Were GROUP C Cars Faster Than F1 Cars? | Racing MyBusters
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лип 2023
- 80s titans clash!
Leave a like if you enjoyed the video and subscribe for more simulations!!
Check JUST SIMRACING: @JUSTSIMRACINGYT
The physics of some models may have been modified to replicate real-life performance as close as possible.
#F1 #LeMans #WEC - Авто та транспорт
80s F1 cars or Group C?
group c🤩
also can i have the track link?
Both
I prefer Group C
80's F1 cuz turbolag
What I think FIA really feared was the Group C becoming more popular than F1. They effectively killed it, which in turn killed the public's interest.
Bernie was the one to blame for. Everyone who are into motorsport know how envy he was toward formula 1
Thankfully they cannot kill what Ferrari is involved in😉LMH is looking stronger than ever
@@ZedNinetySix_uhh thats not group c buddy
@@chefboyardee2497 obviously, but Ferrari was never involved with Group-C which is what made Group-C vulnerable.
But the FIA wont pull the plug/sabotage anything Ferrari is heavily invested into.
@@eett3330still my favourite era
F1 engine durability: 2h
Group C engine durability: 24h
24h and beyond. After Mazda won in 91, the engineers opened the engine and realized that all it needed was an oil change to go another 24h.
F1 engine lasts at least 2 races in 1988
No matter what, the 80s was the most iconic decade for motor racing with not only the clean beautiful lines of the ridiculously powerful Formula 1 and Group C cars but also the even more ridiculously powerful Group B rally cars and the Paris Dakar raid rally cars!
Arguably I'd say the 90s was...
@@mattyg267 both.
Group C cars were faster than F1 cars on the straights, everyone knows that, they were of course going to be, especially on Le Mans spec. But at best, a Group C car could beat a midfield F1 car, because let's not forget that F1 cars in the 80's had a difference of like a million years from the fastest cars to the slowest. And even still, I'm talking about Group C cars like your Jaguars and Mercedes, not the slower ones no one remembers.
ay the one of the slower group c prototype was mazda prototypes, and pretty sure everybody remembers it
@@NicoKyunKyun Because ithe 787B had the luck of winning the '91 Le Mans. How about the 767? Or the 757? Pretty sure not many people know about them, perhaps the 767, but definitely not the ones before.
How about something like the Spice SE89C? Ain't nobody remember that poor thing.
@@Starfire_Storm you got me, i don't know wtf is that se thing😂
@@NicoKyunKyun And I don't blame, thing was slow as hell. Ain't nobody going to remember something that had no glory. But want to know something funny? In the 1991 WSC championship, despite winning at Le Mans, Mazda finished 5th in the constructors championship, behind the obvious Jaguar with the XJR-14, Peugeot with the 905 and Mercedes with the C291. But also, behind a little team called Euro Racing, which ran a Spice SE90C, a 1990 car; they didn't had a single podium all season and even had a retirement, whereas Mazda finished every race, and yet they still finished ahead Mazda in the championship, which just show how slow the 787B actually was. At least it sounds mad good.
@@Starfire_Storm yeah the mazda 787b is very reliable, i think it won le mans because the top guys were dnfing
To my memory of the time, the whole "Group C faster than F1" cars thing was born out of a test in 1991, in Monza, where the Group C Mercedes lapped faster than the 1990 F1 fastest lap (in the race). I remember buying a magazine back then (Italian Autosprint) with an article about the test, but for the life of me can't find it anymore - and can't find info of that test anywhere online, so if anyone can shed some light, it would be great!
That said, it's easy to see how specific the conditions were - a car in a private test (where THEORETICALLY, rules don't apply, they could lap underweight for all we know, ask Sauber what they did in their first F1 winter test in 1993...) lapping quicker than an F1 car did the year before under race conditions (where fastest laps would usually be at least 3 or 4 seconds slower than qualifying times). One interesting thing is that the track F1 and Group C were the closest in qualifying, was for some reason the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez in Mexico City (back then with a different layout than today), where pole for the two categories in 1991 was less than 3 seconds apart; The polesitting Group C car would've qualified in 16th in the F1 Grand Prix - although the races were held at very different times of the year. So in a sense yes, on selected tracks the top Group C cars were faster than some F1 cars - as long as these cars were Dallara, Ligier or Footwork and not McLaren, Williams, Ferrari, Benetton or anything else near the top end of the grid...
Fascinating story, thank you so much for sharing it!!
When someone is able to offer a better product than F1, there is the FIA to make it disappear
Let’s not tell them about Indycar then 😶
WEC exists but they haven’t gotten rid of it yet, thank the lord.
@@brodiemiller2296 fia destroyed IndyCar too. They were involved in the Cart/IRL split
Compare the porsche 917 and ferrari 512 with the f1s of 1970 and 1971!
The new 3.5L N/A engine rule slowed down the group c cars by a lot but the last gen group cars like Peugeot 905 and Toyota TS010 had managed gaining a huge time to its turbo era by increasing the downforce with blown diffuser but even then it was all in vain because the new engine rule killed the sport, it simply too expensive and complex as it has the same spec as f1 engine and small teams simply couldn't afford it.
So it definitely looked like by top speed, the Jaguar XJR-9 was faster than the F1 car (at their era). However the F1 car was able to outmanoeuvre it to beat it in the lap. Nonetheless it was still a great video!
No surprise that a Group C has an higher top speed by a considerable margin. An average F1 car has a worse drag coefficient than a truck. This mainly due to the open wheel architecture - wheels are responsible for an enormous amount of drag. In any other field though, an F1 car outclasses anything else - Group C included.
Yeah, something a lot of people fail to realize is that top speed isn't actual speed. Cornering is crucial.
Looking at you, Bugatti fans.
@@Palatine-Knight Bugatti fans! 😆😆 Nice one.
First part of the race: Haha, McLaren go brrr.
Second part of the race: *AYRTON SENNA DO BRASILLLL!!!*
_Thats the thing about F1 cars, they're not built to be the fastest, they're built to be the quickest around a track, and that makes a whole lot of difference._
Well, the true reason was that the new rules of Group C benefitted teams using F1 engines, causing privateer and novice teams couldn't afford to create machines that could beat teams F1 engined cars, causing Group C and World Sportscar Championship to fall
Formula 1 had been pretty dumbed down by banning streamlined bodies in the early 60s, the fan car, the 6 whelers, ground effects after '82 and reducing the power of the turbos after '87 (when Hondas were making 1000 hp in race trim). And still Formula 1 is faster.
i recently bought a jaguar xjr9 in gt7 and it reminds me of how much i loved these cars back in my early gran turismo days. ive now got a 787b as well and the next on the list is the sauber c9 then the r92cp. out of all of them the sauber is probably my favorite but theyre all absolute monsters and the hypercar regs we have now are the closest we will to see to the old group c days.
My main problem with group C cars(in sport atleast)is how much they understeer and the fact they drink fuel like there's no tomorrow
How can I get Group C cars on GT7
@@MagnumLoadedTractorThere's a little room for front camber and downforce to help turn in, they only understeer on exit if you're too early on the power, and they use less fuel on the spa 1 hour race than the gr3s or gr2s
@@MagnumLoadedTractorwell these cars are practically boats compared to modern prototypes and have insane power figures from big engines which logically guzzle fuel compared to a diesel or a hybrid
Another great comparison......if the race was at the Daytona oval the Jag would have won
Group C, Turbo F1, Group B Rally, pre restrictor plate NASCAR, Indy Car all made the 80s a very special time.
Popularity of every racing discipline,not just Group C,jeopardising F1's popularity was what FIA feared about and that's what i hate about FIA.
Ikr, they always keep F1 as the pinnacle, and if other series like Group C starts to get close or even gets more popular, they nerf it.
man i love how the jaguar sounds, especially in project cars 2
Yeah boy! Race your busters!
The MP4-4 is also slowed down though... The true peak 80s f1 cars were in 1986 before they heavily restricted the Turbos.
Both were in the same year, the Porsches were faster in the early to mid 80s. So
I loved the Group C and IMSA GTP series in the day. What sim did you do this video in? Download of the car files?
I love this. Thanks for sharing
Thanks for watching!
I remember when I was younger looking at their laptimes around silverstone. Very close.
Yes*
*Only on straights
True for pretty much all the modern-day street cars.
People wanting 0-60 in 2 seconds while the car is >2000kg is why I stopped following them as much.
I don't know it's right or not
According to Project Cars 2, Jaguar XJR-9 LM didn't have much grip as Porsche 962 Langcheck and Sauber C9 LM that's the reason why Jag is suffer in the corner
Yeah that seems about right to me. I figured the Group C would overhaul the F1 on Maulsane straight, but that the F1 would so better with acceleration and cornering.
I reckon it could be made closer with a change in gearing.
That silk cut jag is beautiful
Personally, i find this kind of comparisons quite pointless, because different racing vehicles are being made to fit different, incomparable rule sets. Otherwise we would not have different motorsport disciplines. The only common denominator i see is the human being, that will drive them at absolute edge of their capabilities. So if we compare, what the actual drivers must have be able to do, in order to win, the most skilled ones are the rally drivers. This way WRC really should be a pinnacle of motorsport.
The MP4/4 is itself a nerfed f1 car. It's the last of the turbo era that was only a shell of it's former self. If you don't believe me go compare the pole times.
Jerez 1986 pole: 1:21.6
Jerez 1988 pole: 1:24.0
The fastest laps were closer but still the mid 80's cars were quicker.
This narrative that they were nerfed to not compete with F1 falls apart when F1 was nerfed aswell. Did they nerf f1 to not compete with F0?
The original group C cars were heavily nerfed so it wouldn't overshadow the new category of 3.5L NA sports cars. Category created to attract manufacturers to F1 who used... 3.5L NA engines.
And one of the reasons those rules were created it was because endurance racing at the time was just popular if not more than F1. Balestre and Bernie did not intend to almost kill endurance racing as whole, they simply wanted the manufacturers to join the F1 circus.
Nice
That’s interesting
It’s very apparent that the group c has the advantage on straights due to better aerodynamics. But the F1 car has better corner entry and exit due to less weight and better maneuverability.
The F1 car has better aero….
@@ifeelcoke4347 for corners yes f1 is better, but for long straights group c has the aero advantage( covered wheels, less downforce, etc.)
@@thesauceboss2610what you mean to say is less drag.
can you do this with the xjr-14?
The Silk Cut Jaguar was one of the best looking group C cars. 😍😍
Im sure that it was stated the Peugeot 905b was quick enough to qualify on the grid for f1 at the time
It topped out at 405 kph
And then they tried to get the engine into F1 as a supplier and it was dogshit
It wasn't very fast in the corners...
@@THEWINDTUNNEL Quoated in motorsport magazine. "At the season-opener at Suzuka, Alliot’s pole time would have lined him up 22nd on the 1992 Japanese GP grid. Next time out, at Silverstone, Dalmas produced a lap bettered by only 12 F1 cars the following July. And then, at Magny-Cours, Alliot came up with a time good enough for a spot on the fourth row for the French GP. What’s more, the fastest of Peugeot’s drivers over one lap reckons that he did a time in testing at the Nevers circuit that was only eclipsed by Williams drivers Nigel Mansell and Riccardo Patrese in F1 qualifying."
@@TheValiantDwarf that’s still slower than an f1 car mate
Nowadays I think FIA might still kill it if WEC getting better and popular than F1. At least the president and F1 commissioner don't have that approach
Better already is more popular than F1? Never
ACO themselves almost killed the class by making it slower than previous gen LMP2 cars
@@ruzgarakgul2051 huh, really now? Didn't really see that with the record entries at Le Mans and if course the on track battles being ferocious. Also privateer teams coming back which, there's also the rumours of Pescarolo returning in the LMH category.
That really doesn't sound like a dying Motorsport if you ask me.
@@joejohnnys for the sake of WEC, I hope it doesn't get more popular, the fans are already dumb enough.
A common engine formula between F1 & WEC seams such a Fantastic Idea yet it bombed
Wow nice victory senna i am braziliam to
Nothing will corner as quick as an F1 car
That Jag is capped on its top speed, it's a recorded fact they got up to +390 kph down the Mulsanne straight, and here it struggles with the 'so' maybe 370 kph capable MP4/4. Capping the Jag down to 375 kph is deffinetly an insane attempt at closing the action between the cars (just what Balestre would've wanted!). Anyway, apples to oranges.
Can you do Can am vs group c
Sure!
F1 cars top speeds are a pure function of gearing and downforce. I am sure out and out they could easily outrun C cars in a straight line, topping 250mph
2:39 if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver.
I hope this isn't the MP4/4 by ASR. ASR makes pure arcade mods that don't even pass the "crazy monkey test".
It's just the 3d model
group C still is my fave.
Racing my busters
F1 cars were built to do 1hr 30min races while Group C were built to do 6hrs or 24hrs races. Hence brakes, suspension, amount of engine cooling (affects aerodynamics), engine revs would be different.
Impressive how fast an F1 car is faster doing corners than a Gr. C car.
Which tracks, what conditions? Le Mans? Possibly. Monaco? Probably not.
Now run that test for 24 hours and see who comes out on top?
Not 100% sure but the only time we had prototypes faster than F1 was probably like in 1970 with the 917K and i'm not even sure on downforce demanding tracks it would have been true.
I'm extremely amazed seing historic track sessions involving legend cars such as Porsche 962 on places like Hockenheimring being flatout outmaoeuvered by cars such as 488GT cars....
I assume as it's probably been said multiple times, group C performed extremely well for their task : go fast for 5000 km non stop, while staying reliable with "low" fuel consumption. It was not about 1 hot lap.
Try it with the sauber c9 since its faster than the jag and more agile
Question, how did the FIA slow down Group C? Also, your test is on the Le Mans circuit, which the Jag was specifically built for. How about a test around Spa or Silverstone, where both cars raced? Silverstone in 1988 for example, the pole for the F1 race was five seconds quicker than pole for the Group C race
There was a 3.5 Naturally aspirated engine limit that was enforced onto Group C, in order to try and get teams to run both series.
The problem was most Group C teams were privateer as opposed to f1, so budgets ended up skyrocketing and they couldn't afford it.
@@truehunger108 agreed but that wasn’t the FIA slowing down Group C cars, if anything they got faster under the 3.5 litre rules
@@GDH1981 it was never about slowing down, it was about the budgets skyrocketing.
@@truehunger108 literally in the first 10 seconds of the video the caption says the FIA slowed the Group C cars down. I’m challenging that statement of how the FIA slowed them down…
By adding 200 kgs of ballast to non 3.5L cars
That McLaren is f**king gorgeous
Just had a thought, would anyone else be interested in adding the Grand Prix de la Sarthe to the F1 calendar?
Everyone would love it, everyone but the FIA😂
La sarthe is FIA grade 2 and cannot go any higher without butchering the track for grade 1
Nah it wouldn't suit the cars and it would be dangerous.
I don't think the Jaguar would've accelerated that quickly from a standing start. It was designed for rolling starts only AFAIK.
Edit - I've since remembered this cars epic runs runs up the Goodwood hill where it looked quick enough from a standing start. I still think it'd be a lot slower than an F1 car though.
Wasn't it 4 wheel drive though?
@@amjan- Rear wheel drive only.
@@amjanain’t no way you just said that
Why did you test them at le mans ? The track is much more suited to the group C car even if the Mclaren won
it could be done with 50's F1 and sports cars
Group c was sacrificed to keep F1 alive basically! I still to this day swear on my life IMSA GT racing and Group C are the best series of racing ever!
I suppose this isn't much of a surprise. The Group C Jag eats the McLaren alive down the Mulsanne yet the McLaren leaves the Jag in the dust through the corners. Shock horror 😂
The straight line speed of the Group C cars was awesome though. I forget where I heard about it but didn't Pegueot build a car for Le Mans just to break the speed record down the Mulsanne straight? Gotta love the 80s, man. Excess to the max!
This F1 was also drived from Ayrton Senna
Gow did they chance tires
Por lo que ví en rectas y aceleración final el Jaguar de Grupo C es estratósferamente superior, pero en cambio en aceleración y enlace de curvas el Maclaren de F1 es mejor.
even other F1 cars weren't able to beat the mp4...
Just once I would like to see a comparison where the F1 car has to race by the rules of the OTHER car. No standing start, at night (boohoo if you don't have lights) and in cold temperatures. How about F1 against a rally car on a tarmac event?
😉
ua-cam.com/video/nsb1z27ruaY/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/1DYHP8sPBhs/v-deo.html
*HEADPHONES VOLUME WARNING*
ugh -w- some of these comments i can take it anymore, half these people werent even fucking alive lmao
is this ac?
I don’t think a sim is a particularly accurate way of demonstrating the differences. Too many variables from real track changes and environments
Rally and endurance and f1 greatest sport
Needs more NASCAR.
Assetto Corsa or rfactor?
Assetto Corsa
What's the point of putting one of the most notable villains of Motorsport into the thumbnail
Doesn't it look like the bad guy of the movie in the thumbnail? 🤣
@@THEWINDTUNNEL oh, you're right. My bad
F1 car lighter not faster, but makes the difference,now imagine the jag shedding 100 kg , it would increase its power and maybe tip its speed at 400 km /hour plus!
When I seen what F1 became, yep it was worth it lol
Group C was much slower, le mans in the 80s with no chicane layout heavily favours top speed, it's like if you had an F1 car now go against a Indy car at Indianapolis it would lose despite the fact it's much faster on a circuit.
And Senna goes through
F1 isn’t really designed for the likes of La Sarthe. Acceleration, braking and downforce is F1. This no chicane version is obviously going to play to the top speed of the Sportscar, it was designed for this kind of track. If F1 raced at Le Mans they’d come up with a very trimmed out car variant.
What if I told you Group C cars could battle to make the field at Silverstone
The Jaguar is not correctly SetUp
What's wrong?
If wec had 4 more races i would dump watching f1
Next year.
So group c is faster along motorways not race tracks
Stupid comparation that people still do. Diferent types of disciplines. Diferent weight, tyres, tune, reliability and rulesets. Even the way they do battle is very diferent. You can transform both type of cars into missile if rules allowed. Both pinnacle on their respective disciplines of racing.
Group C was so much better as all the shit stuff today !
Group C cars were the best car series ever. Nothing today matches that era of unbridled speed and iconic designs.
F1 is pure garbage for years now. You know who will win before the season starts and before every race.
Loved the GT1 era as well as the Oreca era with those Vipers, McClaren F1 LM, Porsche GT 1 etc.
it was all about bragging rights! imaginge if a manufacturer only did LeMans could brag that they built the fastest car in the world or in motorsports! F1 manufacturers who poured millions into the series would be livid! Why would they be in F1 if LeMans series could get away with that?
FIA had to protect its pinnacle of Motorsports series
Group C cars are faster, over an endurance distance.
It's hard to win a day long race when you blow up after 2 or 3 hours.
F1 more agile group C about 25mph higher top speed
You should have used the 85 or 86 F1 cars...
So basically... You wanted a 1988 Group C car to face against a 1985 F1 car instead of the contemporary 1988 F1 car? That doesn't seem very fair.
Adrian Millward did it ages ago mate , he's original your obviously not
Can you share the link? I can't find a comparison between a Group C and an F1 car on a Adrian Millward channel
comparisons, comparisons but whatever is the winner been decades since I'm not willing to watch any F1 race and that's what matters, ugly cars, ridiculous engine sound, dominance of few drivers/crews with no direct competitors, toys that you not see on the road... I've chosen WRC instead
F1 is the most boring and ugly Motorsports of all. I don't get why anyone would watch this. Whish we still had group c or more of gt.