Check out where Grand-Am's GT class is going...

[Burd]

http://www.motorsport.com/magazine/f...&D=2004-12-23#

Here are some photos of a wide-body Mazda RX-8 that has been built under Grand-Am's new "Prep 2" rules for the GT class. Beautiful car in my opinion. I've always been partial to the silhouettes because I was obsessed with the IMSA GTO/GTU series in the '80s, and it's interesting to me to see how far the silhouette concept has come.

Huge thanks to Ron Ogletree of Sabre Innovations and Keith Goldin of Goldin Brothers racing for allowing us to publish these images

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Burd

http://www.motorsport.com/magazine/f...&D=2004-12-23#

Here are some photos of a wide-body Mazda RX-8 that has been built under Grand-Am's new "Prep 2" rules for the GT class. Beautiful car in my opinion. I've always been partial to the silhouettes because I was obsessed with the IMSA GTO/GTU series in the '80s, and it's interesting to me to see how far the silhouette concept has come.

Huge thanks to Ron Ogletree of Sabre Innovations and Keith Goldin of Goldin Brothers racing for allowing us to publish these images

I will agree it is a nice looking, but under the skin is the basic NASCAR inspired Three Card Monte, only worse, as the car is horribly artificially restricted so they do not embarass the slomobile, DPs.

It is kind of like the old Soviet Union, the harders they tries, the worsers it gets. I will give them credit for trying.

If only Panoz had hooked with John Bishop and not the ACO, it could be wonderful.

Bob

[billnchristy]

GT3RSR MID OHIO 1:24.952
BMW M3 Horribly arifically restricted 1:26.534

THE HORROR!!!

Oh, BTW with those lap times, the BMW would have placed 13th, 4th in GT in ALMS...it finished 1st in GT and 10th in Grand Am...BEHIND 10 slow mobiles...Oh yeah, and lastly, it would have beaten all but 1 of the P2s, 2 of the P1s and ahead of a GTS due to Mechanical failure...something horriblly artificially restricted cars dont tend to do too much...

Why not go poop on someone elses parade!!

That being said, nice car...cant wait to see it at the Glen and Mt. tremblant!!!

[Shady#30]

I'm not quite sure that that made sense...mmm ok.

[nsxr]

wow that's a bad try at a jgtc car. I like the comment about the porsches, right on man. But that car looks good. kind of scca gt2-5 style. I hope it runs well. too bad no one will see it.

[Burd]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

If only Panoz had hooked with John Bishop and not the ACO, it could be wonderful.

Bob

Keep in mind that John Bishop helped lay down the rules for the DP class...

[gttouring]

well if grand am wil allow SCCA GT2,3, and 4/5 (now GT lite) to compete, it could be a devestating combo- so many little tube framers, and no chance of raceing faster then a DP
which are tube frame them selves. it seem s as if GrandAm is allowing for rules so any one can build a real racer in their garage, but they have hese restriced constructor rules, will this apply to GT cars as it does to DP?
i love trans-am now and before gentilozzi- especially. but these cars were too fast for Grand-Am, it all could have have been a super series, but they goofed the DP formula.
all they need to do is make the DP the power house, and maybe lighten it a little, and everything else will fall into place.

[Burd]

Originally Posted by nsxr

wow that's a bad try at a jgtc car. I like the comment about the porsches, right on man. But that car looks good. kind of scca gt2-5 style. I hope it runs well. too bad no one will see it.

Excellent call on the SCCA GT2 comment. I've been saying for quite some time that Grand-Am should use the GT2 format for their GT class, and they've basically done exactly that, except that the Prep 2 cars will be considerably more sophisticated. No comparison to the JGTC cars however, mostly because the Prep 2's will cost much less to build...

[Burd]

Originally Posted by gttouring

It seem s as if GrandAm is allowing for rules so any one can build a real racer in their garage, but they have hese restriced constructor rules, will this apply to GT cars as it does to DP?

That's a good question. As far as I know, there are no constructor limitations on the GT class, but don't quote me on that. I know that Sabre Innovations, the group that built this RX-8, also have a very nice-looking DP design that hasn't been allowed into the GA fold.

[billnchristy]

Gee, you guys are right...lets forget about variety and affordability and have a Porsche parade instead...great idea...carry on your ACO flag, and fly it high!!

The 24 at Daytona this year in GT will see:

upto 4 BMW M3s
2 Maseratis
1 Ferrari 360 challenge (minimum)
1 GTO
2 RX-8
2-4 C-5 Vettes
1-2 C-6 Vettes
Possible 1 NSX
and at least a Dozen Porsches

Shame on grand am for allowing such cars into compete, I shall turn my nose up at them!

[gttouring]

well BNC we all know the Daytona attracts more teams than the GA in and of itself.
however, the GA is making the "racing on the cheap and still professional- and not redneck" thing going for it- i have said after my intital disgust of the DP's and GT neutering i have come to be a fan of the GA - i would like more from it, the DP's should not be "good for now" car designs they should consider making legend. the AUDI R8 love it or loathe it, is legend, to be looked back on much like the 917's the mazda 787b and the Ferrari 333sp and 330's even. the Panoz (GTR1 and LMP roadster) equally has legend status already, and it wasn't nearly the success as the Audi.
the DP's? where will they be relegated to in history and Lore? a coffee table book solely based on Grand-Am, or will they do something to make these machines truly breathtaking, i am waiting for the swan to emerge form these ugly ducklings, and hopefully it will be a Peregrine soaring from these downy youngsters.
trimming up the green house as said ad nauseum anbout these cars is where to start. The GT situation is only an artifact of the DP position. they need to be tops in GA so any comers must be under them, not to say there are not a lot of takers, the races have proved to be pretty good. a full tube frame road race series- from production style to DProto style would be a good foot to stand on and stop the production based idea, make it a legend something we have yearning to see hear and smell/
this is the shame of Grand-Am after so long i think i have nailed it- we all want to see Titans clash, not the little rascals and 3 round boxing matches.
even if these little rascal know how to fight...
i am not trying to start a fight - simply trying to put into perspective what the GA is appearing to be,
i love USAC races, see them everychance i get, but these are good down home racing cars and racers- Turkey night! Eldora, nazareth silver crown fights, but it isn't champcar or Indy for that matter, and some stories will develop but the fight at the brickyard, or the streets of Vancouver, longbeach, laguna these are the legends....

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Burd

Keep in mind that John Bishop helped lay down the rules for the DP class...

I know that but if he had put his head together with Panoz instead of the France boys, who are money,not car people, the results may have been something that far more closely resembles the original IMSA, which did not use tube frames in any way or form, until the original formula was ended for the GTP cars.

All the so called variety,some wish to list,amounts to.by the way the article voiced ow the carw would be made "equal", emphasizes the farce of the variety.
To the greatest degree it is al the same merd, only they have been shoveled to different piles; the cars that are genuine are so emasculated it is not even funny; (although the ALMS cars perform at far from ability level also.)

It is basically, close racing, determined by how tight the leash is pulled.

It is still not a bad looking car, it at least evokes the spirit, appearence wise of the old IMSA.
Bob

[billnchristy]

Im looking at the big picture...when 50+ DP (easily achievable at present growth rate) hit the track at Daytona in 06, with a 30+ GT field represented by over a dozen car types, it wont be the individual cars that are the things of history, it will be the event itself...

This year alone, 30+ DPs starting will be the fullest field of protos gathered and one of the biggest fields in a long time. The race will be hotly contested by at least 12 cars, if not upwards of 20...throw in fortune and fate and another 4 or 5 could run away with it...

The event itself has me boiling over with excitement...why? Because nobody knows what will happen and who will win...

Can you get this excited over a club race? Sure, but I dont know of many club races with 50+ household (well, sportscar racing houses) names, talent from open,closed,touring,stock car, and other series competing on actually pretty equal ground...

Will the French win?, will the FIA GT stars win?, will the Englishman/Dutch/US Nascar star team win?...Man, who knows, and thats why i care!!

[Shady#30]

Originally Posted by billnchristy

The event itself has me boiling over with excitement...why? Because nobody knows what will happen and who will win...

ehh there's probably a few people who know what will happen and who will win.


I see these prep 2 cars as nothing more than false advertising.

[billnchristy]

Ok whats the false advertisement...its a RACE CAR and it has 400+ HP...

[racer11]

doesnt mean it can handle through a corner and could still be slow as a dog

[Burd]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

I know that but if he had put his head together with Panoz instead of the France boys, who are money,not car people, the results may have been something that far more closely resembles the original IMSA, which did not use tube frames in any way or form, until the original formula was ended for the GTP cars.

Bob

Virtually every single car that ran in the IMSA GTO/GTU classes in the '80s were tube-frame cars, including such legendary machines as the AAR Toyota Celicas, the Rousch Merkurs and Cougars, and the ever famous Audi 90 Quattro.

I would venture to say that the new Grand-Am GT class is a virtual carbon copy of the old IMSA GTU class, except the cars will have a bit more power and modern CAD technology allows constructors to make the bodywork look almost exactly like the production cars.

Also, don't forget that the GTPs weren't a part of the IMSA series until it was well over a decade old. In many ways Bishop pioneered the tube-frame concept (at least in the states) in an effort to find a way to encourage teams to run something other than a Porsche 911. Remember the Chevy Monzas?

The Prep 2 rules have "Bishop" written all over them IMHO. Also, and this is very important, remember that it was the Frances who started the original IMSA series with John Bishop in the late '60s. Without France family backing, the IMSA series, including the GTPs, would have never existed.

Love them or hate them (I'm certainly no NASCAR fan myself), you have to admit the Frances have done more for sportscar racing in this country than anyone else other than perhaps the SCCA. And if you don't mind me saying so, suggesting that Panoz is a "car person" in comparison to Bishop and the France family is downright laughable. He is a pharmacuticals manufacturer who had absolutely no interest whatsoever in cars or road-racing until his son dragged him into it in the mid-90s.

I'm not trying to start another ridiculous ALMS vs. Grand-Am argument here, I'm just giving you the facts.

[Burd]

And for the record, just because Panoz is in no way shape or form a "car guy" in my opinion doesn't mean that his idea for the ALMS wasn't a good one. It was. Absolutely brilliant in fact.

Remember how amazing the 2000 season was, and how fantastic the future appeared to be heading into 2001? Then the Caddy crapped out, the new Panoz LMP-07 was a heap, BMW split the proto biz, and the Oreca Chrysler LMP fizzled big time. Not to mention the fact that the economy started to drop. Now the ACO has the LMES up and running, and things are looking a bit sketchy for the ALMS at the moment.

That doesn't mean, of course, that the ALMS is going anywhere. Far from it. Things turn around very quickly in Le Mans land, and I for one am excited as hell to see what the GTS class is going to look like at Sebring. Also, Panoz had a revolutionary idea once, there's nothing that says he and his crowd can't have another one

[Shady#30]

Originally Posted by billnchristy

Ok whats the false advertisement...its a RACE CAR and it has 400+ HP...

Because its an attempt to make street tuners think their cars are out there racing on the track when in reality the GA cars are no such animal. I don't buy it. Tube framed wannabes just don't do it for me. Show me a REAL RX8 with performance mods and I'll bite.

[billnchristy]

like a C5R real?

[Fab]

Originally Posted by Burd

http://www.motorsport.com/magazine/f...&D=2004-12-23#

Looks like a GTO car allright... attractive, IMHO !

[Shady#30]

A C5R is a real C5R. You're not getting what I'm saying and in the interest of not arguing about it (on Christmas eve or any other day) let's just forget it.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by Burd

That's a good question. As far as I know, there are no constructor limitations on the GT class, but don't quote me on that. I know that Sabre Innovations, the group that built this RX-8, also have a very nice-looking DP design that hasn't been allowed into the GA fold.

Any pics of this Sabre DP?

[Burd]

Well, here are some design images from about a year ago...

http://funtechsystems.com/ftsmotorsports/printable.htm

...and a photo of the car that's been floating around for several months...

http://www.speedtv.com/_assets/libra.../19870_sab.jpg

Personally, I think this would be the most aesthetically pleasing of the DPs. The way the sides of the car are sloped into the greenhouse seems to make it all fit together better than the current examples...

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Burd

Virtually every single car that ran in the IMSA GTO/GTU classes in the '80s were tube-frame cars, including such legendary machines as the AAR Toyota Celicas, the Rousch Merkurs and Cougars, and the ever famous Audi 90 Quattro.

I would venture to say that the new Grand-Am GT class is a virtual carbon copy of the old IMSA GTU class, except the cars will have a bit more power and modern CAD technology allows constructors to make the bodywork look almost exactly like the production cars.

Also, don't forget that the GTPs weren't a part of the IMSA series until it was well over a decade old. In many ways Bishop pioneered the tube-frame concept (at least in the states) in an effort to find a way to encourage teams to run something other than a Porsche 911. Remember the Chevy Monzas?

The Prep 2 rules have "Bishop" written all over them IMHO. Also, and this is very important, remember that it was the Frances who started the original IMSA series with John Bishop in the late '60s. Without France family backing, the IMSA series, including the GTPs, would have never existed.

Love them or hate them (I'm certainly no NASCAR fan myself), you have to admit the Frances have done more for sportscar racing in this country than anyone else other than perhaps the SCCA. And if you don't mind me saying so, suggesting that Panoz is a "car person" in comparison to Bishop and the France family is downright laughable. He is a pharmacuticals manufacturer who had absolutely no interest whatsoever in cars or road-racing until his son dragged him into it in the mid-90s.

I'm not trying to start another ridiculous ALMS vs. Grand-Am argument here, I'm just giving you the facts.

Your thesis is correct, I hated the post GTX, the last name for what were once GTO-AAGT cars, the Monza were still, all uni-body cars are tube frames, how radical pick-up location etc. is, determines how "stock" it is, production based, though liberally.
I spoke, have spoken with drivers of GT cars and the rules changed daily, that is not really an exaggeratopm either, until by 1980 they still had tocontain stock componets but neither true tubey nore true non-tubeys.
The SCCA was becoming nearly as libeal when they killed the Cat.II cars after 1979.
When the GTP cars became king, the GTO cars were apprx. as stock as NASCAR cars, although the first of the "new" GTO cars were left radical AAGT cars slightly deradicalized until the full tubeys took over.

I still have some of the AutoWeeks where Bishop expressed frustration with Porsche and their Prod. race cars which Detroit had nothing to compete with including the all important homologated drive-train parts that matched the output of the engines.
Thus the Monzas were born.
It is sad in a way that Charlie Kemps Mustang was handicapped because it started out about as radical as the Monzas finally became.

If Panoz had put his head together with Bishop, I am sure that Bishop could have again gotten financial help from the France boys, only the result would have been probably a cross betweent what ALMS is and what pre-1980 IMSA was.
Plus there would not be a fight to be king of the hill, IMSA-ALMS greatest lacking is Daytona which no other signature race with ever replace.
You cannot make a signature race, in a series already going, it has to start with th series or already be inplace.

Oh well,
A VERY BLESSED CHRISTMAS TO ALL

Bob