Best Bathurst

[Alan52]

I started going to Bathurst in 1967 and have been to every race since 1971 so from the perspective of a trackside viewer the emphasis needs to be on close competition throughout the race preferably between makes and with the finish not completely orchestrated by a late safety car rendering the first 140 laps irrelevant.My picks in chronological order are 1973,1985,1990,1995,2001,2004 and 2011.

[Alan52]

After further thought scratch 2011 from that list.

[Chatters]

My three, in no particular order:

2010: For Skaife and Lowndes finally beating the Mountain together. I was there for that moment, and needless to say it is something I will not forget for a long time to come, the emotion, and the fact that nearly everybody in the crowd was willing them on those last few laps.

2006: Another Lowndes victory, I nominate this because it was such an emotional day for Craig. It had the most heartfelt result for one and the most heartbreaking result for another, with Skaife crashing on the first lap.

1993/1995/1997: Too hard to separate these three Perkins victories, '93 for the absolute sprint that the race was between car 2 and car 11, '95 for that sensational last to first (and for Seton's fractured fairytale), and '97, being the "last" race for Peter Brock...

Obviously being a young fella I have picked more recent races, but I will give an honourable mention to:

2011: That last stint by Craig Lowndes was something else. I don't think we will see anything like that for many years.

1977/1978: For Ford to win so emphatically one year, and for the General to get their **** together and trounce them the next, back when manufacturers raced to sell cars, and not the other way around.

1970/1971/1972: For Moffat, Brock, and numerous others to do the entire race by themselves.

1990: For the little Commodore beating the turbocharged monsters of the Group A days.

[bluesport]

Best Bathursts???........Group A years prior to the current category.

[db120176]

1990 - Gricey gets his second
1995 - Perkins worst to first

1984 keeps on getting mentioned on posts, and I don't get it. What was so appealing about a race where the winner controlled the race all day and won by a lap?

[peckstar]

suddenly i relised that this forum is full of old men with failing memories

[Alan52]

[
1984 keeps on getting mentioned on posts, and I don't get it. What was so appealing about a race where the winner controlled the race all day and won by a lap?[/QUOTE] I tend to agree that alot of peoples picks have more to do with a misty eyed view of history rather than any accurate memory of the race.Many Bathurst races in the Group C era were so 1 sided that you knew the winner an hour after the start. Even if the obvious winner fell over (eg Brock in 74 with a 6 lap lead) hours of relative tedium as far as the lead of the race was concerned resulted.Years that fall into this category were 70,71,74,77,78,79,82,84,87(pre disqualifications),91,92,97,03and 08.Even tough these races had some of Bathurst's greatest individual performances as races they weren't compelling entertainment.The compensation in the Group C era was there was a lot of interest in the small car classes and even if outright was a done deal there were stii great battles to be had-2 litre class in 77 being perhaps the definitive example.

[one five five]

Is it misty-eyed views?

I think its more that alot people are remembering fondly a 1000km adventure as it once was, as opposed to the modern 25-lap sprint at the end preceeded by 5hrs of 'buying a ticket to the end game'

Originally Posted by Chatters

1993/1995/1997: Too hard to separate these three Perkins victories, '93 for the absolute sprint that the race was between car 2 and car 11, '95 for that sensational last to first (and for Seton's fractured fairytale), and '97, being the "last" race for Peter Brock...

Whilst appreciating that your seemingly a Perkins fan, i can't see what was a 'sprint' about the 1993 race.

In race trim, Skaife/Richards were easily the fastest car on the day, and even though still needing two pitstops to Perkins/Hansford's one, they were 50+ secs in front...

After the only safety car intervention which lost them their lead but still needing the extra stop, the race was basically decided, whilst the Winfield car had to try and bridge the advantage they lost.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Alan52

[
1984 keeps on getting mentioned on posts, and I don't get it. What was so appealing about a race where the winner controlled the race all day and won by a lap?

I tend to agree that alot of peoples picks have more to do with a misty eyed view of history rather than any accurate memory of the race.Many Bathurst races in the Group C era were so 1 sided that you knew the winner an hour after the start. Even if the obvious winner fell over (eg Brock in 74 with a 6 lap lead) hours of relative tedium as far as the lead of the race was concerned resulted.Years that fall into this category were 70,71,74,77,78,79,82,84,87(pre disqualifications),91,92,97,03and 08.Even tough these races had some of Bathurst's greatest individual performances as races they weren't compelling entertainment.The compensation in the Group C era was there was a lot of interest in the small car classes and even if outright was a done deal there were stii great battles to be had-2 litre class in 77 being perhaps the definitive example.[/QUOTE]

1979 is a classic example of the hype over shadowing the race. Brock may have won by six laps, but he did have challenges from the elements (rain) and other teams, all of which failed trying to keep up. It is a race I enjoy watching and I am not a Peter Brock fan.

And the first 30 laps of the 1978 race worth the price of admission alone.

I think it is easy in hindsight to say the races were predictable, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout '87 praying that the Fords would hang together and the 1992 was the most emotional I have watched.

[Alan52]

1979 rain?5 minutes of drizzle that no one even put umbrellas up for. 1978.Good first 30 laps,totally predictable and processional last 130 laps. 1987 and 1992.So obvious all race week that Eggenberger and Nissan were dominant enough to control the race running at a pace that was about half their potential advantage over the rest of the field.1987 did however have one of the all time great class battles with the Frank Gardner BMW's up against the factory European versions.

[GTRMagic]

1987 was good fun to watch the early stages, with the likes of Mr Miedecke and Mr Soper and Mr Rouse taking turns at the head of the field. The rest of the grid kinda didnt see which way these guys went for a while.. till the Eggenbergers reverted to formation flying as mechanical dramas crept into the other Sierras.. and some Commodores & BMWs.. in hot pursuit.

The clips of Mr Brock & Mr Seton in their wet weather driving sequences, overlaid with James Reyne's "Fall of Rome" was my memory of watching the highlights a week later on #7's Sportsworld... it was request by fans so much that the segment was replayed the following week! Bet that hasnt happened before or since!

Except for the weirdo mudguards, the result was never likely in doubt then either. But they were magnificently presented cars, a beautiful finish, their fluoro sponsor stickers standing out on what was a very dark day (in many many ways) at Bathurst that year....

[Robert Ryan]

tend to agree that alot of peoples picks have more to do with a misty eyed view of history rather than any accurate memory of the race.Many Bathurst races in the Group C era were so 1 sided that you knew the winner an hour after the start. Even if the obvious winner fell over (eg Brock in 74 with a 6 lap lead) hours of relative tedium as far as the lead of the race was concerned resulted

"It was better in my day" syndrome. Amazing how past events get so much better 30-40 yrs later.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

The clips of Mr Brock & Mr Seton in their wet weather driving sequences, overlaid with James Reyne's "Fall of Rome" was my memory of watching the highlights a week later on #7's Sportsworld... it was request by fans so much that the segment was replayed the following week! Bet that hasnt happened before or since!

Now that is something i would like to see

Originally Posted by Robert Ryan

"It was better in my day" syndrome. Amazing how past events get so much better 30-40 yrs later.

Are you seriously suggesting the race was viewed as boring 30 or 40 years ago??

If it was as boring and processional to the public as you make out, the race wouldn't have survived past the 1970s!!

[Robert Ryan]

Are you seriously suggesting the race was viewed as boring 30 or 40 years ago??

If it was as boring and processional to the public as you make out, the race wouldn't have survived past the 1970s!!
one five five is offline
Quote

Basically todays race is a Sprint Race that has a grid covered by 1-2 seconds. In the 1970's it was an Endurance Race that ran 500 miles or later 1000miles. You could go out for lunch and come back and ask"Who is leading?" The Leader could have been 1-2 laps in front. In the 1960's it was a production car endurance event broken down into classes.. No people were not "comparing" their Bathurst 500 /1000 to some future event. Boring? do you like the 24hr of LeMans or a Drag Race/Sprintcar race?

[Carsandmotorracing]

Ah yes 1987 was a truley great race.

[dsg]

1977 The XC Coupe 1-2.
1985 The beautiful Jaguar V12.
1992 For better or worse we are still talking about it.
2006 Ford is back. (if only we knew at the time it was mostly 888 not so much Ford).
2011 Was pretty good as well.

[Gaz170]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

The clips of Mr Brock & Mr Seton in their wet weather driving sequences, overlaid with James Reyne's "Fall of Rome" was my memory of watching the highlights a week later on #7's Sportsworld... it was request by fans so much that the segment was replayed the following week! Bet that hasnt happened before or since!

I remember that!! If someone has a copy PLEASE put it on YouTube.

For me, most memorable Bathurst was 89, as it was the first time I was actually there. Dick winning was the highlight of a great weekend.

1990 was memorable for a different reason, just watching the Nissan while it was running you knew once they worked out how to bolt the thing togeather to last, nothing was going to come close.

The final laps of the 2007 race were good to watch as well.

[peckstar]

just search for them gaz, they are both there, at least in part

[one five five]

Originally Posted by peckstar

just search for them gaz, they are both there, at least in part

I think Gaz means the clips of Brock/Seton to "Fall of Rome" as shown on Sportsworld (hosted by Jon Harker at the time if it remember rightly?), rather than the individual clips.

[Chatters]

Originally Posted by one five five

Whilst appreciating that your seemingly a Perkins fan, i can't see what was a 'sprint' about the 1993 race.

In race trim, Skaife/Richards were easily the fastest car on the day, and even though still needing two pitstops to Perkins/Hansford's one, they were 50+ secs in front...

After the only safety car intervention which lost them their lead but still needing the extra stop, the race was basically decided, whilst the Winfield car had to try and bridge the advantage they lost.

Point noted, obviously my perceptions of the race have been a bit skewed, having never seen it and being only 3 at the time Thank you for the correction.

[Casper]

I resent being told that older people look at things through rose coloured glasses, of course we do and I don't need to be told that by you or anyone else. My memories are precious to me so don't denigrate them, I enjoyed the races then and still watch the DVD's every so often to rekindle the memory of my youth. Are you going to seriously tell me that you won't do the same? It is human nature and yes, you will so get off your soapbox.

Anyway back to the topic, the Group A years were great but those manic Cooper S's freight training down Con Rod to gain more speed were classic, no one did it before or has done it since. I think it was the first time the Europeans/Poms came out here to race and they loved it.

[peckstar]

But i resent being told how good the old days where and then when we see the facts we see thats not true and todays is actually much better

[DV_08]

Its hard to say, I've collected as much footage as possible and there appears to be good and bad from each era. I think the group c cars were hurt by reliability. Plenty of different cars, the early stages of the race were always a lot of fun but often you would have someone get out front and stay there. Group A appeared to be more competitive and appeared to throw up a lot of different winners plenty of different cars and the international factor. 91 was probably the only real boring race. Then you have the modern formula a lot more competitive cars, less cars, less makes, more reliable and probably and probably too interrupted by safety cars. Can't pick a favourite race though.

[fomoco]

I have watched since 1965,the race has evoled, to me the races were great back in the 60's and 70's were any one could win and classes counted, today it's a bit clinical, but thats want they wanted, to me the mondern race should have at least 30 cars , but V8SCI, dont want to go that way.

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by fomoco

, today it's a bit clinical, but thats want they wanted, to me the mondern race should have at least 30 cars , but V8SCI, dont want to go that way.

they had 29 and had 4 more spots for any takers,

you also forget that in the old days, lots of cars started, but most didnt finish.

today there is often more cars circulating at the end than many of the old races