There were many reasons Group C became so popular. Speeds of up to 400 km/h only came at the end and were only achieved on two occasions. We knew how fast they were but figures for top speeds didn't matter much. That's a recent internet phenomenon. Most people these days would have little to no idea of what it was like when Group C was introduced. First of all, everyone loved the idea of a "big banger" sports prototype series and we hadn't seen anything like them since the days of the Porsche 917 and Ferrari 512. The gap in between had mostly been occupied by production-based racers, like the slightly insane Porsche 935/78. When the Porsche 956 first appeared in 1982, it was like we had been transported back to those heady days of the early 1970s. It looked fast, it sounded great and it spawned the development of an absolute plethora of new types, some based on the old Group 5 cars like Porsche 936. But lots of manufacturers, like Lancia, Peugeot, Lola, March, Ford, Toyota, Sauber (BMW powered) and Rondeau built new cars for Group C or adapted older ones. Later once Mazda (in C2), Jaguar, Aston Martin, Nissan and Spice. With all those different shapes and colours and all those different engine notes, it was impossible not to like them. And yes, they were fast. This video unfortunately spends too much time on top speeds and not enough time explaining how Group C worked and why, for example, there were no cars of 1,000 hp. Group C threw the whole thing back on the engine manufacturers. They had to develop cars that could squeeze every joule of energy from a single drop of fuel and that every drop be burnt. The greatest amount of power with the lowest fuel burn. A fuel economy formula. And it produced the greatest racing series of my lifetime.
Now that video brought back some great memories. I remember watching those cars at Le Man on TV. Some I saw at IMSA races here in the US. I love all the sounds those cars made. You could tell which car was coming by the sound of the engine. These days with the electric cars... Aw never mind.
Times are changing, everything on wheels is going to sound like a vacuum cleaner passing by. To me its very sad. Thats why I started making these videos, to bring back some memories and show people what motorsport used to be all about...
@@JaPsGraph I think there will be separate series that only run petrol. The green agenda might even cause a spit in F1 similar to the Indycar/CART spit in the US. Red Bull won't want all electric. They will form their own series and bring half the teams with them
@@JaPsGraph Glad you are making these videos. I did research on the porsche 956 for two of my own videos w/written commentary and through it grew a deep love for this pretty car AND her designer/creator.
i gotta say i love the 787/767 but for me the ultimate group c car was the sauber c9, i always get goosebumps when i hear this thing and the way it looks is just so typical mercedes style "silberpfeil" i love it
I would say the 956/962..... The car that was so dominative for years to then actually be Banned. And then still win Le Mans after it was banned under a loop hole...... The 787b is very overhyped won 1 race out of 22.... And that le mans win was pure luck........ overhyped by the "jdm yo" fanboys........
@@MiguelGarcia-vj7oo they banned it, thats why it was hyped. Because the other cars would brake down while the 787 didn't Look up donut media on the 787b. I like all cars jdm, european and american. Respect all builds
I know this video is a year old now, but I just wanted to say that each and every one of these engines have an amazing soundtrack, unique to their respective powerplants... But all amazing...
I appreciate the feedback. I spend quite some time going through different footage available on the internet always trying to find what fits best. If you want to see even more of the demonstrations you will find links for all of them in the video description. :)
I just watched Jochen Mass in a 962 trying to catch the Patrese Lancia at Spa. The Lancia is lightning quick away at the chicanes (without cam equipment). Thankyou for the insight and my points go to the vicious C9. She reminds me of the old GT40 girls in many respects.
The 956 and 962 were the best Group C cars of all. Just look at their records. They will never have the cult following of the others but they won more races than pretty much all the others combined, including six wins at Le Mans.
@@newttrz Dude fr, like the 787B is actual garbage - it was slow and never up-to-pace with any of the other cars. People praise it for its reliability, when the most unreliable cars (Mercedes C291 and early Peugeot 905s) ended up becoming more successful by a long shot.
They couldnt keep up in the imsa series but they were ancient at that time. the true best prototype of all time the gurney aar eagle mk3, it took nearly 30 years to beat its lap record's. It wasnt a lemans spec car and wasnt geared for it but any other track they were a sure win. So much so it killed protype cars and sportscar started the next year
The 962 was the IMSA version. After drivers suffered severe leg injuries in Indy cars in the early 1980's, various sanctioning bodies changed the rules mandating the the drivers feet be behind the center line of the front wheels. Porsche 956s and 962s were known for being "flexi-fliers". Some speculate that Palmer survived his crash at Spa while Bellof did not because Palmer was driving a non factory 956 with an aluminum honeycomb chassis.
All thenoisecame out of one port on the right hand side of the Mazda. On Sunday morning at Le Mans after nearly no sleep, it was excruciating. We used to wait for it and know we'd suffer! Only the Matra v12 F1 came close.
The Sauber C9 and Porsche 962C are my favorite Group C cars in Assetto Corsa, although its kind of hard to beat the sound of that Lancia/Ferrari V8 or 787B
Apparently this guy doesn't like Porsche at all. Never mentioned not even one Le Mans victory. And they have 19 of them !!! Most won with the 956 and 962.
Nice video, what a soundtrack! Perhaps you could mention that the 3.5 litre Peugeot & Toyota were really built to a different formula than the Mercs, Jags, Porches etc that preceded them.
Thank you very much I appreciate it. I always felt the same, could never find videos explaining the motorsport classes I loved most. This channel was created so enthusiasts alike can watch videos for the purpose of knowledge and entertainment.
Rotary engines can be very reliable. In fact the reliability of the 787 is what won for Mazda. Wasnt the fastest car but the most reliable by far. They took the engine apart after LeMan and descovered it could go run another 24 hours before a rebuild was needed. Rotary engines like high rpm they dont like low revs like city driving carbon builds up. Most people are un aware of that and how effective an Italian tune up can be on a rotary.
I went to the Long Beach Grand Prix a few weeks ago only because they had the Group C IMSA GTP cars there. They only did a short practice and qualifying and a 20 min race. Obviously the cars were tuned down and not being pushed (unfortunately) but it was still more entertaining than Indy. They had the Mazda 787B and RX-792P (my favorite), the Toyota Eagle MkIII, Porsche 962, Jaguar XJR-9. God I wish these were still racing today. The current IMSA cars look like they rolled off an assembly line... and though they sound pretty good, they sound exactly the same. It's insane to me that Formula 1 and other categories are loosing the great noise of the engines. I understand they want to go green but from an entertainment and race car enthusiast standpoint, it's fucking sad. There should be at least 1 or 2 categories that conserve historic, more pure racing. Loud combustion engines, manual gear box, no computers, simpler aero, no team orders or #2 drivers etc.
Wow that sounds like a really cool experience. I agree motorsport should also be about the noise gotta hear the rummbles, but nowadays you alrerady see some major companies dropping out of motorsports or only racing electric :(
The IMSA GTP Gurney Mk 3 Eagle was spectacular, but it ran the competition off. The next generation WSC Ferrari 333 SP was dynamic in its sound. When Jaguar ran a Bud Light sponsored prototype (driven by Davy Jones) which skirted the IMSA rules, but was very light and fast, does anyone know what it was? Group C? It wasn't the normal GTP Jaguar. Dan Gurney called it a "Formula One car with a shell on it."
@@c2jones imsa didnt have new rules yet at that time. only group c was getting a new rules package with the NA 3.5l only engines. chassis wise everything still stayed the same and imsa just allowed those cars in too, even with the 750kg weight only
I would absolutely agree. Much more interesting concepts were made in my opinion, and it sounded better. But that is a topic that many can debate about :)
Looking at the output of the Peugeot engine…if it could do 1000km at 700bhp, it’s surprising it couldn’t reliably do a Grand Prix distance in a McLaren at 750bhp…
They really push these engines to the limit. Im sure they often had issues. I guess when the engine is at its peak adding 50 more HP is going to make it suffer considerably. It was originally at 641 so overall its more than a 100HP increase...
Forced into a 3.5 litre formula with F1 engines which the manufacturers weren't particularly interested in and died the death unfortunately. GpC was a wonderful time to be watching sports cars while it lasted
@@ianpegge9967 And the one behind this forced move was no one else than Bernie Ecclestone, who wanted Jaguar, Mercedes and Porsche to step into "his" F1, so he put pressure on the FIA to change the rules for Group C. I still think that's one of the crappiest things old Bernie has ever done.
@@tjroelsma and god forbid that they might also be quicker than F1 cars on some circuits. Especially in qualifying. I doubt Bernie would tolerate that.
@@ianpegge9967 Yes, "good old" Bernie certainly wanted to make sure that F1 was "the pinnacle" of motorsport and Group C being as fast and on some tracks even faster than F1 wouldn't have sat too well with him. But his main reason would have been even more simple: money. If he could destroy Group C and Jaguar, Mercedes and Porsche would want to stay racing, they would have to enter F1.
The explanation for this is rather poorly understood, as evidenced by most of the answers here. But money was, indeed a factor. By the end of the 1980s, Group C was costing as much as F1 but without the same number of races, meaning that sponsors got less value for their money than they did in F1 and the amount of money teams could access was consequently less. Rather than expanding, the series was shrinking. Instead of battles between two or three different teams, the series was usually dominated by one team in any given year. Team mangers realised that they could actually do at least as well for their money in F1 so some, like Jaguar, Toyota and Mercedes, made the move. The switch to 3.5 litre engines was intended to save money. So, in fact, there’s not really very much credence to the story that it was a TV rights conspiracy or Bernie Ecclestone or the FIA-Ferrari plot you so often get. I don’t remember there ever being more than ten races in a season so there wasn’t a lot of competition with F1 anyway. The idea that Ecclestone ever had that much clout in the FIA makes no sense. His organisation, FOCA, had been battling the FIA and FISA for years and they were sworn enemies. If Bernie managed to convince them then there must have been some recognition on the FIA side as well.
The most successful would be the Porsche 956 (having run for a long time as well as having more money to spend compared to its competitors). The fastest would be the Peugeot 905b, and to justify, in all of the races it took place in (but one, of which the lap record was held by a Jaguar XJ-14) it managed to set new lap records that would take years and even DECADES to beat (a famous example is its Le Mans qualifying lap in 1992 which was a 3:21 minute run, which was beaten 25 YEARS LATER in 2017 by a Ts050)!
Thank you both very much. I stand by what Captain Barbosa said, he made great points. I would like to add that the answer of course depends on what era you're looking at. But the 25 year gap is very impressive :)
@@captainbarbossa5201The rule set at Le Mans was the main reason for the longevity of the lap records, the impressive 905 evo1 lap at Le Mans in 1992 was 6 seconds faster than Mark Blundell's Nissan lap (with the broken wastegate) that everyone raves about, which puts things in perspective. The Courage prototypes pole lap was about 30 seconds slower than the 905b the year before because of the restrictions and push for GT cars to be the focus of attention. The ACO and Le Mans has always had certain lap times in mind when it sets the rules of course.
You were talking about the 787 and 787b, then showed the 767 video. You also said the 962 came with a 3.2 flat 6, while it also came with a 2.8 and 3.0, the 3.0 L engine was the most common of those. And at the end, you were talking about the Sauber C9, but showed the video of it's successor, Sauber C11. Otherwise, good job.
I appreciate the feedback very much. Thank you, I was unaware about the 767 video, I believe the channel that I got it from stated it was a 787. About the 962, I read that it came with various engines like you said, but i decided to include the best specification. The C9 is the same situation as the 787, I am sorry about that. Is there anything else that you would like to comment on? Feel free to check out more videos, as I said, any feedback is very appreciated.
930 hp for the Mazda is not true. There is no way it could have ever raced with that output for two reasons. First of all, it could never have been economical enough to run at that kind of power level and second because the oil seals were poor enough as it was.
@@bookle5829 You missed it. The Mazda could never have raced with that power because the fuel consumption simply wouldn't work. There's no "if" about it. Furthermore, I can see no evidence that it had anything to do with reliability. It was done purely to meet fuel restrictions. That's how Group C worked. The amount of power it might or might not have produced is unimportant. Fuel economy was important.
@@thethirdman225 You did mention oil seals. So it's also a reliable issue. Also do you mean it can't race with that power or it can't reach that power? The video said it can, it's just not practical to do for the entire day.
Sorry, but this is quite lame to talking about the Porsche 956 and 962 in the shortest time of all these cars in this video, because 956/962 were the absolute kings of the Group C racing era! These Porsches dominated Group C in a way, like no other racing cars before and after them a whole series. Period! Talking about 956 and 962 being "too fast and dangerous" is quite idiotic, dude! Every car in the Group C era had a tremendous top speed capability. The Porsche 956 and 962 literally dominated the whole 1980's endurance racing era, and even in 1994 another LeMans victory happened for Porsche with the Dauer-Porsche 962! In some years of the 1980', the first 8-10 finishing racing cars at LeMans were Porsche 956, 962 and some 911 derivatives from lower classes.
There were many reasons Group C became so popular. Speeds of up to 400 km/h only came at the end and were only achieved on two occasions. We knew how fast they were but figures for top speeds didn't matter much. That's a recent internet phenomenon. Most people these days would have little to no idea of what it was like when Group C was introduced. First of all, everyone loved the idea of a "big banger" sports prototype series and we hadn't seen anything like them since the days of the Porsche 917 and Ferrari 512. The gap in between had mostly been occupied by production-based racers, like the slightly insane Porsche 935/78. When the Porsche 956 first appeared in 1982, it was like we had been transported back to those heady days of the early 1970s. It looked fast, it sounded great and it spawned the development of an absolute plethora of new types, some based on the old Group 5 cars like Porsche 936. But lots of manufacturers, like Lancia, Peugeot, Lola, March, Ford, Toyota, Sauber (BMW powered) and Rondeau built new cars for Group C or adapted older ones. Later once Mazda (in C2), Jaguar, Aston Martin, Nissan and Spice.
With all those different shapes and colours and all those different engine notes, it was impossible not to like them. And yes, they were fast.
This video unfortunately spends too much time on top speeds and not enough time explaining how Group C worked and why, for example, there were no cars of 1,000 hp. Group C threw the whole thing back on the engine manufacturers. They had to develop cars that could squeeze every joule of energy from a single drop of fuel and that every drop be burnt. The greatest amount of power with the lowest fuel burn. A fuel economy formula. And it produced the greatest racing series of my lifetime.
Well said
The 936 was a Group 6 car.
@@geoffsokoll-oh1gq It was also raced as a Group C.
That Mercedes C9 and C 11 were savage in the noise area, fabulous drivers in every car...as were most drivers in the Group C1/C2 Teams
Now that video brought back some great memories. I remember watching those cars at Le Man on TV. Some I saw at IMSA races here in the US. I love all the sounds those cars made. You could tell which car was coming by the sound of the engine. These days with the electric cars... Aw never mind.
Times are changing, everything on wheels is going to sound like a vacuum cleaner passing by. To me its very sad. Thats why I started making these videos, to bring back some memories and show people what motorsport used to be all about...
@@JaPsGraph I think there will be separate series that only run petrol. The green agenda might even cause a spit in F1 similar to the Indycar/CART spit in the US. Red Bull won't want all electric. They will form their own series and bring half the teams with them
@@JaPsGraph Glad you are making these videos. I did research on the porsche 956 for two of my own videos w/written commentary and through it grew a deep love for this pretty car AND her designer/creator.
i gotta say i love the 787/767 but for me the ultimate group c car was the sauber c9, i always get goosebumps when i hear this thing and the way it looks is just so typical mercedes style "silberpfeil" i love it
They are all unique and special, a sight to behold :)
I would say the 956/962..... The car that was so dominative for years to then actually be Banned. And then still win Le Mans after it was banned under a loop hole...... The 787b is very overhyped won 1 race out of 22.... And that le mans win was pure luck........ overhyped by the "jdm yo" fanboys........
@@MiguelGarcia-vj7oo they banned it, thats why it was hyped. Because the other cars would brake down while the 787 didn't
Look up donut media on the 787b.
I like all cars jdm, european and american.
Respect all builds
@@MiguelGarcia-vj7oo only thing 787b was good at was being fuel efficient C11, 956/962 and XJR-9 were far superior
These were the true titans of Motorsport. I miss these cars so much!
I know this video is a year old now, but I just wanted to say that each and every one of these engines have an amazing soundtrack, unique to their respective powerplants... But all amazing...
I appreciate the feedback. I spend quite some time going through different footage available on the internet always trying to find what fits best. If you want to see even more of the demonstrations you will find links for all of them in the video description. :)
I just watched Jochen Mass in a 962 trying to catch the Patrese Lancia at Spa. The Lancia is lightning quick away at the chicanes (without cam equipment). Thankyou for the insight and my points go to the vicious C9. She reminds me of the old GT40 girls in many respects.
The 956 and 962 were the best Group C cars of all. Just look at their records. They will never have the cult following of the others but they won more races than pretty much all the others combined, including six wins at Le Mans.
Granted they raced for the longest time, whereas some cars only raced for one year (take the god-awful 787b for example).
@@captainbarbossa5201 i hate how the cringe JDM medias overhype that shit and make people think that it got banned for being "quick" 🤣
@@newttrz Dude fr, like the 787B is actual garbage - it was slow and never up-to-pace with any of the other cars. People praise it for its reliability, when the most unreliable cars (Mercedes C291 and early Peugeot 905s) ended up becoming more successful by a long shot.
They couldnt keep up in the imsa series but they were ancient at that time. the true best prototype of all time the gurney aar eagle mk3, it took nearly 30 years to beat its lap record's. It wasnt a lemans spec car and wasnt geared for it but any other track they were a sure win. So much so it killed protype cars and sportscar started the next year
@@captainbarbossa5201 The earlier Lola Mazdas did quite well, without any extra help from rule makers. I think that was only a 13B engine though.
The 962 was the IMSA version. After drivers suffered severe leg injuries in Indy cars in the early 1980's, various sanctioning bodies changed the rules mandating the the drivers feet be behind the center line of the front wheels. Porsche 956s and 962s were known for being "flexi-fliers". Some speculate that Palmer survived his crash at Spa while Bellof did not because Palmer was driving a non factory 956 with an aluminum honeycomb chassis.
Wish Group C was still around.
All thenoisecame out of one port on the right hand side of the Mazda. On Sunday morning at Le Mans after nearly no sleep, it was excruciating. We used to wait for it and know we'd suffer! Only the Matra v12 F1 came close.
The Sauber C9 and Porsche 962C are my favorite Group C cars in Assetto Corsa, although its kind of hard to beat the sound of that Lancia/Ferrari V8 or 787B
Apparently this guy doesn't like Porsche at all. Never mentioned not even one Le Mans victory. And they have 19 of them !!! Most won with the 956 and 962.
I can’t thank you enough for providing the video links in the description
No need to thank me, I do it for you and myself :)
Nice video, what a soundtrack! Perhaps you could mention that the 3.5 litre Peugeot & Toyota were really built to a different formula than the Mercs, Jags, Porches etc that preceded them.
Great video man
Fantastic video. Been looking for some in depth Group C content. Subbed :)
Thank you very much I appreciate it. I always felt the same, could never find videos explaining the motorsport classes I loved most. This channel was created so enthusiasts alike can watch videos for the purpose of knowledge and entertainment.
@@JaPsGraph we appreciate the extent you're going to!! Keep up the great work bud :)
Rotary engines can be very reliable. In fact the reliability of the 787 is what won for Mazda. Wasnt the fastest car but the most reliable by far. They took the engine apart after LeMan and descovered it could go run another 24 hours before a rebuild was needed. Rotary engines like high rpm they dont like low revs like city driving carbon builds up. Most people are un aware of that and how effective an Italian tune up can be on a rotary.
I went to the Long Beach Grand Prix a few weeks ago only because they had the Group C IMSA GTP cars there. They only did a short practice and qualifying and a 20 min race. Obviously the cars were tuned down and not being pushed (unfortunately) but it was still more entertaining than Indy. They had the Mazda 787B and RX-792P (my favorite), the Toyota Eagle MkIII, Porsche 962, Jaguar XJR-9. God I wish these were still racing today. The current IMSA cars look like they rolled off an assembly line... and though they sound pretty good, they sound exactly the same. It's insane to me that Formula 1 and other categories are loosing the great noise of the engines. I understand they want to go green but from an entertainment and race car enthusiast standpoint, it's fucking sad. There should be at least 1 or 2 categories that conserve historic, more pure racing. Loud combustion engines, manual gear box, no computers, simpler aero, no team orders or #2 drivers etc.
Wow that sounds like a really cool experience. I agree motorsport should also be about the noise gotta hear the rummbles, but nowadays you alrerady see some major companies dropping out of motorsports or only racing electric :(
The video of the C9 at the end was actually the C11. Nice video
Indeed you are right, I was misled by the source. Thank you for the feedback :)
another great one
Thank you very much :)
The IMSA GTP Gurney Mk 3 Eagle was spectacular, but it ran the competition off. The next generation WSC Ferrari 333 SP was dynamic in its sound.
When Jaguar ran a Bud Light sponsored prototype (driven by Davy Jones) which skirted the IMSA rules, but was very light and fast, does anyone know what it was? Group C? It wasn't the normal GTP Jaguar. Dan Gurney called it a "Formula One car with a shell on it."
Maybe the XJR-14? That one was in the Bud Light livery, driven by Davy Jones. That was still Group C, 1992.
it was a c1 car under the new 3.5l engines rules
@@JaPsGraph
That sounds right. Thank you.
@@blankfiile
The new IMSA rules? Yes. The other teams had said that those rules allowed Group C cars with lighter weight, etc.
@@c2jones imsa didnt have new rules yet at that time. only group c was getting a new rules package with the NA 3.5l only engines. chassis wise everything still stayed the same and imsa just allowed those cars in too, even with the 750kg weight only
Man the Sauber just sound so bad ass, like a villain.
Sure does hahah, haunting the competition :)
boost your volume
I love this cars
The coolest ones :)
@10:02 @10:11 Happy turbo noises!😁
I can barely hear you, there's gotta be some kinda audio issue. doesnt seem to be on my end, I wanna like the video so badly,
Group C was way better than F1.
In my opinion.
I would absolutely agree. Much more interesting concepts were made in my opinion, and it sounded better. But that is a topic that many can debate about :)
Group C is way better then any modern racing too. GT3 cars? Joke
Does anyone remember Can Am and the 917 Porsche and 512 Ferrari? Monsters ahead of their time.
@@c2jones :.sure do.
@@c2jones best motorsports in order
Group C
F1 (v12, v10 era)
Group B
DTM
JGTC
STCC/BTCC
and so on :D
For me, the best group c car is Minolta Toyota 88-cv
Interesting choice, looking at the specs it was quite a fighter :)
nice content
Thank you very much, I appreciate it :)
Looking at the output of the Peugeot engine…if it could do 1000km at 700bhp, it’s surprising it couldn’t reliably do a Grand Prix distance in a McLaren at 750bhp…
They really push these engines to the limit. Im sure they often had issues. I guess when the engine is at its peak adding 50 more HP is going to make it suffer considerably. It was originally at 641 so overall its more than a 100HP increase...
Excellent video and cool channel topic. What actually happened to the group C class ?
Forced into a 3.5 litre formula with F1 engines which the manufacturers weren't particularly interested in and died the death unfortunately. GpC was a wonderful time to be watching sports cars while it lasted
@@ianpegge9967 And the one behind this forced move was no one else than Bernie Ecclestone, who wanted Jaguar, Mercedes and Porsche to step into "his" F1, so he put pressure on the FIA to change the rules for Group C. I still think that's one of the crappiest things old Bernie has ever done.
@@tjroelsma and god forbid that they might also be quicker than F1 cars on some circuits. Especially in qualifying. I doubt Bernie would tolerate that.
@@ianpegge9967 Yes, "good old" Bernie certainly wanted to make sure that F1 was "the pinnacle" of motorsport and Group C being as fast and on some tracks even faster than F1 wouldn't have sat too well with him.
But his main reason would have been even more simple: money. If he could destroy Group C and Jaguar, Mercedes and Porsche would want to stay racing, they would have to enter F1.
The explanation for this is rather poorly understood, as evidenced by most of the answers here. But money was, indeed a factor.
By the end of the 1980s, Group C was costing as much as F1 but without the same number of races, meaning that sponsors got less value for their money than they did in F1 and the amount of money teams could access was consequently less. Rather than expanding, the series was shrinking. Instead of battles between two or three different teams, the series was usually dominated by one team in any given year.
Team mangers realised that they could actually do at least as well for their money in F1 so some, like Jaguar, Toyota and Mercedes, made the move.
The switch to 3.5 litre engines was intended to save money.
So, in fact, there’s not really very much credence to the story that it was a TV rights conspiracy or Bernie Ecclestone or the FIA-Ferrari plot you so often get. I don’t remember there ever being more than ten races in a season so there wasn’t a lot of competition with F1 anyway. The idea that Ecclestone ever had that much clout in the FIA makes no sense. His organisation, FOCA, had been battling the FIA and FISA for years and they were sworn enemies. If Bernie managed to convince them then there must have been some recognition on the FIA side as well.
Question What was the most successful and fastest car (lap times like monza, Nordschleife, le mans blah blah) from group C ? (Good Vid)
The most successful would be the Porsche 956 (having run for a long time as well as having more money to spend compared to its competitors). The fastest would be the Peugeot 905b, and to justify, in all of the races it took place in (but one, of which the lap record was held by a Jaguar XJ-14) it managed to set new lap records that would take years and even DECADES to beat (a famous example is its Le Mans qualifying lap in 1992 which was a 3:21 minute run, which was beaten 25 YEARS LATER in 2017 by a Ts050)!
Thank you both very much. I stand by what Captain Barbosa said, he made great points. I would like to add that the answer of course depends on what era you're looking at. But the 25 year gap is very impressive :)
@@JaPsGraph Very true about which era you compare it to.
@@captainbarbossa5201The rule set at Le Mans was the main reason for the longevity of the lap records, the impressive 905 evo1 lap at Le Mans in 1992 was 6 seconds faster than Mark Blundell's Nissan lap (with the broken wastegate) that everyone raves about, which puts things in perspective. The Courage prototypes pole lap was about 30 seconds slower than the 905b the year before because of the restrictions and push for GT cars to be the focus of attention. The ACO and Le Mans has always had certain lap times in mind when it sets the rules of course.
You forgot one manufacturer NISSAN
Might get featured next time ;)
Sauber Mercedes video at the end its a C11, not a C9.
Indeed you are right, my mistake. The source of the video led me to believe it is a C9. Thank you for the feedback :)
Salut my friend super car super video subscribe subscribe.
You were talking about the 787 and 787b, then showed the 767 video. You also said the 962 came with a 3.2 flat 6, while it also came with a 2.8 and 3.0, the 3.0 L engine was the most common of those. And at the end, you were talking about the Sauber C9, but showed the video of it's successor, Sauber C11. Otherwise, good job.
I appreciate the feedback very much. Thank you, I was unaware about the 767 video, I believe the channel that I got it from stated it was a 787. About the 962, I read that it came with various engines like you said, but i decided to include the best specification. The C9 is the same situation as the 787, I am sorry about that. Is there anything else that you would like to comment on? Feel free to check out more videos, as I said, any feedback is very appreciated.
No Nissan? Geez
It will definitely be featured in the follow up :)
No Nissan?!
Could be in a future video ;)
930 hp for the Mazda is not true. There is no way it could have ever raced with that output for two reasons. First of all, it could never have been economical enough to run at that kind of power level and second because the oil seals were poor enough as it was.
He didn't say they raced with that power. He said it could reached that power if they raised the rev limiter.
@@bookle5829 You missed it. The Mazda could never have raced with that power because the fuel consumption simply wouldn't work. There's no "if" about it. Furthermore, I can see no evidence that it had anything to do with reliability. It was done purely to meet fuel restrictions. That's how Group C worked.
The amount of power it might or might not have produced is unimportant. Fuel economy was important.
@@thethirdman225 You did mention oil seals. So it's also a reliable issue. Also do you mean it can't race with that power or it can't reach that power? The video said it can, it's just not practical to do for the entire day.
@@bookle5829 I said nothing about practicality
@@thethirdman225 I'm talking about the video. What I'm trying to say is you've corrected nothing.
Sorry, but this is quite lame to talking about the Porsche 956 and 962 in the shortest time of all these cars in this video, because 956/962 were the absolute kings of the Group C racing era! These Porsches dominated Group C in a way, like no other racing cars before and after them a whole series. Period!
Talking about 956 and 962 being "too fast and dangerous" is quite idiotic, dude! Every car in the Group C era had a tremendous top speed capability.
The Porsche 956 and 962 literally dominated the whole 1980's endurance racing era, and even in 1994 another LeMans victory happened for Porsche with the Dauer-Porsche 962!
In some years of the 1980', the first 8-10 finishing racing cars at LeMans were Porsche 956, 962 and some 911 derivatives from lower classes.