NZTC 2015/2016

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by darscochuck

I would beg to differ Mark. By the sounds of it Bargs drove the wheels off his machine and his best lap time was still 1 second + per lap slower. this became evident as the meeting went on. It was a large element of luck that also played into his hands. you are correct though in saying that there is a large gap in the ability of drivers in the TLX series. I also like the fact that engineers have the ability to have an influence on the cars. I listened to Foggies interview and he is very welcoming to having an engineer on board. he got quicker as the weekend progressed. they should encourage more of it.

You are entitled to your opinion DC, as I am mine. If you look at Gene Rollinson's performance in Race 3 he was clearly faster than Angus until his disastrous pit stop [when the car's engine stopped and would not start] and all he had to help him was his brother Royce, who is by no means an engineer and a couple of volunteer mechanic's to help spanner the car, no engineer and just making small changes in between race's, so no specialist engineer involved, nor next door with Randle Edgell wrenching on Tim's car, no engineer involved here either.

Whilst Bargs is a very experienced driver, the fact is that he is no longer good enough to keep a seat in V8 Supercars, or get an endurance gig in any of the Aussie V8 Supercar Teams, so no "super-shoe" in that car, just a good driver with lots of experience.

In my opinion the TLX cars still have a lot of potential to increase their performance to bring them much closer to the ST cars, such as adopting the same big brake 380 mm diameter rotor, and six pot brake package instead of running their smaller 355 mm rotors etc. The TLX cars could also run the exact same .625" wider wheel's that the ST run all of which will help them get closer to the ST cars.

The difference between the caliber of the drivers is always going to be a challenge, and one not easily solved, again this is very evident when you compare Blair MacDonald's 100% legal V8ST car's performance [set up identically to Craig Baird's car] with the Lance Hughes TLX cars which were a lot quicker than Blairs ST car, to see the issue.

[socram]

Hate to bring this up yet again, but there has never been any problem with running different classes within the same so parity is irrelevant. In fact, the slightly bigger gap would be preferable to identify each class, seeing as bodyshells alone aren't sufficiently different.

I do believe that a compulsory pit stop is just a bit of a ploy to try and make the racing less processional, but with different classes on the same grid, it isn't required.

According to the Herald report, Saturday's crowds were small, so maybe a 2 day meeting has to be a bit special to warrant it. A better start to the season at last though.

[Goat Boy]

I think with a smaller number of good drivers in the series you will see less processional racing anyway. ST was always quite close at the front end of the grid which got people complaining about it being processional - well either you want parity or you don't, and I for one never have.

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

I think with a smaller number of good drivers in the series you will see less processional racing anyway. ST was always quite close at the front end of the grid which got people complaining about it being processional - well either you want parity or you don't, and I for one never have.

Hi GB,

Interesting post in several respects, the big P word again. I would prefer a level playing field, meaning that there a set of tight, clearly defined rules and within those rules you can do what you like, however, having said that the big teams with the best drivers and best budgets will always dominate as can readily be seen in Australia.

Whats the alternative? I tend to agree with Socram, there are now three categories of V8 Touring car racing in the one race, and that is helping to fill the field and provide 3 races in one, so that is a win/win for everybody in my book but there are very divided opinion's on that.

My own personal view is let the TLX's do whatever they want to bridge the gap from a technical point of view, engine capacity, rpm, whatever it takes, however, at the end of the day the real parity issue is between the various drivers abilities, and that's unfixable, and also the real reasons why the V8 Touring car ranks are so thin on the ground here in New Zealand.

The sad fact is that when a driver is the limiting factor, the driver either packs up his toy's and goes home, or joins a free for all class like GT1 etc, were pretty much anything goes and the driver with the best car and team win regardless of talent, the end result is either that driver is lost to the sport or joins a less demanding category of motor-racing.

[Goat Boy]

I'd agree with all of that actually.

[darscochuck]

i love the healthy banter that is taking place after the first event. I hope that after each event a sincere and worthwhile open debrief is held by those leading the future of motor racing at the top level in New Zealand. Pukekohe is going to be a fantastic place to showcase developments in front of a massive audience. Mark it is fantastic to get an insight as to what can actually be changed on the cars to gain parity. Not sure what you can do about the driver quality except time. In the old class of TLs there was always 3 or 4 different races happening which made for exciting racing. Not sure what you mean about a 100% legal ST but I am assuming to are referring to days gone by in ST racing as referred to by Foggie in his interview.

[Goat Boy]

It's a funny thing, sport. Different people like different things - league people complain that rugby is not free-flowing and has too many stoppages. Rugby people complain that there aren't enough goals in football. Football people don't really care (I've seen some truly brilliant 0-0 draws), but if they did they'd probably say that the scores are often ridiculous in rugby. But not as ridiculous as they are in basketball (which annoys me).

It's the same with motorsport - some people like lots of overtaking, but you get that in motorbike racing and I find it annoying for the same reasons as I do basketball goal scoring. On the other hand, racing where it is so close that the only time you can really pass is in the pits (like F1 was for a while and A1GP was too) can be quite boring to watch.

I do like categories where there are a fairly broad set of rules and some very fast cars mixed in with some slowpokes, it all adds to the challenge of the racing - less formal, no doubt, but hugely entertaining - for me. But not for everyone else, necessarily.

[Bill Brown]

Originally Posted by socram

Hate to bring this up yet again, but there has never been any problem with running different classes within the same so parity is irrelevant. In fact, the slightly bigger gap would be preferable to identify each class, seeing as bodyshells alone aren't sufficiently different.

I do believe that a compulsory pit stop is just a bit of a ploy to try and make the racing less processional, but with different classes on the same grid, it isn't required.

According to the Herald report, Saturday's crowds were small, so maybe a 2 day meeting has to be a bit special to warrant it. A better start to the season at last though.

I thought that the whole point of this exercise was to end up with 2 classes with only the old TLs separate not 3. So some sort of vehicle parity between ST and TLX is important as they are now effectively one class.

[Goat Boy]

It will come, sooner or later. Just keep tweaking the rules to suit until everyone is happy (I don't think everyone has ever been happy though).

[NZSTfan]

I agree with Mark on post # 156. Most people on here know where my loyalties lie, but I think the merger has both good and bad points to be fair.

I heard from a good source that Barg's car differs from other TLX's which makes him so much faster. Why is it that last year there was not massive gaps between him and Nick Ross, but this year he is right up there? If its down to good old engineering nouse and setup, then good on them. But something tells me Bargs is getting some special attention.

The thing I liked about ST was the P word was sorted right from the get-go. Yes we had a couple of cheats, but motorsport would be lost without them. I did not find the racing processional at all, and to this day, the 2013 Enduro and Championship decider at Puke with all the classy co- drivers, is for me, one of the best races I have ever seen.

One thing I said to one of the directors of the new company is that it would be a crying shame to somehow dilute the ST to bring them in line with TLX. As I understand it, the ECU's are still mapped the same, so no power or torque loss. I think they are seemingly struggling a little on the Dunnie, but they will get their heads around that soon enough. Just goes to show how good the Kooks were! They suited that chassis/engine to the ground.

Anyway, my point is that the ST is so close to a SC in terms of build, style, tyre size, brakes etc etc. If young drivers want to be a SC driver then having them in a ST is the logical thing to do in my view. A TLX on the other hand is a very different concept. Although they do have more adjustable bits, which a V8SC also has. But its the chassis that is important to me.

But all that aside, the sport was getting nowhere with the two parties doing battle, so this is the only logical thing to do.

From here I think the onus is on TLX owners to get more out of their cars. But looking at the timesheets, they certainly held their own in Taupo. Bargs was right up there (hmmmm) while the others seemed 2 or so seconds off the pace.

I agree with Mark that this could be an easy fix. Control the suspension, brakes, wheels and tyres, and magically you will sort the P word. Some engines may have to be tweaked to up the power or RPM, but I think parity could be very easy, albeit on two totally different platforms.

Stu

[promax]

lol more conspiracy theories from fan

The fact the Richards team and Bargs have had their hands on the Toyota for a while now.. might have something to with the speed difference between the lead Toyota and the Nissan. The Nissan looked rather evil at some rounds last season. Plus do we really know if Bargs was pushing the Toyota to tentenths? Or was here just doing enough when he was leading in NZV8. Bargs in the Toyota was competitive with the Manuell ST at the last NZV8 round at Puke. So it shouldn't be a surprised to see him competitive in this new combined class.

[promax]

Originally Posted by Goat Boy

I think with a smaller number of good drivers in the series you will see less processional racing anyway. ST was always quite close at the front end of the grid which got people complaining about it being processional - well either you want parity or you don't, and I for one never have.

Parity shouldn't even be an issue at this stage. Who cares if the ST is the faster car. Getting as many cars on the grid should be the main focus. Getting people interested in motorsport again.. is more important than parity.

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by promax

Parity shouldn't even be an issue at this stage. Who cares if the ST is the faster car. Getting as many cars on the grid should be the main focus. Getting people interested in motorsport again.. is more important than parity.

Wow Promax, not just one post that I 100% agree with but two in fact, wonders will never cease!

But seriously you are absolutely right, its V8 Touring Car number that we want, and as long as there is battles up and down the field who cares about parity.

As I have said in a previous post, let the TLX guys do what ever they want, or probably in truth, can collectively agree on, to make their cars faster.

If Nick Ross wants to prove beyond any doubt that it's his car not him that is off the pace, he could easily lease or buy one of the 10 ST's sitting in workshop's around the country and go head to head with the other ST drivers on an equal footing.

Heck I will even lend him my ex SVG Falcon if he's up for it!

[socram]

At last, we seem to have more agreement than disagreement on here - which probably echoes what is happening on the track. Great to see.

Totally agree with GB #159. As long as there are genuine amateurs around, willing and able to mix it with those with deeper pockets, the sport could be deemed to be healthy. Anything that prices them (amateurs) out is a step in the wrong direction - and we all like to cheer on the under-dog at times, particularly if they present themselves as sporting and are personable.

They may never reach the top but as in all sports, the top of the pyramid is always very small, but as long as the base is broad, the sport is generally healthy. So yes, large grids please - in all classes or combined classes if required - and the greater the variety the better.

[Woolley]

Originally Posted by Mark Petch

the real parity issue is between the various drivers abilities.

Isn't that the point of going racing? To see how good (or not) you are, and to enjoy it in your own way once you've found out!

Originally Posted by Mark Petch

as long as there is battles up and down the field who cares about parity.

This. Nail, head, hit.

[Goat Boy]

So we all agree then, in a weird sort of way. That's got to be a first!

[Barry Neale]

Originally Posted by NZSTfan

I heard from a good source that Barg's car differs from other TLX's which makes him so much faster.
Stu

Your source is very much mistaken. It's as delivered by MRX.

He actually prefers the other Toyota. It is a bit stiffer, since it hasn’t done as many miles and has a new front end courtesy of the Manfeild shunt it had.

Originally Posted by NZSTfan

Why is it that last year there was not massive gaps between him and Nick Ross, but this year he is right up there? If its down to good old engineering nouse and setup, then good on them.
Stu

Barg's had pole every race last year (and only missed one the year before), with at least one (Ruapuna) at over 1 second faster. Someone once said the art of winning is too win in the slowest time.

You only have to look at how the other TLX's handle to see that the Toyota's are setup differently and try to achieve their speed in a certain way, that the others don't.

Originally Posted by NZSTfan

But something tells me Bargs is getting some special attention
Stu

The something special is simply hard work and passion on the part of the team to try and do the best possible job with the tools that they have.

A good example of that is the one time that the Falcon TLX was run by RTM, it was significantly closer to the front and Haydn said it was one of the best weekends he'd had racing in the class.

[Goat Boy]

This is similar to A1GP, when there was one garage with three teams running out of it who were a country mile quicker than anyone else. They had the best engineering setup.

If you wanted true car parity one of the things you would have to do would be to force all teams to share their setup data after each test - but even then different drivers prefer different setups so it still might not work.

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by Barry Neale

Your source is very much mistaken. It's as delivered by MRX.

He actually prefers the other Toyota. It is a bit stiffer, since it hasn’t done as many miles and has a new front end courtesy of the Manfeild shunt it had.

Barg's had pole every race last year (and only missed one the year before), with at least one (Ruapuna) at over 1 second faster. Someone once said the art of winning is too win in the slowest time.

You only have to look at how the other TLX's handle to see that the Toyota's are setup differently and try to achieve their speed in a certain way, that the others don't.

The something special is simply hard work and passion on the part of the team to try and do the best possible job with the tools that they have.

A good example of that is the one time that the Falcon TLX was run by RTM, it was significantly closer to the front and Haydn said it was one of the best weekends he'd had racing in the class.

Great post Barry, I didn't bother commenting on Stu's post, so glad you did.

Personally I think that previously there were 'games' going on in the TLX category that have now disappeared, and Barg's and the Richards Team are just doing a great job. So its now up to the other TLX cars to lift their game.

[socram]

Best news comes from the HRC newsletter in that there were over 200 cars at the meeting. That is what we wanted and judging by so many well supported classes, we are at last on the up and up. Makes a change from the 68 cars at a tier one meeting at Taupo not so long ago.

Congratulations to all series/group organisers as there is no doubt whatever that they are one of the major keys to this successful turnaround.

Sadly for some, there may be some great cars out there that should be racing but are now 'classless', so maybe we need some sort of allcomers class at each meeting with priority given to those orphaned cars?

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by socram

Best news comes from the HRC newsletter in that there were over 200 cars at the meeting. That is what we wanted and judging by so many well supported classes, we are at last on the up and up. Makes a change from the 68 cars at a tier one meeting at Taupo not so long ago.

Congratulations to all series/group organisers as there is no doubt whatever that they are one of the major keys to this successful turnaround.

Sadly for some, there may be some great cars out there that should be racing but are now 'classless', so maybe we need some sort of allcomers class at each meeting with priority given to those orphaned cars?

Hi Ray,

Off Topic, however, feel free to correct me if I am wrong but doesn't GTNZ already provide for All Comers racing? Or are you talking about open top racing?

If you are talking about open top racing, as in sports cars and single seater's, then I suggest you help organise them into a group that can give a formal mandate to a representative, and then apply to the newly formed, and MSNZ sanctioned, SOG's organisation, so that they have a voice and can be given due consideration during Event planning early next year.

If you have in interest in doing this then then I suggest you phone PJ at GVI Penrose, who is the Chairman of SOG's and talk to him about you ideas etc.

[socram]

Off topic indeed Mark, but for 20 years I have been very busy as Convenor with not one but two race groups. (There were too many cars for one, so we had to split! The irony of that should appeal to some...)

For the last 10 years, totally on my own, with no committee.

For the last 7 years, we have had over 100 registered, paid up drivers, (and 9 out of the last 11 seasons) so I think I have already done my bit as I am standing down at the end of this season and not looking for a replacement series thanks.

As you well know, Series as opposed to clubs, don't get a vote at MSNZ conferences anyway.

Although we worked very closely with the late Ian Snellgrove (MSNZ), setting up a template for structured series rules/articles, we turned down actually being a Sanctioned Series for very sound reasons. We remain to this day, an invitation series for similar reasons, as it also allows us full control of entrants and running the series, maintaining series discipline and eligibility.

Allcomers NOT part of a series was what I was suggesting, as this allows organisers/promoters to add a varied local content grid at each venue to add a bit of variety. Whether that is a single seater, saloon or sports GT grid would be up to them.

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by socram

Off topic indeed Mark, but for 20 years I have been very busy as Convenor with not one but two race groups. (There were too many cars for one, so we had to split! The irony of that should appeal to some...)

For the last 10 years, totally on my own, with no committee.

For the last 7 years, we have had over 100 registered, paid up drivers, (and 9 out of the last 11 seasons) so I think I have already done my bit as I am standing down at the end of this season and not looking for a replacement series thanks.

As you well know, Series as opposed to clubs, don't get a vote at MSNZ conferences anyway.

Although we worked very closely with the late Ian Snellgrove (MSNZ), setting up a template for structured series rules/articles, we turned down actually being a Sanctioned Series for very sound reasons. We remain to this day, an invitation series for similar reasons, as it also allows us full control of entrants and running the series, maintaining series discipline and eligibility.

Allcomers NOT part of a series was what I was suggesting, as this allows organisers/promoters to add a varied local content grid at each venue to add a bit of variety. Whether that is a single seater, saloon or sports GT grid would be up to them.

MODERATOR PLEASE SHIFT TO NEW SOGS THREAD:

Ray,

With no disrespect, It seems that you are not aware of what has happened in the last 6 months. The all new Series Organising Group SOG, is now responsible for the Premier Series Summer motor racing calendar, which this year consists of 9 major events including the closed shop Australian Supercar Pukekohe round, and the Manfield NZ Grand Prix meeting.

It is now SOG's that make's the collective decision's as to what categories race over the Premier Motor racing Season, not MSNZ, other than the V8 Super car meeting.

I am not suggesting that you yourself organise the "classless" all-comers but if no one is prepared to do that then obviously they have no voice at SOG's and I for one would support them joining SOG's if they can get themselves organised.

[socram]

Thanks Mark. I understand where you are coming from. Obviously, it is the SOG's group we have to thank for getting things back on track (no pun intended). There is no current SOG's thread on here, but you can just start one!

[Mark Petch]

Originally Posted by socram

Thanks Mark. I understand where you are coming from. Obviously, it is the SOG's group we have to thank for getting things back on track (no pun intended). There is no current SOG's thread on here, but you can just start one!

Ray, what type of race cars are you referring to as classless?