Ford v Ferrari – which car was best? | GRR
I promise this will be my last word on the Le Mans ’66 film (or Ford v Ferrari in the USA) at least for a while, but it occurred to me that for anyone who might be pondering the relative merits of the Ford GT40 and the Ferrari P3 that are the lead automotive protagonists of the film, I may be able to shed a little light.
No I’ve not driven a 7.0-litre MkII GT40 like that which won the race – and know of no journalist who has – but I’ve been lucky enough to drive a few 4.7-litre cars of the kind sold to customer race teams at the time. And I really have driven a P3, albeit a 1967 car, officially called a 412P but known to most as a P3/4. It is essentially a P3 updated to P4 spec, but with a two valve, carb fed version of Ferrari’s 4.0-litre V12 race motor, as opposed to the three valve fuel injected engines used in the works P4s. So close enough, I hope, for these purposes.
Despite its smaller capacity, Ferrari’s quad cam V12 would, in period, have almost certainly had more power than Ford’s pushrod V8. Today a well-built 289cu in Ford motor can produce 470bhp, but 50 years ago, I’d be surprised if it had 400bhp. The Ferrari makes 420bhp at 8,000rpm, about 30bhp short of what the ‘real’ P4 had to offer.
Both have wide sills that need to be stepped over, but the ex-Maranello Concessionaires 412P I drove had Spider bodywork, so with the GT40 door cutting so far into the roof it too feels like a Spider with the door open, both are surprisingly easy to climb aboard and slip down into their ridiculously low slung seats.
Even before you’ve gone anywhere, the Ford feels as it is: stronger and heavier. The Ferrari feels like delicate jewel, with bespoke controls, an open gate gearshift and an astonishing view forward over those curvaceous front wings. The Ford is much more a tool for doing the job.
But it would be a mistake to conclude therefore that it was the Ferrari that was necessarily the more fragile of the two. Yes, if I had to crash one I’d far rather be in the monocoque Ford, but if I had to back one to survive 24 hours, my money would be on the Ferrari every time. Contrary to what I think most people think about American V8s, the Ford motor is easy to damage, especially if you downshift a little early, while the ZF gearbox is not the strongest either. By contrast Ferrari’s higher revving, freer-spinning V12 could be hammered into the ground and not quit on its driver.
The customer Ferrari would also likely have been quicker than the customer GT40, but it was a pure prototype while the Ford was far more a production race car, of which dozens were made, compared to a less than a handful of 412Ps. Even so, it’s worth remembering that it took a 7.0-litre motor before Ford finally bludgeoned its way to a performance advantage over its rival.
I’ve not driven both on track at the same time, but my memories of the Ferrari are of a car with light steering, a super-precise gearbox, the most exquisite sound and a sense of occasion rivalled by very few others indeed. The Ford is heavier to handle, slower to shift thanks to its synchromesh ‘box, but with a sound that, while all Detroit thunder rather than Maranello music, is no less captivating for that.
If I could choose to drive one again, it would be the Ferrari because of its rarity, the sweetness of its sound, and its thoroughbred feel. But in period almost no-one would have had that choice: Ferrari only supplied 412Ps to its favoured teams: Maranello Concessionaires in the UK, the North American Racing Team, Scuderia Filipinetti in Switzerland and Ecurie Nationale Belge. Ford, by contrast, would sell a GT40 to anyone who wanted one. Both are magical motor cars.
Images courtesy of Motorsport Images.