>The GT showed it IS a better product.
It didn't. the product their selling still hasn't proven itself against anything.
>It won LeMans in a production based class like Ford set out to do. LM GTE cars are production based chassis with production engines. Those are the rules.
You aren't getting the GTLM GT. you are getting the production version. did the C6 prove it was a better car than the GTR regardless of what the production version did based on the not-for-sale racing version?
>The NSX did not win anything but pikes peak in an unlimited class
They also won the production class (which they still hold the record for) and the production class at pikes uses less modifications than the GTLM cars. its basically just a production NSX with a stripped out interior &R tires (you can still see the stock interior panels). there is no racing parts unlike the GT so even by that metric the GT is still behind.
>No one buys a six figure super car based on a manufacturer's "confidence in the product"
The Confidence in the product shows that not even Ford themselves thinks its better than any of its rivals so why should i?
>Only it doesn't exist in theory it's in the history books
I'm still not seeing production numbers from the GT so whether its better than any of its rivals still remains a theory and will likely stay so.
>Toyota builds about 300k Camrys a year.
Its not about sales its about backing out of comparisons and test for fear of losing because you know its inferior.
>They sure have more "confidence" in their product than Honda does in the NSX because Honda isn't going to build 300K of them. Therefore it's a "better" car than the NSX or GT or any supercar. That's what youre saying.
If Toyota for whatever reason didn't want people reviewing or testing their car's against the competition to put their claims to the test it would show they can't put their money where their marketing mouth is and their competitors are better that's basically what i'm saying.