i was told that the jgtc 500 would not keep up with nascar if nascar were to run on a road coarse, now is that true?

 

NASCAR raced at Suzuka just look up lap times maybe


Just to add I think NASCAR on the road course is great to watch on tv and way more entertaining than most road course racing on tv. Those big cars flying around the turns is awesome to watch.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 75w90 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i was told that the jgtc 500 would not keep up with nascar if nascar were to run on a road coarse, now is that true?</TD></TR></TABLE>
No way. GT500 cars are lighter, have cantilever suspension and significant downforce. While the stockcars have more power they're also heavier, have less sophisticated suspension, and are not as aerodynamically efficient.

GT500 cars can lap faster than Formula 3 cars so I seriously doubt they'd have any trouble with a stock car on a road course.

 

by much less sophisticated suspension he means they use rear suspensions that are identical to that of a 1967 chevy truck!

 

I'm pretty sure that NASCAR's chassis are designed to make the car turn left better than it does right, if they bear any resemblance to circle track cars.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Voodooboy520 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'm pretty sure that NASCAR's chassis are designed to make the car turn left better than it does right, if they bear any resemblance to circle track cars.</TD></TR></TABLE>

They build a specific chassis for the road race cars.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by essex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">NASCAR raced at Suzuka just look up lap times maybe </TD></TR></TABLE>

They only ran in 1996 and 1997 on the east course. It rained in 97 and they had to run rain tires (first time ever in NASCAR LOL). I didn't bother looking up times for 96 because they didn't run the full course.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by essex &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Just to add I think NASCAR on the road course is great to watch on tv and way more entertaining than most road course racing on tv. Those big cars flying around the turns is awesome to watch.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The only time I ever watch a CRASHCAR race.

Comparing NASCAR to JGTC (it's actually called SuperGT now) is kina retarded anyway. They're completely different types of car with completely different sets of rules.

Maybe if you're bored you can see if there are any tracks that Grand Am Daytona prototypes and SuperGT have both run on (i.e. Cali Speedway maybe??). Then you can see how much difference there is. Then you can compare Daytona Prototype times at a track that they also run with NASCAR (i.e. Mexico).

I think the Daytona Protoype is a closer match to the SuperGT cars anyway.

 

you don't need a lot of technology to go fast....

There is NOTHING wrong with a straight axel rear end. So many years have been spent racing on them that they have them figured out really well.


Hell teams in GA rolex GT can use either a trans axle or a solid rear end. More then a few teams run the solid rear end.

P&M built their first Pontiac with a tans axle (the GTO.R) the second car they built has a solid rear end (the GXP.R).

the Cup cars (NASCAR) are VERY fast for what they are. The R&D that has went into every part of the car is amazing. They make 800 plus HP through a hole the size of a quarter (maybe smaller can't remember).

 

I read on some racing site (shortly after the JGTC event at Fontana in 2004) that the top class JGTC cars (GT500 I think?) would slot somewhere between a Grand Am Rolex car and an LMP2 Le Mans car.

I'll look up laptimes when I have a chance. A good track comparison would be the Trans Am, Grand Am and ALMS times at Long Beach. IIRC, JGTC ran a modified version of Fontana's motorcycle course.

Trans Am cars are faster than NASCAR Cup cars at Sonoma.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">you don't need a lot of technology to go fast....

There is NOTHING wrong with a straight axel rear end. So many years have been spent racing on them that they have them figured out really well.


Hell teams in GA rolex GT can use either a trans axle or a solid rear end. More then a few teams run the solid rear end.

P&M built their first Pontiac with a tans axle (the GTO.R) the second car they built has a solid rear end (the GXP.R).

the Cup cars (NASCAR) are VERY fast for what they are. The R&D that has went into every part of the car is amazing. They make 800 plus HP through a hole the size of a quarter (maybe smaller can't remember).

</TD></TR></TABLE>

And yet the best NASCAR drivers still have trouble getting thru turn one at the Glen due to rear axle hop under braking. That doesn't happen with an IRS. Both Jeff Gordon and Tony Stewart spun while leading thanks to axle hop last year.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Outrun &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I read on some racing site (shortly after the JGTC event at Fontana in 2004) that the top class JGTC cars (GT500 I think?) would slot somewhere between a Grand Am Rolex car and an LMP2 Le Mans car.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
That sounds about right. I don't know that they'd have the outright pace of the fastest LMP2 cars (Penske RS Spyder) but they'd certainly be faster than GT1 Vettes and Daytona Prototypes.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JMU R1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">That sounds about right. I don't know that they'd have the outright pace of the fastest LMP2 cars (Penske RS Spyder) but they'd certainly be faster than GT1 Vettes and Daytona Prototypes. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Sometime ago, the head engineer for one of the SuperGT NSX teams was asked how their GT500 car would do against LeMans GT1 cars and the guy responded with, "we'd eat those cars alive." Or something to that effect. Which was kinda shocking to me that a Japanese engineer would be so openly agressive.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ponyboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Sometime ago, the head engineer for one of the SuperGT NSX teams was asked how their GT500 car would do against LeMans GT1 cars and the guy responded with, "we'd eat those cars alive." Or something to that effect. Which was kinda shocking to me that a Japanese engineer would be so openly agressive.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Even the Japanese can bench race LOL. Comparing cars with different sets of rules, running on different tracks, in different types of races (sprint racing vs 24 hour enduro) is like comparing the price of oranges with the weight of apples.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nonsense &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Even the Japanese can bench race LOL. Comparing cars with different sets of rules, running on different tracks, in different types of races (sprint racing vs 24 hour enduro) is like comparing the price of oranges with the weight of apples. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Not at all. A lap time is a lap time. Someone was just asking the simple question about which one would be faster.

An apples to oranges comparison would be if someone asked which series was better or who has the better drivers or something more subjective.

 

There was an article about these SuperGT cars in Racecar Engineering magazines about half a year ago. IIRC, the pace of the SuperGT cars are about the same as LeMans LMP2 cars

 

Having watched LMP2 Porsches run down past turn 4 at Mosport this year, that is stonkin' fast.

 

That was where I read that comment from the engineer. IIRC, that was a very good article.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Andrie Hartanto &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">There was an article about these SuperGT cars in Racecar Engineering magazines about half a year ago. IIRC, the pace of the SuperGT cars are about the same as LeMans LMP2 cars</TD></TR></TABLE>

What would the pace of an LMP2 car be if it didn't have to last for 24 hours, or what would the pace of a SuperGT car be if it did have to last for 24 hours? Nobody knows, thus no way to acurately compare. It's like comparing the average speed of a sprinter vs a marathon runner

Anyway what track have they both run on and what were average lap times for both? Or was Racecar Engineering just bench racing too?

Either way, a NASCAR Winston Nextel presented by Lee Jeans and Jim Beam Cup car is not going to hold pace with either of those cars

 

isn't the power of each class be different too. lets say LMP2, super GT,IROC series, so if lets say all the car are allowed 500hp and they can run the car as is, what car from what class would be the better performer?

 

nascar:



superGT:

 

I'm very surprised that the SuperGT cars would be quicker than even the C6.R's...I guess the rule book does wonders on who's quicker than who (obviously)

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ...esteban &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'm very surprised that the SuperGT cars would be quicker than even the C6.R's...I guess the rule book does wonders on who's quicker than who (obviously)</TD></TR></TABLE>
Downforce + inboard suspension = win

 

if youv ever seen a nascar in person on a road course with vintage trans am cars on the track at the same time its hilarious the trans am cars are so much faster, and i love watching them go through right turns and just rolling over on there suspensions, it almost looks like there going to flip over. fun to watch but gt 500 i think would be way faster

 

I don't think a GT500 car will be as fast as a modern LMP2, which is essentially as fast as an LMP1 these days, so that means FAST.
1:05's at Mosport, insane fast.

They would likely be in around the GT1 ALMS cars, faster? Not so sure.
Faster than a cup car, well, yes, much, much faster. BUT, anyone that thinks a cup car is slow around a road course also has no idea what they are talking about.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by pmachan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't think a GT500 car will be as fast as a modern LMP2, which is essentially as fast as an LMP1 these days, so that means FAST.
1:05's at Mosport, insane fast.

They would likely be in around the GT1 ALMS cars, faster? Not so sure.
Faster than a cup car, well, yes, much, much faster. BUT, anyone that thinks a cup car is slow around a road course also has no idea what they are talking about.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
i kind of agree with you. the superGT cars are not very restricted on the engine layout. most of them are running transmitions in the back of the car and they have way more aero than GT1 cars. they arell have very low roofline (unlike GT1 cars that have to retain the stock roof line) .... and they make roughly the same HP as those Gt1 cars and way alot less. but then again LMP1 cars are REALLY REALLY FASSSSSSSST. umm how about comparing SuperGT cars to the Rolex cup prototype cars?