If various historic race cars were taken out of Gr.X, how would you sort them?

  • Thread starter MIE1992
  • 20 comments
  • 1,259 views

How should historic race cars (1979 or earlier) be sorted?

  • Engine Displacement

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • Prototypes vs. Grand Tourers

    Votes: 26 78.8%
  • Power

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • Power/Weight Ratio

    Votes: 5 15.2%

  • Total voters
    33
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
The examples I'm referring to are the various cars eligible for the Nostalgic 1979 event in GT League. When I looked more online about the various historic race cars within GTS thus far, I discovered that some of these cars were in separate classes at the time, which in turn may be differentiated by factors such as engine displacement, or how some historic race cars were prototypes with others being grand tourers.

Ideally, I'd like to ultimately add as few groups as possible, as I believe the Group C cars could stay in Gr.1, as long as we potentially see "sub-rules" involving the current category system, much like we've been seeing for this week's Daily Race A.

The likely cars in the "Historic Prototype" class would be the following:
-Ferrari 330 P4 '67 (CN.0858, vs. CN.0856, the latter being the car that won the Pebble Beach trophy and has yet to appear in the series)
-Ford Mark IV Race Car '67 (IMO they should change the name from "Mark IV" to "GT40 Mk.IV")
-Jaguar XJ13 '66
-Chaparral 2D

Then, for the "Historic Grand Tourer" class, we'd include the following:
-Alfa Romeo Giulia TZ2 '65
-Ferrari 250GTO CN.3729GT '62
-Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe '64

In either case, there would still be some historic race cars that'd need to stay in Gr.X, or otherwise would not be able to be put into these groups. For example, the Aston Marin DB3S is from the decade before these other racers, being from the '50s, I'm very unsure if it could compete with these cars, even after BoP. Contrast this with how the Group C cars can still have a straight-line advantage over the modern LMPs and VGT cars when all Gr.1 cars are permitted, especially on Le Mans without the chicanes. The Renault R8 Gordini seems to puzzle me, as I'm not too sure why it couldn't be placed in the N-series like other historic models that had light modifications for racing, like the Porsche 356. I'm also not sure if putting the Toyota 7 into the prototype group would be pushing it. Finally, the Chaparral 2J would have to be put into Gr.X, as it was banned for being OP in real life!

With this in mind, we could potentially see other historic race cars be added to each of these classes, provided that they are roughly comparable. If so, we could see the appearance of other automakers in these groups, like Alpine or Abarth!
 
Last edited:
237
Greece
Greece
Engine displacement cannot be a sort. At those days races hasnt got any displacement rules or it was very wide open. Thats why Mark IV has Huge engine compared to 330p4.

Prototypes and gran tourers is fine except the Alfa Romeo. It has no chance against Daytona and 250 gto.
 
661
Australia
Melbourne
LotusEvoraGTE
DJ Yuyuko
As it stands now, by decade and by prototypes vs GT (and the token rally car in the form of the Gordini).

1950's Prototypes

  • Aston Martin DB3S CN.1 '53
1960's Grand Touring
  • Alfa Romeo Giulia TZ2 carrozzata da Zagato CN.AR750106 '65
  • Ferrari 250 GTO CN.3729GT '62
  • Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe '64
1960's Prototypes
  • Ferrari 330 P4 '67
  • Ford Mark IV Race Car '67
  • Jaguar XJ13 '66
1960's Rally
  • Renault R8 Gordini '66
 
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
Engine displacement cannot be a sort. At those days races hasnt got any displacement rules or it was very wide open. Thats why Mark IV has Huge engine compared to 330p4.

Prototypes and gran tourers is fine except the Alfa Romeo. It has no chance against Daytona and 250 gto.

Really? I could’ve sworn that I saw sub-classes sorted by displacement when you look at Wikipedia pages for the 1960s iterations of the LM24. And you don’t think the TZ2 could work even with BoP?
 
237
Greece
Greece
Really? I could’ve sworn that I saw sub-classes sorted by displacement when you look at Wikipedia pages for the 1960s iterations of the LM24. And you don’t think the TZ2 could work even with BoP?

Then it was very wide open. Mark IV has 6997cc engine while 330p4 only has 3967cc engine.

The problem about the alfa is not about its power. Its the gearbox settings. Alfa stucks at 243 kmh.
 
3,879
Australia
Australia
The TZ2 is more closely aligned with the 2000GT than any Group X car. The Aston Martin is in its own class, and would look weird racing against anything else.
 
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
Then it was very wide open. Mark IV has 6997cc engine while 330p4 only has 3967cc engine.

I see. But even then, that can't be compensated by BoP's changes to power & weight?

I also think that if the Honda S800 RSC were to return, it also may need to be put into Gr.X, as its engine is only around half the size of the one in the TZ2. (0.845L vs. ~1.6L) This is also assuming engine size cannot be compensated with BoP changes - though the S800 RSC would need a power boost of about 70BHP and a weight reduction of 40kg, and even then, that'd only give the S800 RSC a similar power & weight to that of the TZ2. That'd be before the other cars in this hypothetical class would potentially be factored into the BoP calculation.
 
Last edited:
5,287
Sick_Cylinder
As it stands now, by decade and by prototypes vs GT (and the token rally car in the form of the Gordini).

1950's Prototypes

  • Aston Martin DB3S CN.1 '53
1960's Grand Touring
  • Alfa Romeo Giulia TZ2 carrozzata da Zagato CN.AR750106 '65
  • Ferrari 250 GTO CN.3729GT '62
  • Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe '64
1960's Prototypes
  • Ferrari 330 P4 '67
  • Ford Mark IV Race Car '67
  • Jaguar XJ13 '66
1960's Rally
  • Renault R8 Gordini '66

This is the obvious categorisation.

There are some more cars coming which will (eventually) flesh out the classes such as the 2014 award winning Maserati A6GCS which could fit with the Aston Martin DB3S.

My concern is that PD appears to be simply refreshing the Historic cars from GT6 and adding the odd award winner - thus repeating the errors and missed opportunities from previous games. With a little thought and planning the historic classes could be so good
 
4,858
United States
United States
Stawookie
1950's Prototypes
  • Aston Martin DB3S CN.1 '53
The DB3S isn't really a prototype. Prototype racing cars originated more in the late 1960's. Although the DB3S is part of sports car racing which could include prototypes, the category also includes cars related to Grand Touring models such as the Aston.

The classification for the DB3S and other racing vehicles at the time like the Maserati A6GCS, Jaguar D-Type, and the Porsche 550 are mainly classified as sports cars. Mainly because they were designed to be street legal vehicles so they can be driven to the track. Most prototypes on the other hand, are strictly for track use only.
 
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
My concern is that PD appears to be simply refreshing the Historic cars from GT6 and adding the odd award winner - thus repeating the errors and missed opportunities from previous games. With a little thought and planning the historic classes could be so good

I think that there's some evidence that for whatever reason, PD is unable to "retcon" the classes of cars, but I think that if additional classes come, they'll be in the next game (and thus GT Sport's successor). For example, I could see the Aston Martin Vulcan being in Gr.X, since it's a track-only hypercar much like the McLaren P1 GTR or the Pagani Zonda R. I wonder if the Renault R8 Gordini would be placed in the N-series in a future title, as well?

I do like GTS's category system a lot, and I think it just needs some minor additions for classes, as well as more races that feature "sub-rules" like this week's Race A.
 

Epic B

Looking for the light
Premium
5,733
Canada
On the run
NaveekDarkroom
Put the P4, Mark IV and XJ13 in Group H, along with the Gulf GT40 and Chaparral 2D if those ever return. The Gordini should be just fine in the N classes. The DB3S and TZ2 should just be in the N classes as there's no other good place for them. The Daytona Coupe and GTO could fit in Group 4 but might be better off in the N classes.

The Chaparral 2J would probably be fine in Group X. But I wonder how it would compare to a Group C.
 

ARTAsean

(Banned)
1,307
United States
United States
I think that there's some evidence that for whatever reason, PD is unable to "retcon" the classes of cars, but I think that if additional classes come, they'll be in the next game (and thus GT Sport's successor). For example, I could see the Aston Martin Vulcan being in Gr.X, since it's a track-only hypercar much like the McLaren P1 GTR or the Pagani Zonda R. I wonder if the Renault R8 Gordini would be placed in the N-series in a future title, as well?

I do like GTS's category system a lot, and I think it just needs some minor additions for classes, as well as more races that feature "sub-rules" like this week's Race A.

Or they’ll learn from their mistakes and simply bring back the PP system, which would solve all these problems.
 

ARTAsean

(Banned)
1,307
United States
United States
Would it really, though?

Well, there are some considerations - but overall, yes absolutely.

Why bother with making subdivisions of divisions when you can just have a 450PP, ≤1979 blanket setting. (Assuming the 3 halo retro cars cannot get down to 450PP, that’s just a placeholder)

That way, cars like the Shelby could be brought down to 450, and the Aston Martin could be brought up to it. And depending on the fidelity of the PP system, the cars would be competitive. This is a MUCH better system than using HP/Weight restrictions because cars like the Shelby have downforce and etc.

Considering the development structure for PP already exists, I think it would be far better and easier for PD to re-implement it than any other option.
 
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
Well, there are some considerations - but overall, yes absolutely.

Why bother with making subdivisions of divisions when you can just have a 450PP, ≤1979 blanket setting. (Assuming the 3 halo retro cars cannot get down to 450PP, that’s just a placeholder)

That way, cars like the Shelby could be brought down to 450, and the Aston Martin could be brought up to it. And depending on the fidelity of the PP system, the cars would be competitive. This is a MUCH better system than using HP/Weight restrictions because cars like the Shelby have downforce and etc.

Considering the development structure for PP already exists, I think it would be far better and easier for PD to re-implement it than any other option.

But why not just have "sub-rules" for the groups that already exist, (e.g. the N300 Race A last week) and then just have a couple groups for historic racers?
 

ARTAsean

(Banned)
1,307
United States
United States
But why not just have "sub-rules" for the groups that already exist, (e.g. the N300 Race A last week) and then just have a couple groups for historic racers?

‘Sub-rules’ are only necessary to keep OP cars out, like the Xbow. The PP system solves this.

And the sub-rules don’t even work. the R32 dominated that race.
 
5,287
Sick_Cylinder
The DB3S isn't really a prototype. Prototype racing cars originated more in the late 1960's. Although the DB3S is part of sports car racing which could include prototypes, the category also includes cars related to Grand Touring models such as the Aston.

The classification for the DB3S and other racing vehicles at the time like the Maserati A6GCS, Jaguar D-Type, and the Porsche 550 are mainly classified as sports cars. Mainly because they were designed to be street legal vehicles so they can be driven to the track. Most prototypes on the other hand, are strictly for track use only.

I was interested in this so I did some research (based on the Le Mans Race rules) and what you say sounds right, but isn't strictly accurate. Prototype sports cars started in the 1930's, but were officially recognised in the rules for the 1949 Le Mans 24 Hour Race. In 1949 a Sports Car was one of which at least 10 examples had been manufactured prior to submission of the entry. A Prototype Sports Car was one with less than 10 examples and normally one where there was no intention to commence production. This is a bit of a grey area because many pre-war entries also fell into this category, but had been allowed to race.

1958 3 litre engine limit.

The GT category was defined for the first time at Le Mans in 1959. It was a Sports Car with an annual production of 100 or more otherwise the car was defined as a Sports Prototype. In 1960 the engine limit for GT's was increased from 3 litres to 5 litres.

1962 Experimental Class introduced with engine limit of 4 litres. GT's allowed over 5 litres.

1963 Experimental Class renamed Prototype.

1966 Group 3 and Group 4 replaced GT Class. Group 3 annual production over 500, Group 4 = 50. Sliding scale of minimum weight based on engine size with 1000kg for 7 litres.

1968 Group 6 Sports Prototypes max 3 litre engine and 120 litre tank. Group 4 max 5 litre with 160 litre tank. No engine limit on Group 3 GT's.

1969 Group 4 production minimum reduced from 50 to 25.

1970 GT Group 3 minimum production increased from 500 to 1000. Group 4 becomes Special GT minimum 500. Former Group 4 becomes Group 5.

1972 Group 6 and 5 combined into a new Group 5 with 3 litre limit and 650kg minimum weight. 2.142 litre limit for turbo engines (X1.4 equivalency).

In addition to the above there were also many other complications such as windscreen height and width for Prototypes increased to match GT's in 1960. Angle of windscreen limited in 1961.

Back on topic - personally when racing historic cars, the most important thing for me is racing in a field from the same era - seeing modern cars on track at the same time as historics kills the immersion for me.

Given time the historic car roster will expand and there will be the potential for PD to split them into more groups. I hope that PD will think more about how to build up these groups which may mean porting the car across from GT6 at a higher or lower PP than previously.
 
237
Greece
Greece
‘Sub-rules’ are only necessary to keep OP cars out, like the Xbow. The PP system solves this.

And the sub-rules don’t even work. the R32 dominated that race.

Xbow isnt really Op. If you want to see OP n class cars look no elsewhere than Ferrari F50 And Porsche 911s.
 
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
‘Sub-rules’ are only necessary to keep OP cars out, like the Xbow. The PP system solves this.

And the sub-rules don’t even work. the R32 dominated that race.

How would the PP system solve it?
 
21,262
United States
United States
Put the P4, Mark IV and XJ13 in Group H, along with the Gulf GT40 and Chaparral 2D if those ever return. The Gordini should be just fine in the N classes. The DB3S and TZ2 should just be in the N classes as there's no other good place for them. The Daytona Coupe and GTO could fit in Group 4 but might be better off in the N classes.

The Chaparral 2J would probably be fine in Group X. But I wonder how it would compare to a Group C.
I don't like the idea of just dropping classic race cars into road car classes. Or putting old race cars into the modern race categories. Or just mixing together race cars that have no business competing with other race cars.
 
2,687
United States
Connecticut
Ridley-X4
I don't like the idea of just dropping classic race cars into road car classes. Or putting old race cars into the modern race categories. Or just mixing together race cars that have no business competing with other race cars.

Agreed for the most part, though I recall that the R8 Gordini isn't that different in concept than the Porsche 356 that's in N100. But I do think it's fine to leave the Group C cars in Gr.1, since there are some courses where they can have an advantage, and there's also the idea that having more limited selections of cars within a category - like last week's race A - may help things a bit.