When I decided to drive the long-term 2005 Ford GT from Los Angeles to Denver for my high school reunion
I had some expectations, assumptions and hopes. I expected it to provide a relatively comfortable and entertaining form of high-speed travel. I assumed it would prove fully functional over a 2,300-mile road trip. And I hoped it didn't suffer any mechanical maladies.
Turns out my plan was flawed; my expectations, assumptions and hopes skewed far too low. Not only did the Ford GT prove a flawless cross-country mount but it performed said duty at a level I didn't predict. I'd like to think Ford's exotic couldn't still surprise me after 13,000 miles, but it could and did.
For example, while I've driven the GT on a few long-distance journeys they were always in the confines of our nation's most populous state. In contrast, this trip had me traveling through such wide-open spaces as Nevada, Arizona and Utah, where the car's high-speed demeanor could be fully utilized.
Under these circumstances the car feels most settled at around 2,400 rpm, but in sixth gear that's about 100 mph. So far no surprise, right? But what if the car were capable of a consistent 20 mpg at those speeds? I'm not sure what kind of mileage a Prius or Civic would pull at 100 mph, but I would argue when you triangulate mpg against travel speed (and thus travel time) the Ford GT starts to look pretty damn fuel efficient. Of course on a 107-mile stretch that included Las Vegas (and road construction) I was forced to travel at closer to a 70 mph average. On that run I recorded 26.2 mpg.
And if you think the GT pulls that mileage with a super high sixth gear...well, you're right. But with the Stage One mods on this car (supercharger pulley, ECU reflash and Ford Racing/Borla exhaust) the broader torque band means you never have to shift out of that high sixth gear -- even when scaling Vail and Loveland pass at approximately 11,000 feet. In fact I didn't just slog up those mountains, I passed other traffic and continually placed the car where I wanted in traffic, all without downshifting.
Needless to say this trip was a boon for the Ford GT's lifetime fuel mileage, which is now at exactly 16.987106. Not bad for a 600 rear-wheel-horsepower supercar that's knocked off a zero-to-60 time of 3.5 seconds.
"Okay, so the car makes the most out of non-renewable resources, but what about storage capacity? Is there really space for two people and luggage?"
Glad you asked. There's no doubt careful planning is necessary when packing for a trip in the GT. But it did carry the wife and me, and a good chunk of luggage, across the country without the use of a chase vehicle.
The front cargo hold handled my small carry-on bag, as well as two pairs of shoes.
Behind the driver's seat I stashed my water bottle, some packages I bought and my jacket (that I never needed during the trip...). Behind the passenger's seat I placed my office bag (or "man-purse" in Seinfeld-ese), another water bottle and travel munchies. In front of the passener's seat was my wife's tote bag, but she still had enough room for her legs and feet (she's 5'4").
The wife gave the GT an official thumbs up as a road tripper, commenting that, "It really surprised me. The seats are very comfortable. Not quite as good as the Honda Pilot's, but way better than the Jeep Commander's."
Another first-time factor on this trip was rain, as it came down in scattered showers during most of the five hours we spent crossing Utah. Except for one three-minute sprinkle about a year ago the GT had never driven through any real weather before, and certainly not in substantial rain and over drenched roadways. I wasn't even sure the wipers worked.
But they did, as did the tires, door gaskets and underbody seals. It started raining, I turned on the wipers...and just kept going. Reason for celebration? Obviously not form the GT's point of view, but I know plenty of supercars (and supercar owners) that would sooner drive through Baghdad rush hour than drive in the rain.
So once again, 2,300 miles, 600 horsepower, 20 mpg, two passengers (plus luggage), 0-to-60 in 3.5 seconds and ZERO problems.
Did I already mention how impressed I am with the Ford GT?
ahightower says:
12:17 PM, 07/25/08
Awesome. I suppose there are a few other performance cars that could do it too. 911 or Corvette would probably have much better luggage space too. But neither are half as unique.
Karl Brauer says:
12:50 PM, 07/25/08
Good point. I didn't include the number of head turns, double takes, waves, points, etc. over my one-week drive because I didn't officially record them. But the total would likely be close to my miles-driven number.
cruiserhead1 says:
01:06 PM, 07/25/08
impressive stats but I hate you because you got to road trip the GT and enjoy the R8 as well.
cah11705 says:
01:17 PM, 07/25/08
So whats a better road trip super car, the r8 or gt?
Karl Brauer says:
01:37 PM, 07/25/08
If you're going for pure comfort/luxury (plus cargo space), the R8.
If you're going for pure attention factor (and still solid comfort/luxury) the GT.
cjasis says:
02:35 PM, 07/25/08
Great write up.
I'm not trying to "stir the pot" here but honestly... how can Ford engineer and build this car (which by all accounts is nothing short of magnificent) and then turn around and build a piece of junk like the current US Focus?
I don't get it.
pengwin says:
02:38 PM, 07/25/08
Showing off the car at your reunion eh?
Karl Brauer says:
03:14 PM, 07/25/08
Sort of showing it off. Most people didn't see it but the drive to-and-from Denver was the main point of the trip.
The GT is proof that Ford is more than capable of building world-beating product at a competitive price (remember, the GT undercut the Ferrari 360's price by a large margin and kicked its a$$ in pretty much every area; same was/is true of the F430).
It was obivously a special case in that Ford broke out their best talent and let them run with minimal interference to produce the car quickly.
Still, if they can do it for a low-volume exotic they can (and should!) do it for a high-volume economy car. Let's hope the new Fiesta shows the same brilliance as the GT.
pengwin says:
09:31 PM, 07/25/08
Mondeo. I'd buy a mondeo. Anything less...nah.
linard says:
01:06 AM, 07/26/08
I'm impressed, I tried taking two trips in the GT and well, during the first one, we had torrential downpours in California and the wipers stopped working and the car felt as though it had NO directional stability, found out later it had a control arm issue. The second time, the car ate through it's 4th clutch in 3,500 miles. Our was an early 2005 model though.
And while in a different league, the BEST roadtrip supercar in my opinion is the Mercedes SLR, you get attention, comfort, cargo space, performance and CRUISE CONTROL all rolled up into one. Best banzai LA to Vegas and back car ever!
As a sidenote, we can't post pictures anymore? I have a great shot of the GT dead on the side of the 55 freeway in Southern California.
karjunkie says:
09:47 AM, 07/27/08
26.2 mpg is an awesome number! Then again the GT is aa slippery little devil. Still,thats about what I get on the highway in a BMW 540i with less than 300 ponies. I have to echo the others that it's a shame Ford can't do better on their mainstream vehicles. Clearly, they have the technology.
Michelle Magoffin says:
02:46 PM, 07/28/08
Wow, I didn't realize your wife was with you on the trip. Even more impressive.
desmolicious says:
03:42 PM, 07/28/08
"The GT is proof that Ford is more than capable of building world-beating product at a competitive price (remember, the GT undercut the Ferrari 360's price by a large margin and kicked its a$$ in pretty much every area; same was/is true of the F430)."
Was the GT a money maker for Ford or a halo car that lost them money? This is significant as Ferrari makes money selling the F360 and F430.
It's one thing beating the competition, but it's another beating the competition while turning a profit in doing so.
Either way, the Ford is a splendid motorcar.
stingray454 says:
11:38 AM, 07/29/08
The Ford GT was a halo car to celebrate Ford's 100th anniversary. It was never designed to be profitable, and as far as I know, it was not.
Karl Brauer says:
01:19 PM, 07/29/08
The GT neither made nor lost money for Ford. But people inside Ford were annoyed at the pricing after it launched. When they saw what the cars were changing hands at they realized they just made a bunch of dealers wealthy rather than making the vehicle genuinely profitable for the company. Plus there was a enough of a price disparity between the GT ($139,995) and the 360 Modena ($180,000) that Ford could have tacked on another $30,000 and still beat the 360 in price (and performance), while making it a strong business case, too.
Still, as is, the car was a SCREAMING bargain if you bought one anywhere near MSRP (and a pretty good long-term investment, too...).
desmolicious says:
03:41 PM, 07/29/08
You couldn't get a new Modena for $180,000. Closer to $220,000 after dealer mark up...
Porsche did the same mistake with the pricing of the 959 as Ford did with the GT, but even more so.
They lost a tonne of money on that car, and then saw it change hands for up to $1 million!
karjunkie says:
10:43 AM, 07/30/08
Karl, a question on your points. Why couldn't Ford have enforced pricing at the dealer level and produced more cars? With the demand that must have existed, this car could have been a real competitor to Ferrari, Lamborghini and Maserati. The original Lambo Gallardo as I remember was priced at $160K and sold like the proverbial hotcakes!
tryan says:
03:29 AM, 07/31/08
Alright, I'll comment on the obvious:
I KNOW it's a 'supercar' and all the fan-fare/hoopla that goes with it, but getting excited about a trouble-free 2300 mile roadtrip, much less the wipers and door seals working as designed?
I respect the engineering accomplishment and performance-value that the GT represents, but still, when was the last time you got excited about the Honda Accord routinely pulling off the same duty? The point is, haven't we gotten to a point in this day and age where the expectation (even of supercars) is that vehicles provide their owners with a relatively trouble-free existence?
e34bmwlover says:
11:16 AM, 09/25/08
Sorry I'm late to the party, I didn't even know IL had Ford GT in their fleet. Anyway, I think that's pretty impressive MPG numbers, but why the hell Jeremy Clarkson could only get 4MPG when he drove thru france?
Do you guys now what the MPG numbers for the stock Ford GT? Cause this GT you got have some mods that makes it fuel efficient
editor_karl says:
11:11 AM, 09/29/08
The mods to this GT only happened the past year. Before that it was totally stock and still averaging over 16 mpg after 10,000 miles.