Most probably think the Pantera is the direct descendant of the GT-40. That would make most wrong. The GT-40 was developed from the Lola race car. It has an out board spine. The Pantera was indirectly descended from the Lotus Europa. It has a central spine.
Alesandro liked the europa, but the Europa was butt ugly. So he made an Italian version and called it Vallunga. Then he scaled it up and put a v-8 in it for more power and this became the Mangusta. Then Ford and he got together and made the Pantera with a slightly larger v-8 and a slightly smaller center spine.
So the Pantera is more like a big Europa than it is a slightly larger GT-40. Why I brought this up is just to make people argue and get into fights over it. Stir things up. I enjoy watching people fight. Razzer
Original Post
Mad Mad

Wrong, and I'll prove it. Wink

The true heart of the Pantera is not its chassis, but its powerplant. That, of course, is the Ford Cleveland V-8.

The first smallblock, not flathead, V-8 was the 1962 221 c.i. version. It was installed in the Fairlane.

quote - The first Ford small block was introduced in the new intermediate size Fairlane in 1962. It was designed to be a weight saving power plant with thin cast iron walls. Weighing in at 450 pounds, it was hundreds of pounds lighter than the big block motors. The first small block was a 221 cubic inch motor. The two barrel version was rated at 216 gross horsepower with 8.7:1 compression. - quote

Thus, our Panteras are most certainly not lineage of some silly little Europa, but instead owe their hertitage to the venerable Ford Fairlane.

So there! Razzer

Larry

HEY - Post #700. Do I win a prize??
When Ford want's to build a mid-engine car, Detomaso is aware of this, builds a model and says "we can build this" Ford says "You can use this engine" is that really lineage?

Did it go from Mangusta to Pantera? They drew from it but scrapped the spine chassis.

In the end I don't think it's cut and dried....Unless the Ford GT-40 program specifically took its GT-40 group over to Detomaso to continue the program in another direction.

Gary
Eeker

The Pantera is what the Pantera is, the Pantera.

It is one step short of the "true Italian" GT's, it doesn't have a DeTomaso powerplant.

Detomaso indeed cut his own throat when he decided on an American power plant. That is just plain against the Laws of Mankind. (Yeah right)

And of all engines to put in it, a Ford! OMG!

I for one embrace the Pantera. It's some kinda wierd bastard, just like me.

And as far as what the "real I-talians" think, you don't wanna know what I think.
Imguy .... you hit it on the head ... the real I-talians think ... and the other Europeans think ... the Pantera is exotic.

The Ferarri Boys dont ever want to see a Pantera do anything better then their car .. if that happened with a car that cost 1/4 of the price how would you feel. LOL
Yes it depends on ones point of view, for sure.
Timing is everything though.

I suppose that 5.7 liters of anything is exotic by Euro standards. What are the v12 ferraris of the time, 5 liters? Little tinny whimpy pistons, valves you need a magnifying glass to see, connecting rods made out of dried pasta, cars painted tomato sauce red, geeze!

I really wonder what we would have had if the Pantera been a 427 Ford? 2 x4's, solid lifters, maybe even....the CAMMER!
Talk about an all time ass kicker, wow.

All those Italian GT's would scatter like the pigeons.
quote:
Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
I really wonder what we would have had if the Pantera been a 427 Ford? 2 x4's, solid lifters, maybe even....the CAMMER!
Talk about an all time ass kicker, wow.

All those Italian GT's would scatter like the pigeons.


DeTomaso did make a DOHC conversion for the 351. Too bad it never went into production.
quote:

The first smallblock, not flathead, V-8 was the 1962 221 c.i. version. It was installed in the Fairlane.


The first Ford OHV small block was the Y block introduced in 1954 with 239 cu in. In 1955 it went to 272 cu in, 1956 292 cu in and 312 cu in. There was a 270 hp dual quad option in 1957 and a 300 hp paxton supercharger option. The NASCAR "racing kit" version was 340 hp. 1962 was the last year for the Y block in passenger cars. 1964 was the last year for the Y block in trucks.
quote:
Originally posted by comp2:
...Did it go from Mangusta to Pantera...


The Mangusta was designed to replace the Cobra as Ford's sports car. When Ford got around to checking it out, they of course gave it the thumbs down, and rightly so. Although they are a beautiful design, they are a terrible car. So Alejandro told his friend, Lee Iacocca, come to Italy, I have another car to show you. Ghia, under Tom Tjaarda, already had 3 prototypes in the works. Alejandro called Tom into his office and informed him he had a visitor coming and to prepare the prototypes for presentation. One of those prototypes was chosen by Mr Iacocca, and became the Pantera.

I've never read if the prototypes were originally intended to have a spine chassis, or if a uni-body was intended from the beginning. A good question to ask Tom.
quote:
Originally posted by accobra:
... this is what sat in my barn only month before the Pantera .. 2 of them ...


You know, I love the cammer motor very much, I have years of fond memories maintaining one for a friend named Don.

But the cammer was never a production motor, and Ford was trying to keep costs down.

Had they chosen the cammer motor, the ZF would never had lasted, and the Pantera's flimsy chassis would have twisted & cracked like a pretzel. And if a 300 bhp motor had over heating problems, can you imagine what problems a 600 bhp motor would have had!

When the 427 was first installed in the GT40, to run LeMans 1965, all the 427 equipped GT40s DNF'd with transmission failures.
quote:
Originally posted by accobra:
Panteradoug ... as they say timing is everything .. this is what sat in my barn only month before the Pantera .. 2 of them ..

Ron


Truth is stranger then fiction Ron.
George, I'll bet that Dennis Q is sitting back chuckling about the 427 thing? Apparently his cars run very, pretty, fantastic good with the FE.

May I also point out the quantity of 351/427's running around? Of course if you get Jerry Grant to drive them consider them already broken. Smiler

But don't mind me. I just stoped into this establishment to check out the bartenders buttery nipples. Nice ones too!
Well , JWR, it did. And the Mangusta came from the Vallunga.
Larry, the engine argument was pathetic. A Pantera is a Pantera no matter what engine is in it, same with a Falcon. You are disqualified. So Doug, even IF a Pantera had come with a SHOC, it woulda still been a Pantera and George was right in that the 427 was not a real engine but a race car motor and Ron is still a poopy head for not haveing been the only person in history to have put a SHOC in a Pantera, but I forgive him for his grevious sin, cause he is doing a rotiserie restoration afterall, which gives him bookoo brownie points in my book.
The argument about being a monocoque is a hearing cause the GT-40 was called that too even though it clearly has two sub frames, and the Pantera does have a suedo-sub frame by having tubing on the bottom of the chassis. The Lotus really was a true spine as it had an ibeam running down the center, the Vallunga had a subframe in the rear. So, I guess I WIN!!! Big Grin Eeker
quote:
Originally posted by jwr2968:
...I thought the pantera chassis came from the mangusta...


No.

The Mangusta employs a big box section "spine" to tie the front suspension to the rear. The rear suspension & motor were mounted to a sub-frame, that was in turn bolted to a big plate at the rear of the spine. The coach simply sat on top of the spine. The coach plays no part in the structural integrity of the vehicle, it is not a stressed member. Of course, with the Mangusta, the spine didn't do much of that either! LOL ........

The Pantera is a true uni-body (aka monocoque), the coach provides the structural integrity of the vehicle & ties the front assemblies to the rear assemblies, it is a stressed member. Take it on a track & watch it start cracking.

DeTom is an engineer, he knows all this stuff, he just likes stirring up s**t.

George

Attachments

Photos (1)
quote:
Originally posted by accobra:
Detom,

Sorry man but as I pointed out the SOHC's came before the Pantera ..and they became Pantera money so in reality they are IN the Pantera.

So tell me what came after the Pantera in lineage ? .. the BMW M1 ???


Ron I said I forgive ya man. I know, you had to get the seed money. It was just a historic oppertunity was lost forever, but that is probably because it wasn't meant to be. Maybe if you had actualy done it the world woulda hit an asteroid or something. Who knows.
But yeah the M1 came later, but I dunno, it was not really a spine car either, and as George pointed out, Neither is the Pantera either. The Panetera is a monocouque. Most modern cars are now. The Pantera was way ahead of it's time in a lot of ways.
Another thing that kinda sticks in my craw. Folks saying the Pantera was not a succes. Bull tinky!!! They sold thousand of the. In the three or four years they sold them they sold way more than the same years of Porsche and ferrari put together. Pantera was probably THE most succesfull exotic EVER. Even to this day. So don't listen to them idiots that don't know crap from shoe polish.
quote:
So don't listen to them idiots that don't know crap from shoe polish.


come on Detom you can say it we are all big boys ... but it may be dating myself " shit from shinola " LOL

I have to say as I look at new cars the Pantera chassis is similiar to the new cars .. only problem is when the get hit .. its a pain in the rear end to straighten them.

Ron
Success from Ford's point of view is selling cars and making money.Unfortunately the Pantera as a new car was an image car for Lincoln Mercury.A hard car to sell and be profitable. As the saying goes the used car market has the tendancy to "fix" a new cars problems. As a used car, especailly from todays point of view it is very successful. There are not may cars that bring the kind of money in relation to its selling price.

Take a look at other image (performanmce) cars of recent history. The Impala SS (with the big motor) hard sell new but now bringing big used car money. The other is the Mauruader - another hard sell new but look at the resale value today.

The Pantera may not HAVE BEEN a success but it is a success today!
quote:
The Pantera may not HAVE BEEN a success but it is a success today!

Even back in the day it was a thumping succes. Ford bought the cars for 6K a piece from Detomaso and gave them to dealers for 8K. Dealers sold them for 10K. A pinto RETAILED for less than 2K in them days. The whole car.
Nope the sales failure sob story is a bunch of BS. They made more $ selling one Pantera than a thousand Pintos. I mean look at the Ford GT of late. They sold less than 1500 cars in a run of simular time length. They sold 5000 Panteras in about the same amount of years, for simular costs. Yep 140K today is about what 10K was back in the day. The fact that dealers went ape shit and wanted over 200K for these cars had a big part to play I guess, but the fact remains, the Pantera was a huge hit for what it was.
quote:
They sold 5000 Panteras in about the same amount of years, for similar costs.


True enough. Do the math at about 9%. And 7200 cars were sold worldwide. The Pantera was the GT40 of it's day. And, even considering all the rework costs on the early cars, the Pantera program actually made money. However, the embarassment of the less than enthusiastic press reviews and the costs associated with the new car requirements of the mid 70's together with the fuel crisis killed any enthusiasm for the car at Ford.

BTW, the Vallelunga predated the Europa. DeTomaso and Chapman knew each other and both developed the spine chassis at about the same time. DeTomaso was using it in his early race cars but he rarely gets any credit for developing it.
The Pantera's dealer mark-up per car was higher than any other Ford/Lincoln/Mercury vehicle had ever been. The dealers made money on them! Corporate Ford's gross income on the project was over $5M (1970 dollars). I'll bet that exceeded their expenditures too. The sole purpose of the car was to increase foot traffic at Lincoln dealerships, which it did. The project cost Ford nothing, the dealer's profit was unprecedented, and the Pantera succeeded in bringing customers to Lincoln dealerships. Sounds successful to me.

There were insiders at Ford pulling to keep the Pantera alive. Technical & production issues were there, but many had been resolved by 1974. The US market went soft on performance cars, but Ford wasn't manufacturing these cars, DeTomaso automobili was. The pinch of low production numbers is felt at the production end. In other words, DeTomaso felt the pinch, not Ford.

The true issue that killed Ford's involvement with the Pantera project were personality (ego) conflicts. Ford brass wasn't going to tolerate it, so the word came down from the top, pull the plug.

If you want a clue, notice that the US GTS Panteras have no DeTomaso badges on them, not one. The DeTomaso badges were all replaced with GTS or Ghia badges (by 1974 Ford owned Ghia). Even the sales literature was edited and any mention of DeTomaso was removed. It was personality conflicts that killed Ford's involvement with the Pantera.
quote:
Originally posted by george pence:
quote:
Originally posted by comp2:
...Did it go from Mangusta to Pantera...


The Mangusta was designed to replace the Cobra as Ford's sports car. When Ford got around to checking it out, they of course gave it the thumbs down, and rightly so. Although they are a beautiful design, they are a terrible car. So Alejandro told his friend, Lee Iacocca, come to Italy, I have another car to show you. Ghia, under Tom Tjaarda, already had 3 prototypes in the works. Alejandro called Tom into his office and informed him he had a visitor coming and to prepare the prototypes for presentation. One of those prototypes was chosen by Mr Iacocca, and became the Pantera.

I've never read if the prototypes were originally intended to have a spine chassis, or if a uni-body was intended from the beginning. A good question to ask Tom.



George I actually question the validity of that. I know they were working with Shelby and Ford at the time but that was one of many deals Shelby left with some one else holding the bag. I think people like to tout it was the next car in their sequence but I believe it over rated.

The whole thing is like taking a Corvette and making the Nova the next car in sequence. I don't see a bridge other then involvement by some people.

I don't see the difference in the spine chassis killing the connection between the Mangusta and the Pantera. They were both Detomaso/Ford V8 mid engine cars designed one right after another. How could there be no lineage there. The Spine chassis soon found severe handling issues so it was natural it was abondoned. I see no difference in the development of the Corvette and some of the suspension changes it made.
Likes (0)
Post
×
×
×
×