THEBIGBULL

iTrader: (5)

++++ for USGT... how about for club racing Pat???? With VTA tires NO NO NO. Almost 21.5 Touring stock with spec tire. Might get me back out....I will be there for the asphalt season.....if spring ever comes. I don't understand why WCICS has to try and put there personal spin on an existing class. Not an issue for me as I don't have a dog in that fight. LOL Daytona Prototype or ZL1 Camaro on USGT tires works for me!!!!!

TJ

ViperZ

iTrader: (5)

There is sound reasoning and judement there!

Looking forward to running all the cool bodies we have planned. I don't know what I was thinking buying the PFM-10's. Although nice, I think they go against the spirit of USGT, solid scale looks, that is based on a real existing car.

I was more excited to run the PFM-10 for 17.5 TC I suppose, and the new era that could usher in to TC. I was overly excited, and hope USGT doesn't become a 1 body class that is optimized for pure performance, over scale fun.

I like the way you think!

SpeedySST

iTrader: (6)

You don't think that the PFM-10 looks pretty darn close to the GT-3 McLaren? Yeah Id call it a dead ringer!

ViperZ

iTrader: (5)

Overall, yes it looks like a McLaren MP4 12C. But it also looks like an Aston Martin DB9 in the front, a Ferrari 458 towards the back, a Lambo Gallardo in the rear. Don't get me wrong, I like this body, and would love to see this type of design work and progressive development more on 17.5TC, as those cars are pretty generic. I just view USGT and VTA more like the Montery Classic historic races where older than last years cars are ran to the fans and onlookers delight and winning isn't the only purpose, I know that's naive of me, but that's my draw to this.

I jumped on the PFM-10 as soon as it was announced ordering a few of them, however I have since rethought my position of USGT. I like it for the scale realism it can offer, I suppose others like it as a class to win at all competitive costs. They are not wrong, I'm not right.... I suppose no matter what we do to change the focus from pure on speed and winning to fun and visual excitement, human nature is to push the limits and what was envisioned, eventually changes and becomes removed from its original intent.

I think the whole issue with me is I'm just a retro grouch from the 1/12, 1/10 pan car days, howling at a world that has forever changed and will continue to. Don't mind me

Jamison R

iTrader: (66)

^^^ great post

patorz31

In What seems a very long time ago TC racing was about scale looks, it turned into the jelly bean cars we have now. USGT, was about scale looks and now with bodies like the PFM-10, I fear it is going to do the same.

.crispy

I'll take a picture of the starting field of our USGT A-main on Friday.

The first three rows minimum are all McAllister Rileys. The entire field will probably be Rileys and one McAllister Corvette.

IndyRC_Racer

iTrader: (9)

I don't mind the Daytona Prototype bodies running in USGT when they are painted in a real/imaginary race livery. It helps add to the scale realism of the class when the cars look like something that you might see on a real track. That's part of the point of the class.

I would never discourage another racer from running a legal body to gain performance or painting it with some crazy scheme. However I never understood why some individuals are drawn to a class where scale speeds or looks are supposed to be important, and then do everything they can to do the exact opposite of scale speed/looks.

One last point about paint. I understand that many racer's have their own unique paint scheme (that they may using in touring car/offroad/etc). Is it too much to ask for you to modify that scheme to fit into a scale appearance class as opposed to seeing flames/tribal paint schemes on a USGT or VTA car?

Travis S

iTrader: (46)

Well... the simple answer is; yes it is. Just like it would be too much for me to ask you to not be upset by these tribal flame jobs running in the class.

Cain

iTrader: (294)

people will gravitate towards the body that gives them the best, whether perceived or real, chance to win.

So in short, yeah, if one body is the "standard" as far as handling goes, don't be surprise that its a field full of them.

Luckily for the level we race at now that isn't the case, but I can see it coming. Heck in VTA it was quite common to see a lot of a given body and not because of looks that's for sure.

hairless_ape

iTrader: (3)

I think some people are being a little too harsh on the PFM-10. Yes, it's not a licenced replica of a real car. But it's still a realistic looking super car. And the last time I checked the point of the class was scale realism, not licencing revenue. Does anyone scoff at the J71 or Big Fish in VTA because they're slightly altered because of a lack of licensing? Point being, they're not blobs.

Not to mention the Riley prototype bodies would still have an aero edge.

Now stop nit picking.

wwddww34

iTrader: (9)

The PFM-10 is a great looking, realistic Euro Supercar. Also, as Eric mentioned in this video, it was purposely designed for the growing USGT/ Spec GT classes. I wouldn't be surprised if PROTOform comes out with more 190mm wide realistic GT car bodies very soon.

+ YouTube Video

RoyU

iTrader: (2)

Are the prototype bodies...LMP, Riley, Corvette, etc.... considered GT bodies? Aren't GT bodies supposed to be BMW, Porsche, Ferrari, Viper, Audi, etc?

pphaneuf

The USGT rules (from the folks who started this thread, so not necessarily "the USGT rules for your local track", of course) specifically says "Daytona prototypes OK".

They do call out bodies like 1/8 and 1/12 with integrated wings as not being allowed, though.

They say Le Mans P1 aren't allowed, even though they are some bodies that have separate wings, but I doubt there's any in existence that would fit on a touring car chassis, so the question is rather academic...

robk

iTrader: (22)

I will be betting that the majority of the a main at the upcoming scale nats will not be daytona or rileys. I would put money on nsxs.....