GTP Cool Wall: 1967-1968 Ford GT40 Mk. III

[Jahgee]

1967-1968 Ford GT40 Mk. III nominated by @OriginalCheezIt

Body: 2 Door Coupe
Engine: 289 c.i. (4.7 L) V8
Power: 306 HP
Transmission: 4 Speed Manual
Drivetrain: Mid Engine, Rear Wheel Drive

 

[Slash]

Sub zero. Those little 289s SCREAM. Windsor engines are bulletproof.

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

1.454 after 113 votes

I didn't think this would have trouble hitting the Ice Box...​

 

[AudiMan2011]

Not as beautiful as the Mk 1 or Mk 2, but still very cool.

 

[JrDarknes]

One of the, very few cars I actually think is cool from the 60's.

 

[mustang fanatic]

Easy sub-zero.

 

[Cano]

It looks cool even with wire wheels. Easy sub-zero.

 

[CinnamonOD]

1.818 after 11 votes

Just that

Sub Zero

 

[Tyger]

I agree it's not quite as pretty as the Mk 1 and Mk 2

Sub Zero

 

[Adamgp]

GT40's are Sub Zero.

 

[Legro]

Ford had to ask help from Brits to make GT40 successful. Good thing is that the Brits did very good job.

Sub Zero.

 

[Roger the Horse]

The uglier, non Le Mans winning version of that car that the Americans always claim that they built to beat Ferrari with when they didn't actually build it.

Oh, and it's a Ford.

Uncool.

 

[INEEDNAWZZZ]

Not quite as proportionate or good looking as the Mk. I or II, but I get why it has to look like it does. Still an easy SZ.

The uglier, non Le Mans winning version of that car that the Americans always claim that they built to beat Ferrari with when they didn't actually build it.

Should just point out that the Mk. III was never intended to be a racer; it was solely designed as a road car.

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

The uglier, non Le Mans winning version of that car that the Americans always claim that they built to beat Ferrari with when they didn't actually build it.

Oh, and it's a Ford.

Uncool.

The reason the Mk III didn't win Le Mans is because there was never a racecar version of it. The III was strictly a road car, with road car needs in mind. Hence the longer rear end, which was meant for cargo.

And yes, you are correct. America and Ford can't stake 100% claim in the GT40. Instead, they split it with one of the most legendary (and most British) race chassis manufacturers of all time, Lola.

To me, the fact that it was an American and Brirish creation made to piss off Enzo Ferrari (who wasn't exactly the type of guy you'd usually want to piss off) just makes the whole GT40 series so damn cool.

Granted, I probably should have nominated the Mk I, but the long tail got me a little caught up in the Mk III...

 

[GTP_Ingram]

Cool. I mean, I'd vote higher but looking at the OP, it isn't even the prettiest car in that photo..

 

[Heldenzeit]

Very high cool, still prefer the earlier MkI/IIs or even the MkIV.

 

[JMoney]

All of the other versions looked better, so I give it a cool rather than SZ.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Sub zero and the only time I play the bias/emotional bit, it's my favorite car. This and the other versions.

 

[SVX]

All of the other versions looked better, so I give it a cool rather than SZ.

Exactly my thoughts.

 

[SagarisGTB]

I'd be embarrassed if I was seen in it. Not just because it has classic mid-engined supercar lines and proportions, no, mostly because the general public is far more familiar with the MK1 and the GT40 is known for having plenty of replicas made. Put 1+2 together, and I'd expect people to think I'm driving an ugly, poorly-made Mk1 replica. Uncool.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'd be embarrassed if I was seen in it. Not just because it has classic mid-engined supercar lines and proportions, no, mostly because the general public is far more familiar with the MK1 and the GT40 is known for having plenty of replicas made. Put 1+2 together, and I'd expect people to think I'm driving an ugly, poorly-made Mk1 replica. Uncool.

Really? I'm surprised if anyone outside groups like this one know anything about the car or that it even exist.

 

[The Bman]

Not a big Ford guy but this is the greatest machine they've put out. Sub-zero.

 

[Panoz]

It's the forgotten model of the GT40, Sub-zero as the car behind it.

 

[INEEDNAWZZZ]

Really? I'm surprised if anyone outside groups like this one know anything about the car or that it even exist.

He's not far off the mark actually. The whole reason these barely sold back in the day was because you could buy a Mk. I road car anyway*, which most people preferred since it would've looked identical to the actual race car. Having one of these today would only really let you play the rarity card I'd guess.

*Not from Ford themselves, but was built under licence from another company IIRC .

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

He's not far off the mark actually. The whole reason these barely sold back in the day was because you could buy a Mk. I road car anyway*, which most people preferred since it would've looked identical to the actual race car. Having one of these today would only really let you play the rarity card I'd guess.

*Not from Ford themselves, but was built under licence from another company IIRC .

Well owning any GT40 would allow you to play the rarity card that gets you money that most Ferrari's of the same time frame run.

http://www.hagerty.com/price-guide/1968-Ford-GT40_Mk_III

However, from that perspective I can see what you mean.

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

He's not far off the mark actually. The whole reason these barely sold back in the day was because you could buy a Mk. I road car anyway*, which most people preferred since it would've looked identical to the actual race car. Having one of these today would only really let you play the rarity card I'd guess.

*Not from Ford themselves, but was built under licence from another company IIRC .

I would also think that the III would make a better all-round road car than the Mk I, due to it being designed solely as a car for the street, as opposed to being a homologation special that is barely different from the racer.

 

[SagarisGTB]

Really? I'm surprised if anyone outside groups like this one know anything about the car or that it even exist.

The MK1 GT40 is the one that has crept into public consciousness and a young me was made aware of it relatively early because of mags like Motortrend/Car and Driver and games like Gran Turismo 2 and Gran Turismo 3. The Mk1 is THE GT40. It wasn't until years later that I became aware of the other GT40s. And I can't think that is an unusual experience.

Not that the Mk3 isn't an interesting car, it is, but I'd have concerns and it's not something I'd want to own.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The MK1 GT40 is the one that has crept into public consciousness and a young me was made aware of it relatively early because of mags like Motortrend/Car and Driver and games like Gran Turismo 2 and Gran Turismo 3. The Mk1 is THE GT40. It wasn't until years later that I became aware of the other GT40s. And I can't think that is an unusual experience.

Not that the Mk3 isn't an interesting car, it is, but I'd have concerns and it's not something I'd want to own.

I can since it's not our era of cars where most people would have been in some knowledge more so than today, GT though selling a lot doesn't mean anything because those vested in the cars and of the culture are still small. Also the MK. I is to you, and I'm sure someone come along and show you the Lola that inspired it and say that is the real GT40.

Picking favorites on the the GT40 front has always been splitting hairs to me I like them all equally for what they did. I read plenty about it as a kid and owned material on it like various other cars, and loved it more through virtual driving as well but it doesn't hinder the fact that it is still from the same cut of cloth that is the automotive history of the GT40 lineage.

Also to go along with this like other old cars not being well known, I think the bigger worry is you pulling up in it or the MK. 1 and people wondering why your Ford GT looks so old.

@INEEDNAWZZZ Wyer was the group that did the MK 1 just looked it up.

 

[AlvaroF]

Not as cool as previous GT40, but still Sub-Zero cool

 

[Dagger311]

Sub-Zero, hands down.