>watch classic car racing>old-fashioned treaded bias ply tires promote a very entertaining, slidy driving style and last forever>relatively basic suspension (such as live rear axles) makes many of the cars even more oversteery>lack of downforce means a lack of worry about dirty air>many cars have the aerodynamics of a brick, so slipstreaming is incredibly effectiveClassic cars have so many characteristics that result in very close, entertaining racing. I honestly don't understand why modern racing can't borrow certain characteristics from classic racing. Classic cars are expensive and it hurts to see some of them crash, so why not have modern race cars with vintage characteristics?
About the best you can hope for in the modern era is either parity rules, which slow down the fastest cars to make racing more exciting, or a same make series.
They're slow unless they have a lot of power and the people who race want to have fast lap times for ego reasons.
>>28841823Wouldn't GT40s break 200mph on certain tracks?
imagine teaming up with someone like classic industries and mass producing shells for late 60s early 70s muscle cars for stock car racing. if we could get the factories in place to pump those things out at scale i bet we'll be deregulated enough by the end of trump's term to even be able to sell them to consumers. imagine being able to buy and drive home a brand new 69 camaro.
>>28842291most race tracks arent drag strips or ovals
>>28842315just looked it upthey would hit 213mph on the mulsanne straight at le mansthe whole car was designed around being able to do that
>>28842309You can drive home brand new GT350 today but it's insanely expensive.
>>28842309man that would be crazy if you could just do that
>>28841823Someone took a Cooper T43, which was made in 1957 to go Formula 2 racing, around Oulton Park in 1:57. A Cayman GT4 managed it in 2:02. The 1960 Lotus 18 made it round Silverstone (bridge layout) in 2:06, the Murcielago 670-4 SV was two seconds slower at the same circuitOld racing cars aren’t just fast, they’re really much faster than everything other than new racing cars. As a general rule you need to go back to the mid 50s to find something you could beat with a modern hypercar. Once you get into the 60s forget it. Colin Chapman was making 850hp/ton in his cars 60 years ago
>>28841822I mean, a spec series featuring lightweight tube-frame cars with a small block V8, hard and slidey tires and minimal downforce would be pure kino. Like V8 Supercars but shittier in an entertaining sort of way.
>>28841781aren't those classics just replicas?
>>28842561No
Why not race new cars on old circuits other than them being too fast?
>>28842532touring car masters?
>>28842680shit wrong post, since those aren't tube frames in a spec seriesstill worth watching
>>28842426That isnt always the caseTopgear did a section of episode on thathttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw-zCsybNtg
>>28841781>I honestly don't understand why modern racing can't borrow certain characteristics from classic racing.I've been saying this since forever, now that every motorsport series is basically fake racing with balance of performance killing the engineering aspect the rulemakers should focus on creating the most entertaining to watch formula they could, make the cars slide and look spectacular instead of making ultraprecise aerodependent boring to watch modern racecars
>>28841781Oldest racing discipline we could realistically return to is GT1>Adapt GT3 front & rear aero rules to LM-H bodies>No BoP, very strictly enforced aero & power/weight rules>Same budget cap, increased spending & evo provisions allowed for cars with road legal variant
>>28841781>the goal of racing is to be as fast as possible>"wtf, why are race cars built to be actually fast???"
>>28844341>>"wtf, why are race cars built to be actually fast???"They are not, every series is cucked by shit liek BoP, air restrictors, etc. Even F1's tires are deliberately designed to be shitty, so why not at least make them shitty in a fun way instead?
>>28841822MX-5 Cup is pretty fun to watch.
>>28844341Fast without drama is boring.Modern racing is so shit to watch, it's far more entertaining to watch a slow old Anglia sliding around a corner than 20 of the same car following the exact same line with zero drama.
>>28842532So NASCAR.
>>28842561>>28842568They're "original" and remain faithful to the engineering of the car but they've been rebuilt with modern equipment to modern historic racing rulesets. Which makes it huge $$$ of course.What's actually needed is a series for cars with baked-in powered ground effect and small footprints with fewer exposed aero parts. Maybe you can make them series hybrids with turbine engines and torque vectoring. McMurtry showed what's possible.
>>28844209A rally car is not a track race car. Do you seriously think that Focus could hold a candle to that Escort on one of the Monte Carlo rally stages? And Top Gear is an entertainment program, not a serious car show
>>28845069Rally car :) Rally Cross.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJpdxK9ks1Q
>>28841781Basically despite being more entertaining the vintage style cars lose vs the modern style cars if the point of the race is who is fastest.You are asking for the WWE of racing, characters and drama with a focus on entertainment, whereas modern racing is more like sport wrestling, all strategy and min/maxing.
>>28845111No, OP is asking for a version of football where it's all about who is best at football. If football was like modern motorsports, the cleats would be artificially designed to wear down after 10 minutes and the teams have to "strategically" decide when to change their shoes in order to win, all because the ball design is so retarded that you can only score when you have a major shoe advantage.
>>28841781Our local classic racing cup kind of imploded when they figured out that the non-classic cup tosses out semi-slicks with one race left in them. Half of the people hated the change from slidey road tires to slicks, quarter loved them because they are 3 seconds faster, other quarter loved them because it's free shit, and one guy who's always out to win just bought brand new slicks and loved beating everyone. In a couple years the field halved, free shit ended, everyone's on new slicks and cars can't handle it anymore, breaking axles and suspensions.
>>28845536>the ball design is so retarded that you can only score when you have a major shoe advantageWonderful sentence.
>>28845111Classic cars are generally more suitable for an actual test of car control and racing skills, especially if there is relative parity in terms of performance.Modern cars suffer from poor raceability in almost every category, and because of that many series have bullshit compensatory rules to drum up artificial drama. NASCAR literally is /pw/ on wheels and F1 isn't far behind.Longer braking zones, no dirty air and trickier cars aren't fakery, DRS, ridiculous energy deployment rules and bullshit cautions are.
>>28845109The video I commented on was on a Ford Escort rally car
