new C5Z which outperformed it for cheaper."
Great car, the R. It's a pity that it was eclipsed by most everything around it simply because of sheer numbers, I only ran across a few R's that were actually beat on as God intended, the rest went into garages.
"In 2001 the Cobra was re-released. This is the closest version to a Mach1 style example - using revised C heads, a stronger 3650 Tremec and an IRS with 28 spline axles. It retained the 320HP moniker which followed the fbodies. It was faster, but still not quite enough - scaling in around 140lbs more than the 96-98 cobras and still dealing with traction issues. Ford was still getting rocked in testing. F cars now got factory LS6 intakes, revised 241 heads and different camshafts / computers. Their T56 was unmatched comparatively."
I get the feeling that Ford was just grasping for straws at this point, and if anything, it seems like they were arranging deck chairs on the SN95 Titanic, in the end, underneath the swanky body of the Pyramid-based-styling-cues 1999-2004 Mustang (I still have a 2000 V6 vert in the driveway, it's really a crap car that didn't age well), it was still essentially a 1979 Fox body Mustang underneath (Ford never really changed the floor pan from 1993 to 1994, they saved somewhere around thirty million dollars IIRC by skipping that part), and the chassis was fairly terrible at higher HP levels.
See also: It's minor quibbling, but the LS1 version of the T56 from GM had switched to Mexico to be built there, and were nowhere near as stout as the older 1993-1997 LT1 T56's.
More reviews like this please. This is the kind of content that only you can provide. I don't have race six figure car money, but I like to dream.
Re simracing, it looks like the Ginetta eSeries is on some proprietary tweaked Assetto Corsa that's probably private. The iracing Radical series has people to race every hour nearly round the clock.
Thanks for a nice race car review Jack. Although most of us will only see this type of car occasionally and probably never drive one, reviews like yours help make them feel more real and approachable...so it's appreciated!
For those with less dosh, plenty of great Jack-approved sporting cars available at the gambling, ahh, bidding sites this week:
Jacks favorite 7:
https://bringatrailer.com/listing/2001-superformance-s1-3/
Quality South African engineering:
https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3pmLlv1W/2009-rossion-q1
Also Jack did you do that article about all of these kit cars ? I know it was in the hopper. About six months ago 😝
I'll do a brief piece about it for tomorrow.
Both of these cars are astounding pieces of dogshit that are dangerous as hell. Here's the comment I just left on the S1:
I owned #45 and put more than 10,000 miles on it, including two autocross seasons and nine trackdays. I have an important caveat to share with any potential buyer, but first:
* Room: This car has more room than any other Seven clone including the Caterham SV.
* Engine: Most of these have been retuned and revamped since they were new. If not, expect to do something because the stock install done by Dynamic and a couple other dealers struggled to break 110hp. I had a prep-track 14.7@92 on the stock engine, which is not great.
* Common problems: The fender supports are weak. The fenders crack. The whole electrical system will keep you guessing. The differential and axle are from a South African market Hilux and in this application you can expect to do frequent maintenance and fillup. The headlights are a suggestion. The roll hoops are sized for Danny DeVito. You will need to do a full nut and bolt underneath and up top every year at a minimum. The transmission does not shift well when it's hot, and in some weather the center tunnel can burn you.
* The top is an absolute piece of junk. The doors are even worse.
* Handling is pretty good, with the major caveat to be listed below. Do not expect to match a Caterham or WCM in terms of raw cornering potential. The truck rear axle and relentless cost-cutting throughout will ensure you don't.
Alright, now the big thing. I've driven about 430 days on track in everything from a 2015 Camry to a full McLaren GT3 factory race car. The Superformance S1 is the only car I've ever driven that had a frame failure at speed. The Mumford links on these break.
I was the first one to experience, because I put more miles on my car than anyone else, but I was not the last.
https://www.facebook.com/100057685718754/posts/its-called-a-mumford-linkage-solid-axle-superformance-s1-its-broken-where-it-att/10159600361440022/
This can and will get you killed on track, in certain situations. I had a very long discussion with the late Dean Rosen about it; he sent me to Superformance in South Africa. And what they told me was:
DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES PUT DOT-R TIRES ON THIS CAR.
Now, keep in mind that this happened in the year 2001. So that means I was running a Kumho V700. Do you know how a V700 compared to a modern R-compound? It's not close. Do you know how a V700 compares to a modern ****200tw****? It's not close.
Therefore, take the advice of someone who went suddenly backwards at Mosport in Turn Two, and don't run anything stickier than a modern all-season.
Selling mine was the best decision I ever made. GLWS.
at least on the upside its ugly
It is. It is FUUUKIN ugly. But I will tell you this: girls liked it.
even with that ringing endorsement i still want nothing to do with one
a real caterham 7 with the correct engine/drivetrain/bodywork however
"The Superformance S1 is the only car I've ever driven that had a frame failure at speed. And given how low-powered this car is, I should probably mention that my nickname for this car was 'Ralph Nader', as it was literally unsafe at any speed."
"...and don't run anything stickier than a modern all-season."
Woooo hooo, I've finally got a use for those 40-year-old Goodyear Vector tires that have been sitting in my shed all this time.
Fun side note, I remember my dad rushing down to the tire shop to buy a set of these for a 1986 F150 he bought/finagled new off the lot, and during the first huge rainstorm he went to turn left into a Marlow, Oklahoma convenience store without really hitting the brakes, I said "slow down!", he said, "these are the best rain tires in the world!", and then someone suddenly whipped out in front of him, he hit the brakes, the truck slid on those best rain tires in the world some 80 or 90 feet, and then he drilled a curb.
"The top is an absolute piece of junk. The doors are even worse. I don't know if there are any words left in the English language to describe how terrible the rest of the car is in comparison."
Why is your comment highlighted yellow if it's not a bid?
This seems to be a direct competitor to the Cayman GT4 RS. By competitor I mean similar cost, and, I assume, similar performance (GT4 RS has almost 500hp). Although the Cayman is street legal and will impress Porsche people. Seems like a large market exists for these cars even though $220k is a lot of money, the hardest part is probably access to a track and time to spend there.
Gt4rs is streetable, but to really work on track seems like you're going to be speeding another 30k on suspension. The comparison might be to a 350K GT4rs clubsport.
The faster you go, the bigger the hit when you go off almost always on a corner, at some point you want properly built track car with crash protection. Plus a track car is far more easily repairable.
Well ok, I know someone tracking a stock GT4 RS regularly so my point is there is a market for $220k “track vehicles”, and this Ginetta is an interesting option.
But you’d need a trailer and tow vehicle for the ginetta and no possibility of road use
You’d be surprised how much $$ people spend on track vehicles. On one hand there can be a sub 20k e36 bmw which is well developed and pretty quick, on the oter some experian mediocre drivers showing up regularly in +500k cars
There’s a market
Manthey Racing make their living out of people that think like this. They'll gladly sell (and fit) you the brakes, little but nontrivially important aero upgrades and wheels to make your GT4RS actually do what Porsche promised you it'd do. And you get to keep your factory warranty.
For 50k manthey, by then the gt4rs will be at gt3 money and still not quite the same spec
Yeah gt4rs is part of a long line of cars with “track” marketing that maybe exceeds the reality.
Still it’s pretty good stock for a road car, certainly more honed and developed than what other manufacturers offer.
Still find one without 50k worth of worthless options. Which says much about the dealers and who is ordering them
Or you can buy an older cayman someone spent 150k + on to turn into a track machine for 80kamy choices for those with big checkbooks
Some typos in last sentence make it confusing but yeah.
The big thing (for me) is the warranty you get to keep. I would not want to run a modern Porsche (by that I mean anything watercooled) without Porsche standing behind it. Being a frequent Nürburgring enjoyer, I talk to the Manthey team frequently, you'd not believe how often do these cars break parts, and expensive parts at that. Two years ago a taxi 911 GT2 RS MR (real type) chucked its gearbox. It was probably the well-known problem of metal shavings fouling the shift fork magnets because we were able to push the car out of the car park and it eventually 'found' a gear and limped to Manthey. They didn't bother rebuilding the trans, just put a new one in it, because it was still in warranty.
This is why I don't understand why "Mr JWW" brought his 911, that he binned a few months ago, back to the Ring and continued to push it. With the unofficial rebuild he lost the factory warranty. I don't get why not just sell the car at a loss, and buy a new one if he really wants to drive a low-7 lap. Maybe it's good for youtube views but I don't think they pay well enough to buy a new GT2.
sounds awful
youd think that car and that track would be something porsche would build for
What does this car actually look like?
Between the black paint, the racing livery and the rainy day, I THINK I'm seeing an FD but I can't be sure.
My mind was thinking stretched RX8 with a touch of 370Z.
It's smaller than it looks. Just a bit bigger than, say, an Exige.
A testament to how compact the LS is. The lower nose also says Miata NC2.
My initial thought was "wow, it's small".
It might also explain the choice of engine in regards to GM pushrod power, depending on who you talk to, a Ford Coyote engine would be an improvement, but easier packaging of the LS goes right out the window.
A Coyote would be more of a pleasure to drive, but the parts and service infrastructure isn't close.
There's also the lure of a lower-revving engine that also doesn't break the bank to maintain from a valvetrain perspective...
which would be great especially in 24h endurance applications
like the viper
Is a coyote not a lot heavier not to mention physically bigger.
It's fairly close in weight, oddly enough. The problem is that while this engine is fairly popular in F150's and Mustangs, that's the only thing it's really installed in, as there are other engines in Ford's lineup to compete with the 5.0 Coyote, such as the 2.7 and 3.5 Egoboost engines, so they're nowhere near as prevalent as the 6.0 and 6.2 GM engines, which are in practically frickin' everything in their truck and full-size SUV lineup.
And yes, the Coyote doesn't lend itself well to swaps into smaller vehicles, while it's not very long in flywheel-to-balancer length, it's much shorter than the old 5.0 and 5.8 pushrod V8's, oddly enough, the 6.8 Triton V10 is almost the exact same length as the 5.0 and 5.8, although it fills in a lot of areas where there are normally gaps with the 5.0 and 5.8.
Where the Coyote makes up for it, however, is the width and height of the engine, it's stupid-wide by stupid-tall.
But compared the Gm engines its a rever which imo is a big big plus. I knew it was big but always thought it was significantly heavier than the gm 6.2.
I also always thought the 302 was infinitely superior to the Gm lumps. That 302 had a comparatively great rod ratio and was internally balanced, always fun to wind one out.
I don't know if seeing it in:
1. Better light
2. Not rainy conditions
will help the looks department, none of the Ginetta product line really stands out from a looks perspective, it's all sort of generic supercar, which is perfectly fine, given what it's used for, you don't need knockout styling to go fast.
" Unlike McLaren’s GT4, this isn’t a converted supercar with the turbo wick turned down to “sleepytime”;" this sums up my 570 GT4 experience in one sentence, well that and nannied so that coming off the apex the right foot is just a suggestion to the computer.
Hired gun Freind raced a 6 cyl ginetta and he was quicker than said 570 Gt4 because the nannies wouldn't let him drive in the Macca. Hes quicker than both ina worked 20 yo lotus exige carrying 200lbs of mandatory ballast at LRP. Nothing like a swb with all the mass centered.
Yeah wings and real aero, ask me about spinning a praga.
I wonder how the gineta compares toa Cayman GT4 Rs club sport which all the "gentlemen" racers and trackers seem to prefer. these days.
In any event seems like a great car with many virtues, but that motor, robust as it may be, hp as it may have is a turn off. Not that i have anything against a pushrod v8, but those 6.2 really don't like to rev and don't feel good doing it. Plus yeah 250K, but then a lesser car will escalate up there over time as you develop it anyway. Way less than the Dallara but light and mid engine is its own school. Still as you point out, with age something a bit more comfy lol.
"I wonder how the gineta compares toa Cayman GT4 Rs club sport which all the "gentlemen" racers and trackers seem to prefer. these days"
Square tires and 50/50 balance make it much more of a driver's car IMO, and one you can push harder in a race.
The Dallara however is manifestly more serious than both this and the Cayman.
I was excited about the dallara when it came out and seemed to be in the low 200s. But the “track” version here you wrote about, I looked at their site and it was more like 400k.
Working with someone on maybe restarting g lotus Elise prod but asa component car roller so it would weigh less and a street version witha Honda ctr motor. Then one may do something like the 211 for track guys 1400lbs. The appeal here is almost Miata running cost and requirements ie fluids pads and tires for a car that in practiced hands can hit that 2 min mark at the Glenn. So way off a radical pace but really quick for a small 4 cyl durable car.
Yeah I’d love a dallara. fuck how does one make more no care vaporizeable $. The lottery seems not to be working out
"Working with someone on maybe restarting g lotus Elise prod..."
Do you mean that you're working on this? I REALLY hope so. Knowing nothing about Caterham's business side, I was surprised they didn't jump on the Elise tooling fire sale some years back.
Yes working with someone on it. There was no Elsie tooling fire sale as lotus was too stupid and just wanted to kill their iconic car so they could go ev kumbaya.
The "new" Elise would be a roller, ie shipped to USA sans engine and engine installed here in theory by a third party. It would cost 100k and need to sell globally in the hundreds of untis 2-300.
But imagine an Elsie with a 400hp honda turbo motor, or a very worked na version of the Toyota motor that always came in an elise. Either way without airbags and some other items it would weight 1-200lbs less than the last Elises.
What do you think.
Wow, great news. I read they were searching for a buyer but that was probably just speculation.
I'd like to think 200/yr is manageable. The only real competition to your "new" Elise is an old Elise with upgrades (incl. the S1 now that they can cross the Atlantic). Those are easily $70k -- plus time and hassle -- so $100k doesn't seem too steep to me for the next best thing to a Stradale.
Godspeed. I'll be looking for updates.
Jack, respectfully, 220K for a car? That, for most of us, doesn't represent just a "substantial purchase," it represents a divorce and loss of wife, home and family!
Do not, I repeat DO NOT get your wife into cars/motorsports.
My wife now has a C5Z, Cayman S, MR2 Spyder, an Escalade to tow with, and she's looking for another trailer.
Yeah, she's happy, I'm happy, but it's cost me a ton!
Thankfully it's mostly autocross.
Lakehouse priority one, if really load of burnable cash, some sort of wakesurf boat. Centurion? Nautique? I can't figure who makes the best and they all seem identical
Bruuuutal.
Is there room for a separate in law suite or ideally a fully separate carriage house ?
I don’t get the second house thing. One money pit is enough.
The dryer has just stopped competing its cycle to dry. Not sure if it’s a sensor or what, but I can’t imagine having a second set of stuff to maintain in a second home. Don’t get me started on the LEDs in the garage. I thought LEDs were the panacea. After 6 years I’ve replaced almost all 10 of them. An an electrician friend of mine said they were the good brand and not Home Depot crap too.
Many smart people have this attitude—easier to rent!
Only problem is in certain zip codes there is simply nothing ideal to rent. If you want to vacation at the elite mountain West lakes you’re stuck in the 80s or overpaying for someone else’s perverse LED-blasted horrorshow.
If you’re really smart and stay out of those zip codes you are a wise man and good to go.
"someone else’s perverse LED-blasted horrorshow"
That's usually how most first-time visitors describe my home.
Boats and houses are great, but nothing pulls the mind and imagination like a car, nothing will spool up your brain and express your 17 yo slef like being on track, maybe some young side chick but thats way to expensive complex and wont last. my wifre knows when my mind wanders or Im not around, cars are involved, thats a good compromise. But yeah to just chill a boat is the way to go.
oh oh my.
Yeah, that was my response as well.
"an Escalade to tow with"
god that is so pimp
It really is. A nice 2006 with only 60k on it, in some horrible emerald green color. It's magnificent.
"Welcome to FLEX CITY"
Toast your success! Please put a K-series in the MR2 and let us know how it goes
love my wife, but I really cherish going off tot he track with my buddies for a few days. Its like schools out for adults.
A Good life is not a zero sum game
I'd like to address this Louis ;
I was not going to bail on my 15 year marriage but wasn't overly happy either .
_SHE_ decided the grass was greener elsewhere and asked me for a divorce .
Because the market was in the toilet and the house was seriously underwater she signed off (Quit claimed) on it and I helped her buy another elsewhere .
She thought she was so very clever telling me " ! and you can KEEP all your beloved cars, Motocycles and trucks !" .
All in all I know she made the right choice for me =8-) .
_MY_ priorities are all in good order =8-) .
-Nate
Got it, amigo and I get it.
Friends of mine used to say that the one thing a wife/girl friend should never say is, "It's either me or that bike."
I simply cannot understand anyone staying in this situation .
My ex wife never even thought about no Motocyles, in the late 1980's I bought a used Kawasaki police Motocycle at the city auction, rode it home and was washing it when she came out and said "nice bike, where do _I_ sit ? " .
At this point she'd not cared to ride with me in close to ten years so I said "it's a _solo_ honey, now you don't have to worry about me riding random women" .
She replied "! you are NOT ALLOWED to have a Motocycle upon which I cannot ride !".
Go figure. right ? My Sweet doesn't like to ride but when I was stuck in that wheelchair saw me looking at bikes on the computer and said If you want another Motocycle I think you've earned it " .
-Nate
My wife spent too much time in ER departments where squashed street bike guys were constantly being wheeled in to get excited about my owning street bikes.
I got tired of dodging texting-while-driving types while on street bikes.
We romantically met in the middle with me heroically piloting at least a 4000-pound car.
Dig it .
My third sister was an Ultrasound Tech when it was new and worked in the Washington, D.C. hospital's ER .
Most nurses and paramedics have stomach twisting stories .
I fear the other folks on their cellphones or whatever too but as it turns, I _must_ ride, I don't really have a choice as long as I can .
-Nate
Well put.
Picking the bike. Thank u, next.
It's interesting to read about,
to compare to it's real competitors (a ~220k Huracan),
To think about as a toy (more actual use than a Huracan? When can you flatfloot a Huracan other than a trackday... at which you'd rather be driving this?)
---and many of Jack's readers have this kind of scratch.
They don't comment much, though (part of how they got all that $$$)
I love fast strong cars, but not actually racing them, fastest cars Ive driven are a factory prototype Viper and my stock c5, but I like driving wifes Mazda Miata nc more…
Just for Shiggles, some time try driving a slow car as rapidly as you find prudent .
It's always fun and often exhilarating and will improve your driving skills more than you might think .
Oddly enough I find it safer, I have no doubt I'd wad an actual fast car and everyone _thinks_ I drive fast when I don't in fact .
-Nate
BTW ;
Driving slower vehicles rapidly will also teach you the importance of tires pressures and tailoring them to suit your needs of traction and longer life .
-Nate
The old adage that its better to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow is truth.
It also helps avoid the pain and embarrassment of wadding something special .
After my last near death Motocycle crash (the one where I was at fault) I was in Beverly Hills to see my lawyer and some kid in a shiny red Ferrari convertible went past me at maybe 30 MPH in first gear, the engine howling in protest at 10,000 RPM or so, the kid looking around to see who was looking at him making such a ruckus .
-Nate
IMO, it’s not just driving a slow car fast. The real fun is driving a slow car fast with a complete lack of mechanical sympathy.
I can't do that, I have some sort of connection with Motor Vehicles I've had since I can remember, I dislike abusing machinery, prolly why/how I can get away with driving the jalopies I do so hard, far and wide .
-Nate
No other auto journo could’ve provided that context. Well done, and I suspect precisely what someone who is shopping for those would appreciate. I know it’s a limited audience, but more race platform reviews, please! These are the things I lust after… if I had that kind of money to spend, I’d do so on something that had usable potential rather than a street car cosplaying as a racer.
It can be difficult getting race car reviews because most autowriters aren't comfortable in that sort of vehicle and/or they damage them quite a bit... like when Kim Wolfkill put the NSX GT3 off at the press preview and ruined one of two noses they had in all of North America.
I recall being invited out with a few folks at PIR (Portland International Raceway) to perhaps try out some of their equipment (I had been working on a few of their cars during my comedically-disastrous run at NASCAR writing) during something of a test and tune session for them, my head was jammed into the roof of every car that was out there, it ended up with my visit being an unintentional comedy routine and I didn't even get to make a lap.
This was some years after a JROTC visit to an air force base during another comedic run at another potential career, with my unit "officer" dragging me around and stuffing me into aircraft seats that I clearly didn't fit in because he thought it was funny, the F15E ejection seat generating the most laughs because the hoop section up top that's supposed to go over your shoulders was hitting me mid-shoulder blade.
The track visit was a bit painful on the inside, but nothing like the AFB visit where I discovered that the only thing I fit in the pilot seat of was one of their cargo aircraft, with the JROTC officer saying, "it's not all bad, son, the air force needs cargo pilots too!".
Sigh.
You should try my Neon. I have about three inches of headroom in it.
That is something I find fascinating about the odd car or two, cars you would think you'd have no trouble fitting into are hideous with headroom, and then there are some cars which have headroom, but like my 2005 G35 Sport coupe, my left shoulder rests against the door panel. It's okay by myself in the car, but I get a bit claustrophobic when the wife is in it with me...which is probably why it's now her driver and not mine.
I do not know why there is so much room in a 1969 Datsun 510, but it is quite impressive.
I think I have something of an acid reflux reaction to anything with 4-lug wheels, regardless of how amazing it might be.
I well remember my first day at skippy school, not being able to keep up in a neon powered single seater with he instructor who was in an actual neon.
by day two it was no contest. Then we did lead follow in same single seaters and the gap was massive. A few mionths later came wings and slicks.
but I still remember seeing someone in a mazda 3 going into he bustop so fast that I couldn't believe it, truly in the presence of greatness, it was a art in motion, so smooth. . Those are the times you slow down and follow for a few laps regardless of how quick your car may be, just to learn.
Agreed. Trusted source for me because he is honest in his reviews. Tough gig. Most mfg. want anything but an honest opinion on their product. If you've made something good, suitable for purpose, then you shouldn't be hesitant of an honest opinion. Not enough truth tellers around today. I'll always give more weight to Jack's and Sam Smiths comments not only for their experience and expertise but for the proven guts to say what they really think.
Amen to that.
The 296 has gold plated resale?
I daydream about a hardcore 2500lb NA corvette, I suppose they already have it covered.
Compared to a race car it does...
There are some insanely good bargains out there here of late, some of them suddenly popping up in the PA area after Pittrace unceremoniously closed.
296 like the sf90 proves that hybrid exotics don't have such great resale. As jack says below, but compared to race cars they do.
Jack, we didn't tell you, but there were bets if you were gonna spin it or not.
I looped my PR6 once in a rain race back in 2023. Can't recall another on track spin over the past 25 years. Hope you bet my way!
I didn't have to pay for my lunch. ;)
FWIW ;
Looping is completely different from spinning, I don't recommend either .
-Nate
Good on you, i seem to spin it once per decade. The cause is always the same, overconfidence.
The secret to racing a car with a $195,000 replacement cost when you work part-time as a writer: don't be confident :)
there is a fine line between confident over confident and not in the game.
my secret is having a very good friend with a home Bodyshop who does it for the cause, and a personal ability to track down parts that aren't really produced. Last time i had to find NLA brake ducts in austra. there is so much to be said for acar supported by the manufacturer and with parts in stock that are easily replaceable. Sounds like Ginetta on to something there.
3 d printing is changing the game at least for little bits.
I should have guessed you're a Scorpio Jack .
That looks like fearsome, gully washer rain, glad we almost never get that nor any appreciable rain .
Looks more like a steering yoke than steering wheel .
A nice review overall, it *almost* makes me want to drive one just to see .
-Nate
Thank you for including a review for me!
That said...this is on BAT with NO RESERVE and I am very tempted to skip out on a proper farm truck and put this in my barn instead (where it will sit, unused except for car shows and illicit street use, until my nine year old graduates high school):
https://bringatrailer.com/listing/1986-dodge-omni-8/
It's always a good time to buy a fun car like this .
I bet you'd discover you're streeting it more than you thought .
-Nate
WHOA.
That would make some pace at Waterford. Once you fixed all the stuff they haven't quite disclosed (I'm guessing.)
Wow.
Update: Sold (not to me) for $6500 today. If it's not hiding any gremlins I'd say that's a screaming deal.
I wish I had seen this earlier.
That looks amazing, and fun!
If I have a 6'4" bike enthusiast friend who track days* a 2014 Shelby GT500 with a half cage, massive wing and dams and splitters, and what I believe is its third complete suspension overhaul by one of those Mustang Racing Engineering Firms... He would be the precise demographic for this vehicle, wouldn't he? If he gets rid of the ridiculous Raptor R he just bought, that would free up a garage slot for the Ginetta. 🤔
*You've made me realize I don't know if he does wheel-to-wheel racing or "just" track days.
This is EXACTLY what he wants.
At the very least, I'd want to get away from track-day running a car with a roots-blown supercharger generating spectacular, high-score-level IAT temps and adding considerable weight over the nose.
surely theres some kind of a2w intercooler available no?
1. Guys with supercharged engines that have half the displacement (someone mentioned a supercharged Lotus elsewhere in here), not so much of a problem (but it's still a problem), but when we're getting into monster-level blowers like you'd find on that Shelby 5.4 DOHC, and also GM's 6.2 LSA cars, then you're running into severe heat soak issues where you're having to get rid of an insane amount of heat and there's not a lot of frontal area on the car in which to run enough of a heat exchanger.
If you want to see a good idea of what it takes just to get rid of forced induction heat soak in a race car with only 500hp, this is what a recent-ish BMW M8 GTE twin turbo 4.4L V8 looks like under the hood, most of what's there is heat exchanger and ducting:
https://www.bmwblog.com/2018/01/29/bmw-m8-gte-stripped-pure-mechanical-artwork/
It's not impossible to get rid of all that heat, it's just that with the bigger engines, there's so much to get rid of, and not a lot of room in which to get rid of it, to the point where most businesses that build or work on track cars strongly recommend the "running while screaming" escape away from forced induction if at all possible, simply from a heat management perspective.
2. On a side note, the much-vaunted 2003-2004 Ford Mustang Cobra Terminator was legendary to a lot of people, but it sure looked like it was an already-obsolete, laughably-mismatched Boomer dragstrip toy to me, in that you couldn't go around a road course more than a lap or two (and even then that was pushing it) before the Eaton compressed space heater on top of the engine pushed IAT's to stratospheric highs and into PCM limp mode.
Yeah, great idea, combine a dragstrip-only engine with a clunky-ish 6-speed manual and an independent rear suspension setup that went into wheelhop even if you were merely looking at it from across a parking lot, with the IRS being yanked and tossed in favor of a straight axle rear end, often within minutes of bringing it home from the dealership.
What cracks me up about Ford in 2003-2004 and their two top-tier Mustangs in the Cobra Terminator and the Mach 1, the Mach 1 chassis was actually perfect for the Terminator engine, and the Mach 1's amazing N/A, all-aluminum 4.6 DOHC engine (waaaay underrated btw) would have been perfect in the IRS-equipped Cobra flagship of the fleet, a Cobra that would have been perfect for road course duty, unlike the 700-pound lump of ancient cast iron block (Ford thoughtfully shitcanned the capable Teksid block after the 1999 model year), but even then, the lump on top of the engine didn't help anything.
But that Terminator engine in the Mach 1 would have been an amazing factory drag car. However, Boomers gotta Boomer, so we got two happily-mismatched cars forevermore.
A further aside: GM isn't a stranger to heat-soak-inspired limp modes from supercharged vehicles, either.
3. Oddly enough, I'm more of an air-to-air guy, or liquid-to-air, once again, most racing types I'm familiar with stay away from air-to-liquid or liquid-to-liquid cooler setups, those work somewhat-better in OEM settings, but whatever you're trying to cool off always remains at the same temp as the liquid that's being used to cool off whatever charge, regardless of whether or not the original piece that needs cooling is designed to run at a cooler operating temp than the engine coolant is normally operating at.
Placeholding to write a small novel in response when I’ve time later.
Bless you.
looking forward to it
"most businesses that build or work on track cars strongly recommend the "running while screaming" escape away from forced induction if at all possible, simply from a heat management perspective"
absolutely agree
na engines are lighter and easier to package as well as needing nowhere near the care and feeding required of forced induction engines like you mentioned
basically why im keeping the miata natually aspirated
"However, Boomers gotta Boomer, so we got two happily-mismatched cars forevermore"
when you spell it out like that the engine mismatch was incredibly stupid
""However, Boomers gotta Boomer, so we got two happily-mismatched cars forevermore"
when you spell it out like that the engine mismatch was incredibly stupid"
I don't know if it was necessarily stupid, it was simply very...Boomer. From an intended-use perspective, my version of "how things should have been" makes a hell of a lot more sense, but then when you put on Boomer beer goggles, try explaining to the most Boomerrific of Boomers when the most powerful car in the Mustang lineup isn't the option package king of the fleet and doesn't have the word "Cobra" on the rear bumper cover, but that the Mach 1 Terminator would actually work better on a dragstrip right out of the box, and they could have a Cobra that could actually go around a road course more than once or twice...a upscale, almost-2000 Cobra R, which was very much not-supercharged.
At the same time that this Boomer forced induction revolution/palace coup was taking place, some Ford engineers were working on an astounding 5.8/351ci V10 engine (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWYCBxTyi8M) that was N/A and could have been a legend very nearly worthy of Viper fame...and would have been lighter over the nose than a Terminator setup.
However, while all that was taking place while all of this was taking place was the fact that the primary, cross-town competition had taken their ball and gone home with the F-body twin-terror-but-in-name-only-and-sure-as-hell-not-in-sales-figures-terror, crosstown competition being canceled after the 2002 model year, so why bother with the Terminator if your reason for being is no longer in existence? It's not like the warning signs weren't there well before the 2001 Cobra came into existence...
Bah.
We gotta talk. On the lotus it goes from near on 400hp afte two laps losing 50 hp, It needs a motec to keep it all together and were running really rich to keep it off the knock sensor.
Apparently the Aussie solution is to run a bigger blower slower(same blower as on c7 z06 but on a 3,5 toyota) with better intercooling, but thats a liquid intercooler.
ive seen worked motors more like 550 hp, but 450 or so is really what the stock internals can safely handle so its all detuned then, at least thats the theory.
"We gotta talk. On the lotus it goes from near on 400hp afte two laps losing 50 hp, It needs a motec to keep it all together and were running really rich to keep it off the knock sensor."
If this is a Roots-based blower setup (or a screw compressor, I thought it was a roots setup with the Exige if this is what we're talking about), it's the best (along with the screw compressor) for boost off the bottom, but if it's a Roots piece, the rotors play air-based pattycake with the air inlet charge, and the problem is getting rid of the heat produced by the blower, which you've obviously discovered.
The Aussie solution of running a C7 ZO6 supercharger sounds interesting, especially if what I'm recalling of the Exige is correct and it's around a 350hp engine, and you've got it cranked up to nearly 400, you might have exceeded the design limitations of the blower (did you go with a pulley change for more boost?) and you're now just creating a hell of a lot of hot air, similar to what people were doing with the Ford Thunderbird Supercoupe Eaton M90 supercharger, which was the basis of many aftermarket kits, all the way up to a 5.0 V8, never mind the original engine it was bolted to was a 3.8 V6 (the Eaton M90 was also bolted to many other engines, not just Ford stuff).
I eagerly await your reply.
Ok, here we go. I'll try not to get sidetracked or come off as argumentative or anything of the like. I've quite a bit of firsthand experience here so its just summation of thought or explanatory to reason. Will bullet based on topic.
1. It's not the size of the engine so much that is the issue here. Fact of the matter is that most all factory superchargers are nearly undersized for the application - which includes both the GT500 trinity setups, the LSA and very much the M112 Eaton found on the 03-04 Cobra. I believe they try to maximize an efficiency range that's paired to an overall budget vs a power target. The factory boost threshold is the correct 'limit' here and cars are outfitted JUST enough to make that work. While there is argumentative wiggle room, this all goes away on a racetrack - see C7Zs going into limp mode. In modern years with newer technology you begin to see some legitimately sized power adders on factory cars - ie: The massive blowers topping the new GT500 / GTD, the giant turbos hung off the C8Zr1. While they still require a surmountable amount of airflow and cooling, they can sustain without meltdown unlike trying to turn up the boost in a lesser displacement housing.
This is why vehicles like an intercooled Miata with an M45 or M60 can still get by on the track with so little - the blower to engine ratio is much greater. Anytime you are compressing more, especially into a smaller space - the heat goes through the roof. Its a doable thing, but not without challenges to run WOT for hours (see Hellcat durability testing).
An often unspoken shortfall is the stresses and side / vertical loading that becomes applied to the crankshaft in a non turbo application. This doubles down when you don't have a "caged" or trapped lower pulley design. Pulling apart an engine as such you will see a drastic increase in bearing wear on the top side of the mains, focused closer to the front of the engine. This becomes exponential with boost levels and the draw to turn a compressor.
TLDR - NA wins on a track setting in most cases. Its very cost prohibitive to engineer it all back out, especially in the aftermarket. Cars like the GTD or Zr1 family (to include c6) can get you 95% there but you pay for it.
2. I recommend anyone wishing to learn more about the 2003-2004 Cobra development to pick up the book "Iron Fist, Lead Foot"; which follows the development process through the eyes of the engineer John Coletti.
I'm not sure how familiar you are overall with the Cobra program, but the reason you feel it might be outdated at launch is because it really was both a late product to the table and due to a huge internal failure that begins with the 1999 Cobra Mustang. The 99 was supposed to be the original siren song, retaining an aluminum block, naturally aspirated and high revving with a new IRS out back. Using the lighter T45, 5 speed transmission. In theory this should have checked off most of your boxes. The reality fell furthest from that possible. Rated at 320HP it underdelivered by ALOT, showing most made closer to 260-270HP and sparking a giant lawsuit. This doubled down bad looks against the new LS powered F bodies. The older B head Cobras (96-98) were actually designed for extreme rpm and or boost with their port design (they actually won the EngineMasters contests of the day and managed to get banned in the process). Nevertheless, with a deep gear, you the 96-98 cars could run with the LS.
The 99 cars got shelved. Ford tried to save face by having intake manifolds extrude honed, sending out tune revisions and believe exhaust changes to TRY and correct this problem. It didn't end there. The T45 was not robust enough and would break 3-4 shift forks, the IRS was bunk and axle breaking as it was not the later 28 spline and updated carrier units. I could go on, but you get the idea. Ford had shot themselves in the foot.
There was no 00 model Cobra to follow. The SVT team launched the R. It really is a decent car for the most part - I've had the pleasure of driving them, but was obviously quite one-off and cost prohibitive. Placing the R well above Corvette pricing and launching / competing with the new C5Z which outperformed it for cheaper. This was now well outside the ponycar window. Base Mustangs were fortunately outselling the F cars, at least winning the V6 war.
In 2001 the Cobra was re-released. This is the closest version to a Mach1 style example - using revised C heads, a stronger 3650 Tremec and an IRS with 28 spline axles. It retained the 320HP moniker which followed the fbodies. It was faster, but still not quite enough - scaling in around 140lbs more than the 96-98 cobras and still dealing with traction issues. Ford was still getting rocked in testing. F cars now got factory LS6 intakes, revised 241 heads and different camshafts / computers. Their T56 was unmatched comparatively.
Ford still had cake on the face so they had brought in John to "put an end to it". If you follow any of the aftermarket tuning at the time, you'd know that all of the 4.6s use the same garbage powdered steel rods. They fail around the 450whp mark and are worse so for torque ratings past 375. When the initial idea was to run the Eaton on the 2001 Cobra - the car was windowing blocks left and right. A Teskid or WAP block can be built for boost in itself, but with 2003 era management and the usual greed of customers turning thing up, the expensive and sleeved setups got the boot in favor of the iron - which unlike the GT block is cast without knock sensor provisions. Its roughly 80 lbs heavier than the aluminum. The trans is the real fatty.
This factory rod / aluminum block combo failure is why there is no 2002 Cobra. They still hadn't had the car sorted. The F bodies got swan songed not so much by sales but by government regulations. The C5 was the only vehicle allowed to continue without redevelopment with its pop up headlights and lower, less pedestrian friendly nose. Sloping sales didn't have an F car full rehash in the works and that was that. RIP T tops.
Back at Ford, somehow John managed to get Ford to spend $68 per connecting rod for a set of Manley's and Zolliner did the forged pistons. They kept the compression quite low which is about the only thing that kept them from not wiping up the world at the time - however it ushered in high boost aftermarket blowers and the huge following afterwards. They retained the forged Kellog crank from the 96+ cobras. The combo is good for holding over 1000WHP when tuned properly on the stock longblock, earning them the 'American Supra' moniker.
The cars then got the T56 which while heavier, is the only thing strong enough at the time. A factory 3650 would simply perish in a hurry. Out back the IRS was updated AGAIN, while retaining the 28 spline count while adding carbon clutches and changing bracing etc. The cylinder heads were again revised. Additional cooling was added. Sway bar thickness increased. The interior saw the reintroduction of a Recaro based seat over the absolute trash found in the 99/01 cars. Double wrapped wheel, updated gauges etc. A new fuel system was introduced with a secondary driver and twin factory pumps.
Body wise, the car was actually restyled by Camillo Pardo - the same guy responsible for the FordGT.
It was never supposed to be a road racer outright, so I never really got the misnomer just because it had an IRS. It was designed to be the total package street car that it never got to be, driving that final nail in the historic coffin as the top dog pony car of its day - despite being a year late. Instead of under delivering the car was underrated, sold as 390HP as advertised but laying down 390whp ranges stock on a dyno. The comfort focused IRS hampered some drag times but there have been some impressive numbers thrown down dead stock outside of MotorWeek. By 2004 it got a second cylinder head revision with higher thread count on the spark plugs and lower, final production numbers.
If you've made it this far, you can delve into my half ass part 2 vs a Mach1. I'm a big Mach1 fan but I can effectively say why the 'crossbreeding' wasn't going to happen.
A REAL treat would've been a 10:1 aluminum forged piston setup with the Cobra rods and a BUILT 3650 but that didn't really exist then. I believe its both the transmission option and heritage that saw the Mach1 play out as it did. I never thought it was any question that the Mach1 WASN'T supposed to be the drag racer; the real misnomer being the Terminator for the roadcourse. The Mach1 saves a considerable amount of weight being between the block, trans and SRA - appx 320lbs or so before the non introduction of the blower and its related cooling heft. I believe this was an effort to run out the inventory on leftover 99/01 Cobra engine blocks. They received the same heads as the Terminator.
The extra kicker here is that the Mach1 was offered in an automatic. Thus, a second transmission not holding up to the power. The automatic Mach1s also got a CAST, GT style crank and a lowered redline accordingly - not for crank strength but for trans tuning. The cast crank actually offsets the auto power sapping due to it being around 18lbs lighter.
If the Cobra were to get the Mach1 powerplant, it would effectively become a slightly improved version of the 01 Cobra and not much else. Yes, the Mach makes a LITTLE more power but what made them stand out was the weight difference.
NOW.
I currently own an SRA swapped 2003 Cobra that's more or less setup to go straight. It does an EXCELLENT job of that on top of just being a legit street car.
I have built a lightweight, Mach1 based SRA 98 cobra setup for twisties and street driving. It used a 2003 Mach1 longblock, a cast auto / GT crank, a 14lb aluminum flywheel, 3v windage, canton pan, gt500 oiling, 98 Cobra intake cams in the C heads, a ported 01 cobra lower and cnc billet adapted 98 cobra upper with a built T45 behind it. The car was ALOT of fun. It made high 340s to the tire on a dynojet which isn't bad at all. Aftermarket cams would've seen 380 and more compression a touch over 400. THAT is what id want in my road race Cobra. It revved IMMEDIATELY with that non factory configured setup. It also addressed the oiling issues with drainback and windage that would've killed every Mach1 based Cobra you stuck on a roadcourse.
I know because I've experienced that first hand... becaaause
I also owned an AIX prepped 1997 Cobra that I used to open track with a strung up 4v. They eat bearings until that is addressed. I sold it with a fresh reman engine and a double diamond trapdoor oil pan.
TLDR - It was never a boomer movement problem. It was a Ford fallacy of engineering, an unintended expectation of its last of the breed New Edge Cobras and continuation of heritage (if anything Boomer) in the Mach1.
* The S197 is the true boomer beacon if we making that argument
* Colleti left after 2004 and the next Gen GT500s went back to powdered rods and windowed blocks. This continued until 2014, sealing the legendary powerhouse 03-04 status for a very long time.
* The Terminator is a straight up giggle machine with an SRA and upgraded support system. Its for sure a meet your heroes car even tuned up on the factory hEaton. I want to early KB It for the sound but its just a riot as is.
* The 02 WS6 is still worth driving today... I kinda have a stable of bucket list, history rich early 2000s toys.
Oh yeah! Thomas is back AND he’s itching for a fight!
(Quickly listens to The Prodigy’s “Breathe”, Tool’s “Aenima”, and the entirety of side 1 of “Captain and Tennille’s Greatest Hits” to get psyched up for online battle)
"Ok, here we go. I'll try not to get sidetracked or come off as argumentative or anything of the like. I've quite a bit of firsthand experience here so its just summation of thought or explanatory to reason."
WHAT? You're going to be...civil? Oh geeze...lol.
Okay, that works as well.
1. "The factory boost threshold is the correct 'limit' here and cars are outfitted JUST enough to make that work."
This is probably the most important sentence out of the entire first section, soooo many folks need to have this tattooed backwards on their forehead so that when they see their face in a mirror, that's the first thing that shows up.
"Fact of the matter is that most all factory superchargers are nearly undersized for the application - which includes both the GT500 trinity setups, the LSA and very much the M112 Eaton found on the 03-04 Cobra."
Oddly enough, I'm going to come across like a "get off my lawn!" type, but this is both on the OEM and the customers who buy these cars, I'm a bit clueless as to why anyone actually thinks they need a 350hp-and-above street car, and I'm thinking that the Terminator needlessly opened the doors for these shenanigans.
Beyond that, I'm going to suggest that the idea was, okay, fine, we'll give you a supercharger, but we're doing it entirely on our terms and hope you don't notice that we've throttled how far you'll be able to modify these engines by dint of blower case alone.
"While there is argumentative wiggle room, this all goes away on a racetrack - see C7Zs going into limp mode."
There are times when I wonder if the supercharged cars of this earlier era weren't more intended for the same folks in the Terminator-buying demographic, as there appeared to be a considerable amount of engineering half-assing in regards to keeping IAT's at an acceptable temperature.
"The massive blowers topping the new GT500 / GTD, the giant turbos hung off the C8Zr1. While they still require a surmountable amount of airflow and cooling, they can sustain without meltdown unlike trying to turn up the boost in a lesser displacement housing."
I think of these cars as being something of a second generation of supercharged cars, in that overall vehicle engineering finally caught up with the idea of forced induction, meaning, you can actually go more than two laps without being in danger of melting something.
"This is why vehicles like an intercooled Miata with an M45 or M60 can still get by on the track with so little - the blower to engine ratio is much greater."
I'll be honest with you, I rarely if at all hear of any IAT issues with supercharged Miata engines, unless someone's tried to go smaller with the driven pulley/larger with the drive pulley, or they've done something terrible with the tune.
"An often unspoken shortfall is the stresses and side / vertical loading that becomes applied to the crankshaft in a non turbo application. This doubles down when you don't have a "caged" or trapped lower pulley design. Pulling apart an engine as such you will see a drastic increase in bearing wear on the top side of the mains, focused closer to the front of the engine. This becomes exponential with boost levels and the draw to turn a compressor."
In regards to roots-driven blowers/screw compressors, one other issue is that of the belt drive itself, and more specifically the issue of letting off the gas suddenly at the end of the dragstrip or at the end of a long straight: The supercharger itself has a comparable level of rotating inertia that's in direct competition with the crankshaft, especially when you let off the gas suddenly, the RPM drops, and the supercharger rotors have their own idea as to when they need to be slowing down, thank you very much.
This is also why one needs to upgrade a few additional parts (forged steel crank and the harmonic balancer, for example), as the rotors (especially on KB and Whipple units heading North of 1.5L-2.0L of displacement) are still going several thousand RPM+, and they literally try to kick crankshaft speed back up to match via the belt drive.
Since the engine is doing its thing, something has to give, and it's usually the belt tensioner or the crank snout (this is why there was so much belt tensioner development with Terminators, I've seen stock ones chucked off after owners tossed smaller blower pulleys on).
Listen to a Hellcat when someone's dry-revving it, the IAC function/TB very slooooowly lowers the engine RPM so it's not breaking anything in the accessory belt drive.
"NA wins on a track setting in most cases."
Yes, due to heat issues, or factory supercharged cars being reeeeally heavy to hold up to 800hp, you can only flirt with physics for so long.
(Continued)
(Continued but I don't know where this is going to come out in the list below, this is "Part 2")
2. "Iron Fist, Lead Foot" was in the bookshelf a decade ago, no idea where it is now.
"I'm not sure how familiar you are overall with the Cobra program, but the reason you feel it might be outdated at launch is because it really was both a late product to the table and due to a huge internal failure that begins with the 1999 Cobra Mustang."
To me, anyway, the Terminator engine itself was an antique before it ever showed up at dealerships, for three reasons:
1. It's 700 pounds over the nose of the worst possible car to be bolted into, the SN95. That's 385-series 429/460 engine territory, the all-cast-iron version.
2. Ford is infamous for half-assing their engineering, and for me, given how many times Ford has been bit in the ass because of this (familiar with the old Jerry Mod and the 4R70W?), they really should have embraced some solid form of VVT or VTEC or something similar by this point (and not the crappy 3-valve version which was only an emissions thing) instead of just casually tossing a blower at the 4.6 DOHC.
3. The 4.6 was already long in the tooth, the first year of its use was 1991, I used to know an old machine shop owner who had one of the early prototype 2 valve engines up until several years ago (the shop burned down, he had all kinds of fascinating mod motor parts, several mark 8's, and also supposedly had a set of prototype A heads buried somewhere among what was left of the shop), long and short of it, it was late 1980's horsepower and 1990's technology that was outdated fairly quickly in the torque and HP department.
"The 99 was supposed to be the original siren song, retaining an aluminum block, naturally aspirated and high revving with a new IRS out back. Using the lighter T45, 5 speed transmission. In theory this should have checked off most of your boxes. The reality fell furthest from that possible. Rated at 320HP it underdelivered by ALOT, showing most made closer to 260-270HP and sparking a giant lawsuit."
Ah, yes, the intake manifold fiasco. At one point I knew two or three '99 Cobra owners who refused to get the replacement intakes, a few more were converted and the owners swore that the car became slower with the newer intake.
Aside from the intake manifold fiasco, the few '99 Cobras I've driven felt like the best out of the lot, with the best-shifting 5-speeds in the T45. I'm a bit puzzled with the T45, Kinsler (I think that was the name) Transmission utilized a hell of a lot of T45 transmissions with a bizarre business plan that essentially came up with a new endplate, allowing for different bellhousings to be bolted on and the T45 to be bolted behind different engines.
I drove one car with it, shifted really well.
"The older B head Cobras (96-98) were actually designed for extreme rpm and or boost with their port design. Nevertheless, with a deep gear, you the 96-98 cars could run with the LS."
The B heads were a favorite of old John Veermeersch (if that's the correct spelling, I think he ran Pro-M and related), who built some insane boosted mod motors, IIRC, he built one of the first mod motors to hit 1500hp, and I think it was using those heads and a filled Teksid block.
In addition, my minimum gear for any 1996-1998 Cobra was at least a 4.10, but that was also the maximum streetable gear, 1st gear was already practically gone with that set, with 4.56's I just bypassed it entirely.
"The T45 was not robust enough and would break 3-4 shift forks, the IRS was bunk and axle breaking as it was not the later 28 spline and updated carrier units. I could go on, but you get the idea. Ford had shot themselves in the foot."
A. Oddly enough, it didn't take much to fix the T45, just updated forks, although an updated input shaft also wouldn't have hurt.
B. 1999 was 28 spline axles, 2001 went to 31 spline units (IIRC)
"The SVT team launched the R. It really is a decent car for the most part - I've had the pleasure of driving them, but was obviously quite one-off and cost prohibitive. Placing the R well above Corvette pricing and launching / competing with the new C5Z which outperformed it for cheaper."
Great car, the R. It's a pity that it was eclipsed by most everything around it simply because of sheer numbers, I only ran across a few R's that were actually beat on as God intended, the rest went into garages.
"In 2001 the Cobra was re-released. This is the closest version to a Mach1 style example - using revised C heads, a stronger 3650 Tremec and an IRS with 28 spline axles. It retained the 320HP moniker which followed the fbodies. It was faster, but still not quite enough - scaling in around 140lbs more than the 96-98 cobras and still dealing with traction issues. Ford was still getting rocked in testing. F cars now got factory LS6 intakes, revised 241 heads and different camshafts / computers. Their T56 was unmatched comparatively."
I get the feeling that Ford was just grasping for straws at this point, and if anything, it seems like they were arranging deck chairs on the SN95 Titanic, in the end, underneath the swanky body of the Pyramid-based-styling-cues 1999-2004 Mustang (I still have a 2000 V6 vert in the driveway, it's really a crap car that didn't age well), it was still essentially a 1979 Fox body Mustang underneath (Ford never really changed the floor pan from 1993 to 1994, they saved somewhere around thirty million dollars IIRC by skipping that part), and the chassis was fairly terrible at higher HP levels.
See also: It's minor quibbling, but the LS1 version of the T56 from GM had switched to Mexico to be built there, and were nowhere near as stout as the older 1993-1997 LT1 T56's.
(Please flip the record to hear side 3)
More reviews like this please. This is the kind of content that only you can provide. I don't have race six figure car money, but I like to dream.
Re simracing, it looks like the Ginetta eSeries is on some proprietary tweaked Assetto Corsa that's probably private. The iracing Radical series has people to race every hour nearly round the clock.
"I don't have race six figure car money, but I like to dream."
I'm in the same boat right now. I don't have the 5 figures I need to get my cars prepped for 2026 :(
You need to get Sherman to get you into one of his "shareholder value" printing money with no work gigs.
I've had enough facial trauma during my cycling-crash days that I can't really get my jaw wide open enough to do one of those “jobs”.
"You can hold slip angles if you like, or you can turn the TC down to the point where such a thing is unlikely to happen."
Did you mean to say up?
Down as in allowing less slip, but yeah up is probably more logical.
That seemed backwards to me, too. Must be like when people say move a meeting back an hour and it ends up occurring an hour sooner.
Well I'm being picky because a professional writer shouldn't have to say when I said left I meant right.
Increase and decrease is what I should say.
“….with a real credit card that is real overdrawn.”
Love it! Great review that is both informative and entertaining.
Thanks for a nice race car review Jack. Although most of us will only see this type of car occasionally and probably never drive one, reviews like yours help make them feel more real and approachable...so it's appreciated!