[BTCC] Vauxhall confirms BTCC withdrawal at end of season

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

I think if you take a closer look, you will see that the present BTCC cars have very little in common with their road-going counterparts other than a visual similarity!
They're basically a spaceframe contruction with body panels fitted over the top.

Sorry but you are very wrong there . BTCC S2000 cars (like WTCC) use full production bodyshells, production-based suspension and production-based engines.

The cars are far closer to production spec than touring cars have been since the early 90's.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

They're basically a spaceframe contruction with body panels fitted over the top. This makes them very complicated and expensive to build.

No they're not. An S2000 car is not at all a spaceframe construction. They may have a complex roll cage for rigidity, but they're monocoque-based.

In terms of Vauxhall's departure, it is very sad, but no surprise at all. The positive thing about the BTCC today though is that its far more dependent on privateers than works teams. It means the level of funding necessary to be competitive is lower and this will give it the best chance possible of surviving the current downturn.

There's no getting away from the fact that the departure of SEAT and Vauxhall is a very heavy blow nevertheless. Consider though what's going to happen to the WTCC when SEAT and BMW exit at the end of this year also.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

Sorry but you are very wrong there . S2000 cars use full production bodyshells, production-based suspension, production-based engines and even the BMW's use their production based gearbox!

The cars are far closer to production spec than touring cars have been since the early 90's.

OK, I apologise about that then. Being honest, it's a very long time since I looked closely at a BTCC car and I suppose I must have been thinking of the old Super Tourers, NOT S2000 cars...

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

OK, I apologise about that then. Being honest, it's a very long time since I looked closely at a BTCC car and I suppose I must have been thinking of the old Super Tourers, NOT S2000 cars...

Apology accepted
Although the Super Tourers still used the production bodyshells too. They were not spaceframe either!

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

Apology accepted
Although the Super Tourers still used the production bodyshells too. They were not spaceframe either!

Yes but...
I accept that may have been the intention, but in all honesty, the roll cage etc. generally picked up on all of the suspension points, and the body panels were mainloy cosmetic. (My comments here are based on my thoughts, comparing one of these to an original Group A touring car which really did use an original bodyshell that was seam-welded, and had a roll cage fitted).

[touringlegend]

Originally Posted by davyboy

Consider though what's going to happen to the WTCC when SEAT and BMW exit at the end of this year also.

Thats news to me?

But I get your point. The BTCC is luckily blessed with some very competitive indies. But who knows what will happen with the likes of RAC backing for next year too.

[touring fan01]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Yes but...
I accept that may have been the intention, but in all honesty, the roll cage etc. generally picked up on all of the suspension points, and the body panels were mainloy cosmetic. (My comments here are based on my thoughts, comparing one of these to an original Group A touring car which really did use an original bodyshell that was seam-welded, and had a roll cage fitted).

Pretty much every modern race or rally saloon car that has a fully welded-in rollcage has it picking up on the suspension points.
But that doesn't make them a spaceframe-like chassis.

[chunterer]

I think what VIVA is suggesting is that any replacement regs need to be more 'standard' than we have now (and i'll venture a damn site more interesting) in order to get ore models involved.

The reference to Group A isn't a bad one. from the 70's to the late 80's production based modified touring car racing was hugely popular and subscribed to by manufacturers and privaterers. It gave some of them the chance to homologate and enter more than one car from their range, albeit in different classes.

I don't think silhouette style racing would befot the BTCC either, but I hardly see Lacetti, Vectra or Leon looking like they have very standard type shells either?

[rdjones]

Wow, that is a shock, but it is not suprising news. I think it's a sad day for the BTCC.

[BootsOntheSide]

Understandable considering GM's financial situation. It would be hard to justify the cost of developing the Insignia into a racecar when it wil only be raced in one market. Not sure how this will affect the chances of anybody else entering a factory car in 2010 - it reduces the competition but also the prestige. The bigger Indies will be able to sell a genuine championship prospect to sponsors, which could ensure a few new teams. Gio will surely seek a factory drive if anything for 2010, while I'd expect Neal and Jordan to return to Dynamics and Eurotech respectively.

[mountainstar]

Too bad Vauxhall pulled out. I wonder what it will do for the future of the championship.

What I think manufacturers should do in Europe is what is common in racing in the USA with contingency money. Make cars and parts available for privateers but don't fund factory teams. The teams that achieve good placings in races get a big check from the associated manufacturer, such and such amount for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, pole position, etc.

That way all the resources are not huddled up in one or two big teams which then causes instability if and when they pull out.

[Sodemo]

Any new regs would (in my view) have to satisfy 3 requirements.

1) Produce fast cars (not slower than S2000)

2) Be cheap

3) Be ratified by the FIA

The BTC rules never really worked and as a result only the BTCC used them (along with a few obscure smaller series). So the FIA needs to rubber stamp them to get them recognised across the world.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by chunterer

I think what VIVA is suggesting is that any replacement regs need to be more 'standard' than we have now (and i'll venture a damn site more interesting) in order to get ore models involved.

The reference to Group A isn't a bad one. from the 70's to the late 80's production based modified touring car racing was hugely popular and subscribed to by manufacturers and privaterers. It gave some of them the chance to homologate and enter more than one car from their range, albeit in different classes.

I don't think silhouette style racing would befot the BTCC either, but I hardly see Lacetti, Vectra or Leon looking like they have very standard type shells either?

There is one issue with the rules - they has to be a worldwide standard. If a manufacturer can develop one racing car to use in three or four countries, that could be tempting. If the BTCC has different rules to the WTCC which has different rules to racing in Sweden, which one will they go for?

The current economic situation will show that lateral thinking for cost cutting measures is needed. Not just in F1. Not just in WTCC. Not just in the BTCC. The engine in IFM cars is a touring car engine, and the 3.5 Renault unit used in WSR is a higher spec version of the Megane Trophy engine. Maybe that could be the future - not in the form of Max Mosley's world engine, but possibly in the form of a 2.0 turbo and 1.6 turbo set of rules with varying degrees of tuning and turbo pressure - with the 2000s being used for prototypes, rallying and a single seater class (something between a re interpreted F2 and F3) and the 1600s being used for Formula 3 amongst others. Touring cars could use the 2.0 turbos pushing out 420 horsepower as the top class, and 1.6 turbos generating 250 or so horses.

The current set of rules aren't really based on road cars that are enticing to the manufacturers, as the two litre naturally aspirated engine is not going to be much popular for long. The trends appear to be going towards forced induction engines, normally at 1.6 and 2.0 litres.

Silhouette racing is not the way forward. However, for the WTCC the cars need to be more dramatic. The power increase should do that, and allowing different base models in would help. A move to performance orientated versions of saloons like the Exeo would help for the top class, as would the legalization of 4WD with different aero rules (no flat floors for example) - FWD cars in TC1 would probably have to be converted to RWD, which would be a bit silhouettey but aside from that the cars should be based on production shells and bear relation to their road going cousins, possibly by requiring the rather extreme body kits that should be permitted be available on the road going model.

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

There is one issue with the rules - they has to be a worldwide standard. If a manufacturer can develop one racing car to use in three or four countries, that could be tempting.

Totally agree. We might not get complete global unity but like we had with Group 1//A/N most coutries recogised those regs for a decent saloon series nationally and internationally at some point or other (or a close variation).n

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

The current economic situation will show that lateral thinking for cost cutting measures is needed. Maybe that could be the future - not in the form of Max Mosley's world engine, but possibly in the form of a 2.0 turbo and 1.6 turbo set of rules with varying degrees of tuning and turbo pressure. Touring cars could use the 2.0 turbos pushing out 420 horsepower as the top class, and 1.6 turbos generating 250 or so horses.

Cost cutting doesn't have to mean spec engines formulas. Touring car racing must be about variety in engines, car sizes and sounds, otherwise it'll be F3 or F2 with roofs, which will of course be silhouette racing in effect and in that case the FIA might as well take DTM as a basis which is nice but not right for production based racing.

As for the engines surely a blueprinted/mildly modified V6 or V8 (or smaller engine for smaller cars) would be cheaper to produce in numbers than a full blown racing turbo engine?

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

The current set of rules aren't really based on road cars that are enticing to the manufacturers, as the two litre naturally aspirated engine is not going to be much popular for long. The trends appear to be going towards forced induction engines, normally at 1.6 and 2.0 litres.

This runs on from my last paragraph really but you're right. The s2000 Vectra/Astras only looked a bit like the showroom car (they look bloody awful actually!). A 1985 Rover Viteese or Escort RS1600 or even a 1993 Mondeo ST looked almost exactly like the showrom car.

Top class saloon car racing shouldn't be about restricting engine size, it has to be open and run under a class system (was popular with Ford, GM, BMW, Rover, Toyota etc) or as one class but incorporating an equivalency factor or something, not ideal but that would offer manufacturers options to run stuff they've already got in production both model and engine wise. Maybe 4 different classes would not be needed (good though!) but a big capacity class and a small capacity class?

Sorry i've gone waaaaaay OT here guys. I must apologise

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

What I think manufacturers should do in Europe is what is common in racing in the USA with contingency money. Make cars and parts available for privateers but don't fund factory teams. The teams that achieve good placings in races get a big check from the associated manufacturer, such and such amount for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, pole position, etc.

That way all the resources are not huddled up in one or two big teams which then causes instability if and when they pull out.

Agree.

In DTM I would like to see Mercedes, Audi and other sponsors create a prize fund (at least 1 million every race) instead of funding factory teams.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Cost cutting doesn't have to mean spec engines formulas. Touring car racing must be about variety in engines, car sizes and sounds, otherwise it'll be F3 or F2 with roofs, which will of course be silhouette racing in effect and in that case the FIA might as well take DTM as a basis which is nice but not right for production based racing.

I didn't suggest a spec engine - it would not be a good idea - however I did suggest engines being shared between multiple series. Whilst a diverse range of engines could be a good idea, it wasn't really present in Super Touring or S2000 - it was more or less the number of cylinders.

[touringlegend]

BMW almost fit into that American mould - they provide cars, kits etc for privateer teams. I don't know how many 3 series S2000 cars there are but there must be plenty.

This reminds me of an article in Autosport about Triple Eight / Ian Harrison. Perhaps he knew what was coming but he suggested that European style racing isn't the way forward and everything should be turned on it's head so that there is prize money etc.

[redshoes]

Why the sudden need for a new set of regs? S2000 is still viable without Vauxhall.

Does Touring Cars in general and BTCC in particular actually need big manufacturer teams? We're never going to go back to the mid-90s with a grid full of mega-budget works, arguably in the long run we are better off with no works teams that with just Vauxhall. I'm sure there are teams out there willing and able to build/run their own cars but chose not to as they know they can't compete with VX. Dynamics and Arena (and to a lesser extent AFM) are leading the way and it wouldn't surprise me to see more following them. In Sweden we already had teams running Opel, Volvo, Audi, Mercedes, Saab and VW - admitted like Dynamics some have had manufacturer or importer support, but these are not fully fledged manufacturer teams.

Look at GT4 (and to a lesser extent GT3) where you have a wide range of makes and models represented all developed by non-factory teams, in fact the rules specifically exclude direct manufacturer teams.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by redshoes

Why the sudden need for a new set of regs? S2000 is still viable without Vauxhall.

Does Touring Cars in general and BTCC in particular actually need big manufacturer teams? We're never going to go back to the mid-90s with a grid full of mega-budget works, arguably in the long run we are better off with no works teams that with just Vauxhall. I'm sure there are teams out there willing and able to build/run their own cars but chose not to as they know they can't compete with VX. Dynamics and Arena (and to a lesser extent AFM) are leading the way and it wouldn't surprise me to see more following them. In Sweden we already had teams running Opel, Volvo, Audi, Mercedes, Saab and VW - admitted like Dynamics some have had manufacturer or importer support, but these are not fully fledged manufacturer teams.

Completely agree... this is absolutely NOT the time to go changing the regulations. S2000 works fine for the BTCC. Its relatively inexpensive and close enough to what's on the road. We need to look at the underlying reasons why we are where we are, and that's a serious economic downturn that's had a cataclysmic effect on the auto industry. Stable regulations minimizes development and minimizes costs... and this will be a necessity for championships like the BTCC to ride out the recession supported predominantly by privateers.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by redshoes

Look at GT4 (and to a lesser extent GT3) where you have a wide range of makes and models represented all developed by non-factory teams, in fact the rules specifically exclude direct manufacturer teams.

But GT4 and GT3 (and the new GT1?) are performance balanced series. This is a very good way to keep costs under control. But do we want this (something like the Superstars series)? I personally have no problem with it, especially because I think it means more different cars and large grids.

But I agree this is not the time to change. However manufacturers and organizers like WTCC, BTCC, STCC, FIA (and we! ) have to think (and work together!) about the future.

[johntt]

I think this is a blessing in disguise. One complaint from the independent teams last year was that the works cars would come through the field bouncing off them because they didn't have to worry about damage costs, meanwhile the indies had to be more acreful due to their limited budgets. Having all independent teams will eliminate that problem.

re. Super 2000 rules, I would only make a couple of adjustments

1) Open it up to different bodystyles, 3 door coupes and hatchs etc, (if anyone is mad enough let them do a S2000 car based on an estate/MPV ).

2) Allow 1.6l turbos alongside the NA petrols and diesels, which is the plan for rally cars as of 2013. I think that could be implemented sooner rather than later.

[chunterer]

No it certainly doesn't need to be about big manufacturer entrants. A decent touring car series always needs a few works or semi works teams balanced by clever and well run privateers. That's pretty much how it's always been.

But a proper touring car series also needs to a fair extent reasonably big choice of cars and engines so makes/entrants can choose which model they want to homologate or enter etc..

S2000 has been ok, but has there ever been a really good range of models entered lately?

Personally i've always seen it a s big crime that the BTCC was dumbed down to small capcity engines in small capacity level cars? It's big cars and big sounds that really attract interest otherwise we might as well just have one make racing.

[helterskelter]

I think that after the introduction of the s2000 rules, which was great anyway as they are cheaper than the old Super Touring cars and easier to manage, the next step would be finding a way of reducing the costs further. I think it's incredible that a season with a New Clio costs around 70-80,000€ (the italian series, which includes 2 races abroad), in a car that has very strong performances in terms of speed, and a season in the Btcc costs 250,000£. This sport has to become more accessible, so that the real talents can come out. I believe a touring car series should cost less than a season in an open wheel car, I'd put a limit to around 120,000€ (A national series). There's no need to have super cars, what we need is close racing and a strong grid. That means more money for the organisers, more money for the manufacturers (who sell more cars) and more money for the teams, as they have more cars available to manage.
In general, cars should be easier and cheaper to develop, IMO. That would be super.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

I think it's incredible that a season with a New Clio costs around 70-80,000€ (the italian series, which includes 2 races abroad), in a car that has very strong performances in terms of speed, and a season in the Btcc costs 250,000£.

You need to factor in the UK being generally more expensive. A season in UK Clio Cup will cost you around twice the figure you've quoted, although that said your BTCC figure won't get you into a top team.

Arguments over exact figures aside I agree with your point. There's a huge difference in costs between a top one-make series like Clios or SEATs and BTCC, just as Jonathan Adam whose been struggling to make the jump for years.

[Sodemo]

When S2000 was first introduced, the idea was to produce cars that cost between £90,000 and £120,000, compared to ST which at its peak in 1999 - 2000 had cars costing £300,000 alone. I'm sure the price of the S2000 cars has increased now though, quite by how much im not sure, perhaps someone can quote me a price for a 2009 BMW S2000?

I think we could get cars down to £50-60,000 by standardising more parts, using more production parts etc.