Supercars Gen 3 (2022)

[Starion13]

GT3. it curently exists, some teams already have a toe in the water there and it wouldn't be too hard to convert Mustangs and Camaro's to GT3 spec. There's some BMW's and what not sitting idle in sheds also that could make a re-appearance. Dane and Walkinshaw already support GT3 entries so who knows.

[benny41]

Originally Posted by Alan52

Option 5 - Declare insolvency and quit.
I am pretty convinced if they can’t get a new tv deal that pays well their cost structure is such there is no way forward.
As a matter of record previous touring car championship categories in Australia have lasted for the following lengths
Improved Production-13 years
Group C-12 years
Group A-8 years
V8’s will have lasted 28 years by the end of 2020.It may be that their time is up.

Not really sure where there is talk of no tv deal being reached.

The history of the precious rule sets are pretty irrelevant the world is a pretty different place to what it was 30 years ago. I don't think winding it up with no replacement is the answer

Supercars needs to come up with a suitable rule set moving forwards that's the key to continuing the series.

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by benny41

Supercars needs to come up with a suitable rule set moving forwards that's the key to continuing the series.

I think it might be too late for that.

When I hear Gen 3, I think "Rev 3" ie. they've already had a couple tries at this and (IMHO) have been found wanting. The decline of the automotive industry, specifically the models Supercars chose to race didn't exactly happen overnight. Gen 2 was the time for a paradigm shift, instead it ended up a failure - one manufacturer leaving whilst only one new model entered. One could even argue the Mustang didn't (intially) meet the Gen 2 rule set.

[Alan52]

Originally Posted by benny41

Not really sure where there is talk of no tv deal being reached.

The history of the precious rule sets are pretty irrelevant the world is a pretty different place to what it was 30 years ago. I don't think winding it up with no replacement is the answer

Supercars needs to come up with a suitable rule set moving forwards that's the key to continuing the series.

Motor racing is not Archer/Supercars.They are a business that could disappear tomorrow and motor racing would continue.
Teams that wanted to continue in the sport would find another series to compete in.Those that don’t could cash their chips.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by benny41

Not really sure where there is talk of no tv deal being reached.

The history of the precious rule sets are pretty irrelevant the world is a pretty different place to what it was 30 years ago. I don't think winding it up with no replacement is the answer

Supercars needs to come up with a suitable rule set moving forwards that's the key to continuing the series.

Supercars doesn’t need to come up with a suitable rule set

CAMS and ARG have already supplied an alternative

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by one five five

Supercars doesn’t need to come up with a suitable rule set



CAMS and ARG have already supplied an alternative

If Supercars ditched the idea of needing manufacturers and went with Marc style cars they would better to watch than GT3 or TCR, and preserve the manufacturing base and unique IP of the series, while offering the potential for radically reduced costs.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

If Supercars ditched the idea of needing manufacturers and went with Marc style cars they would better to watch than GT3 or TCR, and preserve the manufacturing base and unique IP of the series, while offering the potential for radically reduced costs.

If Supercars ditch manufacturers, there is no IP to use.

What will they call the cars? As much as the MARCs look like a Mustang, they are never officially referred to as Mustangs

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by one five five

If Supercars ditch manufacturers, there is no IP to use.



What will they call the cars? As much as the MARCs look like a Mustang, they are never officially referred to as Mustangs

Dead easy to get a licence to use the likeness whether you pay for it or not. Both MARC and TA2 use brands and car names without licences, quite freely.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Dead easy to get a licence to use the likeness whether you pay for it or not. Both MARC and TA2 use brands and car names without licences, quite freely.

Yep I am sure Ford would be happy for the Mustang name to get continued exposure. The likeness of the current Supercars version is not exactly a direct copy and yet is supported by Ford so why not aMARC type chassis / body. Better imo than a me too GT3 series which wont do anything for cost reduction

Given the status, size and trends in the local car/family vehicle market there is there any justification for manufacturer involvement in SC? I dont see it.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Dead easy to get a licence to use the likeness whether you pay for it or not. Both MARC and TA2 use brands and car names without licences, quite freely.

Total rubbish

MARC does not use car brands and car names without licence! The model (which looks like a Mustang) is a MARC II V8

TA2 has the licence from the manufacturer to call the cars their brand name and model

[rik]

Originally Posted by Compromised

When I hear Gen 3, I think "Rev 3" ie. they've already had a couple tries at this and (IMHO) have been found wanting. The decline of the automotive industry, specifically the models Supercars chose to race didn't exactly happen overnight. Gen 2 was the time for a paradigm shift, instead it ended up a failure - one manufacturer leaving whilst only one new model entered. One could even argue the Mustang didn't (intially) meet the Gen 2 rule set.

Does anyone actually know what Gen3 is? Apart from talk about some changes to the roll cage to allow for lower roof 2 door cars there doesn't seem to be much else that can't be achieved on the existing platform? ie. control suspension, different engines, etc.

Could the existing chassis be modified to allow for alternate bodywork? So teams don't have to throw out as much stuff?

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by rik

Does anyone actually know what Gen3 is? Apart from talk about some changes to the roll cage to allow for lower roof 2 door cars there doesn't seem to be much else that can't be achieved on the existing platform? ie. control suspension, different engines, etc.

Could the existing chassis be modified to allow for alternate bodywork? So teams don't have to throw out as much stuff?

I would prefer they also widen the front and rear subframes, to push the front and rear suspension further outboard. The present Mustang is not only too tall, it's also squashed laterally. A 5cm increase in track width would correct this.

Other than that, I don't think there have been any suggestions there would be large amounts of change under Gen 3. Things like fuel tank, transaxle and so on would all be carried over.

It's debatable whether rear tyre size should be increased, or if the current 295/305 (2018 spec/2019 spec) on a 11" wide rim is wide enough. If the latter, then the current wheels could be retained.

It would be good to see a return to small rear wing endplates and deletion of bootlid extensions.

Other control parts like the $20,000 888 pedal box need to be dropped from the rules though IMO. They are just plain stupid. A $5,000 Tilton pedal box would do the same job.

[JAFA851]

Wasn't Gen 3 supposed to be something where you could run a different engine than the current 5L V8? 888 spent a small fortune developing that V6 turbo ( twin turbo? ), all for what?

[mayhem]

8 demo laps.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by JAFA851

Wasn't Gen 3 supposed to be something where you could run a different engine than the current 5L V8? 888 spent a small fortune developing that V6 turbo ( twin turbo? ), all for what?

888 didn't, GM did

[one five five]

Originally Posted by JAFA851

Wasn't Gen 3 supposed to be something where you could run a different engine than the current 5L V8? 888 spent a small fortune developing that V6 turbo ( twin turbo? ), all for what?

That was the intention of Gen2 , which is what we have now

[Spec83]

Why is no one talking about GT4?? Are they not fast enough?? They already have: Camaro, Mustang, BMW, Porsche, M-B, Audi, Maclaren, Aston the list goes on... plus they still look like something you can get from a showroom. Plenty of variety for teams to choose from. Set minimum weights and vary inlet restrictors to even the BOP across brands if you don’t like weight or penalties.

Like TCR, bathurst could be an international event with >30 car grids.

I just don’t see GT3 cars suited to tracks like Winton and Symmons Plains etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tux]

Its going to go electric.....

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Spec83

Why is no one talking about GT4??

They are the same speed as TCR. Yet somehow they are not as racey, since they are heavier and even more production-based than TCR. GT4s seem very similar to the current Australian Manufacturers Championship for Production Cars, just more standardised and without development costs since you can buy a turn-key car.

GT4 feel like a souped-up road car, you can almost feel the high weight and high inertia weighing down on the car (literally), it's just very sluggish to react: https://youtu.be/3408YhUEr0k

I am not sure they would be adequate as a spectacle...

A combined TCR/GT4 class could work however, you could have the market relevant 4 cylinder hatches and bigger engine cars all in the one race. The BOP arguments about the final 5 tenths per lap that decides who wins could get tiresome though.

Originally Posted by Spec83

I just don’t see GT3 cars suited to tracks like Winton and Symmons Plains etc.

Why not? They already race there.

[BlueMax]

I think GT4 makes sense. Combine that with TCR. We keep hearing about market relevance, well you can't get anymore relevent than GT4 and TCR. V8 Mustang and Camaro which sound the goods and hot hatches for the new wave.

GT4 are faster than TCR. The two classes are run together in the US already with success. A 2:15.8 lap of Bathurst is what the GT4 did in the 12 hour. And this is faster than what a Group C car use to do. George Fury's 2:13.8 was done on the old layout and we use to think that was quick. A 15.8 would be about an 11.8 on the old circuit at least.

[mayhem]

I cant see them stepping back to a car thats 10 seconds a lap slower than the current cars. It just wont happen, especially when there are other viable options out there.

[drftin]

Originally Posted by mayhem

I cant see them stepping back to a car thats 10 seconds a lap slower than the current cars. It just wont happen, especially when there are other viable options out there.

they also won't race some else's car (GT3/GT4/whatever), they will run their own car whether the internet experts think that is the right option or not

[cavvy]

Originally Posted by mayhem

I cant see them stepping back to a car thats 10 seconds a lap slower than the current cars. It just wont happen, especially when there are other viable options out there.

See there is a 5litre V8 invitation class at Phillip Island Historics this weekend:

Event Patron and six-time Bathurst 1000 Winner, Larry Perkins will be challenged in the 5 litre Touring Cars by Chris Stillwell, Touring Car Champion and son of Australian Motorsport legend Bib Stillwell driving the ex Dick Johnson AU Falcon, Ed Singleton, President of the Heritage Car Association in the GRM Valvoline Cummins VT Commodore, Brad Till driving the ex Ford Tickford Racing AU Falcon and Allan Nash and Garry Collins will be driving the ex Jack Daniels VE Commodores.

https://vhrr.com/wp/phillip-island/

I understand Jack Perkins will be in another ex Larry car.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by cavvy

See there is a 5litre V8 invitation class at Phillip Island Historics this weekend

Originally Posted by mayhem

I cant see them stepping back to a car thats 10 seconds a lap slower than the current cars. It just wont happen, especially when there are other viable options out there.

In a similar vein, why not roll back to the iconic VF Commodore and FGX Falcon and pretend the Australian car industry never shut down? It should be trivial to convert a COTF back to VF or FGX specification.

Forget the Opel Insignia and forget the Ford Mustang funny car (see below)... Why not just stick to the tried and true models, the same models that Falcon enthusiasts and Commodore enthusiasts (i.e., the fans on the hill) themselves will be sticking to indefinitely (for lack of alternatives).

[BlueMax]

Originally Posted by mayhem

I cant see them stepping back to a car thats 10 seconds a lap slower than the current cars. It just wont happen, especially when there are other viable options out there.

Well they did in 1985. I know that was CAMS that made the change to Group A. Lap times went from 2:14's in 1984 to 2:21's in 1985 for a Commodore at Bathurst.