Can open - worms everywhere.
It's not a particularly tidy class, for either SCTA or ECTA. It was easier when sports cars were sports cars - two seats, two doors - but there were always questions.
I believe the GT class was intended for vehicles marketed as sports cars.
Example - stated earlier - the '65 GT350. Sold and marketed as a sports car. Official builder was Shelby, and it was sold as a two seater. They were Shelby Mustang GT 350's, not Ford Mustang GT 350's.
The Mk I Midget had a jump seat option. That ended in 1964 when they grew door handles and lost the Conestoga wagon/circus tent top arrangement. I opted for a '71, but I suspect if somebody made a stink about running a '63 Midget, an argument could be made that it needs to run in Coup/Sedan.
The Karman Ghia is another odd one - the convertible seats 2, the coupe seats 4 - technically.
MGB/MGB-GT, Jaguar XKE - same story. Even the Austin Healey 3000 was available as a 2+2. I would classify these as GT's because they are all based on 2 seat sports cars, not the other way around.
The 911? Those aren’t seats, those are luggage pads with retaining straps, but it has to run coupe?
I always wondered about the AMX, myself. American Motors advertised it and sold it as a sports car, clearly based on the Javelin, but the chassis was shortened.
I don't think a '57 Chevy business coupe could run GT - it had seating for three.
So did the '57 T-Bird.
The Geo Metro convertible is a two seater, but it runs coupe.
It's an odd class, and the rules have received so many bandages over the years, due in part to the different ways cars are made today, that there isn't a clear cut, obvious definition.
Joe says the Laguna is a GT.
I'm calling my Midget a GT, under the "comfortable, high-speed driving" clause.
Yup - it's a weird class.