@RobK,
Do I not recall your specifically saying that the McAllister Corvette DP body was acceptable for use in USGT? I'm on break at work and don't have the time at the moment to search back through the thread.

I agree with RobK's assertion that an approved body list is not necessary (and I would go so far as to say not wanted or needed). I feel this way for two reasons: The first is because RobK is on here regularly and lets his thoughts and opinions be known quickly and concisely. Think ROAR's process is that quick and easy? The second is because it seems that the tracks are going to make their own rulings anyhow and that they treat the "official" USGT rules as guidelines, not hard-and-fast rules....and that is encouraged by the USGT rules!

Rules are rules. However, if it's not written I see it as an option. I can switch but really like the looks of the Flying M going down a long straight.

Yeah the corvette dp is ok. Kevin k had one and it was about tbe same as anything else. Maybe he will chime in.

One thing I did forget to mention before....Our DP bodies are scale versions of actual current race cars, not something just made up or stylized for RC racing. That seemed to be a concern in previous posts.

Since most full scale road racing venues race several different style car classes....usually at the same time, is there a possibility that USGT would consider having different body style classes, Daytona Prototype being one of them????

I have run one and its not any different than anything else out there. I have ran a bunch of bodies and no body really holds any advantage over the next. I personally like the looks of the NSX, Corvette and Lotus bodies so thats what I mostly run.

I dont think that USGT needs to be split up by body type. I personally do not see any problem with DP bodies racing in USGT they have been shown to not hold any advantage over other bodies. All they do is offer another look and IMO the Flying M bodies are well done and should not be blocked out of USGT. As long as the body is designed to be used on a Sedan(read not WGT or PAN car) and its not a T2 listed or previously listed T2 body then I do not see a problem with only outlawing TRUCKS and letting the racers run kick ass looking bodies.

That works for me. Thanks for your insight.

To ROBK:
Since its OK to run the DP bodies, what about a rear cutout definition? On all the other cars we trim to the mold line. I am not sure these have one.

There is a line in the body rules that is interesting though:
, Can AM or IMSA style bodies, similar to 1/12 or 1/8 bodies are also discouraged

After relentless complaints about VTA not being liberal enough on bodies. Not free enough on motors and the like. It really catches me cross to see the very opposite complaint for USGT. There really is no way to win and it really is best to say this is the class. Here it is. This is it.

+1
Maybe that is why Scotty Ernst took it 1 step further and made a list of 'GT' bodies allowed at the IIC:

1. HPI 7335 Porsche 911
2. HPI 7352 BMW M3
3. HPI 7388 Mazda RX8
4. HPI 7399 Subaru Impreza
5. HPI 17218 Nissan 350Z
6. PROTOform 1531-30 Lexus LFA
7. PROTOform 1532-30 Chevy Camaro ZL1
8. Tamiya 51375 Subaru Impreza
9. Tamiya 51396 BMW M3
10. Tamiya 51453 Nissan GTR
11. Tamiya 51471 Audi R8
12. Tamiya 51474 Ferrari 599X

Even so there were still complaints about the 2 PROTOform bodies being 200mm wide while the rest are 190mm.

1-5 are all sold out
6-7 are 200mm and look weird on a TC with spec tires
8-12 are just too expensive

LOL Cant make everybody happy

what chassis is this sitting on? I ask because i am putting one on my tc3 an the tires will be inside the body. front and rear.

I thought the PROTOform 1532-30 Chevy Camaro ZL1 was a 190mm body.

yes, the camaro is 190mm

Ahhh it's more of a "tweener". width in the rear is 197mm

An idea for some: if you are unhappy with how liberal the class's body rules are, run USVTA. If you are upset with how restrictive the class's body rules are, run USGT.

Happy now?