Why did a Ford GT40 get 293.6 mph in a 1 mile straight and an F1 can't get its top speed on a straight of more than 2.5 miles?

Why did a Ford GT40 get 293.6 mph in a 1 mile straight and an F1 can't get its top speed on a straight of more than 2.5 miles? - 1

Uh, *what* Ford GT40 did 294 mph within a 1 mile straight? I call BS. Check out the Koenigsegg Agera RS video on YouTube.

It was a highly modified GT40 car made for the strip. Lots of dragsters will beat an F1 car on a drag strip but be left very far behind on an oval track. Whole different worlds. The GT40 looks like a lump of coal beside rocket dragsters (no longer allowed on the NHRA). Kitty O'Neil hit 412 mph in a quarter mile, averaging 6G acceleration. At nearly 400 mph it was gaining 25 mph literally in the blink of an eye. For the 3.22 seconds it took to reach 412 mph she was literally unable to inhale because of the acceleration. Heck, even Jack McClure's little rocket kart (the toned down one, not the one that hit 253 mph in the 1/4 mile) would have left the GT40 behind in the mile but would have no chance against an F1 on an oval track or in a Gran Prix.

The F1 will own the GT40 at Laguna Seca. Try again.

I'd still pick the factory Ford GT-40. Here's an ad for it:

Hi so this just goes to show the difference between the different formulas in RACING sunshine the FORD GT40 was in an older race trim to the modern F1 cars. Back in the days of formula FORD huge great V8 7 litre engines where used.
with superchargers and Turbo's sometimes having both on these huge great engines. As time moved on and this racing became more about getting the best from smaller engines the rules changed we lost big V8, V10 V12 and V16 engines. As the formula 1 came in with a 2 litre maximum size engine so they got more inventive. One of my old friends Ross Brawn you know petronas lewis hamilton used a new design of front wing to stabilise the front of the car make it more stable. So now we're on a new era ELECTRIC CARS. YES faster still no gas guzzlers.