[FIA GT] GT4 - The future...?

[Bob Baldwin]

OK

[FormulaFox]

Hey, if the Z28 is such a damn good GS car, go buy one and convert it into a racecar. There's no rule or regulation stopping you from doing it.

[Rcz]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

That's a load of crap. You're comparing entering a car that's illegal under the class rules to a group building a car that complies with the specified class rules.

Like it or not, the Z28 is rules compliant. If you can't do as good or better, it's the fault of nobody but yourself.

It was illegal, then IMSA changed their minds.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Rcz

It was illegal, then IMSA changed their minds.

Their series, their interpretation reigns supreme. IF that interpretation changes, too bad.

Look, you don't have to LIKE the rules - everything I've been hearing about what IMSA wants to do with DPi is not leaving a good taste in my mouth, after all. But if you want to run in a series, you can't be worried about every little thing that doesn't go your way. The team I'm involved with isn't going to let these issues get them down - they plan to adapt to whatever rules BS IMSA may pull and keep winning. They're not going to do that by just complaining about IMSA making a choice that benefits others but leaves them on the back foot.

Adapt or die. It's the way the world works. Camaro Z28 kicking your butt? Buy a Camaro Z28. Can't afford it? Then find a way to win on less budget, find more sponsors, or move on to other things before you go bankrupt.



On that note, I've been holding back on this for the right moment, but it's a point that might as well not be held onto any further:

There's nothing stopping IMSA from adopting GT4 but putting their own production requirements on what will be allowed in to block the kit cars you're all so needlessly concerned about. It's their series, they can apply whatever restriction they want.

I think it'd be foolish to do so, however, as GT4 is a highly adaptable class, and having multiple options for GT4 machinery in the country is going to encourage manufacturers and tuners of all sizes to be more willing to try their hand at it. And that can only benefit the Conti series with PWC set to fully embrace GT4.

[Rcz]

If the rule makers are incompetent then how would changing the game pieces on the board make any difference?

Look at ST, still in the high twenties I think if I remember the last race correctly, used to be around 40 or more. It wouldn't surprise me if it got into the high teens by the time we got to Watkins Glen.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by Rcz

If the rule makers are incompetent then how would changing the game pieces on the board make any difference?

Well, for one thing, they would have access to balance tables created by other more competent individuals which, based on the lack of similar balance PWC GTS has shown with their own balance tables, are much more effective. (granted, PWC has to use their own balance tables to try to effect a balance between the GT4 cars and the PWC-spec GTS cars, but that's just more reason to replace GS AND GTS completely with GT4)

For another, I never called IMSA incompetent. Quite the contrary, I think they're VERY competent, but they just have poor ideas about what they should be doing - particularly in the Weathertech Championship Prototype and Prototype Challenge classes. (but we've had a LOT of debate over that in the LMP3 and DPi threads, so let's not retread it here)

Look at ST, still in the high twenties I think if I remember the last race correctly, used to be around 40 or more. It wouldn't surprise me if it got into the high teens by the time we got to Watkins Glen.

Which, incidentally, supports my point. There's more going on than the allowance of a single car in one of the classes.

And frankly, those years of big 40-car fields were almost certainly just a fluke. It's happened quite a lot over the years - a sanctioning body comes up with an easily accessible mid-tier racing class, and after a few years for it to prove itself there's a sudden surge of entries. But how often do these spikes of interest in these classes last more than a few years? Very, VERY rarely. Whether the class survives the subsequent decline is dependent on far too many factor for any one person to ever comprehend.

We're seeing it with Trans Am's TA2 class right now. They've got fields pushing 40 cars, and I'd put money(if I were a gambler, that is) on it fading to around 20 cars within three years.

The sad truth is those huge spikes in car counts are unsustainable no matter what a series does. When you have huge fields like that, your odds of winning are drastically lower even with the best resources and effort in the world. Eventually teams will give up and move on to other things. We're seeing that in Conti more than we're seeing a single car destroying a class.

Best thing for the series is to replace the higher class with one that has widespread backing, and hope the lower class decline levels off before they have to find a replacement there as well.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by Rcz

If the rule makers are incompetent then how would changing the game pieces on the board make any difference?

Look at ST, still in the high twenties I think if I remember the last race correctly, used to be around 40 or more. It wouldn't surprise me if it got into the high teens by the time we got to Watkins Glen.

Interesting isn't it that both classes are suddenly decreasing and long after the worst of the recession. Historically the series has had huge fields for many, many years through the several different names and then poof - they're gone. Like a plague.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by wdave0

Interesting isn't it that both classes are suddenly decreasing and long after the worst of the recession. Historically the series has had huge fields for many, many years through the several different names and then poof - they're gone. Like a plague.

What changed? Management.

Like it or not, but the series was much better off under Grand Am.
Much like ELMS' woes in 2013, this seems much more of a management problem than one with the technical rule set per se, which is incidentally also what plagued Euro GT4 until Max Braams and his guys took over.

[Deleted]

It was the only thing Grand-Am did right.

Besides not having forced pro-am crap in the main series.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

And frankly, those years of big 40-car fields were almost certainly just a fluke. It's happened quite a lot over the years - a sanctioning body comes up with an easily accessible mid-tier racing class, and after a few years for it to prove itself there's a sudden surge of entries. But how often do these spikes of interest in these classes last more than a few years? Very, VERY rarely. Whether the class survives the subsequent decline is dependent on far too many factor for any one person to ever comprehend.

We're seeing it with Trans Am's TA2 class right now. They've got fields pushing 40 cars, and I'd put money(if I were a gambler, that is) on it fading to around 20 cars within three years.

The sad truth is those huge spikes in car counts are unsustainable no matter what a series does. When you have huge fields like that, your odds of winning are drastically lower even with the best resources and effort in the world. Eventually teams will give up and move on to other things. We're seeing that in Conti more than we're seeing a single car destroying a class.

Best thing for the series is to replace the higher class with one that has widespread backing, and hope the lower class decline levels off before they have to find a replacement there as well.

So 20 or so years of 70+ cars is a fluke and a spike? The series survived several name changes and several sanction changes with undiminished fields until very recently, plenty of GS cars in the mix all along. It was huge much longer than it's been shrinking.

[jjvincent]

FF, you remember when the Camaro came out at Daytona in 2014. Remember all of the things that car had that no other car was allowed to do because it was forbidden in the rules? Remember the big differences between the 2013 and 2014 Camaro? Remember when other teams wanted to buy or build a Camaro on their own and the answer they got? Remember what happened right after VIR in 2014?

That's why you agree as to why the Camaro should have never been allowed in the first place because you were there right in the thick of it.

I know you know all about the new Camaro that's being built right now too, since you are an IMSA official and now agree to the way it's being done.

I do have a question. Why was the SIN so much faster than anything at Barber? Why could it run a multitude of laps over a second faster than any other car? Going from last to 1st was quite an accomplishment. Was it just the driver, the team works harder or maybe the BoP was way off? I know everyone has read through the tech bulletins and how the BoP is done for GTS. So, this will make it easier to discuss.

[Deleted]

The GTs in the main series are full of illegality and secret waivers and bop politics, so they are only trying to make it more of the same in the feeder series... it's like poetry it rhymes :P

Originally Posted by wdave0

So 20 or so years of 70+ cars is a fluke and a spike?.

80 at times...

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by wdave0

So 20 or so years of 70+ cars

20 years? Please excuse me, I need to go have a big laugh now.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by jjvincent

FF, you remember when the Camaro came out at Daytona in 2014. Remember all of the things that car had that no other car was allowed to do because it was forbidden in the rules? Remember the big differences between the 2013 and 2014 Camaro? Remember when other teams wanted to buy or build a Camaro on their own and the answer they got? Remember what happened right after VIR in 2014?

No, I don't. I never heard any such things. I just heard a sudden influx of whining from the teams getting decimated by the car. None of my IMSA conenctions said anything about restrictions being placed on other teams.

I do have a question. Why was the SIN so much faster than anything at Barber?

Did you not see my comment about the GTS balance tables? It's right there. Go read it. Get back to me when you have.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

20 years? Please excuse me, I need to go have a big laugh now.

This is history, as I said the series went through several iterations before it's last naming as Continental cup, you would have to look at a past before the merger, this stuff has been around a very long time.
Think Firehawk, Playboy, Escort, Motorola, Grand Am cup, Koni cup. All either directly or directly ended up as Continental cup and all had huge fields. The series has never been small until now. As Chiana pointed out, 80+ at times.

[jjvincent]

No, I don't. I never heard any such things. I just heard a sudden influx of whining from the teams getting decimated by the car. None of my IMSA conenctions said anything about restrictions being placed on other teams.

I suggest checking up on the facts. What you have been saying up to this point has demonstrated you don't know them at all. Instead of attacking former competitors on this forum because of your lack of knowing the facts, does not give me or anyone else, faith in anything you say.

20 years? Please excuse me, I need to go have a big laugh now

Again, you are losing your credibility. I have a feeling that you need to go back and check some facts before attacking someone else that does.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by jjvincent

I suggest checking up on the facts. What you have been saying up to this point has demonstrated you don't know them at all.

Please forgive the somewhat vulgar nature of this comparison, but I feel the need to illustrate the matter as clearly as possible...

I know someone in IMSA who could tell me the consistency of Scotty A's midday bowel movement on any given day if I REALLY wanted to know. Needless to say, I trust their interpretation of events over that of people I do not know.

And no, I will never be interested in the matter used in the illustration. I apologize if I ruined anyone's lunch/dinner/snack with it, however.

Instead of attacking former competitors on this forum because of your lack of knowing the facts, does not give me or anyone else, faith in anything you say.

I have not attacked anyone in this thread whatsoever. I have done nothing but state simple truth about the reality of racing: You sink or swim based on your own merit.

Again, you are losing your credibility. I have a feeling that you need to go back and check some facts before attacking someone else that does.

The series as it stands has been in existence since the early 200s. The history prior to GA's acquisition is irrelevant as it contains factors that do not effect the matter as it stands right now.

This would technically mean it's a different series now with IMSA in command instead of Grand-Am, but the bulk of the series management(in both Conti and Weathertech) is still made up of the GA management. Despite assertions to the contrary, nothing has really changed at the top.

[jjvincent]

Please forgive the somewhat vulgar nature of this comparison, but I feel the need to illustrate the matter as clearly as possible.

Seems odd. If you knew the facts, you would not have called out someone that wasn't working hard enough or blame the Z28 on their failures. Yet you did. Does it come across as vulgar, yes it does, especially since it's incorrect.

I know someone in IMSA who could tell me the consistency of Scotty A's midday bowel movement on any given day if I REALLY wanted to know. Needless to say, I trust their interpretation of events over that of people I do not know.

I find it hard to believe that a future employee of NASCAR would make a statement like that. I'm starting to believe that you are making this up. Since you are remaining anonymous, it just opens up the door for others to claim that they will be future NASCAR employees too and telling others about bowel movements of various employees of the company.

I have not attacked anyone in this thread whatsoever. I have done nothing but state simple truth about the reality of racing: You sink or swim based on your own merit

So, you just told AJ this:

folks such as yourself decide to work harder.

The fact is you don't know anyone on the team and you don't know the inner workings of the team, yet you tell AJ that he needs to work harder. Again, not knowing the facts yet you know what exactly is happening yet you have no idea as to what the Z28 showed up with, that made everyone whine.

What I'd like to see is some factual information. Because you are a future NASCAR employee, you need to make decisions based on the facts. You just can't tell teams that they are not working hard enough. If you do that, you'll just either be fired or just watch more teams go elsewhere. Since you know the bowel movements of the NASCAR staff, then you might just become the manager of janitorial duties then.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by jjvincent

I find it hard to believe that a future employee of NASCAR would make a statement like that.

I never said I'm set to be a future employee of NASCAR. I said I was getting a job in the business - not explicitly with IMSA/NASCAR itself. I'm going to be working for a TEAM, not the organization.

I'll put a bullet in my head before I work directly for IMSA under it's current management.

So, you just told AJ this:
The fact is you don't know anyone on the team and you don't know the inner workings of the team, yet you tell AJ that he needs to work harder. Again, not knowing the facts yet you know what exactly is happening yet you have no idea as to what the Z28 showed up with, that made everyone whine.

The inner workings of the team aren't relevant. If they can't keep up, it's their own fault. Period. It is not IMSA's job to save the teams that can't keep up. Their job is to do what they feel best suits the series.

And you're free to disagree, but it is the responsibility of the teams to adapt to the changes.

Sink or swim on your own merits. The team I'm joining will be making sure to swim - no matter what it takes to do so. We're not coming to make friends, we're coming to win races and championships.

[jjvincent]

I'm going to be working for a TEAM

Thanks for clearing that up because you pretty much had me convinced (with the bowel movements of the NASCAR staff that you mentioned). So it's a TEAM. I assume you will never tell us which team because that would hurt your employment opportunities.

I do hope that this team will be successful and not pull out, because if they do it's because you and the rest of the team did not work hard enough. As you know, I don't need to know anything about the team whatsoever or the situation at hand because it's good enough to pass judgement as fact on others without knowing any of the actual facts.

I now understand why you want to remain anonymous because racing is a small world.

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by jjvincent

Thanks for clearing that up because you pretty much had me convinced (with the bowel movements of the NASCAR staff that you mentioned). So it's a TEAM. I assume you will never tell us which team because that would hurt your employment opportunities.

I will indeed tell you which team eventually - as long as I don't expressly identify MYSELF, keep clear that my opinions do not represent those of the team, and don't reveal anything they're trying to keep secret there isn't going to be an issue with IDing who I work for.

All I can tell you now is that the team is not currently on the grid - plan is to debut in 2017. I can identify them when they go public. (though I will probably wait until I am in place at the facility rather than blow it open right away)

[joeb]

So does anybody expect an influx of GT4 cars into PWC next year? If that happens how long will it take for the Conti series to adapt GT4 as well?

[FormulaFox]

Originally Posted by joeb

So does anybody expect an influx of GT4 cars into PWC next year?

2-3 years, more likely. GT4 isn't currently(and may never be) as explosively popular as GT3, and PWC will need to prove the SRO balance tables work on tighter American tracks or make their own effective ones if they don't. Any serious growth won't occur until that's done, and it's going to go a lot slower than the GT3 growth.

If that happens how long will it take for the Conti series to adapt GT4 as well?

Depends on IMSA management. If the troublesome elements are removed, expect them to adopt the class(with or without a production requirement that invalidates the kit cars and supercars) within a year of any clear sign of serious growth.

If IMSA management does not change.... I don't dare to think of what will happen.

[jjvincent]

In PWC, you are already down to the 2 Mustangs, the 2 Camaros and the oddball Cayman, TT or local guy that shows up with an SCCA T1 car from time to time. The GTS Camaro is pretty much a GT4 car anyway and so are the Mustangs (I know you all knew this).

Hopefully GM doesn't just build 2 Camaros for PWC and only offer them to one team and not sell customer cars or allow anyone else to build them. I expect them to do this as it's perfectly fine in GT3 to do the same thing and PWC has no problem with that. I know in a perfect world that shouldn't happen but we all know the business of racing and GM does this all of the time. When you throw enough money at a series, you pretty much can do what you want. We all know the story of the P&M 2014 GS Camaros and what they got away with.

Porsche needs to take the 991 GT3 Cup car, add some weight and put a restrictor on it. That way you can really get the GT4 field up in numbers. It can be done as you can build anything for GT4. Just BoP it and it's ready to race. Then doing that, you can eliminate GTC and allow the GT3 cars to have a proper race.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I know someone in IMSA who could tell me the consistency of Scotty A's midday bowel movement on any given day if I REALLY wanted to know.

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I said I was getting a job in the business - not explicitly with IMSA/NASCAR itself. I'm going to be working for a TEAM, not the organization.

Originally Posted by FormulaFox

I will indeed tell you which team eventually - as long as I don't expressly identify MYSELF, keep clear that my opinions do not represent those of the team, and don't reveal anything they're trying to keep secret there isn't going to be an issue with IDing who I work for.

I have somewhat (sadly in a schadenfreude sort of way) enjoyed the train wreck that this thread has become, but I can’t help but to say something. Firstly, good for you to have something lined up in the motorsports industry. It is something that in hindsight I wish I had done… 30 years ago when I was at the right age to do so. But I get the impression from looking at some of your online presence (here and elsewhere) that you are relatively young and maybe haven’t had a great deal of experience out in the world of business (my apologies if I am wrong).

You have mentioned a few times that you have a job lined up with a secret team. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember it mentioned previously that it might be more like an intern and that you really don’t have much or any real prior experience. More of a “you look promising” thing from their perspective. A foot in the door for you. I am not in the racing industry, but am involved in hire/fire decisions. And my opinion is that you are handling most all of this very, very badly. A few points…

1. I assume that you are not on the payroll yet. Regardless it doesn’t matter. Even if you are, or if you have a contract or offer (verbal or written) in hand, nothing is set in stone. You could still very well screw yourself and your chances to make this work.

2. You have an expectations that you can both keep your identity a secret and also that you have your disclaimer that your opinions are your own and not those of the team. You may eventually be exposed and while you would like to think that you are keeping your work and personal opinions separate, sadly that is now how the world works. Your future employer may not care about your attempt at segregation and how consider how you act outside of work as reflecting upon them. I expect most businesses have that opinion. I becomes a problem when you rise up above the noise and as others have said... "Racing is a small world". So it may not take much effort for you to be noticed (if you haven't been already). I can say that I would not want anyone on my team having a social media (which this site is) stance like you do.

3. You may or may not know what you are talking about. But given you are hiding behind a secret identity, it also creates a situation in which you have close to zero credibility because you can’t validate your bonafides. Anyone can claim the things you are saying (even if you might actually be telling the truth). You are currently in a no-win position when trying to use your “inside” knowledge. Your forum "reputation" rating here reflects that.

4. If I was you, I would crank it down a few notches. Your priority should be on making your new job successful and not about proving you are right or “in the know” online. And you get too easily sucked into arguments. I am not sure who plays the role of “troll” in some of your flame wars. I suspect there is a bit of it on both sides. But you take the bait too easily. Someone is going to goad you into screwing up if you let them.

You may not welcome my comments, but I truly wish you the best. Sorry to everyone for the off topic post.

Richard