DTM still has a long way to go to survive by Rob Veltman

[helgi]

And what about new technical regulations? Mono-chassis.Is it a way to reduce costs? Maybe DMSB should invite private teams who will build cars on their own? But the series was originally made by huge companies - Mercedes and Opel to advertise their cars. And the sport factor was playing the second role. Will Haug and Ullrich and their bosses be agree with 'privatization' of the series?

[werner]

I see 1 problem: how to get 400hp on the road through you front-wheels. 280 is hard enough already.

[Valenok]

Originally Posted by stedevil

Now that sounds like a smart new ruleset to make DTM again be an interesting TC series. Might even develop into a good WTCC S3000 series

I've heard, it's known as SuperStars Series now

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Valenok

I've heard, it's known as SuperStars Series now

You mean the series that has 8 out of 9 races in Italy? Even DTM is more of a world championship then that...

[Valenok]

Originally Posted by stedevil

You mean the series that has 8 out of 9 races in Italy? Even DTM is more of a world championship then that...

The way of thousand li begins with the first step
They have good S4000 regulations, so they need to expand all over the Europe in that way, isn't it?

[Go_For_Pole]

The first step for the said series would probably be to get 20 cars on the grid.

[Speed-King]

Nevermind.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

But then you'd have 8 works cars who contest for the win and 10 actual mobile chicanes for them, creating an even bigger gap.

Lapping creates excitement and possibilities for overtaking.

And it probably won't be easy to get the average viewer to notice the second class winner at all.

It works pretty well for Japanese Super GT, which is really pretty close to DTM in terms of the cars and organisation.. Some of the fan-favourites in that series race in the lower GT300-class, so it might be possible as well for DTM.

Maybe they should do away with the four-door rule and allow coupes (and roadsters) as well in the lower class. I'd think that the VW-crowd would love a GTI in DTM, and the Opel-fans - of which there are still quite a lot - would probably enjoy an Opel GT or a really good looking Astra or Vectra.

[werner]

If Opel and VW wants their customers to enjoy racing with their cars, S2000 is the best option. better than it is for Mercedes and Audi, they may find 2l-cars to small, and the competitors not worthy enough. (You dont want to be beat by a seat if you are mercedes, while the other way around might not be that bad)

[Jimmy Magnusson]

Super 2000 isn't "glamorous" enough for Mercedes, and I don't think we will ever see them in that kind of racing. The cars used in DTM are not it's biggest problem; the big problem is the nature of the championship with one or two lead drivers from each manufacteror and 8 drivers from each side doing nothing but backing them up. That's the main reason why the racing is dull, though that is helped by the rubbish 1-hour two-stop format they run. There is a way to fix the DTM, though. Begin with reforming it so that it is the teams racing each other, not the two manufacteror blocks, like in V8 Supercars. The second issue, the race format, can be dealt with in two ways, depending on which cars you want to run. If you run the excellent cars of the Superstars series you should run three one-hour races with no pitstops (and bring in some enduros; Norisring used to be a 200 mile race. Do a 1000km-race with driver changes at the Nordschliefe too. A pity they dug up the old Hockenheim forest circuit, that would have been a nice enduro location), or if you want to use the current cars (or something close to it), run races (one a weekend) that are between two and four hours long with no driver changes. Then you might have something interesting. But don't forget, breathe some life into it - the Le Mans Series shows that this can be done!

[stedevil]

Indeed, DTMs main problem is the "only 2 teams" one. The "let pass" or "block in absurdum" depending on if the driver trying to pass is in the same brand car or not completely ruins the sense of fair play.

However I cant agree with, what seems to be the general consensus, that the 1h 2PS format is rubbish. I think it opens up very interesting strategical options for the team and also puts some focus on that this is actually a teamsport, not a 1 man show. IMO the reason the format might SEEM like rubbish is because of the previously mentioned insane 2-teams/blocking crap going on.

And 3 x 1h races + longer enduros... what TV-channel will actually air that live? Or maybe people here prefer castrated race reviews over full race covering? I dont, and I also dont have the time nor money to attend every DTM, WTCC, BTCC & STCC + other raceclasses Im interested in.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by stedevil

Indeed, DTMs main problem is the "only 2 teams" one. The "let pass" or "block in absurdum" depending on if the driver trying to pass is in the same brand car or not completely ruins the sense of fair play.

This is indeed the main problem.

[Fechna]

The main problem is the DTM-car. There are much more problems, but the cars are the main issue. Too much aerodynamic, too high corner-speeds, too short braking-zones- so no overtaking. This is a problem you can´t fix with a bigger diversity of teams. See F1. Different teams, high competition, booooring races.

[duke_toaster]

Jimmy - one driver races between two and four hours? Are you serious? The one hour format with two pit stops would not work with any touring car format, three races like BTCC is the best - as for tech regs, the current lot are woeful and need to be junked totally.

[racer69]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Jimmy - one driver races between two and four hours? Are you serious?

One driver racing for that length of time is no problem (unless they are extremely unfit)

Each leg (250km each) of the Clipsal 500 this weekend for V8Supercars runs over 2hrs, and is a single driver event. All NASCAR races are single drivers and run for many hours.


Back when Bathurst was a 500 mile race, it was won by Allan Moffat (70 & 71) and Peter Brock (72), each running the race solo beating two-drivers teams, and each of those races ran well over 6 hours.

[duke_toaster]

NASCAR races, though, are predomenatly on ovals. Fitness is less of an issue there.

And what happened in the 70's is not relevant now due to current safety rules. Regarding Clipal, IMO it's lunacy the current format and should be scrapped - stick the two legs together in to one 500km race, and make it two (or even three) driver.

Also, there's the problem of television coverage. Would a TV broadcaster really want to show a two to four hour race, given that motorsport is ALREADY poorly covered?

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

The one hour format with two pit stops would not work with any touring car format, three races like BTCC is the best

I actually think the current BTCC format aint that hot. 3 identical miniature sprint races? C'mon.

If to change the current DTM 1h single race I would much prefer eg a 1x15-20min sprint followed by a 1x40-45min feature race.

BTW, have you ever seen the current STCC format? It's 1x40min with 1 pit stop. That works out pretty well IMO.

[mattt]

Originally Posted by stedevil

I actually think the current BTCC format aint that hot. 3 identical miniature sprint races? C'mon. ...

This format allows for quick, action packed races. full of activity. And how much overtaking do you get? A hell of a lot. Especially with the reversed few rows in the third race.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by racer69

One driver racing for that length of time is no problem (unless they are extremely unfit)

It's not driver fitness or even car reliability that is the issue here, it's TV. Endurance type events may have works 20 years ago but in today's TV-friendly world it's a non-starter.

The DTM in particular lives and dies by TV coverage, and there's no way a four hour event would get the sort of mainstream coverage the DTM demands.

Look at the FIA GT Championship, by definition an endurance based series, but a few years ago even they were faced with reducing races from 3 to 2 hours to keep the TV stations happy.

[werner]

Telly has found a good way to devote less time at long races or other events. They call it highlights. If you have a show of an hour for a race of 3 hours, the first half hour highlights of the first 2,5 hour, and the last 30 minutes live would make it happen. The 2-hour races FIAGT have now are ok, but it's silly to change drivers in such a race. Endurace racing must imo at least mean that a driver does over 1,5h in the car, less is more of a GP-distance.
Having said that, the DTM-format is fine by me, if they just had more manufacturers and less aero it would be great. And a Dutch driver init would add to the fun for me. Albers, Huisman, Bleekemolen, Verstappen or Coronel would be good to see.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by mattt

This format allows for quick, action packed races. full of activity. And how much overtaking do you get? A hell of a lot. Especially with the reversed few rows in the third race.

Which asks the question, what is the point of race 2 in BTCC? An extra chance to lose out on points if you happen to bin your car in race 1?

No, the only things better in BTCCs format then the WTCC is that the reversed grid is randomized between 6-10 + that they dont do a lot of stupid streecourses where passing is nigh impossible.

Of course, in BTCC the officials also seem to be next to blind and pretty much never deal out punishments for running a competitor off the track. Sure, it makes things look "cooler and more exiting" since it leads to more passing, but it's not exactly fair racing is it? More like "biggest bully wins".

2 races of different lenght would actually be a lot more interesting since it requires completely different setup of the car as well as promote different aspects of driver skills. IMO that beats out the "3 identical sprintraces" format by a mile. I even much prefer the STCC 1x40min + 1PS format over the BTCC one.

[racer69]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

Regarding Clipal, IMO it's lunacy the current format and should be scrapped

In Endurance racing, the likes of the Le Mans & Daytona 24 Hours, its written into the rules that a single driver may stay in the car for three & a half hours in a single stint anyway, and only have an hour rest in between doing it again if they want. It isn't a rule solely dedicated to Australia.


The only problem i see with the STCC format mentioned (and same goes with the DTM format, and with most of the V8Supercar races) is the contrived pitstops, why are we stopping for tyres when they aren't needed. I'm a believer that the racing & the passing should be done on the track, not in the pits.

[werner]

If you want to do longer races with S2000-cars it may be nescessary to have the same amount of pitstops for everybody. If this is not the case, rearwheeldriven cars have to less often to change tires, giving an extra disadvantage. This is unfair because technical rules are made with sprint-races in mind.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by werner

If you want to do longer races with S2000-cars it may be nescessary to have the same amount of pitstops for everybody. If this is not the case, rearwheeldriven cars have to less often to change tires, giving an extra disadvantage. This is unfair because technical rules are made with sprint-races in mind.

Indeed. The way it's done in STCC is
* Minimum 1 pitstop during the pitting window (most of the race except first and last half a duzzen laps)
* Change a minimum of 2 tires. FWD usually change the 2 front, RWD usually change left or right side (depending which side is worn the most in the corners).
* Only 2 guys are allowed to work with the car (so while you can also change 3-4 tires, it effectively more then doubles your Pitstop time)

It actually turns out to be quite an interesting addition to the race IMO, especially when you have semi wet conditions. Should you start on wets, slicks or a mix of the two? If you start with 1 type, do you change 2 or 4 tires if the track gets wetter/dries out? If you have or change to mixed tires, do you have the slicks on front or rear axel or on 1 side?

Originally Posted by racer69

why are we stopping for tyres when they aren't needed

With the same line of though, why do "we" change tires between qualifying/races, or in fact the entire season?

Tires are designed to last a specific amount of time before they start losing performance relatively. You dont pick a tire that wears down after 20 laps when you need to go 40 and you dont pick a low grip tire that will last 40 when you only will do 20 laps...

One uses the tires that gives the best performance for the decided upon rules. That is, you pick the tires after the rules, not the other way around.

[werner]

In STCC, as in WTCC and BTCC that is not true. You pick the tyres that are supplied by the tyresponsor.