Historically speaking: the commercial relevance of non-production-based motor sport?

[D-Type]

Look objectively at the on-screen graphics of current F1 coverage. The emphasis is all on drivers and the cars (and engines) they drive hardly get a mention. How long before the manufacturers realise that they aren't getting the return on their investment that they deserve - and walk away? Is there perhaps a hidden agenda by those running the "F1 circus" to not have their power base undermined by powerful manufacturers?

[Greg Cozier]

I have a very good friend who used to be in management at Honda's PR department. I got the distinct impression Honda felt they were raped and would not be back.

[Oldtony]

There will always be a place at the apex of motorsport for the high tech of WEC or WRC, and the celebrity quest which is the F1 drivers championship just to keep those of us with this misguided passion happy.
Our problem is that the generation that is coming up doesn't think that sort of technology can be as interesting as some of the stuff they now have in their pocket or on the desktop.
Thus motor racing needs to relate to their own experience. The most noticable result of this is Drifting. The progression from Video Games, through a little "hooning" in cars that they can buy themselves is a natural. Motor racing with it's spec series, and homologation regulations etc just doesn't offer that progression as either competitor or involved spectator. The only real way to provide a growth path is through strong production based saloon or road sports car series.
We potentially follow sport that is going to die of old age if we don't provide an outlet to race, and achieve recognition, in the sort of car that young people can relate too.
MotoX is offering a more production oriented path to higher classes in bikes than Karting does to open wheelers, and at less cost.
Maybe the future is bikes and drifting.
And the interesting thing from a historic perspective is that a lot of the youngsters are fans of historic touring cars, muscle car masters etc. because they can relate to the cars from both a video game basis, and because the frequently drive cars approaching the same vintage.
Are old cars the answer for a young audience? Seems possible here in Oz.

[nicanary]

In this month's Motor Sport there's a short piece about the future of GT racing, discussing the attempts to combine GTE and GT3, whatever they are. The crux of the matter seems to revolve around the development of the cars by manufacturers and prep shops, and whether they are suitable to be driven by gentleman drivers. TBH I was confused and to some extent angry.

How has it come to this? Why do cars have to be developed - GT racing should be for production cars fitted with adequate safety equipment. And gentleman drivers have always existed, and have comprised most of the grid in this form of racing. Why are they not capable of handling these cars? I'm totally at a loss to understand this.

They just seems to be a hell of a lot of people today who want to be professional drivers when there simply aren't enough drives around. And if the cars were nearer to standard the cost of this so-called "development" wouldn't be anything to worry about. Why can't everyone realise this, or are there too many vested interests?