You are here: Forums Coupes & Convertibles Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion 

Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion - READ ONLY

522 messages,  Last post on Dec 08, 2007 at 6:07 PM

You are in the Coupes & Convertibles Forum. Your Host is claires

What is this discussion about? Porsche 911, Chevrolet Corvette, Ferrari F430, Lotus Exige, Lotus Elise, Coupe

#51 of 522 racing by Mr_Shiftright HOST Apr 11, 2005 (1:46 pm)
If Corvette continues to lose, the factory will pull out. If they win some, lose some, they'll stay a while, but if they are not competitive, only privateers will stay. GM beancounters will not allow a money-losing race season of defeat year after year. You can count on this, trust me. LeMans is a big effort and costs mega-bucks.   Porsche and Ferrari were run by dictators, to be fair about it, and thus it wasn't really a beancounters decision. It was the passion of one man really. That kind of passion took Ford to LeMans, too (some say revenge) but unfortunately when Henry II got his prize he went home. You didn't see Ford at Lemans after that.   Besides, we are talking 57 years here, not 5 years. Big difference if you are building a legend that translates into "brand equity", which I think is what we were originally talking about---why people choose some cars over others regardless of the numbers on paper.   Also we were looking at the broad expanse of history to find out why America took so long to make a decent sports car, and my contention was that the lack of international racing experience was one reason.   Why is the Honda S200 such a great little sports car? The Miata? The RX-7 twin-turbo? International racing experience is part of the answer. Honda has been in Formula for many years and Mazda won Lemans in...um....think it was 1991.   Corvette has never won Lemans, only class, not an outright. To be fair, you need a specialty car to do that, so I'm not knocking it---you just can't say "_____ won Lemans" when you mean a class win rather than an overall. Still, class win is great, something to be proud of.
#52 of 522 Shifty, times change ... by starrow68 Apr 11, 2005 (2:42 pm)
"Okay, it's 57 years for Porsche and Ferrari...got me there cheating 3 years ... "   Hey that's over 5% error, and in a Sarbanes-Oxley world you're a felon! Never admit a mistake, suggest it was the system and you had good intentions, makes a difference under federal rules, sec. 8, I think.     Problem with worry about what happened in history of racing is that I'm in the 99th percential, never followed it and only know what I've read in the last couple years. Loved the link to the London Times article, I too grew up a Ford guy. Maybe too much baggage is a burden and it helps just looking at what is offered today. I'm really having trouble imagining how fast a C6 Z06 will be in the track, down right dangerous I'm thinking!
#53 of 522 zoom zoom by Mr_Shiftright HOST Apr 11, 2005 (4:01 pm)
I'm waiting for some nutcase to take one on the Silver State Classic....those guys are hitting over 200 mph on (closed) public roads!   I'd like to enter in the 140 mph class. I think after that you have to really modify your car. Replies to this message: starrow68 (Apr 13, 2005 8:25 pm) Mr_Shiftright (Apr 14, 2005 10:05 am)
#54 of 522 sports cars by xkss Apr 11, 2005 (4:21 pm)
I agree about the vision of one man and a few others with regard to sports cars and racing.   I've heard that Aston Martin has never made a profit, but they will make a profit this year. Wealthy owners kept Aston Martin going.   Carroll Shelby had the idea to take a big-block Ford V-8, install it in a British sports car's chassis, modify it, and go racing. Peter Brock then styled the Shelby Daytona Coupe which dominated the Ferraris.   The following is from http://www.corvettemuseum.com/library-archives/timeline/1951.shtml   "The Automobile Manufacturer's Association passes a resolution that recommends that member companies (including General Motors) not participate in auto racing."  - June 4th, 1957   I've heard that a Mercedes-Benz racecar crashed at a major race in 1957 or so and over eighty people died. Mercedes-Benz pulled out of racing after that. They didn't come back to racing until decades later.   The following is from the same link shown above   "Zora Arkus-Duntov, in a Corvette SS, hits 183 MPH on the General Motors Proving Grounds in Phoenix, Arizona."   The following is from http://www.corvettemuseum.com/library-archives/timeline/1960.shtml   "General Motors' Chairman Frederic Donner issues a policy memo, re-iterating the company's compliance with 1957 AMA company-sponsored racing ban. This officially cancels production plans for the Corvette Grand Sport, with only 5 of the intended 125 cars built. [1] [3] [30] [55.77] [79.70] [106.5] [131.84] (February [7]) (halt called first week, 5 cars built after that"   - January 21, 1963   Zora Arkus-Duntov is the "father of the Corvette."   Dave Hill and Bob Lutz are likely bigger car enthusiasts than other people at GM.   My guess is that the people behind the C6-R want to dominate racing and they aren't going to let Aston Martin, Maserati, or Saleen get in their way. The more car makers in racing, the better. They probably welcome the competition. If the C6-R turns out to be a flop, which it wasn't at Sebring, it would still be the LAST racecar that GM would pull out of racing.   Pontiac will back the GTO in the Grand-Am Rolex Sports car series by mid-season, which includes 911 GT3s and BMW M3s.   I have no doubt that Don Panoz is sick and tired of Porsche 911s winning race after race in the American Le Mans Series. He now has two GTLMs running this year compared to one last year.
#55 of 522 racing by Mr_Shiftright HOST Apr 11, 2005 (6:06 pm)
But Panoz makes all the decisions I guess, so he might stay no matter what. It pays to be nuts in this game.   Beancounters on the other hand only count beans. They don't understand passion and glory and heritage. Unfortunately, in most corporations the passion boys don't hold the power. That's what's nice about having a company with a dictator.   The only way I can see for an American company to stay in racing is for that company to carefully choose the arena, and only go into venues where the car has a good chance. Otherwise the beancounters will bust your racing program sure as shootin'.
#56 of 522 definition by speeds2much Apr 11, 2005 (7:20 pm)
Thought I'd chime in here. When someone says "sports car," the first thing that comes to my mind is "British sports car," i.e. MG, A-H, Jag etc. with a tan rag top and British racing green paint. I can imagine a chap with goggles and a scarf cruising down back roads of England with his girlfriend. Definately first half of the twentieth century while jets were still nothing more than German top secrets. Sports cars and auto racing grew alongside each other in the early aviation age, and the idea of barnstorming and performance driving seem to have been intertwined during that era.   The early Corvettes, which were beautiful cars by the way, evoked Italian (i.e. Ferrari) design elements and still do imo. Porsche was a different kind of animal...sort of garage mechanic's culture, really. Porsche brothers loved to race tractors, so heck, why not drop a hot engine into the Beetle and have some fun!? That lead to the improbable, rear-engined 911 series...an accident of invention, perhaps.   All of the above can be called sports cars in their own right, because they all have an air of danger and adventure and freedom and impracticality...even a touch of madness. Like the way men perceive women, perhaps?? Replies to this message: porscheguy1 (Apr 12, 2005 11:48 am) designman (Apr 12, 2005 12:11 pm)
#57 of 522 One missing factor by starrow68 Apr 11, 2005 (7:54 pm)
I hear about the cars and the makers but in some cases the sanctioning bodies make the winners. Ask a few other than Archer why Viper is winning in the World Challenge right now. Restrictor plates and weight, added after a good result but then not removed when the results change might be a factor. Lou G. took 3rd in a Corvette in the last race after blowing an engine in 5th place the prior race. Also what benefits is the Caddy effort getting since it is factory backed with advertising dollars for the series? It's not always about the best car or driver for that matter.    I wonder right now if "F" is holding back in F1 so the series doesn't break up and leave them out of power. We will never know.    The racing is fun to watch but driving is more fun still! Randy
#58 of 522 Re: definition [speeds2much] by porscheguy1 Apr 12, 2005 (11:48 am)
Replying to: speeds2much (Apr 11, 2005 7:20 pm) I'm not sure you could call early Corvettes sports cars. Sure they had a swoopy body and were two seaters, but they were no fun in the corners. And the braking performance was pretty bad. Replies to this message: designman (Apr 12, 2005 12:11 pm)
#59 of 522 Re: definition [porscheguy1] by designman Apr 12, 2005 (12:11 pm)
Replying to: porscheguy1 (Apr 12, 2005 11:48 am) Can you call any early sports car a sports car? We romanticize them but whenever I see them on the road they’re not quite the way I like to remember them—they look mighty rickety. That said, yes indeed the early Vettes are vilified. They looked as cool as fazool though, especially the Stingray which I hold on a pedestal as one of the best styling jobs of all time. It still looks modern today. I also loved the MGs and Healeys. When I get in the old Vettes I coif my pompadour and put on the Duprees. In the MGs I get out the mustache wax and aviator shades. Of course now that I have a Boxster I do nothing but go to Starbucks. Shifty, do you wear a sharkskin suit quite often?   Speeds2much… barnstorming… love it. The real sports “cars” of that bygone era were the biplanes. Ever go to an aviation show at the old aerodrome museum in Rhinebeck NY?
#60 of 522 sharks and sports by Mr_Shiftright HOST Apr 12, 2005 (2:17 pm)
Actually I might be wearing a sharkskin suit someday soon if I keep boogie-boarding at Stinson Beach. They tried to eat some guy not too long ago right there in 6 feet of water...but it was one of those harmless sharks...a Great White something or other   Speaking of sportscars (sorry host for veering off topic) and old Corvettes, I guess you could call them "sportscars" but they had ZERO credibility as sportscars among the then small, fanatical group of propeller heads who even knew what a sportscar was in 1953.   Once the Corvette got the V-8 engine and starting racing, I think the view of the car slowly slowly changed. With the Stingray, the car got at least a credible suspension and brakes albeit not spectacular like they have now.   To my mind, the first Corvette to earn the title "sportscar" would be the C4---it went fast, could corner, and it bashed your teeth together while rattling the windows---these were all good signs to me.

You are here: Forums Coupes & Convertibles Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion