Jump to content

Ford Focus Vs. Lamborghini Gallardo


Empfohlene Beiträge

In my previous forum American hotrod Vs. Euro Supercar, I asked for feedback on why people thought a Euro supercar was so much better than a well-built American hotrod. I got some great replies but honestly I rather trying to make a statement about the way people regard a supercar, just because its a supercar, and the way people regard an awesome hotrod, just because its a hotrod. Some seemed to think I was out of my mind by comparing the two. I think people are just freaked that they will realise that they paid a hell of a lot of money for a fancy euro name rather than for a better car. Hey well its good to know I'm not the only one who seems to think they CAN be compared. Check out the latest issue of Motortrend... yea, like the biggest car mag on earth. August, 2004, right on the cover... whats it about? Motortrend journalists see that they really can be compared: A Ford Racing Focus RS8 (a full blooded American hotrod by any standard), for as little as 39,000, but upto 105,000 runs with and outruns a 175 grand LAMBO. ANy comments...

Jetzt registrieren, um Themenwerbung zu deaktivieren »

thats true, it won't be sold as is. But I'm sure you could get someone to build it for you for around 10 grand labor. By the way, does anyone know why Ford calls that line of engines "Cammer". Does that have something to do with camshaft?

Actually to build all this individually it would more less come out to $25,000-$30,000 (without installation fees) and i see no reason to dump THAT much money into a regular Ford Focus RS just to beat a Murcielago. Plus all that weight at the front of the car the weight distribution must be unbelievably unbalanced. A FWD V8 in a light-weight car is just stupid for ne type of track driven purpose.

And i guarantee ALL Murcielago owners would die to have paid $220,000 for their Murci much less $275,000 or more for wat they actually paid. U must be confusing urself with the Gallardo ($150,000-$180,000) and not the Murcielago. ;)

Indeed, the " Cammer " derives it's name from having dual-overhead camshafts. The name itself goes back to the very powerful Ford 427 Cammer racing engine of the 60's. Nowadays, Ford uses the Cammer name as more of a marketing gimmick, like Dodge uses Hemi.

Actually, in the M&T article, they make note that the V8 Focus really has better balance than the standard car, since the engine is mounted longitudinally, and the transmission is set further back in the car. The V8 Focus is also rear-drive by the way. They admitted that it was a really silly comparison, but the point of the article was to show that it was possible to make a Lambo challenger out of a humble little Ford.

No doubt, if you really wanted to spend that much to trick your Focus, you could find someone qualified to do it. But something like that exists more for the sake of shear odd-ball fun. Of course there are better ultimate performance platforms - like the Lambo.

From taking a look at everything installed i'd say this damn car would cost over $62,000. (in exception of knowin how much the engine, tranny and car itself costs.)

I'm taking into consideration of a similar principle from the 3G eclipse club. There was a guy that turned his Eclipse into an EVO AWD, EVO powered Eclipse. He engined swapped the Evo V-VII complete engine assembly and the AWD conversion plus the transmission. That alone made his eclipse run over $53,000. Now he upgraded the suspension, turbo's and made a custom interior. He now has the most expensive Eclipse in the world but still not the fastest :lol: sucks doesn't it?

american hotrod and european supercar prejudicies set aside this is like comparing an overworked "cavalier" with a corvette, over boosted neon vs viper, a highly modded civic vs an nsx, tercel vs supra, etc. it really just is a dumb comparison. if people want to ride an overworked econo hatch(or in my case sedan) thats one thing. but to have the weekend car... thats totally different. status symbol, cost, whatever im not into that, but i would buy the lambo before the focus anyday under all conditions, and this is coming from the person who prefers the sport compact.

you cant compare the american hotrod to the euro supercar. they are both made for different things and which to choose is totally a matter of preference. the "better" car for each person sometimes is not affected by cost and most of the time if it is then it is ruled out simply by personal preferences.

also dont put to much faith in magazines.. they are always swayed.

From taking a look at everything installed i'd say this damn car would cost over $62,000. (in exception of knowin how much the engine, tranny and car itself costs.)

The MT site lists the cost of everything done to the Focus, and with all labor, it rounds out to $105,000 along with the price of the car. This also includeds a $3,000 stereo.

But they also tell you how to build a similar machine from a ZX3, for $65,000, including $10,000 labor. So, the cost to modify a car like this doesn't have to be out of this world. It's still cheaper than some high-end Euro coupes. Amazing things can be done with the humblest of cars, that is the beauty of it, and also the reason the crazy V8 Focus exists.


Anzeige eBay

Hallo imported_qramos,


schau doch mal hier zum Thema Zubehör für Sportwagen Kaufberatung (Anzeige)? Eventuell gibt es dort etwas Passendes.

  • Gefällt Carpassion.com 1
viper, a highly modded civic vs an nsx, tercel vs supra, etc. it really just is a dumb comparison. if people want to ride an overworked econo hatch(or in my case sedan) thats one thing

Regarding Bleh's statement about the nature of the comparison, I disagree. The cammer engine is definately not an overworked engine. It is very solidly built and runs lower compression than the gallardo and lower rpm with a calmer cam profile. (Thanks LateNightCable for the explanation of how the engine got its name, btw :lol: .) You know what that means; less stress on the engine. Yes, the cammer engine is actually less stressed than the gallardo engine, which probably, not necessarily, means it will last longer with fewer problems. The drivetrain is also pretty beefy. It is running an 8.8'' rear live axle with positraction equivalent. THats a tough setup that can probably handle a couple hundred more pound feet of torque than what the cammer engine is putting out. Again, reliability.

you cant compare the american hotrod to the euro supercar. they are both made for different things

In this case, they are not made for different things. THey are both made for the track. They both have suspension that is tuned for the track. THey both have gearing for a track. THey have brakes for a track. Its not like the focus is plain just made for the strip. If that were the case than it would have a completely different setup, and would be running high sevens like some of the pure race drag foci out there (Seven second runs were on inline fours, with fwd, mind you.). This is a street car, street legal, and has all the amenities you could want, including a 3g car sound system. It really doesn't look horrible in my opinion, when its face to face with the Gallardo. Thats my opinion though. It doesn't have a gutted interior like a little wanabe civic would have if it wanted to even compare to a gallardo. THis is a different ballgame than a civic alltogether. Look at the interior. Everything matches. You don't have a stupid little MOMO sterring wheel with a set of Razo pedals, and some bright red seat with plastic carbonfiber glued to the dashboard. Infact, take a look at the interior and compare it to the gallardo. Makes you sick right? Not me. Looks good in either cabin. External sculpturing is definately different, though. I love the looks of the Gallardo, and am not so fond of the looks of the focus. Can you see what I mean but this huge speal? MT is on to something; and this article would not have appeal to MT readers if there weren't some comparable element in the face-of. I don't know how to post pics, other wise I would.

ah see this is a real problem when i dont do my homework.. sorry about that. this "focus" is in an entirely different class and i am impressed.

could you post some facts though on this thing? there is definitely a lot i would like to know but motortrend is forcing a sale. i would be particularly interested in the gear ratios...but i know thats pushing my luck

i dont understand your mentioning rice though. no civic needs all that crap to compare to a gallardo cus it never will. the fact that they made a "focus" compare to a gallardo is an amazing feat.

i think this is more of an argument over what a hotrod is. i really dont think that focus is a hotrod.







i dont know about you guys but i think i like the interior of the gallardo better and your right about not getting bright red, you get bright blue.


THats true...the blue is a little bright. You'd always have to be in the mood for that color. Now down to the gearing; beginning with the final drive: it a 4:10:1

The T-5 tranny they used in the Focus was the M-7003-Z (Cobra Spec)

model. I am surprised they didn't go with a T-56 or a more heavy duty version. But non the less, this tranny is pretty tough to say the least

Here are the gear ratios.


Pretty standard except for first which is not as low as the 1990 spec T-5. That would m atch up well with the extra-low final-drive ratio.

Just a bit of history on that tranny. It is the decendant of the early model T-5s. But the early model T-5s had a reputation of blowing up third when powershifter repeatedly or when engine loads were raised for racing. Ford finally recognized the problem and beefed up the tranny to a rated 300 lb.ft in 1990. Third gear was the main thing they changed, along with a few other things, and the reliability of the tranny was really improved. In 1993 an even stronger T-5 was brought in (310 lb.ft) for the new Cobra. This tranny (the 'Z-spec') also had a 2.95 first gear ratio, narrowing the gap between 1st and 2nd gear (non-Z spec have a 3.35 first gear ratio). That's the version they used in this setup.

Hope that helps.

I think that most people think a "hotrod" has to be a muscle car. But that is not really what makes a hotrod. The muscle-car era was a time when GM, Chrysler, and Ford were fighting to have the fastest, best selling cars in the US. SO they were making cars fast from the factory. But that is not what a hotrod is. A hotrod is a car that is taken from the factory, and rebuilt or souped up to make it perform better. That is simply it. For hotrodders of the musclecar era, that is what they were doing, it just so happens that they had great platforms to work with straight from the factoryl. For them they were working on "modern."

Now check out a 1932 Ford roadster, or a 1940 Deluxe coupe for example. These are absolutely classic hotrods. Here is where the word "Hotrod" came into existance. Actually a little before then even; more like the twenties, and for pride's sake, right here in Southern California :lol::lol::lol::wink: THe term hotrod was coined to describe the machines of those crazy car nuts (our ancestors) who simply could not bear to live within the confines of a normal existance. They had to soup their cars up and take them to the desert dry lakes of SoCal to see how fast they could go. This was utterly a new game back them. And so the term was there to describe the go-fast creation of some crazed Cali guys. Cool or what? X-) Thats a hotrod, and the Focus definately carries that go fast, "make the damn thing go faster" spirit into todays world, as the muscle-car heads of the sixties and seventies carried it into their time. :-))!

Am I a little simplistic in my definition? Maybe, but so were they. :D

Gramos, something tells me you've been hitting the history books in a big way! :-))! About the trans they used in the V8 Focus, it's plenty tough enough to handle the power that the 5.0 is putting out and more.

I'm not sure if I read this somewhere, or if I thought it up myself, but I think " Hot Rod " originated from the way those early ones looked, with the often exposed frame rails, hence the term " Rod ".

wow it all makes sense now... large misinterpretation on my part. i assumed hotrod ment straightline etc.

why didnt they use a 6spd though and bring 4th and 5th closer together, then have a 6th? 1.0 to .63 on a 4.1 fd is a pretty big drop.

now O:-) my curiosity has been struck. what is the redline? and i tried to zoom in on the wall paper but i still couldnt tell what the tire size is...

i was also thinking..... how sweet would this thing be if it were awd...i love awd hatches...with power :)

The redline on the 5.0 V8 is a pretty lofty 7,000, which is where it makes peak horsepower. The car itself rides on OZ Racing Superleggera III wheels ( 18"x8" front - 18"x9" rear ) strapped with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires. ( 225/40ZR18 front - 265/35ZR18 rear )

All wheel drive would be very heavy I imagine, and it might mess up the car's already pretty well balanced weight distribution.

I know what you mean Bleh. WHy didn't they use a six speed? :-? It sucks to be stuck with five when you have a 4:10. At least thats how I feel. For dragracing reasons, and massive power, I have a built top-loader with four and not a T-5. But my final drive isn't too different.I have a 4:10 posi in my mustang, and I can't stand freeway driving because of it (It doesn't help that I have 3500 RPM stall either). Thats why I've been wanting to get a racing 2spd overdrive for it. Seems like a t-56 would fit the cammer block. Maybe they just didn't anticipate needing it on the short tracks they had in mind. So did you calculate the theoretical RPM limited top speed? What was it?

What really inpresses me about the focus is how well balanced the handling supposedly is with a live axle. That is an off-the-shelf axle they are using, and it is only offered with a four link setup on the Ford Racing parts catalogue. I know from driving several mustangs, that the four-link rear suspensios is notorious for binding up. SO I don't know how they have this one setup so it performs so well. But, somehow, it does. If I were a Gallardo suspension engineer, I might be blushing a bit that someone made their live axle outperform my multilink, multisetting hightec suspension.

there is no doubt in my mind that the focus will handle well. from what i have read in most magazines the normal focus was set up pretty nicely and if someone had decided to through on some 600+ lb/in springs on there with a balanced sway bar set up then it would work wonders.

now for my complaints and compliments with the tranny:

1st gear tops at 44 making traction much more managable by spreading such large amounts of torque out.

2nd gear tops at 66 good for 0-60 times, another kudos


4th takes you to 129, which should be a little more than enough in the quarter mile.(i speculated so it could be much more than enough or hitting it right on the mark)

then the big mistake: 5th gear tops out at 204. :-(((° for anyone on who wants to pass 130mph. the shift from 4th to 5th brings you further down in rpms than the shift from 1st to 2nd.(1st-2nd=4700 while 4th-5th=4400). it really is almost like the 5th gear was completely removed...

this makes me want to see the torque curve cus now i wonder if it can even make it to the top of 5th

Your numbers up until 5th seem to make sense. But if you are right about 5th, what were they thinking! THere is no way that cammer motor can push that tub against the wind hard enough to get it to 205. NO WAY!!! However, MT states that the top gear RPM @60 is 2750 RPM. According to my math, the top speed turns out to be 152.7 mph. That makes more sense considering that my engine is revving @ about 7000 at 130 mph in final gear (3rd) with a 4.10 rear end.

i am FAR too lazy to calculate all that by myself. i used a gear ratio/mph calculator: http://bob123e.tripod.com/askbob/Gear_Ratio-MPH_Calculator.htm

i just plugged in the numbers and if you do click it, there are a few ads and some of his scripts are kinda funny on ie, like i have to open a new window every time i want to calculate new numbers.

the numbers mt gave seem much more streetable though and make much more sense.... :???: im starting to think you are right and that there is a torque conversion somewhere that i am totally missing, also i think that calculator is ment for integra type r's

if 5th tops at 153 then that means the other gears would be significantly lower also...(sorry guys this is jared's 1am, after a long day at work math)

1st gear would be in the around the mid 30s

2nd in the low 50s(bad for the 0-60)

3rd in the low 70s

4th in the mid 90s

and 5th like you said....152.7....but that is still a very large jump.... and a very oddly made transmission....those weirdos....

Ford is funny in that way, the Mustang for example has a long history of 5-speeds, when it could have used a 6. A T-56 probably would have been a good thing to use, but maybe they like the old-school simplicity of one less gear, or maybe in the case of the Focus RS8, they just used what they had laying around, it is just an experimental project afterall.


Dieses Thema ist archiviert und für weitere Antworten gesperrt. Erstelle doch dein eigenes Thema im passenden Forum.

  • Neu erstellen...