Sportscars that never raced

[ghinzani]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

it had a 3.5 litre V12, rumour was it was a hack of the Ferrari 3.5 litre F1 lump and that it was designed/penned by Dallara and it was meant to debut in 92 i think but of course Sports Car Racing was teetering on the edge of oblivion at that point and it was axed, a massive shame, its such a beautiful car, and i imagine on open side pipe's, that V12 must of been savagely blood curdlingly loud.

Any links to the later Ferarri 333sp then?

[isynge]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

it had a 3.5 litre V12, rumour was it was a hack of the Ferrari 3.5 litre F1 lump and that it was designed/penned by Dallara and it was meant to debut in 92 i think but of course Sports Car Racing was teetering on the edge of oblivion at that point and it was axed, a massive shame, its such a beautiful car, and i imagine on open side pipe's, that V12 must of been savagely blood curdlingly loud.

This may qualify as a staggeringly unusable piece of 'evidence' but I first came across what I think was this Alfa group C in a conversation I had with a couple of Aussie racing enthusiasts at the 1991 German GP - they were on the typical Australian massive tour of Europe and wholeheartedly recommended visiting the Alfa Romeo museum - one of the highlights being the unraced Group C car.

That would fit with the putative 1986 debut of it, but the car we see here looks a lot more modern, much more like the 1992 time period dj mentions. Might thus there be two unraced Alfa Romeo Group C cars?

[ensign14]

The 1986 thing was surely the silhouette formula car built by Bernie's Brabham, which seems basically to have been either an attempt to emulate NASCAR, or kill off the world touring car championship before it started.

[isynge]

Perfectly possible it was the 164 ProCar that was being referred to - although the 19 year old complete car geek I was at the time should have known the difference. Nice, albeit brief video of the 164 on YouTube here.

[fausto]

Originally Posted by isynge

This may qualify as a staggeringly unusable piece of 'evidence' but I first came across what I think was this Alfa group C in a conversation I had with a couple of Aussie racing enthusiasts at the 1991 German GP - they were on the typical Australian massive tour of Europe and wholeheartedly recommended visiting the Alfa Romeo museum - one of the highlights being the unraced Group C car.

That would fit with the putative 1986 debut of it, but the car we see here looks a lot more modern, much more like the 1992 time period dj mentions. Might thus there be two unraced Alfa Romeo Group C cars?

Could have been the one-off 1975 Giro d'Italia 33/3 http://www.racingsportscars.com/phot...-10-17-518.jpg

I remember there were rumours about a Group C project from Alfa Romeo at the very start (1982/83), possibly with some wind tunnel testing models evaluation, and then the 3.5 atmo car, never seen on the magazines until second half of the '90s. Also a friend went with an university visit to the Fiat wind tunnel early '90s and saw a model of the car. No way they could have done a 3.0/3.5 atmo car with the old "fuel consumption" rules, look at the troubles Ford had with the DFL...

[isynge]

Originally Posted by fausto

Could have been the one-off 1975 Giro d'Italia 33/3 http://www.racingsportscars.com/phot...-10-17-518.jpg

I remember there were rumours about a Group C project from Alfa Romeo at the very start (1982/83), possibly with some wind tunnel testing models evaluation, and then the 3.5 atmo car, never seen on the magazines until second half of the '90s. Also a friend went with an university visit to the Fiat wind tunnel early '90s and saw a model of the car. No way they could have done a 3.0/3.5 atmo car with the old "fuel consumption" rules, look at the troubles Ford had with the DFL...

Thanks for the link fausto - all goes to show that Alfa Romeo were congenitally incapable of making a bad looking car.

I can see how it could easily be interpreted as a Group C.

I'm all too familiar with the DFL problems - although wasn't that at least partially down to the vibrations produced by the V8 configuration - would the V12, or even a bored out development of the 1.5 liter V8 turbo, have suffered the same sort of problems (without digressing far too far from the topic?).

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by ghinzani

Any links to the later Ferarri 333sp then?

If the engine was indeed a hack of the F1 engine, which the 333sp's engine was based on as i recall, then they are linked, albeit quite loosely, as mike said, he's in contact with the designer so we will wait until then to see what emerges, out of interest, who penned the 333sp? i seem to remember it being a rather famous F1 designer am i right?

[isynge]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

If the engine was indeed a hack of the F1 engine, which the 333sp's engine was based on as i recall, then they are linked, albeit quite loosely, as mike said, he's in contact with the designer so we will wait until then to see what emerges, out of interest, who penned the 333sp? i seem to remember it being a rather famous F1 designer am i right?

Tony Southgate was the big name behind the 333SP - indeed ticking the box as a 'rather famous F1 designer' - as well being behind one or two decent sportscars, not least the Toyota TS010.

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by isynge

Tony Southgate was the big name behind the 333SP - indeed ticking the box as a 'rather famous F1 designer' - as well being behind one or two decent sportscars, not least the Toyota TS010.

Appear's my thought's that it was Tony Southgate were correct, im intrigued as to what ghinzani said, it could conspire that the 333sp and the Alfa Gr.C car are possibly related through the engine, but im not entirely sure, if it is a hack of the Ferrari F1 lump, then the two car's are intertwined in that area, Ferrari would also have had a Endurance engine from the off, meaning only adapting it to the new rule set, although im not sure if i can see it myself, time will tell!

on another note, another Alfa, the 8C GT2 that was planned never really came to fruition unfortunately, i would love to have seen a GT version of that car, beautiful with a snorting V8.

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by fausto

I remember there were rumours about a Group C project from Alfa Romeo at the very start (1982/83), possibly with some wind tunnel testing models evaluation, and then the 3.5 atmo car, never seen on the magazines until second half of the '90s. Also a friend went with an university visit to the Fiat wind tunnel early '90s and saw a model of the car. No way they could have done a 3.0/3.5 atmo car with the old "fuel consumption" rules, look at the troubles Ford had with the DFL...

Dont forget the 'family' already were running the lanica LC2, again with a Ferrari inspired engine a V8 turbo. So i very much doubt Alfa would have run another car, with a completely different set up. So is it possible the rumoured early 80's car could have become the Lancia, designed and built by Dallara I think.

Itrs a huge shame Grp C ended when it did, the Alfa would have been a stunning (if unreliable!) addition to the Jag, Merc, Toyota, Pug, Nissan, Brun, Konrad, BRM, Spice, Lola, Mazda (JAG) etc.

[isynge]

Originally Posted by Nordic

Dont forget the 'family' already were running the lanica LC2, again with a Ferrari inspired engine a V8 turbo. So i very much doubt Alfa would have run another car, with a completely different set up. So is it possible the rumoured early 80's car could have become the Lancia, designed and built by Dallara I think.

Itrs a huge shame Grp C ended when it did, the Alfa would have been a stunning (if unreliable!) addition to the Jag, Merc, Toyota, Pug, Nissan, Brun, Konrad, BRM, Spice, Lola, Mazda (JAG) etc.

Alfa Romeo only ended up in the Fiat 'family' in 1986, so prior to then there would have been no internal fratricidal conflicts and post then, with the demise of the Lancia sportscar project you could see it fitting with the overall brand approach (Ferrari for single seaters, Lancia for rallying, Alfa Romeo for touring cars / sportscars).

Agree utterly regarding the collapse of Group C. It's probably fair to say that the 3.5 liter move was a mistake, but all that notwithstanding, there was enough machinery out there to have a superb series in 1992/93 had it been managed properly, but of course, by then the FIA had got their hands on it and a combination of ridiculously short races, the demise of start money, and a curious selection of events probably put paid to any chances of it seeing through the early '90s recession. It is still one of the great 'what if' scenarios I happily indulge in when in idle moments.

[Tim the Grey]

And anyone who wonders why Bernie killed it, just look at that list of names!
At least 4 ended up in Bernie's Flying Circus!

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by isynge

Alfa Romeo only ended up in the Fiat 'family' in 1986, so prior to then there would have been no internal fratricidal conflicts and post then, with the demise of the Lancia sportscar project you could see it fitting with the overall brand approach (Ferrari for single seaters, Lancia for rallying, Alfa Romeo for touring cars / sportscars).

Agree utterly regarding the collapse of Group C. It's probably fair to say that the 3.5 liter move was a mistake, but all that notwithstanding, there was enough machinery out there to have a superb series in 1992/93 had it been managed properly, but of course, by then the FIA had got their hands on it and a combination of ridiculously short races, the demise of start money, and a curious selection of events probably put paid to any chances of it seeing through the early '90s recession. It is still one of the great 'what if' scenarios I happily indulge in when in idle moments.

Opps! forgot Alfa where not part of FIAT in the early 80's.

I dont think Bernie or the FIA Helped the case with a raft of daft rules designed to cripple the series, however don't forget the world had slipped into a recession in the early 90's which then did for the private teams.

The same cycle we are now falling into i fear.

Its such a shame that the series failed when it did, that rosta of cars, plus the ones we heard nothing about but must have been thought about would have been amazing.

Would a Grp C series in 93 - 94 onwards have kept the long distance format? the move was already towards shorter sprints.

[isynge]

Gosh - time to fall back on archives rather than trying to wrack brains on this one! When exactly did they start going to shorter races?

Longer races (with the ability to appeal to the wealthy amateur) would have insulated the series from the recession, as would a sensible European focused calendar and in particular clarity about 1992. The failure until very late in the day to actually agree to run a series I fear killed off Konrad and Brun at least, as, I would argue, did a failure to convince Mercedes and Jaguar to stay around (here however the focus on F1 made that something of an impossibility).

It's a massive counterfactual and probably required too many changes from what actually happened, but given the series survived the oil shock period (albeit shakily) it shouldn't have been beyond the bounds of possibility.

On that topic, I seem to remember a very turnkey March 3.5 liter project around the same time as the Lola - this ring any bells for anyone?

[Tim the Grey]

Bernie wanted short races to take redundant F1 motors... It was all aimed at taking Group C out, to leave F1 as the undisputed king of motorsport.
Oh, and there was also a power struggle with ACO, IIRC, to boot...

[KA]

Originally Posted by isynge

Gosh - time to fall back on archives rather than trying to wrack brains on this one! When exactly did they start going to shorter races?

1989- though a few shorter races had started to creep into the schedule in 1985/6- (Shah Alam in Malaysia (800km) at the end of '85 was the first, and then a few 'sprints' were included from 1986 on- usually 360km, plus the much shorter Norisring races) . The rest of the races stayed at 1000km until '89, when the race distance was hacked right down to 480km, and then I think again to 430 for 1991

[KA]

Originally Posted by ensign14

The 1986 thing was surely the silhouette formula car built by Bernie's Brabham, which seems basically to have been either an attempt to emulate NASCAR, or kill off the world touring car championship before it started.

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Bernie wanted short races to take redundant F1 motors... It was all aimed at taking Group C out, to leave F1 as the undisputed king of motorsport.
Oh, and there was also a power struggle with ACO, IIRC, to boot...

I won't swear to it without looking up old magazines, but didn't Bernie's vision of 'Procar' involve it being the replacement for both Group C and the WTCC? Manufacturer teams only, and 2x sprint races, either as a GP support, or on the weekend between GPs- I don't recall which

[ensign14]

Even that wasn't necessarily the problem. The killer was surely the insistence that teams take part in ALL the races. Someone like Roy Baker hoiking all the way to Japan in order to avoid a $100k fine?

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by isynge

.

On that topic, I seem to remember a very turnkey March 3.5 liter project around the same time as the Lola - this ring any bells for anyone?

I think by the early 90's March had ceased to be able to make a Grp C car after the Leyton House shambles and the buyouts that followed.

Thats not to say they did not want to make one and may even have said they could, but weather anyone would taken them seriously is another matter.

With the demise of the private teams, then the incentive to make them goes as well.

Did Porsche ever have any interest in the 3.5 litre cars?

[Graz]

Why did Bernie want to kill off Gp C - did he think it was crap or too much competition ot F1? I was a bit young to remember the ins and outs though I do remember Bernie always referred to Gp C as 'bloody Group C.'

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by ensign14

Even that wasn't necessarily the problem. The killer was surely the insistence that teams take part in ALL the races. Someone like Roy Baker hoiking all the way to Japan in order to avoid a $100k fine?

Cost was clearly a core problem.

Enough teams, both works and private had made cars suitable, but the rise in costs due to enforced attendance at all rounds would have been a problem for the smaller teams, and then the larger works teams would have weighed up the relative merits of F1 and Sportscars, sorry to say that Sportscars would not have won that meeting at a time of a global downturn.

End result no group C

what part Bernie played in that and if he engineered it is a moot point, surfice to say the ACO vs FIA battle and any hope of a US series going down the tube did not help either.

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by Graz

Why did Bernie want to kill off Gp C - did he think it was crap or too much competition ot F1? I was a bit young to remember the ins and outs though I do remember Bernie always referred to Gp C as 'bloody Group C.'

Most people belive he feared that more manfactures would join Grp C and weaken his investment in F1.

The sponorship pool would also be diluted.

[KA]

Originally Posted by ensign14

Even that wasn't necessarily the problem. The killer was surely the insistence that teams take part in ALL the races. Someone like Roy Baker hoiking all the way to Japan in order to avoid a $100k fine?

that was always a ridiculous idea, and again one that hit the privateers hardest- though didn't a lot of teams just get round it (at least for the trip to Japan) by lending/renting their entry slot out to a local team?

After the 'full-season' rule was brought in, as I recall, most of the local Japanese privateers (Nova, From A, Trust etc) used to turn out at Suzuka using the likes of Almeras, Obermaier, Salamin, Tim Lee-Davey etc as a 'flag of convenience', the Japanese entries either replacing the European cars, or sometimes appearing as a second car (on paper at least) for a European team who had made the trip- either way, presumably a few Yen changed hands in order to sign off the deal...?

[KA]

Originally Posted by Nordic

I think by the early 90's March had ceased to be able to make a Grp C car after the Leyton House shambles and the buyouts that followed.

Thats not to say they did not want to make one and may even have said they could, but weather anyone would taken them seriously is another matter.

With the demise of the private teams, then the incentive to make them goes as well.

Did Porsche ever have any interest in the 3.5 litre cars?

Pretty sure that a March 3.5 litre Group C project was announced, but don't think it ever got further than a wind-tunnel model being shown?

I can't remember whether there were any rumours of Porsche interest in the 3.5 regs or not- they did of course build a 3.5 litre V12 for Footwork/Arrows in F1, but I don't think there was much chance of that ever appearing in the back of a sportscar once they realised it was better suited as a boat anchor than it was a race engine....

http://www.forix.com/8w/engines/por-v12.jpg

[ensign14]

Originally Posted by KA

that was always a ridiculous idea, and again one that hit the privateers hardest- though didn't a lot of teams just get round it (at least for the trip to Japan) by lending/renting their entry slot out to a local team?

After the 'full-season' rule was brought in, as I recall, most of the local Japanese privateers (Nova, From A, Trust etc) used to turn out at Suzuka using the likes of Almeras, Obermaier, Salamin, Tim Lee-Davey etc as a 'flag of convenience', the Japanese entries either replacing the European cars, or sometimes appearing as a second car (on paper at least) for a European team who had made the trip- either way, presumably a few Yen changed hands in order to sign off the deal...?

Yes, I think it gave the Almeras brothers their best result. Problem was that anyone building their own car was screwed; Aston had to pay a big fine as there were obviously no Astons in Japan. Bye bye the Olmases and Isolias and so on. More to the point, bye bye to anyone who fancied educating themselves in the Group C environment...