What Is Pro Touring?

[tyoneal]

Originally Posted by GregWeld

Yep -- Have to agree (as distasteful as that is) with Charley... the name is Pro TOURING -- not Pro Racing... Touring means it has a lot of great attributes and is capable of being drivable - if not almost comfortable - on a longer drive.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Greg:

Thanks for the input:

"Pro TOURING -- not Pro Racing... Touring means it has a lot of great attributes and is capable of being drivable"

Grand Touring 1 cars, Grand Touring 2 cars, Grand Touring 3 cars, are hardly cars you would or could drive on the street successfully with any modicum of comfort, they are full blown race cars.

I believe the PT cars should be proven/experianced to actually doing both, otherwise what is the point of all the Roll Bars/Cages, High Speed Tires, Double adjustable shocks, 600 to 900 hp engines, the 13-14 inch, 4 and 6 pot disk brakes, 6-Speed Transmissions?

It would seem without ANY taste of a high performance experience, the cars would be:

1. A waste of a ton of money

2. Pro Touring cars would also fall under the "Pro Poser" title. The requirements I mentioned were very meanial. It is basically any experiance off public roads where one can experience some of the fruits of all their labors and money.

Otherwise, what is the point? One can build a car that looks cool for a heck of a lot less money.

Is that really too much to ask of a car being in the "Touring" Category?

The highways in Germany, the middle east, and Italy are probably more of a challenge than doing a 30 second autocross.

Again, I do appreaciate your comments. I am taking this position so that the thread can possibly shed some more depth into this part of the hobby.

Do you agree with any of the other points I mentioned? If not, please state your thoughts on the subject.

Thanks again.

Ty ONeal

[Revved]

While there will always be that 2% that purpose build their cars by any moniker for full competition, by saying that anyone who doesn't compete doesn't meet your standards misses the entire point of why we indulge this hobby. One the reasons I love what I do is the people I meet, the stories they tell, and the new stories we make together; the cars are just a medium. The cars are the reason that we come together. They are an extension of our passions for mechanical art an how we fulfill our innate need to build, improve, tinker, and create. I'm not a fan of lowriders and imports but I have to respect that they simply practice a different form of our art.

By your definition it also begs the question...Is someone a "Pro-poser" because they can afford to pay someone like me to build a car for them? No, they just have talents in other areas that allow them to indulge their their hobby in a different way. You are awfully presumptuous calling it a "waste of money" if the owner is enjoying his investment by his standards but not yours? Your hardline definition is actually escaping the intent of the question. While a Pro-Touring car is built with performance in goal, not using it for performance does not make it less of a Pro-Touring car. A bow and arrow is made to hunt and kill, but using it for target practice does not make it any less lethal. IMHO what makes it a Pro-Touring car is its ability to perform, and the enjoyment of the owner in the way that he chooses to use it.

The great thing I found while researching my definition was that I could always find an example of a car someone was building that didn't fit the "traditional definition." There is a thread on Lat-G with a guy building an older Volvo with an LS engine and beautiful metal work, there are Foxbodies with full chassis and TT engines, last OUSCI I attended in 2013 there was a C10 pickup that would outdrive most cars... point being is that by trying to put a hardline definition to what is notably the most pertinent form our our hobby that most of us will see in our lifetimes you lose the point of why we do it.

Originally Posted by tyoneal

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Greg:

Thanks for the input:

"Pro TOURING -- not Pro Racing... Touring means it has a lot of great attributes and is capable of being drivable"

Grand Touring 1 cars, Grand Touring 2 cars, Grand Touring 3 cars, are hardly cars you would or could drive on the street successfully with any modicum of comfort, they are full blown race cars.

I believe the PT cars should be proven/experianced to actually doing both, otherwise what is the point of all the Roll Bars/Cages, High Speed Tires, Double adjustable shocks, 600 to 900 hp engines, the 13-14 inch, 4 and 6 pot disk brakes, 6-Speed Transmissions?

It would seem without ANY taste of a high performance experience, the cars would be:

1. A waste of a ton of money

2. Pro Touring cars would also fall under the "Pro Poser" title. The requirements I mentioned were very meanial. It is basically any experiance off public roads where one can experience some of the fruits of all their labors and money.

Otherwise, what is the point? One can build a car that looks cool for a heck of a lot less money.

Is that really too much to ask of a car being in the "Touring" Category?

The highways in Germany, the middle east, and Italy are probably more of a challenge than doing a 30 second autocross.

Again, I do appreaciate your comments. I am taking this position so that the thread can possibly shed some more depth into this part of the hobby.

Do you agree with any of the other points I mentioned? If not, please state your thoughts on the subject.

Thanks again.

Ty ONeal

[tyoneal]

Revved:

Thanks for the comments.

Originally Posted by Revved

While there will always be that 2% that purpose build their cars by any moniker for full competition, by saying that anyone who doesn't compete doesn't meet your standards misses the entire point of why we indulge this hobby.

I didn't say compete only, I said a open track day, trip down the drag strip, open auto cross event etc. I kept it loose point being that you car should be able to drive in a spirited form at least once showing some suspension, and engine improvements

One the reasons I love what I do is the people I meet, the stories they tell, and the new stories we make together; the cars are just a medium.

I agree 100%! I was just trying to define the PT cars specifically.

The cars are the reason that we come together. They are an extension of our passions for mechanical art an how we fulfill our innate need to build, improve, tinker, and create. I'm not a fan of lowriders and imports but I have to respect that they simply practice a different form of our art.

[B]Again I agree 100% The friends and memories we make together are the gold, and 100%, the PT cars are a specific Art form. An American Art Form, even the Volvo as you have a Vintage shell and an specific American Performance Art form.

By your definition it also begs the question...Is someone a "Pro-poser" because they can afford to pay someone like me to build a car for them?

No, of course not. I am a person who has some non fixable body damage myself, and there are a number of things I cannot do anymore, and thank god for those who can make our dreams come true.

I do drive the hell out of my cars (Not abuse, just very spirited driving) for fun and learning about the limites of the specific parts and set up. It's a blast.

All I was including is someone who has explored, even briefly, the advances there cars have made.

They just have talents in other areas that allow them to indulge their their hobby in a different way.

I am one of them. A PT Car certainly doesn't have to be driven even at all, however the people who supply the parts we use have generally taken a lot of time to benifit our cars performance to their best efforts. I do not understand how one can have this working "Art" and not learn anything about it? I'm not encouraging anyone to race their cars, I'm encouraging people to explore their cars a little bit. That is it, I don't think that is very harsh. I may be wrong, but that is the chance I took when I tried to spur a deeper conversation in the thread.

You are awfully presumptuous calling it a "waste of money" if the owner is enjoying his investment by his standards but not yours?

As mentioned in other post, I think just about everyone on THIS site who spent a wad of cash on their car's suspension, engine, wheels and tires, brakes etc. in an effort to increase the performance of their car, and discovered no improvements whatsoever in performance, would be disappointed and would probably think they "wasted their money". If they wanted there car to just look cool they could do so for a heck of a lot less money. That may sound presumptuous, but as I have worded the above paragraph, and the people who it was addressed to, I do think many would be bummed out to a point they felt like they, "wasted their money". Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think most of us have so much money that it wouldn't bother us if this happened while pursueing a good PT car. I don't mean to come off argumentative, I am just stating a hypothesis, in an effort through conversation to see if it is true, and also learn something in the process.

Your hardline definition is actually escaping the intent of the question.

Please read my intent, I'm not trying to make anyone mad, just exploring the question that was asked at the begining of this thread. Asking specific questions, or taking a specific position nurtures good educational discussions. (Hopefully not Arguments)

I try and defend specific position, even if it is found in the end to be flawed. It fosters a deeper understanding of the Question, because it really does make a difference. If someone doesn't worry about an actual meaning, there is certainly not anything wrong with that, After all we are just a bunch of people with a specific passion, that seek the company of like minded people.

Here is the question:

"Just exactly, what is Pro Touring? Defining the term Pro Touring is a tricky one. It’s like trying to explain to a blind person what the color red looks like. You can explain it, but they still won’t really understand. Definitions of Pro Touring are broad, and range from person to person, forum to forum. Even the name itself varies; pro touring, Pro Touring, Pro-Touring, pro-touring, what is actually correct?"

I meant to create a definite outline to challenge the gray areas of the definition. There are many people who have what they say is a "PT Car" with just a set glass packs, and a set of 14 inch Crager SS wheels. NOT!

It takes a lot of work and money to create a successful PT car, more so than many of the other types of classec/old car styles. Since this is the case, I have made an effort through discussion to see if a cleaner definition of a PT car could be found.

If no one tries to create a specific definition, then I think we all lose some of the design efforts that someone puts into their cars. The Auction's seem to treat true "Pro Touring cars different. They are appreciated by many people as they are not easy to build. Who would of thought that good '69 Camaro PT car would sell for $100,000+ dollars.<OMG>
===========================
While a Pro-Touring car is built with performance as a goal, not using it for performance does not make it less of a Pro-Touring car. A bow and arrow is made to hunt and kill, but using it for target practice does not make it any less lethal. IMHO what makes it a Pro-Touring car is its ability to perform, and the enjoyment of the owner in the way that he chooses to use it.
===========================
For the sake of discussion (please don't get pissed) I think your comparison of the Bow and Arrow is incorrect. I want to take a stab at it.

A PT car is built to drive with performance as a goal, not using it for performance does not make it less of a Pro-Touring car.

How would you know if it was a successful performance increase without seeing if it truly performs as it should?

Doesn't a PT car HAVE to show a significant performance increase?

How would a normal person know how it performs without some "pseudo" spirited driving? (Even a quick trip around a vacant parking lot would tell you quite a lot about the car.)

Calling a car a PT Car without seeing if it truly embodies the characteristics of a PT Car, doesn't necessarily make it a PT Car. Only if it shows an increase in performance can it truly be called a PT Car.

Otherwise, the only thing you can say for sure is, I have a collection of cool looking parts. It may not even run but it looks cool.

The Bow and Arrow: The Bow is designed to propell an arrow in a straight line at a high velocity. The arrow is made to be propelled by a bow. Where the arrow goes is not material as to whether it is a real bow or arrow. The bow may not be capable of bending enough to propell the arrow, the string may not be up to the job etc. ect.

Until one takes the bow and arrow and proves it is a functioning properly, then you can't be sure if is a Replica (Movie Prop) or it is a real Bow and Arrow. (I know this is tedious, please excuse me I'm trying not to make something easily really a hassle.) I do appreciate the position and questions you have posed. They do may one think.

The great thing I found while researching my definition was that I could always find an example of a car someone was building that didn't fit the "traditional definition." There is a thread on Lat-G with a guy building an older Volvo with an LS engine and beautiful metal work, there are Foxbodies with full chassis and TT engines, last OUSCI I attended in 2013 there was a C10 pickup that would outdrive most cars... point being is that by trying to put a hardline definition to what is notably the most pertinent form our our hobby that most of us will see in our lifetimes you lose the point of why we do it.

Would the definition of a Grand Touring Car, (earlier post) except it must have a Vintage Body, be about 90% correct?

I really appreciate your well thought out questions and positions.

Again, I'm just trying to stimulate a deeper conversation. Please don't get offended, as nothing I wrote is ment to make anyone mad or get their feelings hurt, or anything else, this is just a debate/discussion and the better ones are challenging sometimes.

If I have offended anyone please write me an email, and I'll be happy to apologize. This site has been a great place to put my mind into when things have been tough, and I really appreciate the knowledge and friendship everyone has shown.

Long Live,

PT/Pt/Pro-Touring/Protouring/Pro Touring/protouring/pro touring/pro-touring????

Thanks,

Ty O'Neal

[Sieg]

Originally Posted by tyoneal

PT/Pt/Pro-Touring/Protouring/Pro Touring/protouring/pro touring/pro-touring????

Thanks,

Ty O'Neal

Hey!

You left out my category which I've been attempting to perfect for over 30 years now with limited success...........Pro Tinkering.

[tyoneal]

Sieg:

That is probably the truest statement I've heard.

Well done,

Ty
======================

Originally Posted by Sieg

Hey!

You left out my category which I've been attempting to perfect for over 30 years now with limited success...........Pro Tinkering.

[Panteracer]

Greg said a car that is modified
I don't think I have owned one
other than the wife's grocery getters
that hasn't been hot rodded

I was looking at 67 Gt 500 years back
that had a 100 mile perfect restoration

My 16 year old son at the time said dad
what are you going to do with it?
Kid was a lot smarter than me because he
knew I modified everything I owned

Panteracer

[ironworks]

First off, What does it really matter?

To say that a car is or is not anything because it has or doesn't have one thing is just 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.

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.

Pro-Touring is nothing more then a build style. 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.

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.

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.

Pro-Touring is an adjective not a noun.