|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
10 Aug 2010, 09:32 (Ref:2742363) | #51 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,532
|
Quote:
*** The B6 isn't the nicest looking car, but it does sound epic. I do think the car is rather large for GT3, but it will fit nicely in GT1. Z4 in GT3, M3 in GT2 and B6 in GT1. Makes sense. |
|||
__________________
Entire team is babies. |
10 Aug 2010, 09:44 (Ref:2742366) | #52 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 254
|
regarding the B6, I personally think the BMW 6-series is a strikingly beautiful car, full of melancholy but also with an underlying brutishness... but Alpina totally messed it up, especially with that HIDEOUS front bumper and the paint scheme that doesn't do the car any justice.
Regarding a class with hot hatches like the scirocco etc, I agree that GT racing should be reserved to proper coupés, but in those places where it'd be appropriate (that is, series mainly aimed at well-off amateurs and performance-balanced diversity), I see no problem allowing a lower class based on hot hatches and other touring cars. It'd make for a great spectacle! At (A)LMS or Le Mans, there's no place for these kinda cars unless you allow them to be modded to a much higher degree than current GT's can be modded, which is a bad idea IMO. |
|
|
10 Aug 2010, 15:57 (Ref:2742529) | #53 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
Quote:
Oh and make that GT3 wing smaller, haha. |
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 20:19 (Ref:2742665) | #54 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
Quote:
A coupe has less than 33 ft. cu. and a sedan more than 33 ft. cu. |
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 20:28 (Ref:2742674) | #55 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
10 Aug 2010, 20:40 (Ref:2742682) | #56 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,630
|
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 20:58 (Ref:2742696) | #57 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 21:11 (Ref:2742706) | #58 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
|||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
10 Aug 2010, 21:13 (Ref:2742710) | #59 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 254
|
Quote:
So to say 33 ft. cu. is the "official" dividing line is stretching the relevance of the SAE's definitions almost to breaking point. Besides, with all the variation in body styles, and more importantly with cars growing ever bigger, a definition like that (based on interior volume) is pretty pointless for determining a road-going coupé, let alone to determine which cars would or would not be eligible for GT racing. The FIA's / ACO's definition for a car that's eligible for GT racing, pretty much coincides with a definition of a coupé that seems more sensible to me: Quote:
|
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 21:43 (Ref:2742733) | #60 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
Quote:
The term coupe has become what ever one wants it to be, rather meaningless in reality. At the same time, I will take the definition of : SAE International-- The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is the premiere world resource for the design, manufacturing, operation, and maintenance of automobiles over the ACO any day for any reason. |
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 22:13 (Ref:2742757) | #61 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,790
|
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 23:12 (Ref:2742804) | #62 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
Quote:
The more you chop it up, the less relation it has to the showroom. As much as I like the AAGT/Cat II cars, it was the earlier highly tuned but also mod. prod. only parts, that made the original Trans-Am as important as it was to both Detroit and fans. Leave the aero crap off especially. You want to faster, don't cripple the horse power with contrived equivalence. A 305 displacement limit would allow more horse power than the chicken-little sanctions appreciate nowadays. Low-rider stance on the race track does not improve looks. It was that the exhaust system could not pass through or over the chassis or body rule that made earlier sedan/GTs as impressive as they were as the mechanics had to WORK, to make the car work. |
|||
|
10 Aug 2010, 23:17 (Ref:2742808) | #63 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 254
|
Quote:
If you're gonna accept any organization as global authority, I'd rather use FISITA (the umbrella organisation for the national automotive societies in 38 countries around the world; SAE is a member society). Unfortunately I don't think they publish their own standards, but to call the SAE's standards the most relevant when there's a plethora of standard-issuing bodies around the world? Like you said, a universally accepted definition of a coupé is impossible to reach, but if you're gonna use a definition, why use the SAE's if it's a completely silly one? just because they call themselves the premier world resource? or because some of their other standards have caught on internationally? I think the ACO and FIA (which is a fairly globally recognized standard-setting body of motorsports) have done a reasonably good job of defining cars that are eligible for GT racing (read: coupés and convertibles)... |
||
|
10 Aug 2010, 23:24 (Ref:2742810) | #64 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,790
|
Quote:
I don't think its a bad idea at all, I think the current GA GT cars look too conservative. The Ferrari F430 looks great slammed and that's with the ACO ride height limit, they would and have run them lower. GT3 cars aren't that radical and based mostly on the OEM aero dynamics. |
|||
|
11 Aug 2010, 14:28 (Ref:2743061) | #65 | |
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 454
|
^I guess you fall in with the crowd who like to call 4 door cars "coupes" because they have a swoopy shape?
********. |
|
|
11 Aug 2010, 14:32 (Ref:2743063) | #66 | |
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 454
|
Oh I am totally with you, I just think that it is a ridiculous misnomer and the offending parties are a bunch of marketing jackasses.
|
|
|
11 Aug 2010, 17:47 (Ref:2743132) | #67 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 908
|
could an Audi RS5 be a good GT racer ?
|
||
|
11 Aug 2010, 21:24 (Ref:2743244) | #68 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,790
|
|||
|
12 Aug 2010, 13:08 (Ref:2743525) | #69 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 15,690
|
|||
|
12 Aug 2010, 13:25 (Ref:2743533) | #70 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
||
|
12 Aug 2010, 13:49 (Ref:2743545) | #71 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 757
|
|||
|
12 Aug 2010, 14:13 (Ref:2743558) | #72 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,532
|
|||
__________________
Entire team is babies. |
12 Aug 2010, 15:36 (Ref:2743598) | #73 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
A lot more changes are needed to transform the R8 LMS into a proper GT2 car: the production V10 has to be replaced by a real race engine breathing through the mandoraty air restrictors (perhaps the V8 is a better choice), the suspension has to be changed (see here for reason), the aero has to be updates because the current GT3 rear wing is illegal for GT2, the weight has to go down quite a bit (almost 100 kg), etc. |
||
|
12 Aug 2010, 16:40 (Ref:2743619) | #74 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 757
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
12 Aug 2010, 17:30 (Ref:2743639) | #75 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 170
|
It's great that there are 5 pages of this discussion but I think there is one fundamental point that no one has mentioned.
What we think is a coupe, sedan, 2+2, GT, touring car, etc. is pretty much irrelevant, especially when car counts are what they are and the regs are all over the place. The M3 looks big and unweildy against it's competition in GT2 and a SLS AMG "supercar" GT3 is being produced. Of course what is and isn't a supercar is subjective as well. I thought the intent was to capture more and more affordable cars the lower in GT classes you went. GT1 being super/hypercars (i.e., Maseratis/Lambos/Ford GT/Ferrari halo cars), or cars that 99.9% of the population will never be able to afford, GT2 being more affordable but still incredibly performing cars (Lesser Ferraris/Vettes/911s/the new McClaren MP4-12C/Astons/Jags) and then GT3 could be the most commonly attainable performance cars (M3s/Caymans/Mustangs/Camaros). But ultimately if you are car manufacturer X and you have a car that may not be suitable for the "spirit" of GT2 regulations, but it is the most visible GT category and it is your most visible performance vehicle (marketing-wise). So the organizing body is worried about low car counts, and they are approached by manufacturer X. What do you think will happen? They'll figure out a way with waivers or tweaking of regs to get that car on the grid, period. As soon as I see a 4-door, though, I will die a little inside. I blame GT3 for it's laissez faire attitude to "rules". |
||
__________________
"Dude, Scott Sharp wrecked again." Uttered by my buddy at various races the past couple years. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ANYONE GOING RACING Classic GT Cars in 2010 | fasted | Historic Racing Today | 49 | 27 Feb 2010 08:08 |
The cars that destroyed GT racing last time | Adam43 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 58 | 20 Aug 2007 15:47 |
muscle cars | MattC | Road Car Forum | 48 | 28 Feb 2005 09:14 |
Muscle Car Racing | Steve Holmes | Historic Racing Today | 3 | 9 Jun 2004 05:03 |