Prototype versus GT

[Parnelli Bone]

So i'm watching this race on ESPN Speed channel as i type this. The Rolex Grand-Am race at Mid Ohio is on.

Quick question: who cares about prototypes? Every time i watch the race, i'm watching for action in the GT class: the modified street cars. Porsche versus Corvette versus RX-8, etc.


Sorry, i know this is akin to blasphemy to some of you, but I get bored watching prototypes. They're so heavily regulated that there's nothing innovative about any one of them when compared to the next--they all look the same to me, in other words...there's no crazy wing structures or radically different shapes that the crews or car-builders are experimenting with. The only difference from car to car are the sponsorship labels.


Therefore, i spend most of the time waiting and waiting to see some GT-class duels. What do you think?

This thread should be moved to the Motorsport forum..i screwed up.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

You can move it yourself you know?

Don't dismiss cars that are essentially identical in every way. Touring Cars provide some of the closest racing the world ever sees, and they are all pretty much the same in their respective categories.

 

[Motominded]

So i'm watching this race on ESPN Speed channel as i type this.

ABC = espn
FOX = speedtv

So im guessing you are lying about what you were watching.


Oh and Daytona Protyotypes, we have had plenty of threads on them. Just look.

 

[McLaren]

They were at Mid Ohio today, not Lime Rock. Lime Rock's round was back in May, and ironically, if you wanted only to see the GT cars race, then that was the race to watch as the Daytona Prototypes were absent.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

They were at Mid Ohio today, not Lime Rock. Lime Rock's round was back in May, and ironically, if you wanted only to see the GT cars race, then that was the race to watch as the Daytona Prototypes were absent.

Yah, you're right. My mistake.

ABC = espn
FOX = speedtv

So im guessing you are lying about what you were watching.

LYING?..now is that really necessary to accuse me of lying? I made a mistake. Jeez!

Oh and Daytona Protyotypes, we have had plenty of threads on them. Just look.

I did. Guess i'll try again.

Holden: Sure i know the racing is close, but it's just as close in the GT class...and (to me) it's visually more exciting to watch GTs battle it out than a bunch of identical genericars. But whatever.

 

[[empty space]]

Holden: Sure i know the racing is close, but it's just as close in the GT class...and (to me) it's visually more exciting to watch GTs battle it out than a bunch of identical genericars. But whatever.

ive never been a fan of non-P cars, but, that pretty much explains why i dont consider DP's proper prototypes.

 

[Motominded]

LYING?..now is that really necessary to accuse me of lying? I made a mistake. Jeez!

I was bustin chops, i do that on Saturdays,

 

[superberkut]

Stating most of the obvious:

I think Audi has something to do with it... today's modifications are mainly internal or smaller components, so you'd have to know about the cars first before you can get excited about what they do. It's been that way for a long time. Not Can-Am, you might say. I miss it too.

GT racing is closer, though, with production models (albeit heavily modified production models) creating some degree of recognition, so I wouldn't blame you for your opinion. Limited manufacturers in the prototype class contributes; more companies find it less expensive to field an entry in GT.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Stating most of the obvious:

I think Audi has something to do with it... today's modifications are mainly internal or smaller components, so you'd have to know about the cars first before you can get excited about what they do. It's been that way for a long time. Not Can-Am, you might say. I miss it too.

Honestly, i don't know much about real-life racing nowadays, i just watch casually when i remember to. I used to follow the world of racing when i was a kid in the 70's and 80s, when F1, IMSA, and even NASCAR boasted visual differences and obvious team/manufacture experimentation.

GT racing is closer, though, with production models (albeit heavily modified production models) creating some degree of recognition, so I wouldn't blame you for your opinion. Limited manufacturers in the prototype class contributes; more companies find it less expensive to field an entry in GT.

I see. Yeah it kinda sucks that most of the Prototype field is packed with Rileys, but that still is no excuse. I just think that from a casual viewer's viewpoint, it would make more sense for them to shake things up a bit. Try new ideas. It would perhaps get more people interested in LeMans racing who wouldn't normally watch.

...but then again, look at NASCAR. Biggest motorsports events in America, yet all the cars are essentially the same; and most spectators could care less. They just want to see Rudd battle Petty. Again.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

ive never been a fan of non-P cars, but, that pretty much explains why i dont consider DP's proper prototypes.

Yeah. Even the word "prototype" suggests experimentation that can't be carried out in a legal street car. 💡 Instead of the same old vehicles pre-approved and regulated race after race.

...as i said, i spent most of my time watching for the GT-class battles...which they would show for a minute or 2 beofre switching back to the Daytona Prototypes. Guess i'm just about the only one who feels this way so far.

 

[wrcsti]

Proto FTW. I like them because of the technology that is applyed to them compared to the streetlike GT cars. Same reason I like F1.

 

[NapoleonMikey]

yea i cant rely stand the DP cars because they are all ileys and it just bores me. but as for the Le mans prototypes now thats another story seeing as there just as unique as the GT cars are.

 

[superberkut]

...but then again, look at NASCAR. Biggest motorsports events in America, yet all the cars are essentially the same; and most spectators could care less. They just want to see Rudd battle Petty. Again.

The drivers and distinctive paint schemes help (with each driver sponsored by a different primary company). About 50% of the NASCAR fan base is female...

Prototypes? You just don't see that; they have nameplates, but who can see them at 140mph+? Or even on the Hunaudieres at over 200mph+?

 

[Parnelli Bone]

The drivers and distinctive paint schemes help (with each driver sponsored by a different primary company). About 50% of the NASCAR fan base is female...

Guess i'm not a chick then.

bad joke. No, what i'm trying to say is i dont' mind the paint schemes. But i also want to see the cars in NASCAR actually represent the machines they're supposed to be portraying. Go on youtube and look up some old NASCAR races. A Ford Torino stock car was actually based on the Ford Torino sold to customers. Dodge Charger. Dodge Daytona. Ford Thunderbird, etc.

Even tho these cars were still going around an oval back then, i dont' find it boring. My eyes are glued to the TV (or computer screen) as i watch.

But the cars nowadays...i don't see how they can even associate these genericars with the models they're supposed to be representing...nowadays, a good portion of the cars on NASCAR tracks would be front-drive if they were actually "stock" cars. 👎

Prototypes? You just don't see that; they have nameplates, but who can see them at 140mph+? Or even on the Hunaudieres at over 200mph+?

Yeah, i know. NapoleonMikey has a point above BTW....about the European LeMans cars versus the borefest i watched last weekend.. 👍

 

[superberkut]

Guess i'm not a chick then.

bad joke. No, what i'm trying to say is i dont' mind the paint schemes. But i also want to see the cars in NASCAR actually represent the machines they're supposed to be portraying. Go on youtube and look up some old NASCAR races. A Ford Torino stock car was actually based on the Ford Torino sold to customers. Dodge Charger. Dodge Daytona. Ford Thunderbird, etc.

Even tho these cars were still going around an oval back then, i dont' find it boring. My eyes are glued to the TV (or computer screen) as i watch.

But the cars nowadays...i don't see how they can even associate these genericars with the models they're supposed to be representing...nowadays, a good portion of the cars on NASCAR tracks would be front-drive if they were actually "stock" cars. 👎

Ah, the glory days of stock-car racing. I guess racer safety is part of it, but that would make a better contribution to the safety of mainstream automobiles.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Ah, the glory days of stock-car racing. I guess racer safety is part of it, but that would make a better contribution to the safety of mainstream automobiles.

Yeah i know....it's a safety thing. Also, when all the cars on the track are pretty much the same, they are also easier to regulate. In the old days, cheating was so common, it was almost expected, so year-by-year they had to tighten the rules and here we are....i just wish there were a way to re-introduce stock-car racing on a grand level. I bet people would be even more supportive of this in NASCAR than they are now with those genericars.

...Which is why i love GT racing...it's the closest one can come to real-life cars racing around (on ESPN, anyways). I remember watching a GT race last year and a Mazda went off-track and hit a barrier. Its headlite assembly popped out...it fascinated me because i can't tell you how many headlights i've fixed at my job--and here this supercar is, with what looked to me to be an ordinary headlight assembly!

 

[Venom800tt]

Well I personally like LeMans/ALMS prototypes and GT cars roughly equally. I HATE DP's with a passion. I find them very ugly, and are basically mid-engined NASCARS that turn left AND right. Not to mention when DP's came out they were getting beat by 996 GT3 R's at Daytona. You could imagine that a LeMans/ALMS GT1 C6.R or DBR-9 would have no trouble beating DP's. Prototypes, like F1 supposed to push the limits of technology, why else would they be called prototypes?

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Well I personally like LeMans/ALMS prototypes and GT cars roughly equally. I HATE DP's with a passion. I find them very ugly, and are basically mid-engined NASCARS that turn left AND right.

funny, dude! 👍

 

[superberkut]

Wait, Daytona prototypes or LMPs?

Either one is virtually the same in attributes compared to GT, but at least the LMPs are easier to look at than the stubby DPs, if more expensive.

 

[RACECAR]

Prototypes have been a interesting topic as of late. People don't like to watch the LMPs because "its the same cars out front" and people don't like the DPs simply because "They're ugly". Its also kind of tiring that just because the series(not the cars mind you) was founded by the same man who came up with NASCAR that its not good. With a very tight rules package centered around safety and Cost Effiency, thats kinda hard to be innovative. Also, Its to give small teams a chance to actually compete. I don't mean to sound like a DP fanboy, but I just think that you guys don't know about the cars enough looking at comments like "They all look the same" when their are six different cars but the field is mostly packed with Rileys.

Allow me to educate you guys:

For the 2003 Rolex Sports Car Series season, the Grand American Road Racing Association (GARRA) announced that they would stop support of their two premiere open cockpit classes, known as SRP-I and SRP-II. These cars, mostly modified from Le Mans Prototypes, were technologically advanced and could reach high speeds, specifically on the Mulsannes Straight at the 24 Hours of Le Mans. However, these same speeds were found to be dangerous at GARRA's premiere track, Daytona International Speedway. The concrete walls of the oval section of the road course that the series runs were dangerous enough on their own, but were also on the parts of the track where cars reached their highest speed. Therefore GARRA decided that they would need to slow down their competitors in order to make Daytona safer.
At the same time, due to the technological advancement of Le Mans prototypes, GARRA decided that they would also lower the overall cost of their prototypes. To do this, they would use closed cockpit chassis made of tube frames, instead of high cost carbon fiber composites. They would also standardize the amount of technology that could go into a car, as well as not allowing teams to develop their cars over a season, instead being forced to stay with the same basic car. This would stop teams from having to spend money on aerodynamic tweaks and technological experimentation, as well as private track testing. To further restrict cost, the series would regulate who could provide chassis and who could provide engines, thus preventing teams from trying a unique chassis or engine that may end up being a failure. Engines specifically would have to be based on a road-legal production unit from a major manufacturer. At the same time, major manufacturers would not be allowed to run Daytona Prototype teams, in order to help keep competition level and keep costs down.
Combining the low cost elements with the speed and safety elements, the designs for Daytona Prototypes were laid down, with constructors having freedom to develop a car however they wished so long as it fit within the smaller dimensions of a Daytona Prototype over a Le Mans Prototype. These smaller dimensions, especially in length, helped to create a more blunt front end to the car that would slow the cars down, regardless of how much a constructor put into sculpting the design

Lets look at the cars:

Fabcar FD/SC07

Riley MKXX

Lola

Dallara DP-01

Coyota CCE/08

Crawford DP03

I'm interested in hearing how these all look the same.

As for my opinion, I used to not like the GT cars after 2004 whe nwe went from Purpose built racecars to Modified street cars. I hate the porsches at the moment because they don't look racey enough. You look at the Mazda RX-8, the Pontiac GTO.R, the Pontiac GXP.R, and the BMW M6 and they look race ready. The Porsche just looks like you buy it and throw a wing on it. Luckily though, it gets its rear end kick by more race ready cars And the DPs, I seriously think people are way in over their heads wanting the cars to look like the LMPs. I ask what good is it that two series have the exact same looking cars if,

-The series is not affiliated with the race over there in France

-Completely different takes on Sportscar racing.

Like I said before, the ALMS philosophy is to have Le mans style racing as a series with the world's most expensive endurance machines both Exotic and Prodution based duking it out while the Grand am Philosophy is to have a series that caters to exclusively to american soil but at a cost effiencient Formula that allows close competition also with exotic and prodution based endurance machines without the pressure of going to that big race in france.

Not to mention when DP's came out they were getting beat by 996 GT3 R's at Daytona. You could imagine that a LeMans/ALMS GT1 C6.R or DBR-9 would have no trouble beating DP's

Really? Well, take a look at the SRP class Dallara SP1's lap time, piloted by Didier Theys from the 2002 Rolex 24:

1:42.058

Now look at the lap time of the Riley MKXX, piloted by Juan Montoya from this year's Rolex 24:

1:41.232

The fact that a DP beats a SRP/LMP class car and is even able to come that close to those lap times seems to indicate quite the opposite.

 

[The359]

Actually, around Mid-Ohio, DPs were lapping slower than the majority of the GT2 class cars in the American Le Mans Series.

I'd also point out that portions of Daytona were repaved between 2002 and 2008, and the series switched to the shorter backstretch chicane for 2008. Also, the pole time for the 2008 Daytona 24 Hours was actually set by the Michael Shank car at 1:40.793. JPM's Ganassi entry was 1:41.505

 

[RACECAR]

Actually, around Mid-Ohio, DPs were lapping slower than the majority of the GT2 class cars in the American Le Mans Series.

Being its a short track, it seems bound to happen that a Lower class car will have lap times faster. LMP2 cars can get around there faster then the LMP1 cars. Same can be said Lime Rock.

I'd also point out that portions of Daytona were repaved between 2002 and 2008, and the series switched to the shorter backstretch chicane for 2008. Also, the pole time for the 2008 Daytona 24 Hours was actually set by the Michael Shank car at 1:40.793. JPM's Ganassi entry was 1:41.505

Ah yes, That seems to have slipped ny mind. If memory serves me correctly, That was Oswaldo Negri in the 60 car.

 

[superberkut]

Prototypes have been a interesting topic as of late. People don't like to watch the LMPs because "its the same cars out front" and people don't like the DPs simply because "They're ugly". Its also kind of tiring that just because the series (not the cars mind you) was founded by the same man who came up with the opinion that NASCAR is not good. With a very tight rules package centered around safety and cost effiency, thats kinda hard to be innovative. Also, Its to give small teams a chance to actually compete. I don't mean to sound like a DP fanboy, but I just think that you guys don't know about the cars enough looking at comments like "They all look the same" when their are six different cars but the field is mostly packed with Rileys.

Allow me to educate you guys:

*excerpt*

The fact that a DP beats a SRP/LMP class car and is even able to come that close to those lap times seems to indicate quite the opposite.

If I recall, the alternative objective was to limit the cars to speeds under 200mph (to prove that you don't need to hit that mark to be fast), so the designs are a bit stubbier than anything else out there.

That leaves still a lot of room to beat a GT racer.

 

[[empty space]]

Being its a short track, it seems bound to happen that a Lower class car will have lap times faster. LMP2 cars can get around there faster then the LMP1 cars. Same can be said Lime Rock..

...

yes, but, GT2 cars are nearly stock road cars. how can a purpose built race car be slower than a modified road car on a track where the DP's extra downforce/less weight should put it a head on a track with a lot corners?

im also curious how youre then and now times are valid comparsons? specially since we never really saw a fast lmp take to daytona. also, SRP and LMPs arent really the same class. iirc, srp's didnt have rear undertrays nor carbon brakes just to meantion a few differnces.

then theres track differences ...

plus, yes, they are ugly and over restricted. they are prototypes in the since that they have no real relation to a road car, but, arent in a sense that there's no innovation. we never would have seen beautfull cars like the GT-One, CLR-LM, 1998 911 GT1, R8/10, bentley speed 8, panoz lmp1 or peugeot 908s. nor would the new fan favorites like the dome, new lola, or the EE1 have ever been made.

their restricted down to compression ratio and number of forward gears based on number of cyclinders. no turbos, tube frame chassis, all closed tops.

the crawford doesnt look too bad, but, the greens houses are so huge they all look pregnate.

and, one more question: doesnt the team with the biggst budget still win the most?

now, if GARRA want to do something awesome, then they should revived the group c style rules without the full restrictions. but, that might get manufactor interest and they dont want that.

 

[RACECAR]

...

yes, but, GT2 cars are nearly stock road cars. how can a purpose built race car be slower than a modified road car on a track where the DP's extra downforce/less weight should put it a head on a track with a lot corners?[

Actually, GT2 cars are purpose built Race cars based on road going cars. The reason the ycan do this is that GT cars have Mechanical grip. At Sebring, there are actually corners that a GT car can out run a prototype because of the mechanical grip.

]im also curious how youre then and now times are valid comparsons? specially since we never really saw a fast lmp take to daytona. also, SRP and LMPs arent really the same class. iirc, srp's didnt have rear undertrays nor carbon brakes just to meantion a few differnces.

That and the roll bars are the only difference between them. The are basically the same exotic Race car built with expensive and exotic materials. I also make that example because The dallara at the time was competing in both series and was one of the best SRPs out there running a engine that was also in both series.

]and, one more question: doesnt the team with the biggst budget still win the most?

Not really. Last year, there were as many as eight different winners, both big teams and small teams before one small team actually wnet on a streak and won the championship. The only big team(at least to me) is Ganassi and Brumos. This year, Thier have been three wins by the big team and three wins by the small teams. Its relatively equal.

]now, if GARRA want to do something awesome, then they should revived the group c style rules without the full restrictions. but, that might get manufactor interest and they dont want that.

They have manufacterer interest. Notice dallara and Lola have stepped up with another maker in the works? As for that idea, the only problem is cost. Its what killed Group C and GTP. They do not want that to happen again.

 

[The359]

I believe the increase in speed of GT2 cars in comparison to DPs is not because of how short the track is, but how much of a handling track Mid-Ohio is compared to Daytona.

Also, the picture you provided above was the old Crawford. This is the new Crawford DP.

 

[RACECAR]

I believe the increase in speed of GT2 cars in comparison to DPs is not because of how short the track is, but how much of a handling track Mid-Ohio is compared to Daytona.

This is most likely where the GT2's mechanical grip comes in.

Also, the picture you provided above was the old Crawford. This is the new Crawford DP.

I've trying to get a hold of a lone picture instead of just linking it, but I guess that'll then.

 

[[empty space]]

and the next thing youre going to tell me is that the quality of the cars racing then is the same as today too

 

[superberkut]

Also, the picture you provided above was the old Crawford. This is the new Crawford DP.

Would this signal a change in design for the rest of the DP field?

The wings of DP cars are actually less effective than a GT racer's; they would put on better wings but it is there more for interference drag than downforce. So, on certain courses this, along with the GT cars' mechanical grip advantage, would mean that the categories would be fairly close.

 

[The359]

I think Dallara and Crawford are simply attempting to move away from having the air intakes flat on the bottom of the nose (like the Riley and even the new Lola) simply because, as is seen in some many Rolex races lately, the cars get off track and those intakes get clogged with grass. Having the vertical intake means it will get a bit clogged, but not completely.