Superformance Gt40 MKI vs MK2

[ermenasce]

I am back in the market to buy a MKI or a MkII.
Mostly for track use.
What are the main differences between the cars on the track?
I would love to hear experiences that any of you have about these cars.

[twobjshelbys]

It is my understanding that the differences are only in body panels.

[gsharapa]

The MK I were mostly 289 small blocks and the MK II were big block 427 FEs. All the rear scoops on the MK II were for cooling those big engine. You will find the MK II nose is quite different also to provide more down force.

[Mark IV]

There are no chassis differences between the two models. By 'track use" are you talking open track/driver schools or organized vintage racing? If VR there will be numerous differences in the required specs between a MK I and a MK II.

There are other differences beyond the front and rear clips such as the rear subframe but in general the functional parts are the same on the SPF.

https://www.facebook.com/TimeMachine...rtsLlc/?ref=hl

[ermenasce]

I am referring to open track/driving events

[Dwight]

go to RaceLine Digital to see the difference in the Mk1 and MkII bodies

GT40 Mk I Kits : RACELINE DIGITAL, Hull and Deck Graphics | Motorsport Graphics


GT40 Mk II Kits : RACELINE DIGITAL, Hull and Deck Graphics | Motorsport Graphics

[Dwight]

click on the picture of the GT 40 and it will give you a side and top view.


Dwight

[xb-60]

Originally Posted by gsharapa

The MK I were mostly 289 small blocks and the MK II were big block 427 FEs. All the rear scoops on the MK II were for cooling those big engine. You will find the MK II nose is quite different also to provide more down force.

Gary - how are the front clips different between the Mk I and Mk II cars?

Cheers,
Glen

[Mark IV]

Originally Posted by xb-60

Gary - how are the front clips different between the Mk I and Mk II cars?

Cheers,
Glen

MK II front clips have raised "wings" over the wheels, they are about 1.75" inches taller tan the MK I model. Also all MK IIs have the single large radiator air exit as also used on the late MK I cars (i.e. "Gulf" style) where early MK Is used the twin triangular outlets and a MK II does not have the center NACA duct of a MK I nose. The center spider and doors are identical in shape between the models. I suspect there is no difference in "downforce" between the MK I and MK II noses.

[SwiftDB4]

As Rick said there are only cosmetic differences between MkI and II SPF's. I've done a fair # of track days with my MkII. Can't see any difference between the two unless you get a smaller engine MkI. I'd say buy the one you like the looks of.

[ermenasce]

Swift DB4,
I would really appreciate if you can tell me about your driving experience
at the track.
I have done a lot of track time, but most of the times with Ferraris and
Porsches, such as 458, GT3RS, mostly modern cars with a lot of electronics.
My only experience with a pure car (like the GT 40) was with a Ferrari 512 BBLM, a racing car derived from the Ferrari Berlinetta Boxer.
Loved it by the way.
So, a substantial difference with the modern cars.
I loved it, and your inputs about how to drive the MK II on the track,
what do you recommend if there are any weak points, etc. would help me
a lot in making a decision.

[Mark IV]

So it is this:

No power brake booster
No steering assist
No ABS
No traction control
No magnetic adjustable shocks
No torque vectoring differential

No lack of fantastic, visceral, seat-of-pants input, best time you ever had driving experience!

The GT40 is 50 plus years old. It is "old school" but was "state of the art" when new...........and it still will thrill, scare and entertain a driver who is willing to put some effort and concentration into going fast. It is 10/10s of car to my 8/10s of driving skill. It will constantly remind me of why I was never recruited by Ferrari as a factory driver. It will allow me to put myself in Steve McQueen's "LeMans" in a starring role in my imagination easily passing those Porsches and Ferraris. It is the car that doesn't take years off your life (unless you are stupid) but rather takes years off your age (thank you P. J. O'Rourke for giving me that line when you test drove our AC Mk IV some years ago) and lets you be Ken Miles, Chris Amon or Dan Gurney or whatever your fantasy is.

In short, you need one.......................

[ermenasce]

Mark IV,

This is exactly how I feel.
I would have a hard time to put it into words, but you are spot on.
Whenever I buy a car, and I have had t A LOT of cars, one of the driving
forces is the story of the car - the people, the tracks, the success and
failures - and of course the car itself.
The journey not necessarily the result.
I am 70 years old, and in 1966 I was 22 , and although
being a Ferrari fan, the images of a Ford GT 40 - so advanced for that
period - are still in my mind.
In the process of looking for a Ford GT 40, continuation car, I went back to that time,
procured all the books, videos, you tubed every episode, and came back
to that story about Ford vs Ferrari, which was somehow different
than what happens today.
Henry Ford II, vs Enzo Ferrari.

[ermenasce]

By the way MkIV, you made a decision for me.
I will buy one as soon as I find one that I like,
Thanks a lot

[1795]

I believe that Mark I might still have a used GT40for sale....

[ermenasce]

Another question that I have is the weight of the MkI vs the MkII.
It seems the MKII is heavier because of its bigger engine.
I have been quoted 2700 to 2800 all included.
Maybe more 200 to 300 pounds more than the MkI
Are my assumptions correct?

[SwiftDB4]

Originally Posted by ermenasce

Another question that I have is the weight of the MkI vs the MkII.
It seems the MKII is heavier because of its bigger engine.
I have been quoted 2700 to 2800 all included.
Maybe more 200 to 300 pounds more than the MkI
Are my assumptions correct?

My MkII with 427W Roush weighs 2450lbs. dry. 302W based engines might be 100-200lbs. less.
Changes I found necessary for track use include:
Track tires
Harder brake pads
Accusump or dry sump
Adjustable shocks and stiffer springs (helpful, but not essential)
I have not driven modern supercars, but have a lot of racing experience with Formula Atlantics and older production based racecars. A GT40 is definitely old school with no electronic assists. Powerslides are a blast, but braking and cornering probably don't match modern supercars. Torque out of corners probably exceeds modern cars.

[Mark IV]

Originally Posted by 1795

I believe that Mark IV might still have a used GT40 for sale....

Nope....sold and going to Montana ("to raise dental floss" as Frank sang) however we can supply a new chassis to the OP's specification.

The weight difference between a MK I and MK II with the same powertrain will be less than 20 pounds and that is due to the additional weight of the body panels/scoops etc. The SPF chassis has most of the reinforcements Ford placed on the MK II so technically it is sturdier than the MK I chassis.

[1795]

Congratulations on the sale Rick.

[Igofastr]

Originally Posted by SwiftDB4

My MkII with 427W Roush weighs 2450lbs. dry. 302W based engines might be 100-200lbs. less.
Changes I found necessary for track use include:
Track tires
Harder brake pads
Accusump or dry sump
Adjustable shocks and stiffer springs (helpful, but not essential)
I have not driven modern supercars, but have a lot of racing experience with Formula Atlantics and older production based racecars. A GT40 is definitely old school with no electronic assists. Powerslides are a blast, but braking and cornering probably don't match modern supercars. Torque out of corners probably exceeds modern cars.

The weight issue can really be minimized by using alloy parts. In reality, most MarkII owners put in bored and stroked small blocks anyway...so no real difference there. If you wanted an FE, well, there are a number of aluminum blocks for sale (Pond, Shelby) that would bring the weight down somewhat.

One other thing to consider is how you expect to use this car...if its going to be used primarily on the track, I'd seriously consider getting one with a cage (SPF R-model?), a fuel bladder would also be a consideration (the fuel tanks are, after all, between you and whoever is T-boning you on the track). If you intend to use it as only an occasional track toy, I wouldn't bother with either of these modifications. Just something to think about.