Modern Group A

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by one five five

And yet we have a production car class in Australia that is fully within CAMS and FIA regulations?? If this style of car was so dangerous, they wouldn't be allowed to race period

Not really, it will be allowed until someone is killed. Crashes like that which killed Gregg Hansford and Mark Porter could happen tomorrow in a production car.

Fact is production car racing is effective amateur and only casual. If you race it professionally week in week out your chance of a catastrophic accident multiply exponentially. Plus we are talking about production shells and racing engines, that will only get faster and faster.

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by one five five

And yet we have a production car class in Australia that is fully within CAMS and FIA regulations??

If this style of car was so dangerous, they wouldn't be allowed to race period

wether its dangerous or not, being honest here..it still wont capture peoples interest in true Stock Racing..even seeing my car doing and being driven by the worlds best drivers, 3 minute lap times just wont get any interest from me whatsoever, even though I love my car to bits

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by David Towe

Every Group A car I've owned has had the cage extended through to the front and rear strut towers. The seat is also moved inboard as far as the transmission tunnel will allow (not very far when get a seat to fit my more than ample rear end) the fuel cells were all in the boot area.
Can I ask you Mixer, do you think that Don Watson and Mike Burgman would have survived those same crashes if they were in a COTF? .

yes, they would've

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by David Towe

Can I ask you Mixer, do you think that Don Watson and Mike Burgman would have survived those same crashes if they were in a COTF? We lost Mike Porter (and another who's name escapes me) in the last few years and they were in V8 Supercars which are more developed than the supposedly unsafe Group A cars. The simple fact is that we take a risk when we get behind the wheel and travel at speed around a race track.

Of course we are postulating about things that can never be proven. I do think the survivability is greater with a purpose built vehicle that hasn't got the compromises inherent in a road car. Your comment about risk is true; motorsport is dangerous. But I think its a lot safer in a chassis made for it, rather than a road car which is going to be built to get 5 stars in a crash at 40km/h.

[DAVID PATERSON]

Originally Posted by FAS33

..it still wont capture peoples interest in true Stock Racing..even seeing my car doing and being driven by the worlds best drivers, 3 minute lap times just wont get any interest from me whatsoever, even though I love my car to bits

40 years ago a stock Falcon did 2:48, on cross ply tyres and the public interest was huge!

In the last year of group A, the front runners were doing 2:12. (Biggest crowd ever was in the Group A era).

[Woolley]

Group A was production based, not production, and were proper race cars built from a road chassis. They were substantially faster than ProdSaloons and full cages and racing seats meant they were as safe as they could be in the day, and there is no reason why a production shell shouldn't be able to cope with everything the COTF can just as in the 80s they were as good as anything purpose built at the time. To suggest otherwise really suggests a lack of understanding of the build of the cars and the mechanics of an accident.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Woolley

and there is no reason why a production shell shouldn't be able to cope with everything the COTF can just as in the 80s they were as good as anything purpose built at the time. To suggest otherwise really suggests a lack of understanding of the build of the cars and the mechanics of an accident.

Sorry Woolley, I fail to see how you can possibly think that a custom build racing chassis & cage will not provide better protection in a crash than a modified road car shell with retrofitted cage, which is designed to a wholly different set of parameters and was never put together to provide occupant protection at potentially hundreds of km/h.

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by DAVID PATERSON

40 years ago a stock Falcon did 2:48, on cross ply tyres and the public interest was huge!

In the last year of group A, the front runners were doing 2:12. (Biggest crowd ever was in the Group A era).

sheesh thats an awesome lap time!. I wonder how fast my XR will do that today, not that I'd be game to do it full throttle I appreciate the courage that the drivers had back their, heaps of respect...... In a Motor Mag I once read not even Will Davison said he'd go around Bathurst race pace in the GT-HO that the legends once raced in.

the Production race doesn't interest me because theyre a bit slow, and if the 4 manufacturers that'll be in the V8 next year were to all race in THAT series in bathurst (or any other track) one car make would just win all the time. making it unfair and boring to the other fans.

[Woolley]

A roll cage is a roll cage. As a marshal I've attended plenty of shunts of cars built both ways. Safety performance is not much different between the two. I'd guess it's probably harder to rebuild a production based chassis afterwards but I've seen no evidence that their ability to withstand a sizeable shunt is noticably diminished. WTCC and BTCC aren't exactly renowned for genteel racing, after all.

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by Woolley

A roll cage is a roll cage. As a marshal I've attended plenty of shunts of cars built both ways. Safety performance is not much different between the two. I'd guess it's probably harder to rebuild a production based chassis afterwards but I've seen no evidence that their ability to withstand a sizeable shunt is noticably diminished. WTCC and BTCC aren't exactly renowned for genteel racing, after all.

and the COTF program is all about closer racing, faster lap times, but more importantly safer racing. so the cars are gonna be infinitley safer then the group A's ever were.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by FAS33

and the COTF program is all about closer racing, faster lap times, but more importantly safer racing. so the cars are gonna be infinitley safer then the group A's ever were.

And i'm sure a group A car built today is going to be infinitely safer than a group a built in the 80's and 90's

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

And i'm a group A car built today is going to be infinitely safer than a group a built in the 80's and 90's

Yeah and its called V8 Supercars, COTF style....

[Woolley]

Sorry to continue to disagree, but I'd suggest the safety differences between the two are more to do with the 30-odd years that have passed rather than any inherent engineering restrictions. And the fact that not all Group A cars might have been built entirely to the rules...

I can understand why you think a puprose built car would be safer, but in my experience I have seen nothing to suggest that is actually the case. Indeed, I have seen some purpose built sports and GT cars fall apart and some converted road cars soak up some extremely big hits.

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by FAS33

yes, they would've

Interesting statement, how do you justify that conclusion?

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by FAS33

the Production race doesn't interest me because theyre a bit slow, and if the 4 manufacturers that'll be in the V8 next year were to all race in THAT series in bathurst (or any other track) one car make would just win all the time. making it unfair and boring to the other fans.

Possibly true FAS, but the concept of Group A forced the car manufacturers to improve the product produced for the road in order to be a more competitive race car, thereby benefitting all who bought them from the showroom.
The cage technology improved over the years, from alloy cages in Group C Touring cars and very early Group A cars, to steel cages in 1986 onwards. These cages were improved with more developments and bars included in the later years. I wonder what a modern Group A car with the latest cage technology would be like on torsional and impact test beds?
I still think that the great suggestions for a modified set of Group A rules that have been suggested in this thread would be more interesting and the cars would be more relevant than COTF.

[Axeman444]

a question for the "old school is not as good as the current school" peeps, if you had never seen a modern race (say V8SC) and the speeds they achieve around an example track, would you still consider proddies to be slow and boring if you had nothing faster to compare them to apart from eg F1?

[DAVID PATERSON]

Originally Posted by David Towe

The cage technology improved over the years, from alloy cages in Group C Touring cars and very early Group A cars, to steel cages in 1986 onwards. These cages were improved with more developments and bars included in the later years. I wonder what a modern Group A car with the latest cage technology would be like on torsional and impact test beds?

Good point. I own two Group A Touring Cars, they are both of the same make & model, but one was caged in 1986 and the other was caged in 1991. The cages are chalk & cheese in comparison, the 1991 cage being far superior.

[Mr Revhead]

As far as making things popular go, I reckon it needs to.look kik one you buy that's had wings and flares bolted on, it has to spit fire and go everywhere sliding and looking like the driver is fighting for his life. Anything like that will draw the crowds

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

As far as making things popular go, I reckon it needs to.look kik one you buy that's had wings and flares bolted on, it has to spit fire and go everywhere sliding and looking like the driver is fighting for his life. Anything like that will draw the crowds

Possibly the best post I've seen anywhere re. what would get a crowd in. This is why F1 has gone away from driver aids and back to driver ability thank God. The return to a car taht had a closer appearance to the production model was at the forefront of the early years of Group A. They looked far more like the car you could buy rather than the wings and flares of the Group C days. True you could buy production cars with wings and flares eg. the SLR5000 but not many.

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

As far as making things popular go, I reckon it needs to.look kik one you buy that's had wings and flares bolted on, it has to spit fire and go everywhere sliding and looking like the driver is fighting for his life. Anything like that will draw the crowds

Group A racing wasn't even Production racing anyways , like as in 100% stock, they had bits and pieces added to it too, and did very similar things that you just described. and a car you'll find in those racing days you wont find at the local dealers "back in the days". stock as a rock , ok you get the picture but im sorry but times have changed, you can watch the Group A's in your VCR's while we watch the awesome racing today on HD.

Originally Posted by David Towe

Possibly the best post I've seen anywhere re. what would get a crowd in. This is why F1 has gone away from driver aids and back to driver ability thank God. The return to a car taht had a closer appearance to the production model was at the forefront of the early years of Group A. They looked far more like the car you could buy rather than the wings and flares of the Group C days. True you could buy production cars with wings and flares eg. the SLR5000 but not many.

lol comparing F1 to V8 Supercars.

[David Towe]

Originally Posted by FAS33

Group A racing wasn't even Production racing anyways , like as in 100% stock, they had bits and pieces added to it too, and did very similar things that you just described. and a car you'll find in those racing days you wont find at the local dealers "back in the days". stock as a rock , ok you get the picture but im sorry but times have changed, you can watch the Group A's in your VCR's while we watch the awesome racing today on HD.




lol comparing F1 to V8 Supercars.

FAS, I wasn't comparing V8 Supertaxis to F1, I was relating the reason why F1 went away from driver aids and put the onus back onto driver ability, that's all. Don't you think F1 has been more exciting since this happened? V8 Supertaxis are becoming so hi-tech that I fear it won't be long before they have traction control and launch control, this surely would be a backward step?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by DAVID PATERSON

40 years ago a stock Falcon did 2:48, on cross ply tyres and the public interest was huge!

In the last year of group A, the front runners were doing 2:12. (Biggest crowd ever was in the Group A era).

That's because the public hadn't seen anything faster.

If there were tintops running 2:25's 40 years ago, that's where the public interest would have been.

That said, they should bring back bias-ply tires.

[David Towe]

I think this thread has done it's dash, it's turning into another Group A versus V8 Supertaxi debate. I think there was some really good suggestions posted but I'm gone.

[FAS33]

deleted

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by David Towe

FAS, I wasn't comparing V8 Supertaxis to F1, I was relating the reason why F1 went away from driver aids and put the onus back onto driver ability, that's all. Don't you think F1 has been more exciting since this happened? V8 Supertaxis are becoming so hi-tech that I fear it won't be long before they have traction control and launch control, this surely would be a backward step?

DRS?