GTL Car Classes - For Reference
greg130:
Quote from: Paul968 on February 02, 2006, 09:26:25 PM +0000
Look at your times at Donington Greg - You are 3 SECONDS faster than any other car in the GT-40.
Yes it tells me its a fast car which I have done a lot of laps in.
Quote from: Paul968 on February 02, 2006, 09:26:25 PM +0000
I'd be interested to know what is a good time for you at Modello is in a Lotus btw?
What exactly are you trying to say here Paul ?
Did a couple of laps earlier in the week, 1:03 not pushing to hard, nice and steady pace. I guess 1:02 would be a good time with race fuel.
Quote from: Paul968 on February 02, 2006, 09:26:25 PM +0000
Even on a track which should suit it least it was clearly the fastest, and would have won if Ruskas had put in enough fuel.
Yes it was the fastest by 0.001's, and whilst I finished 2nd my fastest lap was only good enough for 6th. Does that tell you anything ?
I had hoped to be constructive my putting all those lap times up, not start another flame war about the GT40, Elan or whatever.
Paul why don't you pick a track, do the laps and see what times you come up with.
Ideally we should have all the times from 4 or 5 laps and take the average, that way we could make an accurate decision on all the cars capabilities instead of just going with what you think. Now obviously I like the GT40 and for my money it would be a shame if it wasnt allowed to race, however if it was decided that was the case then no big deal. Is it going to be the case where we are not allowed to use the fastest car in each class ? What if the capri wins loads of races or the alfa ? Just food for thought.
Paul968:
It's not a flame war Greg - just a discussion.
The reason I need to know your times in a lotus is that I can't judge how your GT40 compare to my lotus ones without knowing your lotus ones.
What I know is that on an average track, I will be significantly quicker than the other cars in the GT40, even without great experience driving it. I don't have the time to do laps in every car, but Mondello was a good example of a twisty track that should suit the elan vs the GT40, and even then the GT40 is quicker - easily quicker. When the track suits the GT40 it romps away. The comparison seems enough to make the point - if the elan can't hope to compete even on it's best circuit and gets hammered elsewhere then why take the Lotus (and remember the Lotus is one of the BEST cars).
This isn't just what I think btw - most of the quick drivers have said the same if I remember correctly.
Doing a handful of laps is not going to help that much IMO. Unless you have a chance to learn how to exploit a car, you won't be anywhere near it's best time. You can only judge times from people who have done a good number of laps or have exceptional talent (like Ruskus perhaps). I chose to compare the Elan to the GT40 because I have driven the Elan enough to know I'm on the pace - more than I am the GT-40, anyway. The others I'm not qualified to say.
This isn't personal Greg - it's just that if you want to have a system where the fast drivers take slower cars (or avoid races where we all drive GT40s) then allowing the GT40 is a bad decision IMO.
Paul
greg130:
No problem Paul, just sounded like you were having a pop at my driving. Glad that you wern't, iv'e never pretended to be a quick driver, all of my good results have come from normally being able to stay on the track, same last night. I wish I was quicker but its not the case so we make the best of what we have.
Onto the GT40, yes it fast, of course it is and if it turns out that you need to drive the 40 to be in the points then perhaps it would spoil the racing for some guys. As I said if its decided that we cant take it the no big deal, just a shame imho.
As it happens iv'e just done a few laps at Mondello in the Lotus, average time would be in the mid to high 1:03's, around 1 sec of my 40 pace, but again I have done a lot more laps in the 40 and probably have a better setup for it. Of course the 40 is going to thrash it on the bigger circuits but so is the Daytona, Cobra and TVR, thats the nature of the beast i'm affraid.
Take Dijon for example, that s/f straight has got to be one of the longest on the racing circuit, the 40 was 240kph + down there, bit slower in the corners mind. ;D
I still think it would be intersting to let it run for the 1st season and see what happens.
Oh well guess we will see what happens after a few more races, i'm going to enjoy driving it while I still can ;)
Paul968:
Hi Greg
Quote
Onto the GT40, yes it fast, of course it is and if it turns out that you need to drive the 40 to be in the points then perhaps it would spoil the racing for some guys. As I said if its decided that we cant take it the no big deal, just a shame imho.
This isn't exactly the problem. The scenario I want to avoid is the threat of several mid-field drivers turning up in GT 40s. This will force the quick drivers to take at a minimum one of the other fast cars (TVR, Daytona Coupe, Cobra, Elan) and even then they wont be sure of beating the GT 40s. This will mean that the idea of fast drivers taking slower cars won't happen much. Remember that with the proposed point multiplier system you won't know what everyone else will take, so with the threat of GT 40s turning up the fast drivers will HAVE to take a fast car just in case they do.
Quote
As it happens iv'e just done a few laps at Mondello in the Lotus, average time would be in the mid to high 1:03's, around 1 sec of my 40 pace, but again I have done a lot more laps in the 40 and probably have a better setup for it. Of course the 40 is going to thrash it on the bigger circuits but so is the Daytona, Cobra and TVR, thats the nature of the beast i'm afraid.
I don't see it like this - the Daytona, Cobra and TVR are much harder to extract quick times from (see your Donington times) and most mid-field drivers will be quite a bit slower in them than a GT 40. I was able to compete against the TVRs at Anderstorp using the Ferrari - I couldn't have done that against GT 40s.
Quote
Take Dijon for example, that s/f straight has got to be one of the longest on the racing circuit, the 40 was 240kph + down there, bit slower in the corners mind.
Yes, but part of that is that the GT40 can carry speed onto the straight too, as well as brake well for the next corner.
In an ideal world I would also like to see the GT 40 included - it feels the most like a racing car of all the GTC-65 cars. I just think that allowing it will rule out a host of the midfield cars from the mix - E-Type, Ferrari, Alpine, even the Elan and Corvette look like also rans if the GT 40s turn up, and drivers may have to assume they will and choose a fast car just in case.
Btw, I did half an hour last night at Nurb Sprint in the GT40 - It is mighty fast :-)
Paul
Dave 'Gizmo' Gymer:
Quote from: Paul968 on February 03, 2006, 10:21:28 AM +0000
The scenario I want to avoid is the threat of several mid-field drivers turning up in GT 40s. This will force the quick drivers to take at a minimum one of the other fast cars (TVR, Daytona Coupe, Cobra, Elan) and even then they wont be sure of beating the GT 40s. This will mean that the idea of fast drivers taking slower cars won't happen much. Remember that with the proposed point multiplier system you won't know what everyone else will take, so with the threat of GT 40s turning up the fast drivers will HAVE to take a fast car just in case they do.
It's a bit of a "mutually assured destruction" scenario though. A mid pack driver won't turn up in a GT40, knowing that the realy fast drivers will turn up in one of the "best of the rest" cars, beat them anyway, and scoop relatively more points because they're not in a GT40.
Meanwhile, some of us mid-pack drivers aren't going to dream we can beat Ruskus and Pero just by using a GT40, and instead turn up in our E-Types, Healeys and Ferraris and hope to put one over on the other mid-pack drivers by being consistent and not falling off the track.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page