All New Ferrari F50 Gt Pictures!!!! New!!!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter pimp racer
  • 26 comments
  • 1,777 views
I have always liked this car for some reason, but I need bigger resolution than 1024x768. Too bad my laptop runs 1680x1050 resolution and needs like a 1600x1200 resolution. :sigh: But do I love having the widescreen resolution and the clarity it offers.
 
VashTheStampede
I have always liked this car for some reason, but I need bigger resolution than 1024x768. Too bad my laptop runs 1680x1050 resolution and needs like a 1600x1200 resolution. :sigh: But do I love having the widescreen resolution and the clarity it offers.
Click to expand...
:lol: there is places that have it that big you just have to search.
Welll i dont think i know of anywhere with F50gt images that big but in the meantime this will have to do the F40 LM (incase you were wondering what LM stands for its stands for Loudmusic. :lol:)http://www.highresautoimages.com/1600/ferrari/f40lm.html
 
Yeah, I know about both Fast-Autos.net and Highresautoimages.com. The same person does both of them. And I would definitely recommend both to everyone. 👍
 
If you think Highresautoimages.com is good, go to Fast-Autos.net too. Then go to Photo Archive and there is a whole lot there too.
 
pimp racer
I dont like the rear wing when you see a picture of it from the back or at an angled top view but from the front it looks a bit cool.
Click to expand...
Nah. It look weird. But I think the design is horrible.
 
pimp racer
Hmm... What is it that you dont like about the desigin? EX. THe front bumper or the rar or the mid frame something like that.
Click to expand...
It don't seem like a true ferrari look to it.
 
Darin
It don't seem like a true ferrari look to it.
Click to expand...


I dont want to make a big deal out of this, but this is as true as a ferrari can get.. This ferrari was lapping faster then the ferrari 333sp.. look that car up and then you will realise that is no small step...

This car has been crashed twice , the first time it was sent back to ferrari with frame damage which had to be fixed. this took a long time, as there are no molds for this car because they were destroyed after the 3 examples were made.

The car crashed again , recently after an accident and laguna seca, this time only the shell of the car was damaged, and they dont expect the repairs to be long on it. :)
 
Avenix
I dont want to make a big deal out of this, but this is as true as a ferrari can get.. This ferrari was lapping faster then the ferrari 333sp.. look that car up and then you will realise that is no small step...

This car has been crashed twice , the first time it was sent back to ferrari with frame damage which had to be fixed. this took a long time, as there are no molds for this car because they were destroyed after the 3 examples were made.

The car crashed again , recently after an accident and laguna seca, this time only the shell of the car was damaged, and they dont expect the repairs to be long on it. :)
Click to expand...

I'm not doubting its fast. And if its quicker than the F33SP, oh damn no doubt its fast. But it leaves me with the question.

Why didn't Ferrari use this car for endurance racing?
 
Darin
I'm not doubting its fast. And if its quicker than the F33SP, oh damn no doubt its fast. But it leaves me with the question.

Why didn't Ferrari use this car for endurance racing?
Click to expand...

The ferrari f50gt1 program was requiring to much money and its around this time that Ferrari decided that their last attempt at endurance racing was the 333sp.

At this point ferrari decided that they would focus all funding on their formula 1 development and racing team. and we all know the story from there :)

it truly is a shame that this car was not developed longer, although I'm quite sure Mclaren is happy... now Im a huge fan of the Mclaren F1 gtr , but this car would have been a handful even for the mighty mclaren racers. 👍
 
Yep, he is right. Ferrari saw the development costs for the F50 GT as too much and cancelled the programme for that reason.

Personally, I think the F50 GT is a whole lot better looking than the road car. I love the pure racer look of the car. It looks so freakin' sweet in just the Ferrari Red colour with the black wheels. The F50 GT is probably one of my favourite cars. Plus you cannot beat a V12 engine revving to some where around 11,000rpms.
 
pimp racer
Because they suck and dedicates probably most of their money to F1. I would LOVE to see this in anytype of edurance race!
Click to expand...
The F50 GT would be over run. The LeMans cars today would punish it like nothing. But it would be a treat to see.
 
Darin
The F50 GT would be over run. The LeMans cars today would punish it like nothing. But it would be a treat to see.
Click to expand...
:lol: yeah but think about it in the old days wouldnt that have been cool to see it against the CLK GTR or the CLR whichever.
 
pimp racer
WHOA DUDE WHAT THE HEL! only 383.5 amout of tourque!
Torque 520.0 nm / 383.5 ft lbs @ 8000 rpm
Click to expand...

Your point being? Not every car needs 8000lb-ft of the twisty stuff. It is not like the car really needs it down low, as it will never spend any time down low in the revs; in fact, it will be spending most of it's time around the 10,500rpm redline where it will need the torque that it produces. And if you look at where the torque peaks at, 8,000rpm, then it will pretty much always be right there in the bulk of the torque. Not only will it be spending most of it time right around that part of the rev range, but you also have to look at the weight of the car. The F50 GT weighs in at 2005 lbs. So less torque will be needed to propel the car just as quickly as one that weighs more.

And have you not noticed, but most Ferrari cars are like this. Their cars have a shorter stroke; meaning less torque, but also more revs and thus more horsepower. Horsepower is much more important at this point; if the F50 GT would have been taken to Le Mans, then it probably should have had a very good top speed down the Mulsanne Straight because of that extra horsepower created by the sacrifice of some of the torque.

And am I not the only here that thinks Ferrari probably know what they are doing when it comes to cars? Ferrari is very successful with their well backed programmes, i.e. Formula 1. So unless we actually knew what the car could have been capable of, only then could we judge if that so called lack of torque would have meant anything.

I think the lack of extreme amounts of torque and having the shorter stroke--thus giving the abilitry for many more revs--would make for one hell of a beautiful sounding scream. I can only imagine how much of a screamer that wonderful Ferrari V12 would be.
 
VashTheStampede
Your point being? Not every car needs 8000lb-ft of the twisty stuff. It is not like the car really needs it down low, as it will never spend any time down low in the revs; in fact, it will be spending most of it's time around the 10,500rpm redline where it will need the torque that it produces. And if you look at where the torque peaks at, 8,000rpm, then it will pretty much always be right there in the bulk of the torque. Not only will it be spending most of it time right around that part of the rev range, but you also have to look at the weight of the car. The F50 GT weighs in at 2005 lbs. So less torque will be needed to propel the car just as quickly as one that weighs more.

And have you not noticed, but most Ferrari cars are like this. Their cars have a shorter stroke; meaning less torque, but also more revs and thus more horsepower. Horsepower is much more important at this point; if the F50 GT would have been taken to Le Mans, then it probably should have had a very good top speed down the Mulsanne Straight because of that extra horsepower created by the sacrifice of some of the torque.

And am I not the only here that thinks Ferrari probably know what they are doing when it comes to cars? Ferrari is very successful with their well backed programmes, i.e. Formula 1. So unless we actually knew what the car could have been capable of, only then could we judge if that so called lack of torque would have meant anything.

I think the lack of extreme amounts of torque and having the shorter stroke--thus giving the abilitry for many more revs--would make for one hell of a beautiful sounding scream. I can only imagine how much of a screamer that wonderful Ferrari V12 would be.
Click to expand...

:lol: no 8000 would be too much but i mean if it was like 486 or something then it would be a bit quicker.
 
AWESOME! So this makes that the 2nd event where the car has had pics of it posted right?

1 at that Speedway,
and now that course.

Right?
 
pimp racer
:lol: no 8000 would be too much but i mean if it was like 486 or something then it would be a bit quicker.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with you; but Ferrari does know what they are doing. So really now with the car having no real race experience, it is definitely hard to tell whether the lack of torque would have truly mattered.

Now I have to go back to how the engine would sound. I am sure that Ferrari V12 just sounds heavenly.
 

Similar threads

MatskiMonk
The GT7 Livery Editor Competition #46: All Livery Open (CLOSED)
2
Replies
47
Views
8K
MatskiMonk
MatskiMonk
MatskiMonk
The GT7 Livery Editor Competition #52: Hot Wheels (CLOSED)
Replies
19
Views
3K
SouperK
S
M
Original New Car Design Pictures
Replies
1
Views
432
syntex123
syntex123
MatskiMonk
The GT7 Livery Editor Competition #51: Le Mans
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
MatskiMonk
MatskiMonk
MatskiMonk
The GT7 Livery Editor Competition #47: Cartificial Intelligence (CLOSED)
2 3
Replies
61
Views
10K
SouperK
S

Latest Posts

Back