Do muscle cars belong in GT racing?

[I Rosputnik]

Here's another pancake to toss up, and digest.

Muscle cars. Do they belong in GT racing? On one had you could say that they are too saloon like, but then you could say that they are too GT like to be in touring cars. Sure the Dodge Viper, Ford GT and Chevrolet Corvette race in GT, but they are sports cars with elements of muscle cars.

There are currently muscle cars in GT3, but what about GT2 or GT1? An Aston Martin is 4712mm long and 1270 mm high, but a Chevrolet Camaro is 4840 mm long and 1380 mm high, so size wise they are simliar. They even produce simliar amounts of horse power with the Camaro's GM L99 engine producing 400 bhp, while the Astons produces 470 bhp. So there are some simliarities between them and grand tourers, but both are aimed at different markets.

So where do they belong in motorsport?

[NaBUru38]

GT in racing is totally different from a road GT. The former is a coupé or cabrio modified (a lot or very little) for racing. So a 370Z, a Miata / MX-5, a Mustang, a 911 and a DBR9 in race prep are all GTs. The latter is a relatively large four-seater (or 2+2), front-engined, rear-wheel drive (perhaps also 4WD) sports car. Examples are the 612 Scaglietti, the 6 Series and the XK.

[Speed-King]

I guess it depends on geography.

The American GT-tradition was for some time* (that is roughly until the advent of ALMS) quite different from its European counterpart (which of course didn't even really exist during the 80s when prototypes was all people cared about).
American GT-racing for most of the 70s, 80s and early 90s was a hybrid between what Europeans would consider GT-racing and touring cars, mainly because there was no proper touring car series in the US, so Trans-Am and IMSA GTO/U were pretty much the only place where one could road race production based (or porduction based looking) cars.
In general this led to US-GT-racing slipping somewhat downmarket with relatively affordable performance cars and muscle cars becoming the mainstay of Trans-Am as well as IMSA GTO/U.

The situation in Europe, however, was somewhat different:
During the 70s proper GT-racing wasn't all that big in Europe, and most series were somewhat overrun by Porsches with the occassional De Tomaso's and others being pretty much helpless outsiders.
Anyway, along came DRM (Deutsche Rennsport Meisterschaft) and later the World Championship of Makes for Group 5 cars, which tried to combine manufacturers from touring car and GT racing - that is mostly Porsche, BMW and Ford, later also Lancia, just to name the more noticeable factory backed entries.
It worked for a little while, but when the whole thing came down in the early 80s, it almost spelled the end of GT racing in Europe. Sure there were some Group B BMWs and Porsches in Le Mans early on, but in general there wasn't really a lot professional GT-racing left, with most of the big teams gravitating towards Group C prototypes.

There was a muscle car tradition in touring car racing in the 70s with Mustangs and Camaros showing up in BTCC and ETCC, which didn't really go away until the mid to late 80s, partly due to the lack of proper professional GT-series, which meant that a lot of people would run two door cars like the Jaguar XJ (???) BMW 6-series and Toyota Supra in the touring car series.

In a way IMSA GTO/U and ETCC were pretty similar to eachother during the 80s as far as the base models or at least the market segment of the cars running was concerned. The rules were, however, radically different with one running widebody tubeframe cars with up to 700bhp and the other relatively tame Group A-production based cars.

When GT-racing was reestablished in Europe by Ratel, Peter and Barth in the early 90s they moved it decidedly upmarket (I think one of the germ cells of BPR was the Porsche-Ferrari-Challenge?).
By the end of the 1990s this upmarket definition of GT-racing was also adopted in the US, when Panoz created the ALMS.
Even before that, Super Touring had made European touring car racing the domain of two-litre-family cars.

The pony- and musclecars fell somewhere in between. Not upmarket and advanced enough to compete in GT, but too big and powerfull for the new era of touring car racing.
They still have a stage in the US to race on in Grand Am and Trans-Am, which carry on the older American tradition of GT-racing, but these are of course series of somewhat lesser importance. OK, no importance at all for Zombie-Trans-Am...

*On thinking about it again, it was not all that different during the 70s and there especially during the Group 5 era, so the "split" only happened with the death and reemergence of GT-racing in Europe

[Nick6]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

The situation in Europe, however, was somewhat different:
During the 70s proper GT-racing wasn't all that big in Europe, and most series were somewhat overrun by Porsches with the occassional De Tomaso's and others being pretty much helpless outsiders.
Anyway, along came DRM (Deutsche Rennsport Meisterschaft) and later the World Championship of Makes for Group 5 cars, which tried to combine manufacturers from touring car and GT racing - that is mostly Porsche, BMW and Ford, later also Lancia, just to name the more noticeable factory backed entries.
It worked for a little while, but when the whole thing came down in the early 80s, it almost spelled the end of GT racing in Europe. Sure there were some Group B BMWs and Porsches in Le Mans early on, but in general there wasn't really a lot professional GT-racing left, with most of the big teams gravitating towards Group C prototypes.

There was a muscle car tradition in touring car racing in the 70s with Mustangs and Camaros showing up in BTCC and ETCC, which didn't really go away until the mid to late 80s, partly due to the lack of proper professional GT-series, which meant that a lot of people would run two door cars like the Jaguar XJ (???) BMW 6-series and Toyota Supra in the touring car series.

If I'm correct the rules during the Gr. 1-5 days made no distinction between saloon or GT, nor did they mention number of doors. The separating requirement was the minimum number of seats. 4 for Gr. 1 and 2, and 2 for anything after that.

[gucom]

I've always assumed that coupés belong in GT racing and saloons (and hatchbacks) in touring car racing... where I'd define a coupé as a 2-door car with a sloping roofline, and a saloon as a 4-door car, or a 2-door car with at least 4 seats and a very distinct 3-box design (the E92 3 series and the 6 series are both still coupés in my opinion, mostly due to their strongly sloping roofline, although I could understand people disagreeing...)

regarding the musclecars, I consider the ford mustang and chevy camaro both coupés due to their sloping roofline.
The dodge challenger has a rather steeper drop in its roofline / rear window, but considering its overall shape (especially the negligible rear side windows and the way that makes the rear seats seem unsuitable for long travel), I'd still call it a coupé.

as to how effective they'd be as GT racers, that's another matter, but not important in their classification as coupés thus eligible for GT racing...

[Matador]

Drag strip.

p.s. @ Gucom. Coupes have 2 doors. The person who came up with the "4 door coupe" moniker needs to be shot.

[I Rosputnik]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Drag strip.

p.s. @ Gucom. Coupes have 2 doors. The person who came up with the "4 door coupe" moniker needs to be shot.

Audi or Porsche?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

Drag strip.

p.s. @ Gucom. Coupes have 2 doors. The person who came up with the "4 door coupe" moniker needs to be shot.

Whether a car is officially a coupe or not is determined strictly by interiorspace.
A coupe has less than 33 ft. cu. and a sedan more than 33 ft. cu.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Whether a car is officially a coupe or not is determined strictly by interiorspace.
A coupe has less than 33 ft. cu. and a sedan more than 33 ft. cu.

Hmm, so by strictly using that standard a Corvette is a sedan. Thats funny!






L.P.

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Hmm, so by strictly using that standard a Corvette is a sedan. Thats funny!






L.P.

A pretty fast one at that!!

DK

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Hmm, so by strictly using that standard a Corvette is a sedan. Thats funny!
L.P.

Tell it to the SAE, (Society of Automotive Engineers) they set the standards.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Tell it to the SAE, (Society of Automotive Engineers) they set the standards.

I think not, the SAE has little if any influence in this.
It is the ACO or FIA that set the standards that are being critiqued here!








L.P.

[gucom]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Whether a car is officially a coupe or not is determined strictly by interiorspace.
A coupe has less than 33 ft. cu. and a sedan more than 33 ft. cu.

that's the SAE (society of automotive engineers)'s definition, but their standards, as far as I can tell, aren't legally binding for roadcars, let alone racecars. Also the SAE is mainly an American body, unlike for instance the ISO (dunno if they have a definition for a coupé?)
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:

It is a car having an aptitude for sport with 2 doors, 2 or 2+2
seats, opened or closed, which can be used perfectly legally
on the open road and available for sale thanks to the dealer
network of a manufacturer recognised by the ACO.

although this obviously covers both coupés and convertibles. The only caveat is that it needs to "have an aptitude for sport" which is kinda vague... I think the definition I proposed earlier would lead to more clarity and probably the same results.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by gucom

that's the SAE (society of automotive engineers)'s definition, but their standards, as far as I can tell, aren't legally binding for roadcars, let alone racecars. Also the SAE is mainly an American body, unlike for instance the ISO (dunno if they have a definition for a coupé?)
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:

although this obviously covers both coupés and convertibles. The only caveat is that it needs to "have an aptitude for sport" which is kinda vague... I think the definition I proposed earlier would lead to more clarity and probably the same results.

There is no "legal" definition; there is the official one, at least as far as engineers are concerned, but a company can call any thing it wants a coupe, or sedan or gt as it chooses and no one is going to go to court.

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.

[gucom]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

There is no "legal" definition; there is the official one, at least as far as engineers are concerned, but a company can call any thing it wants a coupe, or sedan or gt as it chooses and no one is going to go to court.

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.

the SAE standards certainly have their place in terms of, for instance, HP ratings etc., although even there, they're not nearly universally applied (german car manufacturers often quote their power outputs in PS, and British in bhp for instance).

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)...

[Dead-Eye]

I think Mercedes were the first with the CLS

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

I think Mercedes were the first with the CLS

Rover 3-Litre Coupé, early 1960s, had four doors.

[gucom]

@ MatadorRacing: I totally agree on a 4-door coupe being impossible (although I wouldnt label the RX8 a saloon but a coupe, but that's the only exception I can think of), but that's basically what I said right? or am I misunderstanding your point?

[Matador]

Originally Posted by gucom

@ MatadorRacing: I totally agree on a 4-door coupe being impossible (although I wouldnt label the RX8 a saloon but a coupe, but that's the only exception I can think of), but that's basically what I said right? or am I misunderstanding your point?

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.

[fiend540]

No the only cars that belong in gt are Porsche and Ferrari..

[dj4monie]

The post will be titled "Beers & Brats vs Wine & Cheese" but this subject matter is along the same lines.

America has never had a Kingdom or a long history of lower class suffering with no middle class.

European Sports Cars are expensive to buy, maintain and run. American cars are cheap, easy to repair/upgrade and generally more affordable.

Because Drag Racing is an affordable sport using your everyday daily driver in most cases, means manufacturers can stick with solid axle rear ends which are much cheaper to do than IRS (also cheap to repair when it does break). This is why handling has suffered usually on American cars. Now having said that, there is technology where you can get a solid axle car to handle extremely well, the problems are on wavy pavement.

Even today the largest memberships of SCCA and NHRA are made up of middle and upper middle class families/income earners. This explains why you see mostly affordable cars at NASA and SCCA Club events. They have usually legislated out uber performance cars like Porsche and Corvettes.

SCCA T-1 is basically one step below SCCA World Challenge. The main protagonist are Dodge Vipers and Chevy Corvettes. But even by European standards those cars are still affordable.

As an American I don't understand this sort of elitist bent on Sports Car Racing where's there are questions of weather Muscle Cars like Mustang and Camaros belong on track in the same class with Porsche and Ferrari. The only advantage of either of those cars are heavily developed (911) or optimized mid-engine designed.

Or even if BMW's M3 should be allowed...

If Ford really wanted to build a high performance world beater it could, look at the Ford GT.

The problem is the average American wouldn't be able to buy a $50,000 Mustang Cobra or GT500 or whatever you want to call it.

For the first half of 2010 Porsche sales are up at 10,984 units sold as of July 1st.

By Feb 2010; 11,000 2011 Mustangs had been ordered....

Ford Sells more Mustangs total in a year than Porsche sells cars PERIOD.

Ford tried to make the Mustang a world beater once. They had the Mustang Cobra with the IRS from the Thunderbird and was a pretty good handling car. They wanted to try to go for balanced performance. But the Mustang market is firmly working class and likes to Drag Race. Drag Racers don't like the IRS because when it breaks its expensive to repair (also chassis squat unloads the rear tires under acceleration).

The current Mustang chassis is the S197 which is the same car as the Lincoln LS and Jaguar XJ Sedan. So its very possible to have IRS in a Mustang.

As I said the people that buy them, don't want to spend the money. Saleen tried it by building the Saleen Mustang SR, it was the pre-courser to the Mustang Cobra with IRS. He took those cars to Le Mans and ran them in the ALMS in the early days before the S7 appeared.

The Marc VDS Mustang FR500 GT3 has IRS and I keep saying was on pace at Jarama before being pulled and the whole project rebooted for 2011.

So I think American Cars (Muscle Cars if you will) have every right to be in the same class and series as European Sports Cars. I guess you can call the M3, Mustang and Camaro "Sporty Cars" but all of them are pretty series "drivers" in their own right.

Its just how America does things, rather bluntly...

[MJ_N_09]

Originally Posted by fiend540

No the only cars that belong in gt are Porsche and Ferrari..

/end topic. Seriously though, the Spa thread was frustrating to read because of this.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by MJ_N_09

/end topic. Seriously though, the Spa thread was frustrating to read because of this.

You're gonna find a lot of topics eventually gravitate towards that, so suck it up and deal with it now.

As for the AAGT/EUGT bullspit, you can't beat these:

[Speed-King]

As for the AAGT/EUGT bullspit, you can't beat these:

Absolutely, and that's what ALMS is sorely lacking these days and why the ACO-regs need to go (at least in GT)...

[fiend540]

Originally Posted by MJ_N_09

/end topic. Seriously though, the Spa thread was frustrating to read because of this.

Yes, glad to see someone else shares the same point of view.