Supercars Gen 3 (2022)

[Casper]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

Nope.

If CAMS and ARG play their cards right over the next few years, they can create a good series that people will attend. Without even one supercars "fan" crossing over, and the pretentiousness of supercars.

It won't happen then because CAMS doesn't exist these days.

[Tourer]

Aaaannnnyywaaaaayyyyyyy.....

Back on topic - some preliminary information from Mr Burgess on Gen 3 progress.

Lowered roll hoop, reduced downforce and possible control engines - no great surprises there but much more info to come of course

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Aaaannnnyywaaaaayyyyyyy.....

Back on topic - some preliminary information from Mr Burgess on Gen 3 progress.

Lowered roll hoop, reduced downforce and possible control engines - no great surprises there but much more info to come of course

So they lowered the roll bar to allow the Camaro into the series from 2022 and it goes out of production if all the stories are true about two years later. That sounds like sound reasoning to me. They want to lower engine costs with no specification on how to do that which will be interesting as it seems easy enough to supply a crate motor from a pool all built by one supplier, that removes all the overhead for the engine department in most teams.

[one five five]

And no word on who will actually fund all these Gen3 changes

Originally Posted by Casper

removes all the overhead for the engine department in most teams.

And dumbs the class down even more with “everybody has the same thing” rubbish

It’s worrying that Burgess himself says in the article that he wants to dumb the whole category down.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Casper

So they lowered the roll bar to allow the Camaro into the series from 2022 and it goes out of production if all the stories are true about two years later. That sounds like sound reasoning to me. They want to lower engine costs with no specification on how to do that which will be interesting as it seems easy enough to supply a crate motor from a pool all built by one supplier, that removes all the overhead for the engine department in most teams.

Whether the Camaro ever gets entered or not, lowering the hoop (or being able to) makes sense as it means that any manufacturer with a coupe (such as Ford, Dodge, Kia, Nissan, BMW etc) can choose to enter the series if it makes sense for them and can do so without altering/ruining the shape of their car, a la Mustang.

[rich07]

Gen3 is a good five years too late

[Casper]

Originally Posted by one five five

And no word on who will actually fund all these Gen3 changes




And dumbs the class down even more with “everybody has the same thing” rubbish

It’s worrying that Burgess himself says in the article that he wants to dumb the whole category down.

Don't get me wrong here, I would more open regulations for all aspects of the category as I think it does very little for the racing. If their intent is to lower costs then do it properly and don't stuff around at the edges. I will make one comment on engine builders, they are all full of promises if you keep giving them money and they deliver very little in most cases. I think I would rather use a crate motor and let the teams spend money on other aspects of the car. The engine regs as they stand are dead end and little is gained for all the money spent.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Casper

Don't get me wrong here, I would more open regulations for all aspects of the category as I think it does very little for the racing. If their intent is to lower costs then do it properly and don't stuff around at the edges. I will make one comment on engine builders, they are all full of promises if you keep giving them money and they deliver very little in most cases. I think I would rather use a crate motor and let the teams spend money on other aspects of the car. The engine regs as they stand are dead end and little is gained for all the money spent.

People **** and moan when common components are introduced but TA2 is the proof that a cheap engine can produce great racing. 5 engine manufacturers all competing is just silly.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

People **** and moan when common components are introduced but TA2 is the proof that a cheap engine can produce great racing. 5 engine manufacturers all competing is just silly.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Five engine manufacturers competing is motor racing

Mass common components is a contrived show.

Why don’t Supercars just announce the series is a one make series with all cars from the one source, all engines from the one source, all components from the one source, all cars built at the one place and delivered to teams ready to race, one shape of car so no parity problems, that sounds like what people want. Do it properly or don’t do it at all and leave it to proper racers.

[S griffin]

Agreed. Nothing wrong with extra manufacturers. Variety really adds to the series

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Agreed. Nothing wrong with extra manufacturers. Variety really adds to the series

Right, but at a time of global recession when manufacturers are pulling out of series left and right, finding additional factory entrants is an enormous challenge if not almost completely impossible.

Most non-factory teams are, however, not particularly interested in technical Arms races as it only adds costs without anything in return - worse: if you get your development wrong, you might find yourself uncompetitive. And that's why common parts and Balance of Performance are becoming more and more popular.

[S griffin]

You can’t go too far with the common components. You need to keep some things open so that it’s not all standardised

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by S griffin

You can’t go too far with the common components. You need to keep some things open so that it’s not all standardised

Why?

Let's see which of the involved parties in racing actually profit from a technology race:

Manufacturers: Those with the biggest wallets or best race engineering department will profit for a while. Those that find themselves on the losing side will have a hard time justifying their unsuccessful projects sooner or later. In the end, they quit the series and the dominant manufacturers end up without anyone to race against. In the end, the series shuts down and everyone loses.

Teams: a professional race team needs to make money, usually through sponsorship. As everybody likes a winner, it's much easier for winning teams to find sponsorship. The more open the technology in a series is, the bigger will be the gaps between the winning and losing teams (cf. today's GP) and the less teams can be confident that their investment in a car and equipment will give them a shot at being competitive. F1 has the popularity and elite reputation needed to sort of even that out - but even there a number of teams is permanently at risk of shutting down. If I'm a team owner and have the choice between an open development series and a more limited one and am in it to make money rather than as a personal vanity project, I pretty much have to choose the more limited series if I want to see some of my money again.

Fans: here it's hard to quantify, but it's save to say that some people are following racing for the technological competition, some for the on-track action and most for both. But many will stay away/tune out if the on-track product is lacking, which then further complicates the situation for manufacturers' racing departments who have to justify their expenditures to the board and for teams looking for sponsorship.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a technological masterclass like the one currently performed by Mercedes F1, but all in all, the fact that there is a potential for such one-sided races as we have seen today really complicates things for the majority of stakeholders - and the less media presence a series has, the worse the consequences will be.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by S griffin

You can’t go too far with the common components. You need to keep some things open so that it’s not all standardised

Why not?

F2 and Carrera Cup produce great racing. The consistently close battles in F2 are very impressive!

Originally Posted by S griffin

Nothing wrong with extra manufacturers. Variety really adds to the series

Perhaps. But does it really matter if everyone races an identical Gen 3 Ford Mustang Supercar?

At least it would put parity debates to bed!

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by one five five

Why don’t Supercars just announce the series is a one make series with all cars from the one source, all engines from the one source, all components from the one source, all cars built at the one place and delivered to teams ready to race, one shape of car so no parity problems, that sounds like what people want. Do it properly or don’t do it at all and leave it to proper racers.

Running the race cars with a brand on the side is a profit making exercise, whereas developing a race car is a loss-making exercise.

If a number of teams are only interested in running cars and not developing them (e.g., Team 18, Team Sydney, Matt Stone Racing), why force them into a technical arms which they have no interest in?

A standard car would allow Supercars teams to concentrate on the profit-making business of racing, instead of spending squillions to find a tenth of a second (cough, DJR Team Penske and 888 Race Engineering).

[I have nothing against 888 and DJRTP. Adjusted for inflation they are spending about the same as Gibson Motorsport in 1991 or the Holden Racing Team in 2001, spending big to win the ATCC is not without precedent. ]

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Why not?

F2 and Carrera Cup produce great racing. The consistently close battles in F2 are very impressive!



Perhaps. But does it really matter if everyone races an identical Gen 3 Ford Mustang Supercar?

At least it would put parity debates to bed!

Because it’s never been a one make championship and it would take away the DNA if they did that

[chavez]

If Carrera Cup is the shining light for great racing then smash that globe.

Didn't we see nearly a whole season of Carrera Cup in Australia when there wasn't a single pass on track for the lead other than at the start?

It has got better more recently, but those years with Baird, Richards, et al were some of the most mind numbing racing in living memory. Althougth the cars did sound great.

[rich07]

The category needs to take some lessons from
BTCC. Mostly privateer teams running a variety of cars which don’t cost the earth and don’t require manufacturer support. But as I said it’s all a bit late.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Because it’s never been a one make championship and it would take away the DNA if they did that

What, this DNA?



All kinds of different cars, different engines, different body styles? That's already long gone.

The discussion of whether the somewhat more varied ATCR would be a better fit for the ATCC & Bathurst 1000 titles is here: https://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=155291

Gen 2 Supercars are all nearly identical:





So what does it matter if Gen 3 cars are actually identical!?

Does even one single fan care that GRM use Kevlar wheel arches when Kelly Racing use carbon-fibre wheel arches? Nobody cares about the minute differences that are still allowed, it makes no difference to anybody.

For example, the Supashock control shock or Alcon control brakes have come in... It's not like we've seen fans throwing away their Sachs or Brembo flags away in disgust at their favourite brand of shock or brake caliper being outlawed!

It was great that once upon a time you could take your Alfa Romeo GTV6, Ford Sierra, Jaguar XJS or Volvo 240 Turbo and build it up into a touring car however you want, with all the design freedoms in the world (homologation permitting). But the "DNA" of Supercars is so far removed from that now -- a regulation in 1993 effectively made the category into a restricted two-make series for instance, so doesn't it seem futile to try to cling on to days gone by?

[Casper]

It is a silhouette series as is NASCAR who are in the process of introducing a standard chassis kit for all competitors. At any sort of serious level costs have always been high and the sophisticted engineering that has entered motor racing in the last several decade have pushed costs into the stratosphere.

[S griffin]

Keeping it as a silhouette championship is probably the best idea. That way manufacturers can still be identified with their brands, without the need for costs going too high

[Casper]

Direct manufacturer entry into SC without any team being involved is zero I think but I may be corrected there. The management has not been able to convince manufacturers that racing in the series is a good and wonderful thing for some reason so I can't see that the advantage of a silohuette series for that purpose.

[djr81]

Originally Posted by Casper

It is a silhouette series as is NASCAR who are in the process of introducing a standard chassis kit for all competitors. At any sort of serious level costs have always been high and the sophisticted engineering that has entered motor racing in the last several decade have pushed costs into the stratosphere.

Problem being if you remove the engineering challenges/advances you remove much of the interest from the sport and many of the opportunities for sponsorship.

Eg a standard brake package notionally saves money but not if you then lose your sponsored supply. To use an old example Larry Perkins using Endless pads and callipers to help win Bathurst in 1995. Endless still use it today to promote their product. No chance of that happening with mandated callipers/rotors etc now is there?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by djr81

Problem being if you remove the engineering challenges/advances you remove much of the interest from the sport and many of the opportunities for sponsorship.

Eg a standard brake package notionally saves money but not if you then lose your sponsored supply. To use an old example Larry Perkins using Endless pads and callipers to help win Bathurst in 1995. Endless still use it today to promote their product. No chance of that happening with mandated callipers/rotors etc now is there?

I totally agree but the world of motor racing is changing unfortunately and new answers will have to found. From top to bottom of professional racing there is a move to contain costs and all the teams doing the same work to get to the same answer seems pointless and wasteful. I have said before that a totally freed up set of regulations would be my preference but it is no longer practical. The first thing to go would be the rev limit & engine restrictions and the second that dopey diff they use. Next would be fixed ratios and the costs just went through the roof.

[V8 Fireworks]

There’s a whole list of things we want to try and achieve. Do you tick every box? You don’t know. One of the big ones at the moment; our current chassis is too tall. It’s designed around a four-door saloon.

The industry and the market is going away from those sort of cars. They’re going to more halo cars; Mustangs, Camaros, things like this.

One of the things we are trying to achieve is a lower roll hoop, which, at the moment, I think we’re going to be about 100mm lower.

We’re going to endeavour to make the car cheaper to buy, cheaper to operate, and a little bit more controlled than what we have been. One of the big things for the teams is the amount of design resource they need, manufacturing resource they need.

They’re constantly able to tweak and adjust the [anti-]roll bar or any particular part of the car. So we’ve probably got to take away some of those expenses out of the operating costs. So the car will be a lot more generic and everyone has got the same.

Engines are clearly an expensive part at the moment. You’ve got five different engine builders all trying to do the same thing but they do it differently.

The rule book is very complex and takes the resource, and time, and energy from our side to manage those sorts of things. We’ve got to simplify a lot of it.

- Adrian Burgress
https://www.speedcafe.com/2020/08/14...-gen3-details/

Prototype build underway presumably with lower rollhoop. No mention of moving the A-pillar backwards and extending the bonnet to better match the road-going Mustang, but presumably that will also be undertaken.

Supercars mooted to build their own Chevrolet Camaro to retain General Motors supporter base (not confirmed).

All very interesting tinkering!

One presumes the long-running pushrod port-injected naturally aspirated 5L engines will stay the same because of inertia and sunk costs (etc)?