Originally Posted by orthojoe
Technology has advanced so much that race cars of yesteryear can be outperformed by mundane street cars today. Modern track focused car will annihilate anything from 1969.
I remember seeing an interview of Walter rohl mentioning today's street cars are far more capable than the cars he used to race back in the day
It may be that race cars from yesteryear are not understood well. The car in my sig pic went 197 mph
at Spa in 1967
and it was the Grand Prix winner that year. Spa was 90% public roads at the time. No aero. Bias-ply tires, hard as rocks
A "mundane street car" from 2014 is not doing that even with new tire tech. Even if you put 10,000 hp to the mundane car's drive wheels it's not beating that old F1 racer on the public road track. Everything from ramp angles to bounce and rebound, to spring rate, to toe on all four corners to the number of clutches to the final drive and every gear split, to the brake bias and ride height were tuned on the F1 car for that track or could be tuned for it, as standard practice. In real practical use it was usually just the gear splits since teams showed up with not a lot of pit time to prep, but the new, mundane car just simply doesn't have the capability that old F1 cars has; if the new car can use it's whole capability then the old one can too
I agree that a new car built for track use can and will surpass that old car given the tech available today. But the idea that an old race car is beat by everything that's new is not very accurate. I have no doubt that a 1967 Gurney-Welslake Eage F1 would present a real challenge to a new Z/28 or ZL-1 or new Corvette pick-your-alphabet-soup on that public road track, or on a purpose built track. The lack of aero on the old car would be the worst mark against it...but then again by 1969, F1 cars had aero, and then the turbo era cars in F1 were right around the corner