Ford's upcoming supercar will feature Gorilla Glass-laced windshield

[Shawn Knight]

Corning's Gorilla Glass is used in countless smartphones and tablets due to its impressive scratch-resistance characteristics. But it's the glass' light weight that has once again attracted the attention of those in the automotive industry.

Gorilla Glass was first conceived in the '60s as a product called Chemcor. It was used in a variety of commercial and industrial applications (including in the automotive industry) until the early '90s. It wasn't until the mid 2000s that a need for hardened glass once again presented itself in the form of mobile devices. Corning went back to work, refining its formula to create the Gorilla Glass we know today.

Ford plans to use the technology in its upcoming supercar, the Ford GT. As Car and Driver notes, the special glass will consist of three layers: automotive-grade Gorilla Glass as the inner layer, a noise-absorbing thermoplastic adhesive middle layer and an annealed soda lime glass on the outside.

It'll be utilized to create the windshield and rear engine cover, resulting in a 32 percent weight reduction (about 12 pounds) compared to traditional automotive glass. That may not sound like much but in a high-performance vehicle, weight reduction is the name of the game. Ford says the weight reduction will positively impact acceleration, braking performance, fuel economy and handling.

The Ford GT is expected to retail for more than $400,000.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/63168-ford-upcoming-supercar-feature-gorilla-glass-laced-windshield.html

 

[VitalyT]

As far as I know all the Corning products so far have been single-layer.

A good sound shielding as achieved today by double-glazing and even triple-glazing the glass.

There are plenty of premium cars that use double-glazed windows, like Mercedes S-class, BMW 7-series, Bentley, etc...

Triple-glazed windows are now very popular in colder areas, because of their heat-keeping qualities in addition to an incredible sound isolation.

That, plus we don't know yet how it will perform under extreme stress, raises a question about its wider usability. We know how a glass wind shield shutters in tiny pieces, but what does the Corning glass do under maximum stress, and what will it do to the car and to the passengers...

P.S. Ford GT is perhaps the most over-priced performance car in the world. One can buy a much better Ferrari or Lambo for that kind of money, and still have plenty left. And changing the glass isn't gonna help Ford push this piece of junk any further.

 

[lripplinger]

As far as I know all the Corning products so far have been single-layer.

A good sound shielding as achieved today by double-glazing and even triple-glazing the glass.

There are plenty of premium cars that use double-glazed windows, like Mercedes S-class, BMW 7-series, Bentley, etc...

Triple-glazed windows are now very popular in colder areas, because of their heat-keeping qualities in addition to an incredible sound isolation.

That, plus we don't know yet how it will perform under extreme stress, raises a question about its wider usability. We know how a glass wind shield shutters in tiny pieces, but what does the Corning glass do under maximum stress, and what will it do to the car and to the passengers...

P.S. Ford GT is perhaps the most over-priced performance car in the world. One can buy a much better Ferrari or Lambo for that kind of money, and still have plenty left. And changing the glass isn't gonna help Ford push this piece of junk any further.

I don't know if this car is a "piece of junk" is a fair thing to say, but wow....$400k for a car that has one of their turbo 3.5L V6's in it their lame marketing calls "Ecoboost" when it turns out those engines don't produce the fuel economy that Ford claims??? Where is the V8 Ford?? I wonder how much it will be to replace the windshield when a nice big rock chips it, and cracks form. Or does this 3 layer glass resist that better than your normal automotive windshield?? And that is a good point...how does the windshield stand up in a car wreck? How will it hold up to road debris that impales the windshield? Many questions to be answered for sure....

 

[Adhmuz]

That, plus we don't know yet how it will perform under extreme stress, raises a question about its wider usability. We know how a glass wind shield shutters in tiny pieces, but what does the Corning glass do under maximum stress, and what will it do to the car and to the passengers...

You can be sure Ford has done some extensive testing to be using the technology, what reason do you have to believe it will perform visually any different from regular automotive windshields. The exterior Soda Lime glass will spider web the same, the Gorilla glass layer is replacing the tradition cellulose inner layer, a technology first used by Henry Ford in 1919, and changed the way the industry looked at windshields, some would call that innovative.

P.S. Ford GT is perhaps the most over-priced performance car in the world. One can buy a much better Ferrari or Lambo for that kind of money, and still have plenty left. And changing the glass isn't gonna help Ford push this piece of junk any further.

They only plan on making 200 of these, of which all are likely to already be sold and at $400,000 I wouldn't consider that over priced at all given what's going in to this car, clearly you don't know anything about this car other than it's made by Ford and immediately shun it. The company that will be making these is not a generic Ford assembly line, it'll be build by a private Canadian company called Multimatic whom which "engineered and constructed the carbon chassis and suspension systems for the RUF CTR3 and Aston Martin One-77" the ladder being a multi million dollar car, that alone should say something. The entire body is made from carbon fiber, it has active aerodynamics, 600 HP twin turbocharged engine, and it only weights 1300kg. The potential is there, you may look past it, but until it gets some reviews, testing, no one will really know.

 

[VitalyT]

clearly you don't know anything about this car

Plastic-made, cheap-looking cockpit, under-performing V6. In the world of super cars, it is as shameful as it gets. Clearly, you know nothing about this car.

 

[Adhmuz]

Plastic-made, cheap-looking cockpit, under-performing V6. In the world of super cars, it is as shameful as it gets. Clearly, you know nothing about this car.

Well Damn, you sure know everything there is to know about this car don't you... In what world does a 600HP engine in a car weighting 1300kg "under-perform"? This equates to 0.46 HP per kilo, the same as the McLaren P1 and only 0.01 HP per kilo less than the Ferrari F12, both of these cars cost well over twice as much, but you know everything to know about cars already right? So why bring any of that up if your not going to listen to it anyways. Combine that astonishing power to weight ratio with a carbon fiber monocoque chassis and F1 inspired suspension, should be a pretty pour performer in your eyes right? How about you show me that you know more than what you gather from looking at pictures and I can start taking you seriously, otherwise, conversation over.

 

[VitalyT]

Well Damn, you sure know everything there is to know about this car don't you... In what world does a 600HP engine in a car weighting 1300kg "under-perform"? This equates to 0.46 HP per kilo, the same as the McLaren P1 and only 0.01 HP per kilo less than the Ferrari F12, both of these cars cost well over twice as much, but you know everything to know about cars already right? So why bring any of that up if your not going to listen to it anyways. Combine that astonishing power to weight ratio with a carbon fiber monocoque chassis and F1 inspired suspension, should be a pretty pour performer in your eyes right? How about you show me that you know more than what you gather from looking at pictures and I can start taking you seriously, otherwise, conversation over.

Here's the basics for you to understand about engines...

Extra ponies for a cheap engine is like extra megapixels for a cheap camera, it doesn't deliver.

In case of cars, all the extra HP comes from turbos, and the biggest problem with turbos - their require a good spin to kick in, which results in uneven power delivery all the time. Even under ideal conditions turbos can get laggy at high speed.

This is why you are not going to see a V6 in a Bentley or a Ferrari. They can always swap it for a V6 with more HP than their V12, but the power delivery will be terrible by comparison.

A V6 with 2 turbos in a car that's over $400K, that's taking the piss. Only a person who doesn't know anything about engines would buy one. That engine can only produce about 300hp, while the extra 300hp all come from the large-a$$ turbos, with the result likely to resemble a donkey ride, it will deliver when it feels like.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Corning's Gorilla Glass is used in countless smartphones and tablets due to its impressive scratch-resistance characteristics. But it's the glass' light weight that has once again attracted the attention of those in the automotive industry.

Some history of Corning Glass - when they first made they hunted around for a good use. What, they wondered, would be a great application for this very strong, but a little more expensive glass. Home windows? no... they're strong enough. But cars could benefit, right? Well, sure they could, but super strong glass in a car also has a big downside - it feels like a brick wall when a passenger without a seat belt hits the windshield in an accident. After a few too many crash-test dummies got their 'heads' cracked, they scrapped the idea and the glass sat on the shelf until smartphones came along.

So... what's changed? maybe nothing... maybe that' why it's 'laced' with Gorilla Glass and not 100% Gorilla Glass. Anyone know?

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

The Ford GT (40) is the only decent supercar the Yanks have ever made, I only hope they don't stuff it up in it's latest iteration.

 

[Mandark]

It is a supercar, worthy of super glass... nuff said

 

[Mandark]

Corning's Gorilla Glass is used in countless smartphones and tablets due to its impressive scratch-resistance characteristics. But it's the glass' light weight that has once again attracted the attention of those in the automotive industry.

Some history of Corning Glass - when they first made they hunted around for a good use. What, they wondered, would be a great application for this very strong, but a little more expensive glass. Home windows? no... they're strong enough. But cars could benefit, right? Well, sure they could, but super strong glass in a car also has a big downside - it feels like a brick wall when a passenger without a seat belt hits the windshield in an accident. After a few too many crash-test dummies got their 'heads' cracked, they scrapped the idea and the glass sat on the shelf until smartphones came along.

So... what's changed? maybe nothing... maybe that' why it's 'laced' with Gorilla Glass and not 100% Gorilla Glass. Anyone know?

Why are people driving without restraints? that is just insane. This is a perfect application for their product anyway. It's a race car, and if you are stupid enough to drive without restraints, well, then you shouldn't be contributing to the gene pool or even driving for that matter.

 

[BrianMontanye]

Well Damn, you sure know everything there is to know about this car don't you... In what world does a 600HP engine in a car weighting 1300kg "under-perform"? This equates to 0.46 HP per kilo, the same as the McLaren P1 and only 0.01 HP per kilo less than the Ferrari F12, both of these cars cost well over twice as much, but you know everything to know about cars already right? So why bring any of that up if your not going to listen to it anyways. Combine that astonishing power to weight ratio with a carbon fiber monocoque chassis and F1 inspired suspension, should be a pretty pour performer in your eyes right? How about you show me that you know more than what you gather from looking at pictures and I can start taking you seriously, otherwise, conversation over.

Here's the basics for you to understand about engines...

Extra ponies for a cheap engine is like extra megapixels for a cheap camera, it doesn't deliver.

In case of cars, all the extra HP comes from turbos, and the biggest problem with turbos - their require a good spin to kick in, which results in uneven power delivery all the time. Even under ideal conditions turbos can get laggy at high speed.

This is why you are not going to see a V6 in a Bentley or a Ferrari. They can always swap it for a V6 with more HP than their V12, but the power delivery will be terrible by comparison.

A V6 with 2 turbos in a car that's over $400K, that's taking the piss. Only a person who doesn't know anything about engines would buy one. That engine can only produce about 300hp, while the extra 300hp all come from the large-a$$ turbos, with the result likely to resemble a donkey ride, it will deliver when it feels like.

You must not have been in a modern, twin turbo powered vehicle. The idea here is that you have two different sized turbos, one smaller and one larger. The smaller one requires less to spin and takes the turbo lag to a minimum at lower rpm. The larger one kicks in at a higher rpm and give it the oomph. If done properly, it is fairly seamless. I'm pretty sure Ford has incorporated this or another system to get rid of the turbo lag. Is it worth 400k? Probably not to most buyers. I am not a Ford guy for sure but I do respect the car, it should be very fast and very track worthy. I'd still prefer a fully specced out C7 Z.

 

[VitalyT]

You must not have been in a modern, twin turbo powered vehicle. The idea here is that you have two different sized turbos, one smaller and one larger. The smaller one requires less to spin and takes the turbo lag to a minimum at lower rpm. The larger one kicks in at a higher rpm and give it the oomph. If done properly, it is fairly seamless. I'm pretty sure Ford has incorporated this or another system to get rid of the turbo lag. Is it worth 400k? Probably not to most buyers. I am not a Ford guy for sure but I do respect the car, it should be very fast and very track worthy. I'd still prefer a fully specced out C7 Z.

I have been in one, not mine of course, the latest Mercedes S63, and turbos in that one lagged like hell. When you are at low speed and press the pedal to the floor, it takes a whole 1 second for the turbos to kick in. I hear that never happens in their S65 series though, which costs a lot more. And that's a V8 vs V12, which makes a huge difference. I don't know, maybe Mercedes V8 bi-turbo has always been a joke, which is a shame, given that their 2-litre V4 bi-turbo is better than that (one in CLA45). My own car is a single-turbo engine, which wakes up after 1.5 seconds perhaps, but that's means to be shitty in that car segment I suppose.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Why are people driving without restraints? that is just insane. This is a perfect application for their product anyway. It's a race car, and if you are stupid enough to drive without restraints, well, then you shouldn't be contributing to the gene pool or even driving for that matter.

Why? Because they don't care. Not wearing you seat belt MIGHT kill you, sure, but smoking almost definitely will and plenty of people smoke. Next time you're at Walmart look in the cars driving around and see how many have kids tumbling around the back (or front) seats without car seats or seat belts. Perhaps unfortunately, not wearing your seat belt isn't a big enough offense to guarantee not contributing to the gene pool.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Why are people driving without restraints? that is just insane. This is a perfect application for their product anyway. It's a race car, and if you are stupid enough to drive without restraints, well, then you shouldn't be contributing to the gene pool or even driving for that matter.

Why? Because they don't care.

The "It's a race car" made me think they were restricting themselves to just that topic. Of which I agree. But if it is the general population that was targeted, I agree with you.

 

[Greg S]

Horsepower doesn't mean anything when it comes to how much fun it is to drive a car nor does the number of cylinders hold any relevance to power distribution with the technology available at this price point. Consumers of $400k cars don't care that much about the technical reasons as to why parts were chosen. Driving such a vehicle is about feeling good and enjoying the thrill of it as well as having a toy to show off to others.

I have driven single cylinder formula style cars that can be launched 0-60 in 3 seconds and I've driven electric formula style cars that near the 2.0 second mark for 0-60. These only have about 125-150HP and weigh next to nothing (sub 350lbs excluding driver, that's a lot of carbon). Far more fun than any production vehicle I've been in. That said, the GT is going to be nothing like an F1 car no matter how much inspiration it takes from them.

 

[Eric Koch]

Here's the basics for you to understand about engines...

Extra ponies for a cheap engine is like extra megapixels for a cheap camera, it doesn't deliver.

In case of cars, all the extra HP comes from turbos, and the biggest problem with turbos - their require a good spin to kick in, which results in uneven power delivery all the time. Even under ideal conditions turbos can get laggy at high speed.

This is why you are not going to see a V6 in a Bentley or a Ferrari. They can always swap it for a V6 with more HP than their V12, but the power delivery will be terrible by comparison.

A V6 with 2 turbos in a car that's over $400K, that's taking the piss. Only a person who doesn't know anything about engines would buy one. That engine can only produce about 300hp, while the extra 300hp all come from the large-a$$ turbos, with the result likely to resemble a donkey ride, it will deliver when it feels like.

Bahaha. If you think this has anything in common with a run-of-the mill 3.5L ecoboost you suffer delusions. Secondly, Ford has made some of the best race cars in the history of motoring, many of which have been turbocharged. Thirdly, formula one was turbo 4 for its most powerful era, until the FIA banned them - along with group B rallying which suffered a similar fate at a similar time. Fourthly, the nissan GTR was famed for its ability to humiliate much higher classed hardware with a "humble" V6. Fifthly, as previously mentioned, multimatic will be doing the legwork for the chassis on this car, as Saleen did much for the similarly avante-garde GT back in the early 00's. What is multimatic known for? F1 carbon fiber work.

Enough said.

 

[SirGCal]

Here's the basics for you to understand about engines...

Extra ponies for a cheap engine is like extra megapixels for a cheap camera, it doesn't deliver.

In case of cars, all the extra HP comes from turbos, and the biggest problem with turbos - their require a good spin to kick in, which results in uneven power delivery all the time. Even under ideal conditions turbos can get laggy at high speed.

This is why you are not going to see a V6 in a Bentley or a Ferrari. They can always swap it for a V6 with more HP than their V12, but the power delivery will be terrible by comparison.

A V6 with 2 turbos in a car that's over $400K, that's taking the piss. Only a person who doesn't know anything about engines would buy one. That engine can only produce about 300hp, while the extra 300hp all come from the large-a$$ turbos, with the result likely to resemble a donkey ride, it will deliver when it feels like.

Don't tell Porsche or the others that 6 cylinders suck... The engine is already proven in races, so are theirs. It also doesn't need to be a big fuel burning engine these days to produce real power. When the power is more then enough to out-drive almost any driver, it's enough. Getting the power to stick to the track is far more critical. And modern turbos I've driven have no detectable lag when tuned properly to this level. We'll know for sure when the dyno tests are released. In the end it's all going to be about how it drives. Plus the 1K total production over 4 years will make them a bit more focused to potential buyers.

 

[VitalyT]

Don't tell Porsche or the others that 6 cylinders suck... The engine is already proven in races, so are theirs. It also doesn't need to be a big fuel burning engine these days to produce real power. When the power is more then enough to out-drive almost any driver, it's enough. Getting the power to stick to the track is far more critical. And modern turbos I've driven have no detectable lag when tuned properly to this level. We'll know for sure when the dyno tests are released. In the end it's all going to be about how it drives. Plus the 1K total production over 4 years will make them a bit more focused to potential buyers.

A racing car doesn't need to be refined. But when a proper racing lambo or ferrari can be had for 350k new, ford GT with plastic cabin and a V6 for over 400k seems like a bad joke. But then of course, it is far from the champion of the over-priced crap - Lucan, for 3.2mln that isn't really worth 320k.

I don't have anything against a V6 in general, it can be great in its own segment. Best example is perhaps Nissan GTR, nothing beats that when it comes to price versus racing pedigree. But that's less than 150k new.

 

[SirGCal]

A racing car doesn't need to be refined. But when a proper racing lambo or ferrari can be had for 350k new, ford GT with plastic cabin and a V6 for over 400k seems like a bad joke. But then of course, it is far from the champion of the over-priced crap - Lucan, for 3.2mln that isn't really worth 320k.

I don't have anything against a V6 in general, it can be great in its own segment. Best example is perhaps Nissan GTR, nothing beats that when it comes to price versus racing pedigree. But that's less than 150k new.

So you quoted me and didn't even reply to anything I said... OK...

And it's plastic reinforced carbon fiber... FWIW. You can have your ugly Lambos and (while I do like them) Ferrari's. I'll take the best power to weight ration available if I could afford it which is indeed the new GT. All the carbon fiber used in that car makes a vehicle that weighs only 2,890 lbs without a driver.

The cabin is a carbon fiber cell and the body is even carbon fiber. Dual Clutch Transmission, and the motor is direcly out of their race cars which alone cost nearly 40k in the crate... And if you think race cars are not refined, you're truly mistaken. A lot of vehicle tech comes from development in racing vehicles first.

As for the (ugg, but another topic) Nissan, they sold nearly 1500 cars in 2014... (http://www.carbuzz.com/news/2015/3/2/How-Many-Nissan-GT-Rs-Have-Been-Sold-So-Far-7725728/) Ford is going for quality over quantity. 250 max per year over 4 years. They made their own limited market by choice, and they won't have any problem selling them out possibly before the production year. They also weigh nearly a thousand lbs more then the new GT coming in at 3851 lbs (http://buyersguide.caranddriver.com/nissan/gt-r/specs#features). Cutting weight safely to that level is very expensive.

And you do apparently have an issue with 6 cylinders... You keep harping on about it like it's against the holy grail of racing performance. I don't care if it's a single cylinder or a W16, I look at the numbers and the graphs for torque and power and how it's controlled. Most 'super' cars are out of any normal driver's control today, have to keep the power on the ground to do any good.

 

[MannerMauler]

Wow, this is becoming REALLY controversial.

Guys, even the original Top Gear UK cast likes the Ford GT.