FIA/ACO to create universal GT class

[urdragon]

Originally Posted by arakis

but I fear that is all fools hopes, the reality of the sport/and situation is that will just have a re-badged GT3 class..with the core of the GTE class going to the history books....

That would be ridiculous, then why not accept GT3 now?, it's the same and WEC wouldn't have to wait.

[DeathOrGlory]

http://www.endurance-info.com/versio...cus-14004.html

As expected, SRO is not pleased.

[Fogelhund]

Thank God Ratel/SRO firmly has his fingers on the pulse of what the manufacturers and entrants want, just like when he continued with GT1, when no manufacturers wanted it, and all but Nissan asked for GT2.

These clowns continue to amaze me with their ongoing incompetence.

[Scooter185]

Well until the announcement I was thinking DTM/gt500 may become the new gt1/gtp, GTE would be classified gt2, and gt3 would stay as it is; which kind of sounds what SRO wants to have happen.

[urdragon]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Thank God Ratel/SRO firmly has his fingers on the pulse of what the manufacturers and entrants want, just like when he continued with GT1, when no manufacturers wanted it, and all but Nissan asked for GT2.

These clowns continue to amaze me with their ongoing incompetence.

Well, he may "opose" to manufactures, because all manufactures he "opose" are all entrants to WEC, only these part of the teams want a single car development. Manufacturers like Audi or Merc, or BMW are they pleased with the ACO ideas? Have anyone asked them?

A single class will leave behind lesser GT3 cars like Ford GT, Jaguar emil frey, Camaro GT3, and to the unknown Nissan and Bentley, those who DO NOT want a factory effort with their steeper cost line increased, from what he say "official tuners" or private developers whose slower car investment will render those cars obsolete.

Ratel explains his reasons, and for me the key ideas could be a similar base structure but with different investment curves for each class unless it was "let to ratel the control of the costs" i would not trust on the ACO, because simply they have both different models on business one only interested in manufacturers and one on privateers, the ACO model will spoil SRO's interests. The Ratel model will increase costs on ACO manufacturers, a comoon base may be useful but since SRO does not trust the ACO controlling the brand investment (like some of us, because the aco does not need so many brands), simply fears about his business.

[kober]

Originally Posted by DeathOrGlory

http://www.endurance-info.com/versio...cus-14004.html

To the contrary, SRO Motorsports proposes:
[...cut...]
2) To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car. Strict production requirements would be maintained to avoid a potential drift towards GT1/GTP.

Should such a new FIA GT2 category be introduced, SRO Motorsports will consider running it in the Pro Category of its International Series in 2014.

Could somebody please remind me what's the status of the current incarnation of FIA GT2? Is it dead? I'm aware that ACO GTE is a variation of it.

[arakis]

Actually he makes good points, and is on the dime as they say...

GTE and GT3 are too conceptually different to be blended...

if they try to impose rules on GT3 manufs will bolt, if the thye further dilute the rules in GTE manufactures won't bolt, but manuf investment/involvement/development will drop...

He is right IMO...but what he doesn't know/or perhaps knows and fears, is that the new class will be GT3(without ratel)

Originally Posted by kober

Could somebody please remind me what's the status of the current incarnation of FIA GT2? Is it dead? I'm aware that ACO GTE is a variation of it.

as based on the health ALMS grid, and a very lively competition in WEC it's good pushing toward fine..it's neither poor, nor is it excellent...
GTE is basicly identical to GT2, the rules are different as much as GT2 2007 rules are different to gt2 2009 rules...


As for the last point and his sugestion I like it so much it will be my new SIG

Originally Posted by Ratel

To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car. Strict production requirements would be maintained to avoid a potential drift towards GT1/GTP.

[helgi]

He's conventing a bicycle. His GT2 = GTE.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by helgi

He's conventing a bicycle. His GT2 = GTE.

you seem to have missed his key points I'll bold them for you...

To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car. Strict production requirements would be maintained to avoid a potential drift towards GT1/GTP.

This strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast is not what GTE has become, it's no rules, and vast array of BoP.....

his GT2 is what GT2 used to be in the NGT/initial GT2 years. (also known as the GT golden age (basicly pre BMW).

I especially like the successive ballast.. example, 150kg is max..
every win you get 30kg, and 15kg, 3rd 10...6th removes 10kg, 7th removes 15, 8th removes 30...

after the season is over the winning car gets 50kg+2nd 30kg 3d 15 kg....this is the starting point, and it's not comulative..so if a car wins 2 championships in a row it still gets 50kg initial ... af it wins the 1st championshi, and comes in second on the 2nd, it starts the 3rd with 30kg...and the 2nd with 50kg..

[urdragon]

The GT2 issue will solve WEC/internationlRatel Double cost issues?

For everything else perfect for me.

Tough i prefered single class with ratel himself controling costs entering the FIA/ACO for me. (No extreme manufacture competing for best car->I+D unapplicable to road cars)

[Speed-King]

The problem with Ratel's GT2 proposal is that it ignores the basic premise behind FIA and the manufacturers looking at merging GTE and GT3 in the first place, i.e. cost control...

[pach233]

I can't believe this but I actually agree completely with SRO in this case. GT3 and GTE started off with completely different missions. GT3 to be a cheaper performance balanced class for amateurs. GTE (formerly GT, NGT, GT2 etc) a class with tight regulations allowing for manufacturer backed development and top class racing. Both have a place in GT racing and both have lost their original intent due to waivers and excessive B.o.P. in GTE and cost in GT3. Their suggestions, consolidation of series and a universal rule set is exactly what I would do.

[GTKers]

Ratel is hypocrite. He defends GT3 but then he wants constructors directly involved in his championship!

FIA should have told him: You want manufacturers? Use GTE cars and let GT3 be a gentleman category.
Instead he is cause of his own problems putting pros in gt3 making costs for GT3 cars grow higher year by year.
He is the one who firstly let GT2 down and now he would like GT2 to continue. BAH

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by arakis

This strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast is not what GTE has become, it's no rules, and vast array of BoP.....

his GT2 is what GT2 used to be in the NGT/initial GT2 years. (also known as the GT golden age (basicly pre BMW).

So the years when only Porsche and Ferrari were competing, were the "GT golden age"?

• 2000 NGT standing
  1. Porsche 89 points
  2. Porsche 57 points
  3. Porsche 51 points
• 2001 NGT standing:
  1. Ferrari 62 points
  2. Porsche 62 points
  3. Porsche 38 points
• 2002 NGT standing
  1. Porsche 103 points
  2. Ferrari 80 points
  3. Porsche 28 points
• 2003 NGT standing
  1. Porsche 92 points
  2. Ferrari 71 points
  3. Ferrari 70 points
• 2004 NGT standing
  1. Porsche 138 points
  2. Porsche 93.5 points
  3. Ferrari 67 points
• 2005 GT2 standing
  1. Porsche 180 points
  2. Porsche 45 points
  3. Porsche 39 points
• 2006 GT2 standing
  1. Ferrari 140 points
  2. Ferrari 103.5 points
  3. Porsche 59 points
• 2007 GT2 standing
  1. Ferrari 139 points
  2. Porsche 64 points
  3. Ferrari 60.5 points
• 2008 GT2 standing
  1. Ferrari 138 points
  2. Ferrari 76 points
  3. Porsche 69.5 points

[Gingers4Justice]

Gwyllion, you make a brilliant point regarding early-mid 2000s GT2-style racing.

If the rules are too strict in GT racing - even more so than Touring Cars or other forms of racing based on road-going vehicles - then variety inevitably suffers.

I personally don't care who is running to what rules, so long as the racing is close and diverse. Unfortunately, diversity often brings a lost of cost - and both GTE and GT3 are beginning to get too expensive. Both categories worldwide enjoy great success, with close racing, quality entries, and healthy grid sizes (I count the WEC in this given the current economic climate).

But GTE and GT3, like any formula would, both have limited shelf lives. Anyone with any knowledge of the sport can tell that GTE and GT3 are at their peak (GTE, arguably, has gone past it), and so naturally, something has to change before things go downhill. And when things go downhill in sportscars, boy, do they tumble!

A unified GT category embracing many different types of cars whilst trying to keep costs down just makes sense. A formula where the most proffesional teams and the manufacturers can do the big races and championships, like Le Mans and WEC, whilst the small teams can still afford to do BEC and smaller local series.

That might sound difficult to do, but rule makers make difficult jobs even harder through making some blinding errors. The sensibility seen in this proposal gives me some confidence that this can happen.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

So the years when only Porsche and Ferrari were competing, were the "GT golden age"?

Just saying you knew what was what, and you felt it... Those cars were super close racers, and tehy were all built to the rules, with minimal or nonexistant BoP...If you couldn't cut it with the big boys you were last...

This does hinder variety, but heck when you have tho of the greatest motorsport brands in the worlds, ducking it out blow for blow, what the heck else you want....

and don;t give me that bla bal ferrari base car cost more, limited production etc, so other manufs cant compete... Porsche has been racing the 911 for 40 years now, and it;s mass produced, it has an engine in the back, and it was still able to fight with ferrari on equal footing, and even kick it's ass a few times(and years)...

I'd rather have 2 manufacturers giving it all, and really influencing the development , then have 6-10 brands where FIA dictates who wins and who losses, I just can't get emotionaly involved then. Sure its fun, it's preatty, but it's no where near the excitment of watching your favorite brand wining because they rally are/were better at that track... It comes close to the LMP1/F1 level of fan excitment...while Gt3s are more Homer Simpson type enjoyment...mmmmmm pretty...

[lms]

Originally Posted by arakis

This does hinder variety, but heck when you have tho of the greatest motorsport brands in the worlds, ducking it out blow for blow, what the heck else you want....

variety

i want to see mercedes, mclaren, dodge, lamborghini ... at le mans

[arakis]

Originally Posted by lms

variety

i want to see mercedes, mclaren, dodge, lamborghini ... at le mans

Mclaren, and lambos could easily develop rune based competitors to ferrari and porsche, and corvette, perhaps even dodge..

donno about merc....

but seriosly..I'd rather just see Ferrari, Porsche, Lambo, Mclaren, and corvette figitng in GT like some of them do in LMP1/f1 etc...
similar fixed rulesets to F1 LMP1 will provide awsome Manufacturer competitiong...

[trickyd]

I have to say I agree word for word with Arakis here. I want to watch cars racing, and I want to see the fastest car, and driver, win. If that means Giancarlo Fisichella and Marco Holzer in their Ferrari and Porsche repectively win all the races thats fine by me, they deserve it. If I see former grand prix winner Fisichella in a mid engined GT car getting beaten by a rich German in a massive front engined Mercedes or BMW coupe then I see that as a turn off, because it has been contrived, and is fake. Fake is not entertaining, I can see through it, and feel like I am being taken for a ride, so I wont watch. There are enough cars for a top GTE/GT2/GT1 category of genuine, competitive racing; Ferrari 458, McLaren mp4-12c (should they build one), Porsche RSR, Aston DBR9, Corvette, maybe the new Lexus. How many do you need? In the mid 60's it was Ford v Ferrari in prototypes, later on Porsche v Ferrari, then pretty much just Porsche, then Porsche v Jaguar v Mercedes. They were considered golden ages. At the height of late 90's GT1 it was Merc v Porsche v McLarenBMW, and that was good too. All this 10 manufacturers talk is a load of rubbish, they are all so balanced they might as well be the same car, and they aren't pretty either with those wings. If you just want to watch loads and loads of different cars there's nothing stopping you standing next to a road.

I don't think there is much to be done. Revert GTE back to GT2/NGT, revert GT3 back to what it was, make a rule that a car homologated into one can't be in the other (to prevent confusion when they are in the same race) have the top class in WEC and IGTO, and the lower one for amatuers in IGTO plus their own series and that will do. I have no problem with a Bop'd class of 20 makes of car, as long as its not the top/only class.

[MitchZ06]

So what Ratel plans to do is create a new GT2 class? Won't that just bring us back to the current situation?

[arakis]

Originally Posted by MitchZ06

So what Ratel plans to do is create a new GT2 class? Won't that just bring us back to the current situation?

with the planed C7 corvettem and the porsche 991...the time is right to revert back to tight rules..make the rules so both those cars are on par with the 458 anf you got yourself a helova series...

put the -5l to DFI engines into the rulebook, insted of a mid season BoP.. add a few cumalitvie weight penalties on for wins etc.. and you have a balanced awsome series...

Tricky D, love the comment "If you just want to watch loads and loads of different cars there's nothing stopping you standing next to a road."

[lms]

Originally Posted by arakis

"If you just want to watch loads and loads of different cars there's nothing stopping you standing next to a road."

hilarious. except those cars are not nearly as exciting as a racecar (any racecar)

[urdragon]

Originally Posted by arakis

I'd rather have 2 manufacturers giving it all, and really influencing the development ,

Well, you want development? Where is the ACO (GT) hybrid class?? Will they be allowed??

Originally Posted by arakis

It comes close to the LMP1/F1 level of fan excitment...

Wow, Audi/toyota, and somebody complained about Porsche/Ferrari in GT2 beeing boring.

Originally Posted by arakis

while Gt3s are more Homer Simpson type enjoyment...mmmmmm pretty...

Well, without Fernando Alonso i would find F1 quite more dull than GT racing, Allways Red bull wins when Newey discovers something, mercedes are dull, and mclaren without hamilton, we will see... it's impossible that the last three scuderias make a single point and in the middle pack only 1/10 of the times a Williams/Sauber make a podium.

[Mt. Lynx]

I think Ratel understands that there can't be only one class for GT's. There has to be two - one for all out mfg's, and one cost effective, IE GT3.
If they want a single class, I can only see two options; adapt to BOP a la GT3, or rewrite the rules alltogether.
I'd prefer the latter. And like Ratel, I'd like to see those rules applied to the letter, and only make adjustments with ballast throughout the season.

The rules should concentrate on performance rather than construction. Say 450kw, 1275kg and a set downforce, f ex 1000kg (or 10 000 newtons) at 250kph.
Of course construction needs to be cost controlled though. But maybe a financial roof (€500 000?) rather than "use this and this"?

[urdragon]

Originally Posted by arakis

Tricky D, love the comment "If you just want to watch loads and loads of different cars there's nothing stopping you standing next to a road."

Correction, a Monaco road.

Originally Posted by trickyd

All this 10 manufacturers talk is a load of rubbish, they are all so balanced they might as well be the same car, and they aren't pretty either with those wings.

I guess they seem more a road car than a LMP or a DP...