A way to save GT1

[SALEEN S7R]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

So the ACO claims GT2 is too expensive, and your solution is to make them faster, and likely more expensive?

The ACO claims GT2 is to expensive? This thread is about GT1 being too expensive not GT2. GT2 as things are is thriving all around the world.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by SALEEN S7R

The ACO claims GT2 is to expensive? This thread is about GT1 being too expensive not GT2. GT2 as things are is thriving all around the world.

This thread is about GT1 only? If so, why are you and others even talking about GT3 and GT2 then? Are the future of GT classes all not interconnected?

GT2 is thriving? Lots of Porsches and Ferraris. Panoz and Spyker left to privateers in 08'. A two chassis class isn't exactly thriving. Let's hope more come to the table.

[SALEEN S7R]

Sure it might not be thriving in terms of variety but GT2 is thriving in terms of entries. Around 9 GT2 entries in FIA GT (discounting the G2 class cars), 19 in the LMS and 11 in the ALMS. Only Porsche and Ferrari? Well over here in Europe there are no factory teams from Porsche or Ferrari anyway, all are privateers. Looking at GT2 across the world this year of the 3 main series ALMS/FIA GT/LMS we have Ferrari's, Porsches, Panoz's, Spykers, Vipers and Corvettes. All fully legal GT2 cars, not G2. Hardly a 2 chassis class.

[Fogelhund]

Where is there a fully legal GT2 ACO Viper racing?

Expect Panoz to pullout in 08'. When the factory does, privateers will only be a year or so behind.

Same with the Spyker.

I thought the Corvette program in Europe had the plug pulled?

[SALEEN S7R]

Isnt there a Viper racing in GT2 this weekend in the ALMS? As far as I know that car is homlogated if it wasnt surely more would have been made of it? As for the Corvette there was a Corvette in the last round of the LMS entered by Team Markland racing in GT2.

[Purist]

The Viper is a Comp Coupe that has gotten special dispensation to run in GT2.

As to the lack of variety, is it any surprise? Ferrari and Porsche have built from-the-factory GTs for decades, and in significant numbers. Nobody else has a record that comes close to theirs and nobody builds as many cars of the type than they do. So, if you're looking to buy a GT2 car, who are you most likely to choose?

Any GT1 "replacement" class needs to be spectacular and have reasonable flexibility. I mean, I know most of this is for marketing, but there should be the opportunity to actually develop something that may make it onto the road cars eventually. And anyway, GT1 needs to be higher up the ladder seeing as there are already so many classes out there for lower-spec TCs and GTs; the top GT category needs to stand out from the crowd.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

So the ACO claims GT2 is too expensive, and your solution is to make them faster, and likely more expensive?

I don't believe a variance of between zero second, to three seconds per lap, is enough to make GT3 cars "dangerous", over GT2 pace.

The only reason GT is as expensive as it is, is because of the asinine contrived speed equivalency, and limiting factor.

It COSTS A LOT of money to try to go faster when there are quasi-spec. rules.
Go to GT whatever, give them little to no restriction, with wide tires, and if they are truly produciton based, they will not get close to the P cars, and if they do make the P cars faster.

Slowmobile racing is moronic at best, and self-destructive at worst.
Bob

[Fogelhund]

Appears I stand corrected on the Markland Corvette. Don't know why I thought they'd pulled the plug.

Thank You Bob for providing further reference to the LMP1 thread.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

The only reason GT is as expensive as it is, is because of the asinine contrived speed equivalency, and limiting factor.

It COSTS A LOT of money to try to go faster when there are quasi-spec. rules.
Go to GT whatever, give them little to no restriction, with wide tires, and if they are truly produciton based, they will not get close to the P cars, and if they do make the P cars faster.

Slowmobile racing is moronic at best, and self-destructive at worst.
Bob

Road Atlanta and Mid-Ohio are two great road course which we can make some faily good comparisions.

the Corvettes Lap times at Mid Ohio

C6r 1:16.5

C6 - Speed World Challange 1:25.6

C5 - SCCA T1 1:28-30

C6Z06 - 1:35-40

So racing a "Show Room stock" car is slower. I can imagane the 997 times are simular differences depending on the prperation.

the GT1 cars are 9 to 10 secs / lap faster then the SWGT cars, which are 3 to 8 sec lap faster then the SCCA or NASA prepped, which again are 5-8 sec lap faster then stock.



And I loves to race Slowmobile up at Eagle River Wis when I was 12 to 14 years old. Snomobile racing in the winter and go-karts in the summer. Life was great. Then the engine manufacture folded and I got into bicycle racing for next 20 some years, and one summer break in the late 70s to race a Camero in SCCA racing.

[Purist]

Well, we want the GTs, at least the classes running with LMPs, to be fast enough that they're not a hazard on the straights, but particularly in the corners. You don't want a GT going much less than 150-mph through "the Kink" at Road America when the LMPs are screaming through at 170-mph or so. I bring up that particular setting because "the Carousel" is a long, fast, high-downforce corner; so if the GTs don't have much downforce, you could have some serious closing speed issues into "the Kink" and Canada Corner between the LMPs and GTs. I suspect the Porsche Curves at Le Mans would be an issue with the low-downforce GTs Bob seems to be proposing, though there isn't too much to go on as GTs began sprouting wings in the mid-70s, and the Porsche Curves were only added in 1972.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Purist

Well, we want the GTs, at least the classes running with LMPs, to be fast enough that they're not a hazard on the straights, but particularly in the corners. You don't want a GT going much less than 150-mph through "the Kink" at Road America when the LMPs are screaming through at 170-mph or so. I bring up that particular setting because "the Carousel" is a long, fast, high-downforce corner; so if the GTs don't have much downforce, you could have some serious closing speed issues into "the Kink" and Canada Corner between the LMPs and GTs.

The Pucker factor without downforce though that "Kink" is about 120 mph. Most skilled drivers without downforce wont do much over 120 with about 110 being non-dowforce optimal.

So lets see 110-120 mph vs 150 to 170 mph hmmmmm Yes that is a weeeee bit of a difference.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

The Pucker factor without downforce though that "Kink" is about 120 mph. Most skilled drivers without downforce wont do much over 120 with about 110 being non-dowforce optimal.

So lets see 110-120 mph vs 150 to 170 mph hmmmmm Yes that is a weeeee bit of a difference.

A: Closing speed difference have always been there, and are nothing new. The doom and gloom is without a base.

B: My idea would give the GTs larger, to unrestircted tire width, the drivers who can handle it will; those who cannot will leave.

The IMSA GT AAGT/Grp 5s had incredible closing speeds at Daytona, as did the later GTP cars on GTU cars at Road America.
Bob

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

And I loves to race Slowmobile up at Eagle River Wis when I was 12 to 14 years old. Snomobile racing in the winter and go-karts in the summer. Life was great. Then the engine manufacture folded and I got into bicycle racing for next 20 some years, and one summer break in the late 70s to race a Camero in SCCA racing.

OT:
Snowmobile racing, even with horribly detructive rules making, is not close to slow.
The fast one-half mile tracks they being lapped at over 100 mph, and this is after ten years of rules to slow them down.
Now the racers, are divdided as as some want rules that make them happy, and others want to return to the crow pleasing Sno-Pro/Formula 1 days of exotic fast machines.
Jaques Velleneuve is strongly in favour of fewer rules and faster machines; he posts at the site on more than a few occasions.
Bob

[JAG]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Road Atlanta and Mid-Ohio are two great road course which we can make some faily good comparisions.

the Corvettes Lap times at Mid Ohio

C6r 1:16.5

C6 - Speed World Challange 1:25.6

C5 - SCCA T1 1:28-30

C6Z06 - 1:35-40

So racing a "Show Room stock" car is slower. I can imagane the 997 times are simular differences depending on the prperation.

the GT1 cars are 9 to 10 secs / lap faster then the SWGT cars, which are 3 to 8 sec lap faster then the SCCA or NASA prepped, which again are 5-8 sec lap faster then stock.



And I loves to race Slowmobile up at Eagle River Wis when I was 12 to 14 years old. Snomobile racing in the winter and go-karts in the summer. Life was great. Then the engine manufacture folded and I got into bicycle racing for next 20 some years, and one summer break in the late 70s to race a Camero in SCCA racing.

GT2 cars are lapping around 1.19/1.20.

That's the pace heavily restricted GT3 cars would lap at.

You only need look at British GT to see laptimes set by GT2 cars in 2006 are matched by GT3 cars in 2007.

[Purist]

Bob, I'm sure the closing speeds were significant on the straights, the issue I'm looking at is the difference in the corners. As to old IMSA, given the horsepower of the GTPs,, I suspect they were slower in the corners than LMPs, but made up for that at tracks like Road America with their significantly higher top-end speed. I really think you'd be setting up for some nasty inter-class crashes at "the Kink" with what you're proposing.

Also, how many drivers are accustomed to the 40-50+mph differentials that used to be seen in places? I doubt many of those are still active. And I'm sure there are even fewer who are used to driving wingless GTs left running professionally. Besides, wouldn't racing compound tires overheat until they were undriveable if you did the old power-sliding routine?

[AU N EGL]

Closing speeds can be very scary. Come up fling behind a slower car that does not see you, and then having a faster car close in behind you......

Keeping your eyes open and race traffic managment is very important.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Purist

Bob, I'm sure the closing speeds were significant on the straights, the issue I'm looking at is the difference in the corners. As to old IMSA, given the horsepower of the GTPs,, I suspect they were slower in the corners than LMPs, but made up for that at tracks like Road America with their significantly higher top-end speed. I really think you'd be setting up for some nasty inter-class crashes at "the Kink" with what you're proposing.

Also, how many drivers are accustomed to the 40-50+mph differentials that used to be seen in places? I doubt many of those are still active. And I'm sure there are even fewer who are used to driving wingless GTs left running professionally. Besides, wouldn't racing compound tires overheat until they were undriveable if you did the old power-sliding routine?

This is supposed to be professional racing.
Up to the nineties SCCA amateurs and semi-pro drivers made up the majority of the field. There have always been people like Andretti who loved to whine and *****, but mostly the problems were few and everyone adapted.

Racing always has separated the men from the boys, i.e. you either get used to it, or you quit.
Fortunately or unfortunately, MONEY has always bee the major factor that decides who can and cannot race. Racing is NOT a welfare sport; it is better to let it die, than turn it into the equivalency of T-league baseball so everyone can play.

The hypocrisy is partly due to the fact that the cars have become quasi-slot cars with high cornering speeds. These are A: more dangerous than high horsepower cars with high straight-away speeds but slower cornering;therefore any safety BS put forth as a reason for the rules is a damned lie; B: it is far, far, far more expansive to develope these slot-car inspired vehicles whose winning edge is determined by aero tricks that increase cornering speed, as that is the only way to win.
The restrictors decide how fast the cars can go,(and there the $$$ Chevy could afford to spend for special cyl. heads only made matters worse) so high bucks in aero tricks, which have ZERO tech. transfer to street cars, is the only way to win.

Lastly--racing used to be where better street tires came from. The tech. transfer was direct.
The lack of tire wars has HARMED, not helped racing.
Bob

[minimangler]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

B: My idea would give the GTs larger, to unrestircted tire width, the drivers who can handle it will; those who cannot will leave.

Oh, aren't we the brains!
Let's take out the amateur less skilled drivers from Gt racing, my oh my what an idea!
Man, are you on the Bush administration? 'Cause that could have come straight from the White House.
Explain to me how many drivers in GT racing would be left, percentage wise?
5%? 10 at a push?

[TWK]

Originally Posted by minimangler

Oh, aren't we the brains!
Let's take out the amateur less skilled drivers from Gt racing, my oh my what an idea!
Explain to me how many drivers in GT racing would be left, percentage wise?
5%? 10 at a push?

Since you refer to brains, at Petit Le Mans (a longer race where more amateur drivers than usual compete) that number would be 75% - just a wee bit more than "10 at a push."

(Ignoring the rather ridiculously irrelevant political remark.)

[minimangler]

Petit Le Mans and the ALMS is not GT racing worldwide, is it?

Look at FIA GT- how many pros there?

Ok, i was being ridiculous at 5 or 10% but still, half?

And then who pays the bills?

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by minimangler

P

And then who pays the bills?

Car and team owners with some sponsorship. I would bet that some of the sponsors are the business owned by the team owner too.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by TWK

Since you refer to brains, at Petit Le Mans (a longer race where more amateur drivers than usual compete) that number would be 75% - just a wee bit more than "10 at a push."

You think? Looking at the entery list and the drivers, I really dont see many semi-pro drivers. There are a few, but not many.

Different world driving at that speed and cars. Even Speed World GT drivers make a step up to this level, let alone amature drivers.

IMSA and SCCA-Pro ( Speed World GT & Touring )does a good job of getting rid of the so so drivers. Rookies have special meetings ( over and above the normal drivers meetings) before the practice, qualifing and the race to be given special instructions. When a so called 'amature' driver gets in the way they are black flagged and pulled off the course.

Even the <koff koff> slower GT2 cars will do 165 mph on Road Atlanta's back straight between T8 and T10. Let alone the P1 and some P2 cars will be running close to 190-192 mph. That is 22+/- mph speed difference.