Some FIAGT/ACO snippets

[19dodge]

just read the latest autosport, and the ACO and FIA have agreed to rename their GT classes of cars next year.

the GTS class in ACO racing and the GT class in FIA GT will be called "GT1". the GT class in ACO Racing and NGT in FIA GT will be called "GT2"

whenever i think of GT1, i think of purpose built factory prototypes. makes you wonder if thats where that class will be headed within the next few years.. may not be a totally good thing.

[rdjones]

Havn't we been here before, about 10 years ago IIRC, lets see how things pan out this time. The thing to remember here is that both the LMP1/2 class are very strong at present. The next few years will be interesting. I shall be watching with interest.........

[Fab]

The same name everywhere : I'm agree. It will be easier to understand, even for us.

GT1 remaining factory prototypes... the end was sad, but see what we had in the middle ! One of the best race cars IMHO... let's not think about the end, let's think about a new start of a new period, and it is obviously !

The Maserati leading the overall ? We asked for closed prototypes. Let's see it as a challenger for Audi ! A roofed challenger !

[jhansen]

But this is just a name change. Is there more to this story? The only thing I can see is perhaps this means the names could suit future rule changes, but that's just a guess. Let's not get too excited just yet.

[JAG]

The problem with the original GT1 was the homologation requirement of just one road car!

GTS requires at least 25 for a 'supercar'.

I suppose it is possible that the 'GT1' cars will be given some performance breaks to compete for overall wins, as in 1995 (when the cars were genuine road car based GT1 cars). I.E, slower over a lap, but bigger fuel tanks etc.

I read last week that the Maserati, in its current form, may not even be allowed at LM as its overhangs are too long. Yet at LM the ACO said they expect Maserati to be at LM in 2005!

[tblincoe]

its only a name and dont let the past iterations of these classes fool you into thinking that the days of 1997 and 1998 are coming back in GT racing. the classes were only named that way for ease of recognization by the general public. "GT" for GT cars, "1" for the top class in this category, "2" for the second class in this category... i like it.

[JAG]

Any further details yet regarding the regs themselves?

[Cadete]

Slightly OT, but I can't see why people simply love the GT1 (post 1996), JGTC and Group 5 type of cars. They aren't really road cars, as they are only silhouettes, nor are they full-blown prototypes...

Oh well, matter of taste, I guess As long as I have my protos I'll be happy...

And factories do have places to put their GT1-type cars, remember that LMP1 accepts closed cars.

[The Badger]

I think renameing it is a step in the right direction however small . Could this mean that the ACO and the FIA are finally agreeing with each other to some extent !!!

[JAG]

Originally posted by Cadete


And factories do have places to put their GT1-type cars, remember that LMP1 accepts closed cars.

This is the most important point. When the GT1 cars raced there was no closed prototype class so Toyota etc. had to make homologation specials for GT1.

[Cadete]

I guess you're right, JAG.
Then now that there is a closed prototype class there is no need to put protos in GTs. Can someone draw this to the attention of Maserati

[JAG]

I guess Maserati committed to FIA GT before the LMES was announced, were they could have raced a closed prototype.

Now they are in a tricky position with Corvette, Lamborghini and Aston Matin launching genuine road car based GTS cars.

[Cadete]

Maybe Maserati will simply use the experience to build a LMP1 or a real GT car based on the Maserati Coupé. This if the ACO doesn't aprove the MC12, of course.

[jhansen]

I disagree with you a bit Cadete. I think you can definitely call the Porsche 911-GT1 (98) and the Toyota GT-One genuine prototypes. Those were dedicated racing cars that were developed just like the Audi and Bentley were.

[Fogelhund]

Keep in mind, the Corvette people have been stating that they hope to be able to compete for overall with a "GTS" class car. This hasn't changed at all in the past year, and it has been repeated several times. We don't know what the C6R looks like yet, or how GT vs. how Prototype it is.

It seems obvious that given current state of GTS cars, even an improved Corvette, by 5 seconds or so would have a hard time with LMP1's in an overall LM scenario. To achieve a chance at LM, one would expect the ball to be moved quite a bit forward from where it is now.

Let's see what the C6R is and then decide how far out the Maserati is.

[jhansen]

Quote from Fogelhund: "To achieve a chance at LM, one would expect the ball to be moved quite a bit forward from where it is now."

Or the ball moved quite a bit backword for the LMP's.

It's all in preference, what would the people rather have...rocket GTS cars and dumbed down prototypes (or lose them all together), or keep it as is?

[JAG]

The ACO told Sam Lee of Veloqux (reported on DSC) that the LMP1 class would be the main/quickest class.

However, make the GTS cars 1000KG (rather than 1100KG), plus bigger tyres/fuel tank, and they could have a good chance of a win as in 1995 when the weather gave the F1 GTR a suprise win at LM.

When talking about all of these new GTS cars, it needs to be put into context. In 2000 the GTS class was virtually dead with Vipers winning everything. When the Vette arrived the Viper left shortly afterwords and we had races in the ALMS with 2 or 3 car GTS entries.

GTS has had 3-4 years to get its act in order, and now the cars are begining to arrive.

The exact same will happen in in LMP1, with cars currently being discussed/designed, arriving over the next 2 years.

[kdr]

is there a middle ground...with rocket gts but not restricted lmps? keeping the class wins...but allowing both to go for overall...or is this technically not possible?

[jhansen]

That is more or less what JAG proposed. Lighten up the GTS cars and the quick ones would be in the hunt, but it wouldn't detract from the LMP class. I can't say that I like it, but it's better than losing the LMPs all together, or "dumbing" them down ala Grand-Am.

[bf1]

The MC12 should be accepted as there will/is a production run going ahead, although I'm not sure how many road cars above 25

..as for the overhangs.. they could be changed as it isn't homologated yet.

bf1

[JAG]

Originally posted by bf1
The MC12 should be accepted as there will/is a production run going ahead, although I'm not sure how many road cars above 25

..as for the overhangs.. they could be changed as it isn't homologated yet.

bf1

Good point. Especially if it is only a few centimetres out.

[jhansen]

But if its more than a few centimeters out, couldn't that significantly alter the aero capability of the car? Surely though Masserati would have known the regs when making the car. Maybe they have an ACO spec bodywork for it, but have only been testing the car in FIA GT spec.

[JAG]

The ACO produced revised 'Supercar' regs last year with different splitter/wing sizes etc., for cars like the Zonda, Saleen, Maserati etc., to equalise them against the mass produced 550s, DB9s and the like.

[WidespredPaddok]

Compare the Maserati to the Saleen. If the overhangs on the Maserati are too long, it can't be by much.

This name change is great. Frankly, it's obvious and should've been done years ago.

If it also represents an upward shift in the GT cars' speed and profile, all the better. In my opinion the 1997 GT1's were ideal.

In any case the ACO and FIA are only going to do what the manufacturers want. If they want to upstage or challenge the prototypes (IMO not as inspiring or strong a class as it once was) then they probably will.

[Osella]

if they make 25 road cars, whatever the overhang, I don't see why the ACO shouldn't let them mod the racecars a bit. after all, non-homologated car widening and wheelarch enlarging is ok, so long as the ACO is satisfied that the changes look nice.



i don't see the MC12 as a 'problem' at all; i think the MC12 is actually a clever way of getting more value out of the enzo development, to give Maser a supercar, not an out-and-out racer.



i don't think any of us are expecting them to go the corvette/prodrive route of completely re-engineering a bespoke vehicle that just happens to look like a homologated MC12 road car?
i really can't see them spending that kind of cash, can anyone else?

an MC12 prepped like that might as well be an LMP anyway!