I really think that the car needs to be priced under $80,000 in the ball park of the Z06 or Viper to make sense for Ford. I don't know if a good version could be made at that price, but this car needs to be somewhat attainable by upper middle class folks.
To be honest, my preference would be for the car to continue to be priced in the GT league. When the car
was going to be built, it was going to be directly benchmarked to beat everything the Ferrari 575 could do, much in the way the GT was benchmarked specifically against a Ferrari 360. That includes pricing. There is no way the car could be produced anywhere under 100k, or probably 150k, just because it's continuing to use the GT architecture.
The GT is not really a competitor to the Z06 and Viper. Those cars are tremendous performance values, but the Corvette is not exotic and the Viper is aimed at an audience looking for something very raw (a dwindling market, which is why the car will be gone in under 4 years). I agree it would be nice if Ford had an "affordable" sports car, but that would be a ground up project. The viability of the GR-1 lies solely in its derivation from the GT program.
I also think Ford's strength lies in capitalizing on showing itself as the legitimate American alternative to Ferrari. People don't cross-shop F430s vs. Z06s. They buy both. People do choose F430 or FGT.
I was reading up on the car tonight and a couple things are not clear.
Inspiration for the Ford Shelby GR-1 came from George Saridakis from production and concept designs. In Ford's Irvine Advanced Design Studio
So if its a ford employee's design how did shelby get his name on it? :confused
2nd "Based on the architecture of the Ford GT, the Ford Shelby GR-1 is a front-engined, two-seat, fastback supercar, combining modern sculptured surfaces in a sleek muscular fastback design"
how can it be based on a GT if it is front engine? :confused
The name is just a name Todd. George did the sketch in one take and the car was modeled and built. Pure marketing.
Architecture can be shuffled around.
Does this mean there would be the luxury of a reasonable trunk? Does anyone, (DBK) have a clue if this is even still on the list of possible production vehicles? BTW, GR stands for ???
I don't know on the trunk question, but given the shape and the location of the engine, and the point of benchmarking the 575 when that was still around, I would say yes.
It is still a possible production vehicle. We mentioned it to Mark Fields and Robert Parker as recently as this week. I probably shouldn't open my mouth too much but they already had performance metrics, costing, etc under way for the production of the vehicle before the proverbial "s" hit the fan and everything got scuttled. Just need someone to say "hey, remember that thing (that we still have in commercials and tow around the country)? Let's finish what we started.
GR stands for Group Racing in an homage to the Shelby road race vehicles of the 60s.
Is anyone in this group in the "Loop" sufficiently to get accurate info as to if/when/how much this GR-1 could be a commercial possibility? Would be very interested in a GROUP BUY, as someone here said.
See above. I think the volume for this car would be appropriate at 1500 units per year for 3 years. It would take probably 2-3 years to make it hit the road. The GT went ground up in the same time frame, and this car would be using substantial re-learn from that program.
As for price, my guess would be marginally north of what the GT cost.
