GT/Proto

[Bob Riebe]

---"What I find funny is that the cars Bruce picked as "prototypes" were actually GTs by definition. The GT40 ceased to be a prototype when they reverted to the 5L (or was it 4.7?) motor, from the 7L they ran in 1966 and 67. There were enough MkIIs built at the time to have considered it a production vehicle.
And the 917 was also considered a GT, since they had built the minimum required before the race in 1969 (25).
Now, the 907, which ran the 3.0L motor, was the precursor (one might even say "prototype" ) of the 917."----

Paul:
I apologize for this back-arseward way of answering your response at the IMSA site, but it seems I have been booted and all my posts there erased so I brought it here.

GT means Grand Touring, which such cars as GTO, Cobra were, although Ferrari cheated, as they were quite streetable cars. You could tour with them, although I do not think it was quite as grand an experience as the name says.
If you used the same chassis, you could make special bodies for the race versions. Ford and Ferrari stretched the rules to the breaking point.
The butchering of the GT name started partly because if the race was a Camel GT race, they had to figure a way to keep the GT name attached, GT-GTU-GTO-GTX-GTP etc.
The Ford GT40, the name was hype and had nothing to do with what GT meant, but they had enough cars produced to meet the Sports 50, not 25 for this, which included the Lola, class. The Ferraris and Porsche 917 were in a different class but also produced enough cars to meet requirements.
The FIA never thought anyone would produce as many cars as they required, surprize, and thought the GT40 was passe'!
Do not forget one reason such cars were called prototypes was they also were required to have items related to being a prototype production car, including a dedicated place to carry the FIA suitcase, and a spare tire.
These cars were all prototypes and were never considered a GT in any manner, which is why the Ford GT was in the "sports 50" class, not a gt class.
The Mk.II and Mk.IV cars were never anything but prototypes as they were different enough from the GT40 to be different cars.
This is also why the first Mirages were reconverted to GT40, they were prototypes in Mirage form.

---"Now, the 907, which ran the 3.0L motor, was the precursor (one might even say "prototype" ) of the 917."---

I would say you are correct here. Going from the 906-907-908-910, each is a platform leading to or connected to the next. The same as the Ferrari P-P2-P3-P4. This is what made racing so exciting, waiting for the next years developement. Of course the FIA decided this was not a good thing.

One last note. As the thread was-GT/GTS next prototypes-or something like that,remember IMSA started out with Gr.2 Sports and GT cars(Camaros and Mustangs)I see no reason why it cannot go back to what it started with. The exception woud be that before, you could modify the car but the parts had to be homologated(in US cars it meant if an IMSA or SCCA official went to a dealer to buy a part, he had better be able to do so), so the cars were not so much prototypes as developement mules.
Using the various GTs as a prototypes class would work fine as long as any new part was available in the parts catalog the next year.
Bob

edited to take my name out of the title

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe
The Ford GT40, the name was hype and had nothing to do with what GT meant,

Hm, the old question: what is a proper GT. I'd say that if it fits the GT regulations and is homologated as a GT, it is a GT. (And since a bunch of road cars actually exists/existed, it is probably more of a GT than the Toyota GT-One!)

Both the GT40 and the 917 were Gp.4 homologated. The road car series required was reduced to 25 in order to fill the grids with aging Lola T70s and GT40s, but it led to Porsche (and also Ferrari, with the 512) exploiting this loophole.

The 910 was actually a precursor to the 908, based on the 906, and with a smaller engine than the 908. I believe the 908 didn't have so much to do with the 910 but rather was a development of the 907. There was also a 909 hillclimb spyder which was based on the 910.

[Aysedasi]

Originally posted by cybersdorf
Hm, the old question: what is a proper GT.

What an interesting question.......

I don't think I'll get involved........

[pirenzo]

The old GT40 was a prototype

The new one is a GT. Which must mean the old one was better

[Bob Riebe]

Cdbersyorf:
Which one had the 8 cylinder engine, I remember Porsche produced them seemingly willy-nilly.

(although I am sure the original ideas were cataloged as the numbers say, it is they just built them as it served their purpose, remember the 912 4 cyl. version of the 911. I knew the 909 was a hillclimb car but always think of it and some of the other rather amazing hill cars from that time as oddities.)

---"And since a bunch of road cars actually exists/existed, it is probably more of a GT than the Toyota GT-One!"---

I agree with that, the should have required a suit-case and spare tire.

---"Both the GT40 and the 917 were Gp.4 homologated. The road car series required was reduced to 25 in order to fill the grids with aging Lola T70s and GT40s, but it led to Porsche (and also Ferrari, with the 512) exploiting this loophole."---

Are you sure they were in Group 4, I know that the GT40 already had 50+ cars built for the class, but Sports 50, which the GT40 made with ease, is a long ways away from Group 4.
The Lola was a stretch of the rules and if I remember right Bruce Mclaren had a go-around with the FIA over his GT version of his Can-Am car.
Are you sure they did not drop the total required to avoid a field full of GT40s by letting in the Lolas?
I am going on stuff read here a long time ago, but even at 25, I remember the FIA still think that no one would actually build so many cars? There is a picture of the annoyed FIA inspectors looking at all the cars of Ferrari, I think, all lined up.
Bob

[Fab]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe
There is a picture of the annoyed FIA inspectors looking at all the cars of Ferrari, I think, all lined up.

I remember another one with 25 (or was it 50 ?) 917 Porsches...

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by Fab
I remember another one with 25 (or was it 50 ?) 917 Porsches...

25. That was the reduced road car "quota" that made such a venture feasible for Porsche and Ferrari (I doubt they would have built 50...).

The 909 had a 2l flat 8, the 910 a 2l flat six or 2.5l (?) flat 8, and the 907 a 2.2l flat 8.

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by cybersdorf
25. That was the reduced road car "quota"

Actually, no. It wasn't just roadgoing cars, it was road or race cars.

[Fab]

Originally posted by cybersdorf
Actually, no. It wasn't just roadgoing cars, it was road or race cars.

Did they finished on the road, really ? What become of those cars ?

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by Fab
[B]Did they finished on the road, really ?

No, it wasn't required. That's why I added the "road or race". There was only one street legal 917, that of Count Rossi. But that was a modified racecar.

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by Bob Riebe
I am going on stuff read here a long time ago, but even at 25, I remember the FIA still think that no one would actually build so many cars? There is a picture of the annoyed FIA inspectors looking at all the cars of Ferrari, I think, all lined up.
Bob

According to this site, they only had 17 made, and claimed parts were made for the other 8. There are only 25 known 512 chassis according to wspr-racing.com.

I had heard that Ferrari did a switcheroo, and showed the first 17 before lunch, saying the others were "down the road at our other carriage shop." After lunch 8 or so cars were found at the other shop... This may be legend.

It is Porsche, I think, who first shocked the FIA with their 25 lined up.

Two other things:

1. In my original post, I tried to be clear that what I meant by calling the GT40 and 917 "GTs" was that they were such cars as described in the rulebook. I tend to agree that they were not GTs in spirit, but then again, neither do I think an M3 is a GT. A desirable car, yes, but not a GT...

2. I'll check into the IMSA forum for you. Weird. What was your user id, was it some variant on Bob (or Butch) Riebe?

[cybersdorf]

Originally posted by paul-collins
I had heard that Ferrari did a switcheroo, and showed the first 17 before lunch, saying the others were "down the road at our other carriage shop." After lunch 8 or so cars were found at the other shop... This may be legend.

Like that of Ford, when they had the GT350 homologated (homologation series of 100 was required I believe), and the cars at the back of the shop were just ordinary hatchback Mustangs painted up to look like GT350s - the officials never got that far

It is Porsche, I think, who first shocked the FIA with their 25 lined up.

Yes, a famous image, with Piech posing proudly in front of 25 "white giants" in the Porsche factory yard.

In my original post, I tried to be clear that what I meant by calling the GT40 and 917 "GTs" was that they were such cars as described in the rulebook. I tend to agree that they were not GTs in spirit, but then again, neither do I think an M3 is a GT. A desirable car, yes, but not a GT...

Depends on the definition of "GT spirit" I guess. Some believe the GT-One was the epitome of that GT spirit, I think it was a travesty. Some don't see (or, "feel") any difference between GTs and prototypes at all. Personally, I'd be much happier if the distinction were between "performance cars" (based on a road car counterpart) and all-out prototypes.

[cybersdorf]

btw, yes it was Gp.4 in those days (until 1969 I believe).

[Bob Riebe]

---"Depends on the definition of "GT spirit" I guess. Some believe the GT-One was the epitome of that GT spirit, I think it was a travesty. Some don't see (or, "feel") any difference between GTs and prototypes at all. Personally, I'd be much happier if the distinction were between "performance cars" (based on a road car counterpart) and all-out prototypes."---

Grand Touring--It means what it says. Not a sportscar or a touring car but a "grand touring" car.
You can have a GT with four or two seats, it is still a form of "touring" car.
This goes way back but some car mag. writers used to say the original AMX was a GT but the Corvette was a Sports Car. Same for the Jaguar XKE and Aston Martin DBS, first was a Sports Car and the latter a GT.
It is sad that nomenclature that used to specifically define things has turned into a version of white man ebonics.
Bob

[Bob Riebe]

http://www.diecastsportscar.com/FIA/FIA.html#FIA1970

Here is a page which gives good review of FIA classes and changes.(Including info on some of the Porsches)
You are right Cy, the "S" class was also called Group 4.

It was also the FIA that started the GT mumbo-jumbo name of the day thing.
Bob