James Warburton declares V8 Supercars the best motorsports ‘product on the planet’

[Alan52]

The relative status of Supercars and WEC might be a valid debating point if Brendan Hartley was looking to move to Supercars.The Stanaway situation is more comparable to a Supercar driver on the way out of the series looking for a pro role in Aus GT.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

So the point you have conveniently side stepped is that first it was a Sierra, then it was the GT-R, and if you did not have THAT car, you could not win a DAMN THING. Peter Brock showed up in a Sierra for god's sake.

John Bowe won almost as many races in 1992 as Mark Skaife did. And four manufacturers won races in the 1992 ATCC, so your statement there is plainly false.

If you bought a Sierra in 1987, you were still able to win races with it in 1992.

It was Brock's choice to run a Sierra. Had he not split with Holden, Brock and the HDT would still have been running Commodore's in 1989.

Originally Posted by Mixer

Group A was never a level playing field where anybody could turn up and hope to win anything.

Since when was Group A ever meant to be a "level playing field"?

It was a sporting contest, not a show as we have with Supercars these days.

Originally Posted by Mixer

Yeah.... OKAY

In 1989 CAMS announced that Group A was only guarenteed in Australia until the end of 1991... a whole year before a GTR was even debuted in the ATCC!!

Group A only got extended into 1992 because the rule-makers couldn't decide on a new formula in time.

How could Nissan and the GTR have been responsible for the end of Group A in Australia when it's demise had already been planned out before the first racing version had even seen a race track in Australia??

[Matt]

Originally Posted by one five five

John Bowe won almost as many races in 1992 as Mark Skaife did. And four manufacturers won races in the 1992 ATCC, so your statement there is plainly false.

If you bought a Sierra in 1987, you were still able to win races with it in 1992.

It was Brock's choice to run a Sierra. Had he not split with Holden, Brock and the HDT would still have been running Commodore's in 1989.



Since when was Group A ever meant to be a "level playing field"?

It was a sporting contest, not a show as we have with Supercars these days.



In 1989 CAMS announced that Group A was only guarenteed in Australia until the end of 1991... a whole year before a GTR was even debuted in the ATCC!!

Group A only got extended into 1992 because the rule-makers couldn't decide on a new formula in time.

How could Nissan and the GTR have been responsible for the end of Group A in Australia when it's demise had already been planned out before the first racing version had even seen a race track in Australia??

You're a broken record dude.

We get it, you don't like the current product. Thankfully there are plenty of other motorsport competitions you can watch instead.

[RedZedMikey]

Originally Posted by peckstar

Correct it does, the one driver that has an opportunity to race both

Notice SVG chooses to race V8s over Blancpain as well, we can discard that choice as well. the one driver that has a choice of both

Young Stanaway has the opportunity to choose either at the moment. His current choice is Sandown, but, as stated by him, if he does well at double points Le Mans, that position may be reversed.

SVG on the other hand may well have a contractual situation which only releases him for Blancpain when there is no conflict with V8SC. As such, he may not have an option to choose Sandown, rather an obligation.

Let's ask Mark Webber, WEC or V8SC ...

[mayhem]

We went down this track yesterday Mikey, I presented the same argument that couldnt be argued against but a bunch of posts have clearly been removed...

[Mixer]

I DO find it interesting that out of the couple of series Pascal Wehrlein may choose as profession, Supercars are up there with Indycar and DTM.

However I am not dumb enough to stretch that to an interpretation that Supercars are better than or equal to anything else.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Matt

We get it, you don't like the current product. Thankfully there are plenty of other motorsport competitions you can watch instead.

My posts here having to do with what I like or don't like (and i don't believe I have stated that i don't like the current product, criticism of certain aspects of something doesn't mean you don't like it, i have followed this championship for almost 40 years afterall)

I am just putting some facts out there to counter posts from another user who is trashing a set of old regulations for the sake of trying to justify his personal opinion of a set of current regulations.

[Mixer]

Sorry or bringing facts into the equation.

Group A had lots of diversity but was fundamentally completely flawed by rampant "creative" rule interpretation worldwide, and was utterly dominated by more and more expensive cars of one type, that became the only cars with a realistic chance of winning regularly.

Everybody hated it at the time, and I'm shocked so many people have such amazing rose-coloured glasses to look back on a time that was not that long ago.

I love seeing the old machines come out, but the 1992 Bathurst podium was a lightning rod for the public feeling at the time.

Nobody had an answer to the Nissan GT-R, and nobody was ever going to afford to build one. The arms race had reached its zenith. The way people talked about it at the time is exactly how people talk about 888 Commodores now, and the numbers of Sierras would not be out of order with the ratio of Commdores now, simply because at one time, you HAD to have one. So the notion that I am responding to was that Group A was a level playing field where anybody would turn up and have a chance of winning, which is absolute, complete tosh. Nissan motorsport at that time were testing almost every day of the week, and had a budget of $2m annually in 1990 dollars.

Any class that gave us the 240T, 190e Evolution, E30 M3 Evolution, not to mention the Walkinshaw plastic pig as well as the Sierra Cosworth and the GT-R has its place in history, but it isn't something to be held up as a bastion of fairness and equal opportunity. The truth is FAR from that.

We have more of an equal playing field now than then. The difference in car performance and driver ability is so much smaller now than then. I recall in '94 or so, Mark Skaife jumping into a privateer car and immediately going 2 seconds a lap quicker than the car's regular pilot. Now we have the whole field covered by ~1sec at certain places.

[peckstar]

Did you know that in 2016 VASC has had as many event winners as Group A had in its whole 8 years

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Everybody hated it at the time, and I'm shocked so many people have such amazing rose-coloured glasses to look back on a time that was not that long ago.

At what point did everyone hate it? I was certainly time for a change at the end of 1992 and everyone was in favour of a change (except probably Fred Gibson, Tony Longhurst & Frank Gardner)

Are you referring to the drivers/team owners, the fans, who?

Alot of the competitors certainly hated Group C when it was dropped though...

Originally Posted by Mixer

Nobody had an answer to the Nissan GT-R, and nobody was ever going to afford to build one. The arms race had reached its zenith. The way people talked about it at the time is exactly how people talk about 888 Commodores now, and the numbers of Sierras would not be out of order with the ratio of Commdores now, simply because at one time, you HAD to have one. So the notion that I am responding to was that Group A was a level playing field where anybody would turn up and have a chance of winning, which is absolute, complete tosh..

You seem to continually keep ignoring the 1992 ATCC where John Bowe arguably should have won the title in a Sierra! He had more poles than Skaife in a GTR, and won 6 races to Skaife's 7. He lost too many points with a bad start at Amaroo, blowing an engine at Symmons, being punted by Longhurst at Winton etc etc....

All the main manufacturers won races in 1992 as well... so it seems that year anybody serious certainly could turn up and have a chance of a win.

You also seem to have a misunderstanding of the Group A regs as a whole. The regulations were NEVER about having a level playing field, nor has anybody in this thread even claimed that Group A was a level playing field.

All anyone has claimed on here was that Supercars are a manufactured show, something they do well, they are not an out and out sport, which the Group A regs were much more closer to.

Originally Posted by Mixer

We have more of an equal playing field now than then. The difference in car performance and driver ability is so much smaller now than then. I recall in '94 or so, Mark Skaife jumping into a privateer car and immediately going 2 seconds a lap quicker than the car's regular pilot. Now we have the whole field covered by ~1sec at certain places.

Nobody has claimed in this thread that the "level-playing field" isn't better now.... to some of us that is the problem!

With the plethora of controlled parts, the micro-manufactureed rules that ensure the cars are so bloody similiar it may as well be a one-make series, the field being seperated by 1sec should be expected the way the rules are written currently! It would be a massive fail on the rule makers if it wasn't.

But the current regs are successful though, it keeps the cars close which makes a better "show" and keeps the "entertainment" levels up. It does make it much harder to take that seriously though as a proper sport, in my opinion of course.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by peckstar

Did you know that in 2016 VASC has had as many event winners as Group A had in its whole 8 years

Not true.

But what is true is that Group A had a wider variety of championship winning and Bathurst winning teams between 1985 and 1992 compared to the last eight years of V8 Supercar racing.

And that is not to take anything away from what is a very enjoyable series.

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by chavez

Not true.

.

totally true

well ive only counted championship round winners, same as now

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by peckstar

Did you know that in 2016 VASC has had as many event winners as Group A had in its whole 8 years

That's not surprising considering the races these days are better then they've ever been before.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Sorry or bringing facts into the equation.

Group A had lots of diversity but was fundamentally completely flawed by rampant "creative" rule interpretation worldwide, and was utterly dominated by more and more expensive cars of one type, that became the only cars with a realistic chance of winning regularly.

Everybody hated it at the time, and I'm shocked so many people have such amazing rose-coloured glasses to look back on a time that was not that long ago.

I love seeing the old machines come out, but the 1992 Bathurst podium was a lightning rod for the public feeling at the time.

Nobody had an answer to the Nissan GT-R, and nobody was ever going to afford to build one. The arms race had reached its zenith. The way people talked about it at the time is exactly how people talk about 888 Commodores now, and the numbers of Sierras would not be out of order with the ratio of Commdores now, simply because at one time, you HAD to have one. So the notion that I am responding to was that Group A was a level playing field where anybody would turn up and have a chance of winning, which is absolute, complete tosh. Nissan motorsport at that time were testing almost every day of the week, and had a budget of $2m annually in 1990 dollars.

Any class that gave us the 240T, 190e Evolution, E30 M3 Evolution, not to mention the Walkinshaw plastic pig as well as the Sierra Cosworth and the GT-R has its place in history, but it isn't something to be held up as a bastion of fairness and equal opportunity. The truth is FAR from that.

We have more of an equal playing field now than then. The difference in car performance and driver ability is so much smaller now than then. I recall in '94 or so, Mark Skaife jumping into a privateer car and immediately going 2 seconds a lap quicker than the car's regular pilot. Now we have the whole field covered by ~1sec at certain places.

Actually the fact that privateer or local importer backed Holden, Ford and BMW teams (for example DJR, Perkins Engineering and Frank Gardners team could build a car as faster or faster than the official factory teams probably suggests your analysis is wrong.

Was it expensive? Sure was.

Did one car dominate at times? Sure did. But most marques one at least one race each year.

Was it the greatest racing ever seen? Of course not but it did have some great races.

If anyone doubts me treat yourself to one of the many great DVD's from the Seven Magic Moments of Motorsport library.

I wonder if in 30 years time there will be a market for Classic V8 Supercar races?

[chavez]

Originally Posted by peckstar

totally true

well ive only counted championship round winners, same as now

Including the long distance races that were part of a separate championship or even stand alone the number is a little greater.

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by chavez

Including the long distance races that were part of a separate championship or even stand alone the number is a little greater.

but they werent part of the championship.

thus my comment still stands

many drivers have won rounds this year as in the whole 8 years of group A - 9

understand i really dont care about group a/ v8 argument, enjoyed them both, went to them both

[chavez]

Originally Posted by peckstar

enjoyed them both, went to them both

I can 100% agree with that.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Sorry for bringing facts into the equation.

Everybody hated it at the time, and I'm shocked so many people have such amazing rose-coloured glasses to look back on a time that was not that long ago.

I would suggest this isnt a fact?

Originally Posted by Mixer

Group A had lots of diversity

And here is the answer to why Group A is popular - especially when compared to today's silhouette product

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

And here is the answer to why Group A is popular - especially when compared to today's silhouette product

history shows that v8 supercars is more popular than group A

clearly diversity is not what fans want.

just some fans

[racer69]

Originally Posted by one five five

You seem to continually keep ignoring the 1992 ATCC where John Bowe arguably should have won the title in a Sierra! He had more poles than Skaife in a GTR, and won 6 races to Skaife's 7. He lost too many points with a bad start at Amaroo, blowing an engine at Symmons, being punted by Longhurst at Winton etc etc....

All the main manufacturers won races in 1992 as well... so it seems that year anybody serious certainly could turn up and have a chance of a win.

You also seem to have a misunderstanding of the Group A regs as a whole. The regulations were NEVER about having a level playing field, nor has anybody in this thread even claimed that Group A was a level playing field.

All anyone has claimed on here was that Supercars are a manufactured show, something they do well, they are not an out and out sport, which the Group A regs were much more closer to.

I agree with alot of what you are saying, but the 1992 ATCC wasn't run to "pure" Group A regulations, the GTRs were heavily penalised, the Sierra's and Commodore's were given 7500rpm rev limits, and weights were adjusted a fair bit for every car, plus the whole event formats that year were adjusted to produce entertainment first.... when the top qualifier had to draw a random number & then win a dash to be able to start from pole position, the emphasis there was obviously on creating a show.

DTM used Group A regs as their base for the 1984-1992 championship's but played with the formula (creating a one-class series) with air restrictors, weight penalties and so on.

1992 in the ATCC produced great racing though that season, plenty of great racing that season (though i even find a good number of the 1991 races enjoyable to watch)

---

Personally i grew up watching Group A, so that formula always has a special place for me, and that type of racing is what i like watching.

V8Supercars/Supercars personally hasn't done it for me for a long time, i still watch alot of the races, even attended two events last year, and enjoy it for what it is, but i don't plan my weekends around every event like I did in the past and its not a "must watch" for me like it used to be.

It's hard to argue though that the current model isn't successful and really, i don't see the status quo changing any time soon.

[FAS33]

Originally Posted by peckstar

history shows that v8 supercars is more popular than group A

clearly diversity is not what fans want.

just some fans

agreed. Always have, always will be.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by peckstar

clearly diversity is not what fans want.

In that case why is V8SA moving to Gen 2?

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

In that case why is V8SA moving to Gen 2?

Put it back in context. Are VASA moving to gen 2 because of the popularity? - No!

Its because the cars that have been the base for over 20 years are no longer being manufactured, totally unrelated to popularity issue