Ironworks:
Thanks for the input. I think I would approach this in a direct manner.
Pro-Touring
[B]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pro-Touring is a style of classic muscle car with enhanced suspension components, brake system, drivetrain, and aesthetics, including many of the amenities of a new performance car.
These modified muscle cars have been developed to function as well as, or to surpass, the capabilities of the foremost modern performance vehicles.
Functioning requires the act of trying it to see if the attempt was successful or not.
Pro-Touring cars are built with an
emphasis on function and are intended to be driven.
(See Above)
====================================
Whether they are driven on the street, the race track, the drag strip, or through cones at an auto-cross is of indifference. Regardless of the location, pro-touring cars are destined to be driven.[1]
As I read this, apparently it is a car capable of doing any of the above. Unless you try,
and are successful, doing at
least two of the above, then it would
not[B/] be a Pro Touring Car.
1) Every legal Street Car can drive on the street, so it must be able to pass inspection and drive on the street.
2) Since (I think) we ALL agree that NOT ALL cars are Pro Touring Cars .....
then it must be able to
3) Be developed to function, ie. perform comfortably (Showing some kind of finness) at another activity/venue. The activities are listed race track, drag strip, through cones, auto cross, and the like. It doesn't say formaly, it doesn't say in competition, I think it could easily be said that it could stay ONLY on the street.
It just must perform as well as, or to surpass, the capabilities of the foremost modern performance vehicles.
A PT Car MUST prove it Runs, Can Run on the Street, and Perform at the minimum to a pretty high level.
It cannot be because you think it is PT.
It cannot be PT because it looks like it is PT.
It must Run AND be Street legal.
It must Run in such a way to establish it is/as PT.
That doesn't sound gray and nebulous, does it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironworks
First off, What does it really matter?
For some it doesn't matter, for others it does. If your selling it definitely matters, if you have bought PT parts, or a PT car and it doesn't perform than YOU do.
To say that a car is or is not anything because it has or doesn't have one thing is just Crazy.
The Definition seems to lean in favor of my statements as NOT being "Crazy".
What does it matter if the car has competed in an autocross. Lots of people buy guns and never shot them. Lots of people buy food they never eat.
It doesn't say it MUST compete, it does say it must PERFORM. (Fairly High)
Lots of people buy Gun and don't shoot them, TRUE. ALL manufacturers test fire Guns to make sure they work as intended. Otherwise, you might just have instead a, "Lock, Stock, and Barrel".
I have said that Pro-touring was the best thing that ever happened to amateur road racing. Lots of people have sold there super high end show car that they ran on the race course for race cars or built cars that are less show and more go because of this build style influencing them to try actual racing.
I agree 100%. I think it's been awesome for everyone!
Pro-Touring is nothing more then a build style.
I think the definition says it is more than a build style. (A static 69 Camaro with a big engine and lots of pricey go fast parts can ONLY be said it is in the "Style of" a PT car. A painting in the style of "Van Gogh", it not even close to a real, or proven "Van Gogh".
To most people I think it means you have taken a muscle car and put some parts that modernize the handling and style in a direction toward a race car. Some are modified far more then others. With usually some kind of modern power plant for improved power and efficiency.
It still must Perform to adhere to the specific definition.
But with out the Muscle car part in the definition you could lump Greg or Gwen's 33 into that pile as it is modernized with suspension that works better and has a modernized power plant.
I agree, I wouldn't throw their cars out either, I do think that part of the definition should be amended to Cars 25+ years old, then it would collect all the cars that are everything that seems to matter. Whether I like it or not since I didn't write the definition, I can only say '33's, P/U Truck's, Full Size 4 Door Cars etc. don't fall within the definition of a PT car.
I think that part should change, do you agree? Also, with 25+ y/o cars being the cut off there will always be a new supply of cars for people in the future. Isn't 25 years when the emission standards drop off for a lot of states?
But saying something has to be raced on track to be a Pro-Touring car seems wrong. It seems to me it would now be a race car. I'm sure that is how your insurance adjuster would see it.
It doesn't say it has to be raced on a track, it says, "it must perform as well as, or to surpass, the capabilities of the foremost modern performance vehicles." I doubt if you really brought your car up to much higher performance standards than it was, in all areas, you would probably get no fuss about it. (But to say that IS Presumptuous, I'm just guessing.)
Pro-Touring is an adjective not a noun.
|
This was a sticky one, I had to look it up. Evidently words ending in "ing", are pretty complicated. You decide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/-ing
Thanks again for the questions.
Ty