Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Agreed^

The major difference that many neglect to acknowledge; being that the GTR was always a race car built for the road...where Group A were mass produced cars being touted as race cars. Probably closer these days in equivalency to IP or the utes lol. Not making excuses for the GTR, something had to be superior in a broadly homologated series.

V8 supercars has steered so far away from the Group A roots that you can't really call it a "Group A designed to exclude everything but Holden and Ford" series anymore. It truly is it's own thing now...well, NASCAR with left and right corners :)

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Agreed^

The major difference that many neglect to acknowledge; being that the GTR was always a race car built for the road...where Group A were mass produced cars being touted as race cars. Probably closer these days in equivalency to IP or the utes lol. Not making excuses for the GTR, something had to be superior in a broadly homologated series.

V8 supercars has steered so far away from the Group A roots that you can't really call it a "Group A designed to exclude everything but Holden and Ford" series anymore. It truly is it's own thing now...well, NASCAR with left and right corners :)

yep, nissan designed it from the ground up to work around the group A rules as best as possible. plus the fact that it cost about twice as much to buy as the top model commodore at the time

V8 supercars was NEVER based on Group A

The supertaxis were created at the same time that all of europe, and even japan, had dropped the Group A specs (mostly due to the bigest race series- the DTM, going to an engine sized based category) as it allowed the creation of more of a "silloutte" style of race car.

Its interesting to note, that when the supertaxis first started, there was actually a Group B subcategory for cars under 2000cc that complied with the FIA Class II Touring cars. This never actually took off due to the "sister" series of the supertourers offering pretty much the same regs, but in a more competitive environment.

In the year of its inception (1993) they even allowed entrants from cars that complied with Group 3A 1992 touring car specs, but only for naturally aspirated RWD platforms - but this was only to allow people to get one mnore year out of their homoglated VN Group A's. After the start of the 94 season there was no longer any link between group A (of any class) and the supertaxis.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • If that's the wiring from the factory, I'd be inspecting the loom everywhere.   Any signs of that anywhere else, and seriously, I'd get rid of the car ASAP before the electrical gremlins make it worthless, or it goes up in flames on its own. That is scary how that insulation is failing!
    • I should note too as I have all 4 wheel speed inputs to the emtron I now have the emtron controlling the attessa solenoid for 4wd/traction and launch control strategies. 
    • It works quite well with the adjustibility within each of the programs of the turbolamik. Essentially p1 is drive and lockup comes on like a normal driver.  But in program 7 I have customised it to not request the lockup clutch to engage until something like 6500/7 when slip was the lowest. 
    • Yep, I like that. The tags are only on the first post of a thread and we don't get huge numbers of new threads. Also, I plan to add some more report types and we could have a member report type like 'review tags' then members could flag if they thought a topic wasn't tagged correctly.  No way man, I dig the input. Thanks! 
    • It's a valid thought. There's not exactly that functionality already (when creating a thread) - that's where the OP can use/create any tag they want. We'd have to come up with a way for the user to request their tags get reviewed or something. Otherwise the mods would have to review every new post's tags (for those that have them, anyway). There's kind of that functionality already exists to some extent, post facto of starting the thread, where the OP or any other user could report the post to admins, and request that tags get reviewed. We could do this already, and any user could already have made such a request. To make it a part of the forum proper, it would require an initial and an ongoing education programme, so that people know that it's a thing. OP based tagging/request for review would also require at least some (probably most) of the user base to be told that it's a thing they can do. Both of these things probably wouldn't spread too far and/or get used very much. If it was the standard approach on a lot of different sites, then it might do, because people would be used to it. Prank's approach to this differs from my original thought, by leaning into tagging. Which is fine - it's possibly better than what I originally suggested. In fact, I just went to the R32 GTR wiring diagram thread and added tags, including "Library". That's probably a good way to use tags and the idea of a library. We just have to drag together an (organised!) index of threads or posts that have that tag. I have yet to do any of my own follow up by pursuing worthy threads and posts and reporting/marking/tagging them for the library, such as the @Sydneykid stuff I was talking about, and possibly any amount of @Lithium 's and others' posts. At least if I tag them Library, we'll have a start.   Back to @Wazmond's idea as it relates to @PranK's, we might have some sort of a list of tags that are already used to scrape for this library. I'm not entirely sure how that would be presented or used, particularly if it got long. But it's yet another idea!   cheers
×
×
  • Create New...