Super GT what do you think?

[DanJR1]

I cant see why ACO don't replace LMP1 (get rid of LMP2) with a replica class (considering thats where the rules are heading now), where the cars are silouette spaceframe like DTM cars, with bodywork modifications like in GT500 class (maybe slightly more extreme even?) but with the same engine rules as current LMP1 cars (when the diesel rules are clipped). proper racing cars which actually resemble road cars, and these would be a lot cheaper to produce than the current cars. Imagine this.....

Audi R8 (road car) LM V12 turbo diesel
Peugeot 407 coupe LM V12 turbo diesel
Ferrari 430 LM V12 (run by pescarolo)
Porsche 911 LM V10 (from the canned LM2000)
Aston Martin DB9 LM V12
Nissan GTR (the new skyline)
Jaguar XKR LM V10

it could be any car as it would only be a silouette of the original.

[Satorian]

It would be actually quite nice if the LMGTP class was done in cooperation with SuperGT officials in a way that SuperGT adopts the class (as it sounds similar enough), which would foster intercontinental racing competition, bolstering the fields around the world.

[pitviper]

These ideas are exactly what i was getting at... it would be beautiful, exciting, and like stated, would foster perhaps more crossover world wide between the series...

pit

[Nivola]

guys taking those photos in the bus is the hardest thing I have ever done.

My knee was jamed between the seat and the side of the bus to give me support. The Bus driver was not mucking about either! The amout of profanity going around was funny also as everyone was being throwen around trying to get photos!

I will never forget it. Till I get to old to remember in that nursing home.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Satorian

It would be actually quite nice if the LMGTP class was done in cooperation with SuperGT officials in a way that SuperGT adopts the class (as it sounds similar enough), which would foster intercontinental racing competition, bolstering the fields around the world.

The question is: what would Super GT gain by such a cooperation and what the ACO? From what I read the big 3 Japanese automakers shell out each about 100Mio $ per year on their Super GT-programms. This is IIRC a considerable chunk more than what Audi and Peugeot spent on their LMPs. Given the increased competition the cars may even get more expensive if other manufacturers joined. So I'm not sure if the ACO would like this.

As for the Super GT teams: What could they gain by increased competition? Well, it's always nice to be able to boast about beating the established European luxury car makers, but would it be worth risking a perfectly well running series and a formidable marketing instrument for the Japanese manufacturers? And shelling out maybe even more money?!
I don't think so.

Another thought: Does anybody else think that Super GT is somehow the modern incarnation of Group5?

[Satorian]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

The question is: what would Super GT gain by such a cooperation and what the ACO? From what I read the big 3 Japanese automakers shell out each about 100Mio $ per year on their Super GT-programms. This is IIRC a considerable chunk more than what Audi and Peugeot spent on their LMPs. Given the increased competition the cars may even get more expensive if other manufacturers joined. So I'm not sure if the ACO would like this.

There is nothing anyone can ever do in any series against competition increasing prices as everyone struggles to the front. That notion holds for every series. One can only hope that the rules lead somebody pumping ever more money into it to very quickly diminishing returns, where still the driver outweighs the difference between a $5m budget and a $100m budget.

BUT, big BUT, was that my thought of shared regulations wasn't about expanding the SuperGT with European/American cars, but expanding American and European series with Japanese cars without additional development cost for the Japanese manufacturer and teams. They wouldn't gain much in Asia, but they would gain a lot in Europe and we would welcome them with open arms.

As for the Super GT teams: What could they gain by increased competition? Well, it's always nice to be able to boast about beating the established European luxury car makers, but would it be worth risking a perfectly well running series and a formidable marketing instrument for the Japanese manufacturers? And shelling out maybe even more money?!
I don't think so.

Look above. I didn't mean to expand SuperGT. I meant to expand FIA GT, ALMS, LMS et al.


I want to see Nissan, Toyota and Honda at Le Mans, and if there was a comparatively easy way to get them here and be competitive in a common rule set, I would be all for it.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Satorian

BUT, big BUT, was that my thought of shared regulations wasn't about expanding the SuperGT with European/American cars, but expanding American and European series with Japanese cars without additional development cost for the Japanese manufacturer and teams. They wouldn't gain much in Asia, but they would gain a lot in Europe and we would welcome them with open arms.

I want to see Nissan, Toyota and Honda at Le Mans, and if there was a comparatively easy way to get them here and be competitive in a common rule set, I would be all for it.

Okay, I like that idea theoretically, but being a native Franconian I have a strong tendency towards pessismism and pointless bad-mouthing of good ideas. So please excuse my following remarks:

Wouldn't the Japanese cars then crush their European opposition and maybe even consequently make them walk away from the sport. Just think about 1998 when the monster-CLKs kiled FIA GT. So when the Japanese teams came over here for LM the European factories could either step up their game and spent the same amount of money as the Japanese or they could say that a LM victory isn't worth 100M and quit.
So we had basically a 50/50 chance of LM(S) getting super-expensive or getting a playground for the Japanese with probably decreasing European spectator interest due to the lack of competitive European entries.
I think the Euro-style top prototype ranks are in an upswing right now and with the addition of Acura and maybe Aston Martin/Prodrive will be for quite some time...

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Okay, I like that idea theoretically, but being a native Franconian I have a strong tendency towards pessismism and pointless bad-mouthing of good ideas. So please excuse my following remarks:

Wouldn't the Japanese cars then crush their European opposition and maybe even consequently make them walk away from the sport. Just think about 1998 when the monster-CLKs kiled FIA GT. So when the Japanese teams came over here for LM the European factories could either step up their game and spent the same amount of money as the Japanese or they could say that a LM victory isn't worth 100M and quit.
So we had basically a 50/50 chance of LM(S) getting super-expensive or getting a playground for the Japanese with probably decreasing European spectator interest due to the lack of competitive European entries.
I think the Euro-style top prototype ranks are in an upswing right now and with the addition of Acura and maybe Aston Martin/Prodrive will be for quite some time...

Besides a long shot, Aston Martin, who would bother with it?

Cheverolet would not, the spokesman for the team has said they will not participate in a series not based on mod. street cars, and that does NOT mean cockpit, that means the entire chassis.

The superGT cars are Japans version of tuve frame GT1s.
The death of grp.5 was when the cars were no longer like the Porsche 935, a streetable race car, but cars not related, ut by name to a treet car.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Satorian

It would be actually quite nice if the LMGTP class was done in cooperation with SuperGT officials in a way that SuperGT adopts the class (as it sounds similar enough), which would foster intercontinental racing competition, bolstering the fields around the world.

The problem is tha ACO LMGTP class will have more in common with a Peugeot 908 than a Super GT car, no road car pretentions, other than (optional) styling cues.

If you have a prototype class, the GT class really does have to be heavily production based, if not, what's the point?

As I said previously, a Japanease manufactuer would likely enlist someone like Lola/TTE to build a LMGTP and go for overall victory, rather than bring over a Super GT car and go for a class win.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by JAG

If you have a prototype class, the GT class really does have to be heavily production based, if not, what's the point?

Why?!
IMSA had GTPs and Lights and heavily modified GTOs and Us. the 70s had Group6 prototypes and equally brutally modified GTs in the form of the Group5 cars. The same goes for the mid-90s with the LMPs/WSCs and GT1s.

After all the average fan - those that don't post at 10/10s - don't really car if a car is tubeframe underneath the shell or a unibody. Hell, a lot of people think that DTM cars have something in common with their A4 and C-class cars...

[JAG]

Cost.

Manufactuer's also want true production GT classes.

GT1's of the mid 90's were production cars, morphed into a prototype class in all but name, self destructed, then were phased into the LMP1 class.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Why?!
IMSA had GTPs and Lights and heavily modified GTOs and Us. the 70s had Group6 prototypes and equally brutally modified GTs in the form of the Group5 cars. The same goes for the mid-90s with the LMPs/WSCs and GT1s.

After all the average fan - those that don't post at 10/10s - don't really car if a car is tubeframe underneath the shell or a unibody. Hell, a lot of people think that DTM cars have something in common with their A4 and C-class cars...

If that were true,the Trans-Am would be as strong in 2007 as it was in 1987.

It was as the prod. content was reduced, the series attendance also went down.
Both fans and cars.

Bob

[Speed-King]

May have as well been a problem with the management or maybe the ban of foreign manufacturers that made the niveau of the series decrease to a mere club sport series with a better name.
Maybe if it was still them vs us, American Iron vs European sophistication it would have lived on!?
I think it's an oversimplification to assume that the troubles of T/A were only related to one descision. And after all aren't NASCARS tubeframers as well?

[ss_collins]

NASCAR is a spaceframe world.

Super GT - I think that they should be allowed to enter as LMP2's now at Le Mans as long as they run in Super GT spec and are not developed or greatly modified for Le Mans, the you would have Honda, Toyota and Nissan. However for 2010 put them in LMP1.

Thing is, they wouldn't win as the likely wouldn't last. The absolute longest race in Super GT is 1000km the cars are built and designed primarily for 500km races.

[pitviper]

Funny, Sam, just a moment I was reading about the 1999 Fuji 1000k. Similar in ways in concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Le_Mans_Fuji_1000km
I think I'm going to organize a 1000k race at the Nurburgring (for size) open to All classes of the LMS, ALMS, FIA GT, and Super GT. if we could only get them to make it a points-scoring round for each respective series we could get a nice entry ;-). Can you imagine?!

Next time you go off to watch the Super GT series by the way, you're taking me with you, lol.

Ciao,

pit

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

May have as well been a problem with the management or maybe the ban of foreign manufacturers that made the niveau of the series decrease to a mere club sport series with a better name.
Maybe if it was still them vs us, American Iron vs European sophistication it would have lived on!?
I think it's an oversimplification to assume that the troubles of T/A were only related to one descision. And after all aren't NASCARS tubeframers as well?

I still have the Comp. Press & Autoweek in which the spokesman for the SCCA was to "copy" NASCAR. THe reason for allowing tube-frames.

Remember up until the eliminated the production car, production classes, there were factories spending the equivalent of millions on amateur races.

That came to a screeching halt with the tube frame rules.
Bob

[Satorian]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

Thing is, they wouldn't win as the likely wouldn't last. The absolute longest race in Super GT is 1000km the cars are built and designed primarily for 500km races.

I have heard that the rebuild costs on the SuperGTs are astronomical. It's supposedly what makes at least the GT500 really, really expensive.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

NASCAR is a spaceframe world.

Super GT - I think that they should be allowed to enter as LMP2's now at Le Mans as long as they run in Super GT spec and are not developed or greatly modified for Le Mans, the you would have Honda, Toyota and Nissan. However for 2010 put them in LMP1.

Thing is, they wouldn't win as the likely wouldn't last. The absolute longest race in Super GT is 1000km the cars are built and designed primarily for 500km races.

Not reliable compared to LMP2 cars?

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

I still have the Comp. Press & Autoweek in which the spokesman for the SCCA was to "copy" NASCAR. THe reason for allowing tube-frames.

Remember up until the eliminated the production car, production classes, there were factories spending the equivalent of millions on amateur races.

That came to a screeching halt with the tube frame rules.
Bob

Not necessarily, after all the Roush Mustangs came in in 1984 and the Audis in 1988 so it isn't like there was no factory involvement anymore. And with banning the foreigners in 1989 the pool of cars that could enter T/A had become considerably smaller than it was before. Maybe BMW would've took on the Audis in the 90s if they were allowed to stay, or maybe the Japanese would've come in?!!

@Moderators: I realize that we're going way off topic here, maybe it would be usefull to split the T/A discussion from the original thread.

[DanJR1]

when you consider the LMP prototypes, you could say whats the point? F1 is the "pinnacle" of motorsport, touring cars are obviously road going cars, same with WRC and GT classes. To me, the LMPs seem a bit pointless. they could be considered long distance F1 cars!

[jaybond]

Hi,

I watched the SuperGT race Malaysian round at Sepang, last Sunday. What a blast!

I was curious actually, with the way the GT500 Nissan 350Z engine sounds everytime the gearchanges (upwards) take place. It bangs really loud(kaboom)!

Surely it's not due to anti-lag system , as used by the GT300 Toyota Celica & Subaru Impreza.

The engine is capacity & configuration is quite similar to that of GT500 Lexus SC430 (V8 NA, 4000-plus cc). But the Lexus engine never bangs during gearchanges. And I don't think its a backfiring.

Anybody knows why?

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by DanJR1

when you consider the LMP prototypes, you could say whats the point? F1 is the "pinnacle" of motorsport, touring cars are obviously road going cars, same with WRC and GT classes. To me, the LMPs seem a bit pointless. they could be considered long distance F1 cars!

F1 pinnacle of motorsport? Not if these proposals become reality.

[dj choc ice]

the 350Z bangs on the upshift because its backfiring on the upshift's, the engine was used in the rollcentre racing dallara LMP1 in 2005 and it sounded great for a turbo engine and made huge pops and bangs on the downshifts and upshifts.

its the engine backfiring.

[ss_collins]

Listening to a field of them it sounds like a attack of WW2 fighters

[EuropaBambaataa]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Until these GT500 or Super GT race cars get into a LMS or ALMS race ( conform to the rules as well ) we will never know HOW good they really are.

Lap times dont mean squat, which you guys know. Finishing first ahead of other world super sports cars is IMHO the real test.

What about having GT1 cars go to Super GT in GT1 spec and getting their asses handed to them? The Prodrive Ferrari 550 owned by Hitotsuyama Racing was never competitive, and Team Goh gave up trying to run the Maserati MC12 in pre-season testing, because it couldn't get to the GT500 pace without extensive modifications.