GTL into Prod??

RADICALLY against the philosophy of Production racing. I can't imagien why you're even spitballing it.

What you're describing is "bracket racing": run whatcha brung, no philosophy, no prep limits, run to specific lap times...and don't break out. Maybe we let cars out of the pits based on relative lap times and shoot for a win! It'll be fun to see how the T1 Viper does against the B-Spec Sonic...who will win on PAX...?

GA
 
What else can you see happening to GTL?

FWIW the Prod classes are a form of bracket racing. They have to be to be successful.
 
Protech Racing":1ekv64ur said:
What else can you see happening to GTL?
Click to expand...
It becomes a Regional-Only class. Why should we prop up a class that has flagging interest (bring back G Prod <AHEM!>)? What makes it so special?

After all, B-Spec came back from the brink, why can't GTL? And each reason you give me why it cannot is one more reason why it should just go Regional.

If competitors want GTL to continue to exist then they can work to bring in more competittion, or they can change the regs to make it more attractive; maybe bring in tasty production-chassis options? But if they want to fight on the hill of retaining the purity of the superiority of the tubframe philosophy, then that's the hill they are choosing to die on. Let them.

FWIW the Prod classes are a form of bracket racing. They have to be to be successful.
Click to expand...
(My emphasis)

No, they don't. They can die off too, if there's lack of interest. What makes Prod so special that it needs specific support? Cause it's old? I bet the FA/FC/FX/F-Whatever crowd say the same thing about their classes (despite embarrassing Runoffs fields).

Again, why should we be supporting dying classes? Everyone seems to think that OTHER dying classes should go away...except theirs, of course. And every one of those people are wrong.

Let it run its course. (And bring back G Prod <AHEM!>)

GA
 
RADICALLY against the philosophy of Production racing. I can't imagien why you're even spitballing it.

And what do you call adding the 2022 MX5 Cup car to Eprod earlier this year !!
just saying. :)

Paul L
 
I could see GT3 and GTL somehow combining, using SIR's and other means to create BOP. Makes a hell lot more sense than consolidating GTL into FP.
 
Maybe GT3 ,4,5 could use the circle track formulas. 1 # per cc plus 200. Adders for multi valve and cams .
I'd hate to see GTL in Prod also . But prod in GTL without SIR could maybe save GTL. Vintage looks good .
 
I would hate to see GTL go to Regional only, clearly self serving. I understand the sentiment that it is different than the class philosophy, but would counter that the GTL cars "race" more like the front running FP car than some of the cars in the class. Joe Huffaker and I raced our FP MG Midgets in both production and GTL for years.
Are there any classes that couldn't use a bump in participation numbers? As long as it doesn't disenfranchise the current participants, it would be beneficial to FP (IMO*)
Judging how the combined FP and GTL qualifying sessions were gridded at VIR Runoffs, the classes seemed to be close. The two fastest in the classes (Prill & Shadowen) were both in the 2:07's and then there was more FP in the 2:08's and then some GTL.

If you look at GT2, it has grown from almost extinction to one of the more popular classes. This is a different scenario than what FP is in, but shows that combining classes that are different philosophies (GT2, STO and possibly something else) can work. It does seem that some of the "classic" GT2 cars are not running at the front as they were once. I wouldn't want to see that with FP.

I'm not writing my letter to the committee, but just providing a counterpoint.

*My opinion is clouded by owning a GTL car but also a full prep FP car
 
Brian, since both you and Joe did a season of switching from FP to GTL, can you tell all how much was involved to do so? Others may want to double dip especially those from the left coast who might be able to get additional tow money and who knows, Mark Weber may want to run a 3rd and even a fourth class (EP, FP, GTL & GT3). I believe he's trying for 500 Runoffs entries now.

BTW, how many of you know that Mark spent the week before the Runoffs as assistant paddock chief?
 
Jim, The idea of running two cars in the same weekend is fine unless the two cars are always in the same race group, as FP and GTL are.
 
FP Racer":39rkoflt said:
Brian, since both you and Joe did a season of switching from FP to GTL, can you tell all how much was involved to do so? Others may want to double dip especially those from the left coast who might be able to get additional tow money and who knows, Mark Weber may want to run a 3rd and even a fourth class (EP, FP, GTL & GT3). I believe he's trying for 500 Runoffs entries now.

BTW, how many of you know that Mark spent the week before the Runoffs as assistant paddock chief?
Click to expand...

I did
 
racingspridget":183dk3um said:
Jim, The idea of running two cars in the same weekend is fine unless the two cars are always in the same race group, as FP and GTL are.
Click to expand...

If you wish you double enter, talk to your local stewards and ask them to put GTL into a different run group. Unfortunately with the local grouping, that would probably mean you'd get put in with Big Bore and stuck behind guys in AS with tons of torque but no cornering or 'stamina' through the race. The brakes and tires fade through the race while the torque doesn't, so you're continually stuck behind huge cars just going slower and slower.
 
In SEDiv, we also have a STL/STU run group as an option. But, I was mainly thinking about west coat guys having a second class to run to help justify the long tow.
 
FP Racer":2gfwzxlg said:
In SEDiv, we also have a STL/STU run group as an option. But, I was mainly thinking about west coat guys having a second class to run to help justify the long tow.
Click to expand...

That sounds good. STL/STU here just doesn't have the numbers to justify it. We have big bore, small bore, SM and sometimes B Spec as our closed wheel run groups.

Currently STL runs with small bore and STU used to. SWDIV recently (2020-ish) started putting STU in with big bore for some reason, so I know the pain of being poorly matched. I requested moving STU back to small bore many times with no results, so I gave up complaining and voted with my feet this season. I'll save my money and show up for the Super Tours where we have more appropriate grouping. sucks for the local region and the track that's 10 minutes from my house, but I'm tired of following around oil-leaking big bore cars with inconsiderate drivers who don't care to work with other classes.
 
The difference between Spitifire MK III (1296) in GTL trim vs Prod FP is larger valves, Weber carbs, non-steel doors and exhaust exiting out passenger door. Take off the wing. None of those things would make it an overdog vs the FP Miata which was determined to be non-competitive without free rods. As currently classed in FP it is non-competitive. Midget is probably similar.
 
So. If SCCA follows their rules, GTL will be regional only very soon. Too bad. I have suggested a few options to get rid of the SIR and get more power options in play ,but GTL guys refuse and dont seem to mind the 2 car per event.
Maybe fold them into FP with some weight corrections as needed. Really hard to set any BOP with 3 cars worth of viable data .
 
Mike,
What has always stumped me is the 84-87 Civic has a 24mm throttle body. In GTL there is a requirement for a 24mm SIR. It comes from Honda with one??? Why not just let the cars run in HP trim and be class fillers?

James R.
 
jwr914":2prg0saa said:
Why not just let the cars run in HP trim and be class fillers?
Click to expand...
I've noticed GTx (as opposed to GTX) drivers have a unique culture; they tend to be purists, led by a few vocal proponents. Many of these, ignoring their past of an de-evolutionary march from Production and Sedan (production chassis) to the 1980s heyday of Grand Touring (tubeframes), are hard-core "we will be tubeframe cars, period" and are exclusionary to alternate thoughts. I've tried to request addition of a few of my tub cars into GTx (STL and Prod), and was rejected. "You must meet our rules, including the $400 SIR that we can change at any time, regardless of your prep level".

That's clearly not working out to their advantage, as their numbers are dwindling and modern high-performance tub cars are infiltrating and winning; it was quite the fight when the CRB moved STO into GT-2...and yet, their response to dwindling numbers is to find old dead tubeframe chassis and get people to rebuild and campaign them (does anyone build new tubeframe chassis any more?)

The 1980s are calling for their tubeframe cars back..and no one is responding.

The new millenium's modern, high-performance production-chassis cars are the core of today's production-derived motorsport. - GA
 
That would make too much sense . But HP would be upset with the evolution that has taken place so far. HP has a pretty good BOP at this point . Maybe in the near future , separating the lower half of the class out would make sense. but not yet IMHO.
The regions could take the slower HP cars and GTL cars and do their own thing .

The GTL clan needs to start a process to be included into Prod with LP spec line engines, and an adder for tube frames of maybe 6% . That would give them an engine of known good values without years of Dyno tuning, special cams, 15/1 compression . All expensive, time consuming crap.
IMHO the biggest issue with GTL is that it is a builders/engineers, class. Racing is low on the priority and the cars run one or twice a year, after years getting "engineered."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top