Review: 42223 1966 Ford GT40 MKII
Posted by Huw,
42223 1966 Ford GT40 MKII is one of three 15-wide Technic cars that have been announced for release in 2026. The relatively compact format allows the designers to produce reasonably accurate models at a mid-price point, albeit with limited functionality.
The 20-odd that have been produced so far have portrayed modern cars. This is the first to tackle a historic vehicle.
Summary
42223 1966 Ford GT40 MKII, 793 pieces.
£64.99 / $74.99 / €74.99 | 8.2p / 9.5c / 9.5c per piece.
Buy at LEGO.com »
A competent model, but really just more of the same
- Bonnet opening mechanism
- Drum-lacqured gold wheels
- Inaccurate rear end
- Price has gone up
The set was provided for review by LEGO. All opinions expressed are those of the author.
Stickers
The model is based on a specific vehicle raced at a specific event (see below) so stickers are provided to recreate the exact markings on the car. They are not too arduous to apply, although many of them form stripes across the bonnet and roof, so they do need to be aligned carefully.
Construction
The chassis incorporates a rear V8 engine connected directly to one of the rear wheels – there's no room for a differential – and steering via a gear on the roof.
As is often the case, much of the bodywork is connected at various angles, including the piliiar at the rear of the cabin and its roof.
Reference
The GT40 Mk II is an endurance racing car, most famous for securing a historic 1-2-3 finish at the 24 Hours of Le Mans that year, ending Ferrari's run of wins since 1960. Later versions of the car would go on to win in 1967, 68 and 69.
Iain A Wanless, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
The completed model
Comparing the photos below with that above, it's clear that the model has some shortcomings, but generally it looks pretty good. The main area of concern is the rear end: the very steep slope on the real car has not been replicated, so it looks a bit flat.
The livery looks great, though, and I particularly appreciate that the headlights are brick-built and not stickers. If you did not want to replicate this particular car you can leave all the stickers off.
I believe the angled beam used for the A-pillars is new.
Functionality-wise, well, there isn't much other than the aforementioned steering and V8 engine connected to one of the rear wheels, but it does have one neat feature that has not been seen in a 15-wide car before.
The engine cowling lifts to reveal the engine, the doors open, and the unique feature is that the bonnet can be opened using the orange/red lever in the cabin.
As you can see, there is no diff.
Verdict
As with all of these 15-wide cars, it's a competent model that resembles the real vehicle as well as can be expected given the size and medium used to model it. Whether this particular one will interest you will depend on your affinity to the 1960s racing car.
Unfortunately, the price has crept up somewhat by £10/$10 compared to last year's 15-wides with a similar number of pieces. This one is £64.99 / $74.99 / €74.99, so it'll be worth waiting for a discount at Amazon before buying.
What's even more unfortunate is that eight of the 11 Technic sets announced for 2026 are cars, and there's really only one set with any decent functionality among the 11: 42221 NASA Artemis Space Launch System Rocket. That will be the subject of our next Technic review.
31 likes
24 comments on this article
Similar to 42123 McLaren Senna GTR but costs 50% more, no thank you Lego.
This is the rare official brisket review that feels a bit dismissive/negative for the sake of negativity? I may be wrong. I get the sense this one set is carrying the weight of disappointment with the overall new technic line up because it’s just another car, regardless of its own strengths. But I do very much appreciate the comments on price. That should be called out every time a model is overpriced or goes up in price. LEGO needs to know we all see it and feel it. Thanks for not glossing over that.
On the flip side, I’m not a technic guy at all, and this is the first technic set in a while I am drawn to. I love the car it’s based on, and I feel this looks really good. I’m not a technic guy because I am shallow and want my builds to look sort of like the real thing. This is one that does to me.
Oh look, another car.
Decent rendition. I'm not a sports car guy, but have always had a particular awe and feeling for the Ford GT40. The curves and overall shape look so smooth... Beautiful car. Which proved very hard to handle and drive, as is mentioned in many videos on the internet about its history. No hand of God on Le Mans race track ! Thanks for the review.
Couple of points:
pros
1) one of the best looking one at that scale.
cons
2) No differential. I though that was the reason for Lego to create that new tiny differential - to put in small vehicles like this one. There is no suspension on that car,; so plenty of room for that small differential.
3) Lego just recently created a triangular piece - it would have been a good time to use it for the back end of the car.
4) Am I the only who really hate those new "valves pusher" engine? I understand they look the part - but to me they are negative because they do no teach anything = in fact, they teach the wrong thing - engines do not work that way and you don't want to put wrong ideas into young minds.
5) Not a good part pack. There is no differential and/or suspension. A lot of the parts are panels. Not easy to build anything else out of this.
6) Opening doors/bonnet/hood/etc is not a 'Technic' function. It is a function for City/Icons/Ideas/etc sets but for Technic, a function must involve some gears and/or levers (IMO).
Might be a fair starter set for some but could hardly ever satisfy one hour of a 'Technic' veteran/aficionado.
EDIT: (point 3) 4 of those new triangles are used on the sides near the doors. I guess they did not want to use it for the back.
@tfranklin84 said:
"This is the rare official brisket review that feels a bit dismissive/negative for the sake of negativity? I may be wrong. I get the sense this one set is carrying the weight of disappointment with the overall new technic line up because it’s just another car"
I gues there is a element of that, although I had hoped that it hadn't overshadowed the review. It *is* a nice model of yet another car, but I'd rather have a tractor, or digger, or crane, or anything that includes some decent functionality, and sets like that have been in very shory supply lately. Just 2 last year and one was prohibitively priced.
I don't know the part that is used for the rear/break lights. Could someone identify it for me?
The good thing about black ccar models: You cannot see the details - either good or bad ones. However, I like the side view in the last picture.
... no comments from me about the set today. What can I say that I haven't said before about the others that preceded it before?
... I guess I like the gold wheels.
@chefkaspa said:
"I don't know the part that is used for the rear/break lights. Could someone identify it for me?
The good thing about black ccar models: You cannot see the details - either good or bad ones. However, I like the side view in the last picture."
Those are tea saucer pieces, recolored into trans red.
I believe they were first introduced with 71022-11 Sybil Trelawny in white.
They were used on the micro tlbuild from this year's City advent calender on day 6 in black. https://brickset.com/article/127707/city-advent-calendar-day-6
Indeed a bit more negative than expected. Dare I say to me this is the best looking of the Car Transporter Gang? Surely not perfectly accurate, but Technic at this scale will always struggle at that. My main issue (besides the price and the stickers) is that it's not the same scale as the 42154 GT. I'd think it would have been quite cool to display old and new side by side!
@HOBBES said:
"4) Am I the only who really hate those new "valves pusher" engine? I understand they look the part - but to me they are negative because they do no teach anything = in fact, they teach the wrong thing - engines do not work that way and you don't want to put wrong ideas into young minds. "
You're not the only one.....
I think those pieces can be usefull for other purposes, but to represent an engine, rather not. Then even rather the cam-and-axle variant they used before for small engines. Not accurate either, but at least those tend to create a bit of a rattling sound.
@Binnekamp said:
"Those are tea saucer pieces, recolored into trans red.
They were used on the micro tlbuild from this year's City advent calender on day 6 in black. https://brickset.com/article/127707/city-advent-calendar-day-6"
Thanks - I must have seen them but they look much better on the GT40 then on the tractor.
@HOBBES said:
"Am I the only who really hate those new "valves pusher" engine? "
No - I do miss the sound of the previous cylinder engines.
Simply the best looking real car ever created! Not too bad as Technic but would have been infinitely better as Icons!
On the first picture after the sticker sheet, I fail to understand how the two black pieces (4x2x1) near the steering mechanism were able to be installed like that without seriously bending something. This certainly make for a very solid construct but since the instructions are not yet available, it will remain a puzzle for a few more weeks.
If the lower 3x1 blue pins would have been the new-ish 3x1 push grey pins, I would understand the assembly but like this I still cannot think of a way to do that without bending things around.
@HOBBES said:
"On the first picture after the sticker sheet, I fail to understand how the two black pieces (4x2x1) near the steering mechanism were able to be installed like that without seriously bending something. This certainly make for a very solid construct but since the instructions are not yet available, it will remain a puzzle for a few more weeks."
The blue pins connecting it to the lower beams are pushed through from the inside before the 5x3 black L beams are added.
@Huw said:
" @HOBBES said:
"On the first picture after the sticker sheet, I fail to understand how the two black pieces (4x2x1) near the steering mechanism were able to be installed like that without seriously bending something. This certainly make for a very solid construct but since the instructions are not yet available, it will remain a puzzle for a few more weeks."
The blue pins connecting it to the lower beams are pushed through from the inside before the 5x3 black L beams are added."
Thanks. Makes sense now. They often do that "insert here now, push in later".
@Huw said:
" @tfranklin84 said:
"This is the rare official brisket review that feels a bit dismissive/negative for the sake of negativity? I may be wrong. I get the sense this one set is carrying the weight of disappointment with the overall new technic line up because it’s just another car"
I gues there is a element of that, although I had hoped that it hadn't overshadowed the review. It *is* a nice model of yet another car, but I'd rather have a tractor, or digger, or crane, or anything that includes some decent functionality, and sets like that have been in very shory supply lately. Just 2 last year and one was prohibitively priced."
Prohibitively priced is only 1/10th of the real issue. Those who have been around for a while know what is possible with Lego Technic. Namely, 8043 was produced 15 years ago (2010) for $200. Lego can sell its sets at $400-$500 if they want but at least give the patrons something that is an improvement from previous models - esthetic/branding just does not cut it - in fact, many people have 'strongly' voiced a preference for cruder models but easy access/view of the mechanisms. True enough, 8043 is a tough act to beat.
Instead of gushing, the reviewer gives useful feedback on the price hike, and the fact that it's another car filling a slot. Nice to see.
Plenty of folks already cheerlead for this multi-billion-dollar brand thank-you-very-much.
@tfranklin84 said:
"This is the rare official brisket review that feels a bit dismissive/negative for the sake of negativity? I may be wrong. I get the sense this one set is carrying the weight of disappointment with the overall new technic line up because it’s just another car, regardless of its own strengths. But I do very much appreciate the comments on price. That should be called out every time a model is overpriced or goes up in price. LEGO needs to know we all see it and feel it. Thanks for not glossing over that.
On the flip side, I’m not a technic guy at all, and this is the first technic set in a while I am drawn to. I love the car it’s based on, and I feel this looks really good. I’m not a technic guy because I am shallow and want my builds to look sort of like the real thing. This is one that does to me. "
Huw has been very clear about his growing disinterest in the increasing avalanche of automobiles that Technic has been pumping out. That's saying something.
This is marketed as 18+, and it's €10/ $10 more than 42222, another licensed Technic car of the same size with almost identical piece count.
Explain that Lego.
I do want to comment, the review has been changed since my comment. There was only 1 bullet point in the “positives” when I published my comment. It feels more balanced now. I am in no way for cheerleading LEGO blindly. In fact, I encourage folks to try other brands as I have.
@HOBBES: I wouldn't even go so far as to mention 8043 (which to me too is the best Technic set ever made), but just try deliver something the likes of 42009, 42030 or 42043.
People today maybe don't even realize that there was a time not aeons ago when Technic created awesome sets regularly. And at comparatively fair value too.
I have to go back quite a bit to find anything that comes even close.
To me, the abolition of the Power Functions system and physical remotes was the point of no return when Technic became uninteresting.
Should have been Ken Miles’ car.
@Duq said:
"This is marketed as 18+, and it's €10/ $10 more than 42222, another licensed Technic car of the same size with almost identical piece count.
Explain that Lego."
This is the thing that bugs me the most about this set. It really feels like they slapped on the 18+ label so that they could charge more.
I'm not an extreme car enthusiast but the rear end of the car is something I cannot unsee.