• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

Leno says "Honda couldn't do it with the NSX..."

Jim

Experienced Member
Joined
26 March 2000
Messages
1,114
Location
Chicago, IL
Read the article here

I'd Rather Have A Ford

The reborn Ford GT simply stirs men's souls.

BY JAY LENO


Not to take anything away from the U.S. Olympic hockey team's 1980 "miracle" win over the Russians or Joe Namath's Jets beating the Baltimore Colts in Super Bowl III in 1969, but the greatest upset in sports in my opinion was Ford winning the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1966. The idea of Ford beating Ferrari was simply inconceivable.

It was also a terrific example of "race on Sunday, sell on Monday." I remember kids with beat-up, 6-cylinder Falcons beaming with pride because they were now driving a "real race car."

But when I heard Ford was going to bring back the GT40, my initial reaction was, "Uh, okay." I remembered the Mustang II, and I was afraid that this was going to be just another example of bad badge engineering. But my opinion changed when I saw the new Ford GT. To me, the Ford GT has the cleanest, sexiest, most attractive lines of any GT-type race car. It has the elements of a race car and the elements of a street car, all built into it. A lot of these new cars--even supercars like the Ferrari Enzo--don't emotionally move you the way a Ford GT's shape does. Of course, some guys don't agree. They point out that the new Ford GT is 13 percent bigger than the old car. Hey, if I were only 13 percent bigger than I was in 1966, I'd be thrilled.

The new car has to safely withstand a crash. It has to have airbags. It needs to look like the old car but must have all the technology to be a modern car. I don't think people really appreciate what Ford had to overcome to make this car street legal. Take that gas tank up the center--a brilliant idea, in terms of both safety and weight distribution. Also, it's true to the original idea of an American V8: supercharged, nothing overly tricky, nothing you couldn't understand or fix yourself. Okay, forget fix it yourself, but at least you can understand it.

I first drove the car at Laguna Seca with legendary Formula One champion Jackie Stewart. He is still such a good driver that you think, "Well, I might as well just turn my license in right now." It's so demoralizing. As we drove, he was saying to me, in his thick Scottish accent, "Well Jay, when yur shiftin' the cor, ya got t'be more linear, Jay. Y've got ta maike sure you do this royt.'' And of course, he's clipping the apex of each turn perfectly--while he's looking at me. He's looking at me and driving the car really fast. I'm going off the track while I'm staring at the road. He does this all with such a minimum of effort while I'm physically exhausted.

Then I realize that people like Jackie Stewart are not that much older than me. When I was 13 years old, for instance, they were like 23. But somehow, it seems like they should be 80 now. It seems like such ancient history. I find it really intriguing when I meet them, especially because they still look the same to me. I remember I was on a plane once with Mickey Mantle. So I'm thinking, that can't be Mickey Mantle--look how young he is. Then I realized that Mickey Mantle was only about 16 years older than I was when I was a kid, so he was still only 16 years older than I was then.
Stewart and I had only a few laps around the track in the car, but it was a hoot to drive. It's fast--in fact, PM's auto editors tested one and it ran 0 to 60 in 3.43 seconds and did the quarter-mile in 11.69 seconds at 122.74 mph ("Acceleration Nation 2," May 2004, page 112). That's faster than fast. And the brakes are incredible. I can't wait to get mine--red with white racing stripes. Of course, some people don't know I've already got my car on order, so I'm getting lots of calls from Ford sales guys. And the conversations usually go something like this:

"Mr. Leno?"

"Yup."

"Are you aware of the new Ford GT?"

I always say, "I've heard something about it. Are they available?"

And they say, "We have one."

To which I always say, "What's its serial number?"

And there's a long pause. "Well, we don't have it here yet, but we will have it."

And I ask, "What are you asking for the car?" And they're all like $450,000. So I say, "I just want one. I don't want three."

And they say, "Well, that is one."

So I say, "What is the list price of the car?"

And there's another long pause. Then the salesman always says, "Well, they're hard to get.''

So I reply, "I feel bad. Are you guys making enough on this? Can't I chip in a little more?"

And then I add, "Read your dealer newsletter. I bought the first one."

The one thing the American and the European carmakers have over the Japanese is a sense of history. The Japanese are getting there now with the 240Z and Mazda Cosmo (the RX-8 is its direct descendant), but that heritage isn't as strong yet. For Ford to call upon its history is a smart marketing move. Just think of that famous photo of Carroll Shelby, wearing a suit, standing there with a Mustang, a Cobra and a GT40, and the caption says, "It's a long way from bib overalls." I've always wanted to replicate that picture, with me standing with those cars.

We're in an interesting time, when American carmakers, and I don't say this sarcastically, are actually building cars that people want: the Z06 Corvette, the Dodge Viper, the Cadillac CTS-V and now it's the Ford GT. In the classic American sense, these cars have built-in simplicity and reliability. Plus they have the same power--if not as much sophistication--as some exotics. But who would have thought that people would rather have a Ford GT than a Lamborghini Gallardo?

How often does that happen? People like me are actually saying, "I'd rather have the Ford."

Honda couldn't do it with the NSX, which to everybody was the equal of a Ferrari--it was lighter, faster and it would handle better. But people in 1991 were saying, "I don't want to pay $80,000 for a Honda." Even the people at Toyota knew the Toyota name had a certain badge limitation, so they wisely called their upmarket car the Lexus, and the Nissan folks called theirs Infiniti. But Ford didn't become Fjord or some other goofy name. Ford said, "No, we're gonna put our name on it. It's gonna cost $150,000, buy it or don't." I don't think people realize how exciting or revolutionary or just how good this car is. I'll get mine as soon as it's built.

Now if I can just get back to 160 pounds, like I was in 1966.
 
Now he's just being an a**.
He acknowledges Infiniti and Lexus, but not Acura.


Also, wasn't the original GT40 designed by a European design team? :confused:
 
While I disagree, I do recognize his point. Ford has a very long racing heritage that is known well in this country. For them to sell a car like the Ford GT here is a very smart move, and helps them cash in on their racing background. I have to give them credit for having the balls to build and sell a car like the Ford GT.
 
Interesting article. I love the phone conversations :biggrin:

But Ford can go under tomorrow for all I care.

Actually, that's not entirely true.

In fact, I want Ford to fail.
 
I'd dump the supercharged Zanardi in a second to get a GT40 at list and not because of the badge but rather the looks and performance. I agree with Jay. Sorry...
 
Unfortuntely Honda had a chance to create a "history" starting with the NSX. But because there was no evolution of the car, Honda has dropped the ball. Honda had a chance to become the Ferrari of Japan, but was to short sighted to see the value in that. Now they are back to budget cars and most likely will not foray into the supercar field ever again.
 
Ford (along with other American manufacturers) are making the biggest mistake by relying on heritage and nostalgia to sell their cars. Retro designs are figuratively and literally a big step back. Do they have nothing to offer a new generation of car buyers besides what they offered their parents and grandparents? This new mustang belongs in a classic car book- not a brand new car brochure. Car companies need to move foward with designs and technologies; they cannot look back to their glory days and hope to recapture whatever charm or charisma they had.

What is the next step for these retro-companies? Are they going to move foward or backward from their already retro designs? Will we end up with a new retro model-t 50 years from now or just progress through the mustang design cycles again (I don't want to relive those 80's lines)?

Nearly all other manufacurers are moving ahead. It is the only way to go.
 
Just one more thought- GT-specific this time. What is with the decapitating doors? Was that a design cue that really needed to be brought back to life?
 
Let's give some credit also to the real designer of the original GT40:
Eric Broadley, the owner and designer of Lola Cars, was hired by Ford to design a car based on his existing Lola GT which was V8 powered. The entire car was British designed and built, the engine was given by Ford.

So Skoda could buy Zonda and claim that they produced a supercar... and in 40 years from now they will remake it at 3x the price, one million $! :p
 
avalon96 said:
Ford (along with other American manufacturers) are making the biggest mistake by relying on heritage and nostalgia to sell their cars. Retro designs are figuratively and literally a big step back. Do they have nothing to offer a new generation of car buyers besides what they offered their parents and grandparents? This new mustang belongs in a classic car book- not a brand new car brochure. Car companies need to move foward with designs and technologies; they cannot look back to their glory days and hope to recapture whatever charm or charisma they had.

What is the next step for these retro-companies? Are they going to move foward or backward from their already retro designs? Will we end up with a new retro model-t 50 years from now or just progress through the mustang design cycles again (I don't want to relive those 80's lines)?

Nearly all other manufacurers are moving ahead. It is the only way to go.

I wholehardly agree, I've always hated cars with the retro design. I think it's just a quick fix for a sagging american car market.
 
You people seriously believe that Honda has any vehicle that can live up to the legendary status of the GT40?

It is not about whether or not this car is good/great/bad/cuts off heads, its about the celebration of what was, at its time, a magical car.

There are plenty of boomers who remember those days who will/are step(ing) up to buy this car. Kudos to Ford for bringing a great history back to life in a car that can be driven on the street.
 
Jay is right. Honda couldn't do it. The car is not exactly a sales success. In the first 3 years it was selling pretty well, but as sales fell off a cliff, Honda did nothing to fix that. So, I would say though that a lot of the fault lies with Honda and their lack of keepnig the car updated with more HP and newer technology.
 
I'm not sure if Jay really made his point about the NSX though. He seems to be talking about the Honda badge's success at the NSX rather than Honda the car company. He pointed out that Toyota created Lexus and Nissan, Infinity to address the upmarket. For some reason, he's tied to it being a "Honda" NSX (which indeed it is), rather than the Acura NSX (which indeed it is). He's suggesting that the NSX wasn't a great success because it was badged as a Honda (which as far as N. America is concerned, it wasn't).
 
Thats not what I take from his comments.

I interpret what he said as the ability that the car has to overcome the limitations of its brand. He said that the NSX was better than the Ferrari, but because it was a Honda, its ability to be perceived as anything close to a Ferrari was compromised.

I believe that he is suggesting that despite the GT40 being a Ford, it is being perceived as something beyond what the brand is perceived as.
 
Hmm.. Interesting. Maybe it's just me, but I still see the GT as being a Ford and not much more. It's just priced like a Ferrari. Not to take anything away from the GT, but it IS a Ford, and my perception of it is still tied to the rest of its current line (read quality).
 
Maybe they should have created a brand name of "Honda Racing" Might have helped the NSX out?? Who knows.
 
I've seen the GT40 up close. If I didn't know a thing about it's "racing heritage", I would look at it and think "That looks like a remake of an old car". Then I would head straight to the Ferrari/Lamborghini booth, to later stop by and admire the Acura booth.

It so happens that I do know about the GT's race history, so I can look at the car with some admiration. However, there is nothing passionate or emotional looking about the car to me. I'm tired of hearing about history.
I'm tired of American car companies making ALL their new cars look retro. The japanese car companies appear to at least infuse their designs with some originality. The New Mustang, PT Cruiser, Crossfire, Etc. look ugly to me. Then again most American cars look ugly to me.

As for race heritage, Didn't ford pull out of Formula One Racing? I guess Nascar is enough racing heritage for them. I know they still compete in other venues. To me, Formula One is THE race venue to compete in. I know that is merely a matter of opinion. But, I bought a 10 year old HONDA not because of heritage (even though the NSX does have a race heritage), but because it is a damn good car.

Now what I would REALLY like to see is the Ford GT compete in JGTC 500gt series. Hmmm. :cool:
 
who in there right mind could justify paying 150,000 for a ford. yes it still is a ford. same crappy product, same crappy everything. call me crazy but the only people buying these things will be ford executives who have had to hide there nsx's, used lambos, and used ferraris. now they finally have a so called super car they can drive to work and park in employee parking.
 
CDX_NSX said:
I'm not sure if Jay really made his point about the NSX though. He seems to be talking about the Honda badge's success at the NSX rather than Honda the car company. He pointed out that Toyota created Lexus and Nissan, Infinity to address the upmarket. For some reason, he's tied to it being a "Honda" NSX (which indeed it is), rather than the Acura NSX (which indeed it is). He's suggesting that the NSX wasn't a great success because it was badged as a Honda (which as far as N. America is concerned, it wasn't).

I understood his comments differently. He refers to the NSX as a "Honda" because that's what it is, just like a Lexus is a Toyota and Infiniti a Nissan. He didn't use Acura in his example, but his point was that all three use a different name for their "high-end" line of cars, unlike Ford that didn't feel the need to change its name for a different market. "Honda" versus "Acura" is irrevelant, he's stressing the fact that Honda (and others) don't have a history or heritage that they can rely on to help sell cars.

As far as the retro cars coming back... Its kinda like hip-hop. A little bit of the good old stuff mixed in with some good new stuff. Not quite original, but a lot of creativity added in the mix. It can appeal to a wider market, and there are a LOT of middle-aged people out there with money that get excited when the retro designs stir their memories. I think the new Mustang is a brilliant idea. A leveraged design? Absolutely, but sometimes making an old design new again is harder than starting from scratch.

In the end its always about what they think they can sell, and if Ford wants to use its racing heritage to help sell cars then I call that smart.

I would guess that Honda is known in every other part of the world as a manufacturer with a great racing history. F1. Most people in the U.S. don't even know what F1 stands for.

Dan
 
"I would guess that Honda is known in every other part of the world as a manufacturer with a great racing history. F1. Most people in the U.S. don't even know what F1 stands for."

Dan

This is true; and, quite a shame. I don't feel that Nascar showcases racing technology and varied markets very well. Then again, Formula One is a very expensive venue to compete in.

I understand your point of the "old mixed with new"...Puff Daddy (or P-diddy) whatever, made a killing with it. Still, there is nothing more than pure originality offered in a brilliant form. When a car is brought out like the Enzo that is totally "out there" and makes people cock their heads or raise an eyebrow, that to me is far more difficult that mixing some old stuff with new stuff. In fact, it seems just plain lazy to me. Yet, for whatever reason, the American market eats it up. Good for them, I like to be different from the rest anyways, while still being reliable with great performance in a 10 year old car.......now that.....is originality.
 
Back
Top