All those tracks are non-technical power tracks, where the old school high powered/low downforce cars excel. You can't just pick and choose tracks based on the strengths of the F1 then claim the F1 is a superior car. It's like putting a Formula 1 car next to a top fuel dragster to see which gets down the quarter mile faster then say the dragster is a better car since it won that particular race.
Either your just grasping at straws or you simply don't understand. The F1 GTR is a completely different car than a current GT3. The old F1 excels at high speed tracks due to its power/weight and low downforce but on any tracks that require precise cornering its a no contest. Please re-watch my video as it clearly shows the F1 ahead on the straights but as soon as braking/cornering is involved the GT3 instantly makes up the time lost. On some tracks the F1 is faster, on others the GT3's are faster depending on the layout.
I took those track because those are the only tracks I could find in same configurations,but jarama,anderstorp are decently technical,if you don't mind if tracks are not in same configuration then these are the other qualifying laptimes from racing sports car.
Monza
5.8km Mclaren F1 GTR 1:43.045
5.773km Ferrari 458 italia 1:46.571
Paul Richard
5.813km Mclaren F1 GTR 1:53.270
5:791km Lamborghini Huracan GT3 1:56.638
Brands Hatch
4.184km Mclaren F1 GTR 1:22.110
3.916km Audi R8 LMS Ultra 1:23.269
If all the above are power tracks,then I am sorry we cannot compare them directly,but F1 GTR is slower even on power tracks in AC in leaderboard page,if you have brands hatch test it there.And remember F1 GTR is not the fastest GT1 car of its day F40,911 set much faster laptimes.
In AC F1 GTR monza is 1:48.944,MP4-12c GT3 is 1:45.510.That was the point I wanted to make,i.e F1 GTR is even slower on power track.
Regarding downforce figures F1 GTR 95 develops enough downforce to run at walls upside down in 100mph,read the motortrend
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/112_0004_2000_mclaren_f1_supercar/viewall.html
these are their words at that paragraph.
"Fast forward to Le Mans in the summer of 1995, where all seven of Murray's new F1 GTRs qualified for McLaren's debut in the classic enduro event. The conversion had been reluctantly approved by Dennis on a shoestring budget, resulting in a package that was basically a standard F1 stripped of trim and equipment, with rear wing, modified underfloor diffuser, side skirts, rollcage, and racing instruments. It was 90 kilograms (200 pounds) lighter than the road car, slightly down on power (600 horsepower against 627), but massively up on torque (527 pound-feet against 479), and it created so much downforce it could run along the ceiling at 100 mph."
Do you know the downforce figures for GT3 car,I have seen a video in which an engineer says a nissan nismo gt3 produces 1000kg downforce at 120mph.
Those times are, for all intents and purposes, identical and ambient temperatures could easily affect them a second one way or the other.
No, you don't assume it to be ideal. You either find out the actual weather or you throw out the data point as unreliable.
The Nurb has at least 4 long, high speed sections, where the superior power and top end of the Group C cars would come into play, which could be the reason for the discrepancy. We'd also need to know the weather conditions when that 6:16 was set, as it's possible it may have been unusually warm that day leading to higher grip track conditions.
Okay,but have a look at other Group C laptimes,it is significantly faster than GT3 car.Okay it was not fair of me to assume it to be ideal,I will try to find out the weather condition.No,in hot weather laptimes will be slower than ideal condition.topgear reduces 2s for comparing lap time with ideal condition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_test_track#Time_deductions
Now it may not have anything to do with this topic but it is to show that laps during hot weather are slightly slower than ideal conditions
Major props to that F1 GTR! That old timer is right there with the newer machines.
