[BTCC] New Regulations From 2011

[werner]

I'm no expert, but the quality of the chassis does have it's effects on the performances of a car. Different chassis have different quality's in terms of weight, stiffness, aerodynamics (although they want to equalize that somehow), centre of gravity etc. So different cars will not be the same in terms of performance, even when they share suspension, steering etc. In a tubeframe-with-body concept, like Rouses, this is not the case.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

I agree. If BMW wanted to go back into the BTCC and made a firm longterm commitment I'm sure they would alter the rules to allow them. Maybe that's the game that Gow is playing to make them commit? Who knows, but there are still 3 years left of BMW's racing in the BTCC so anything can happen between now and then.

It makes no sense. If I were Gow I'd rather do something to encourage them (especially now that BMW's future in the Wtcc is under discussion), not saying that RWDs are not allowed. Knowing a bit the way Theissen behaves, he'll simply think that if he's not welcome in the championship then there's no need to spend his political power to be allowed to compete in it. He feels too strong to do that, IMO.
What's sad is that 2009 is shaping up as the last year in which BMW is competing in TC. If so, a big piece of our beloved sport is going...

[crmalcolm]

According to the BTCC official site,
BMW left as a manufacturer in 1996, Audi in 1998.
Honda, MG, Ford, Vauxhall, Proton, SEAT and Vauxhall have all had factory efforts since then.
I don't see why an allowance should be made in any rules for a minority configuration manufactured by a company that has not supported BTCC as a manufacturer for over 14 year.
As said, if BMW were to show a genuine interest in a BTCC entry, then the regulations may be looked at again. In the meantime, lets concentrate on a set of rules that can be raced with by teams not requiring a manufacturer to fund any development, as I can't see many manufacturers investing heavily in National Touring Cars for a few years yet.

[jab]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

WSR certainly are touring car constructors and very good ones. They built and ran the works MG's, Honda's and Ford's in seasons gone by and for customers as well.

Not right now, though. Having checked the 07 thread, I got mixed up with the Swedish thing as that was where the original show car was from, but they haven't been fully constructing the BMWs themselves

And of course RML builds cars for any team who pays them. They currently build rally cars, sports cars and touring cars for customers - that's their business, so they certainly don't just focus on the WTCC.

They can't have too many projects on the go at once, though. If they're concentrating on the S2000 or next gen Cruze in the WTCC as well as sports cars and other stuff, I can't see them doing a separate NGTC car for the BTCC. Especially if they do end up in F1. Heck, it's only this year they've come back into the BTCC after being out for a few years

The point is I don't see that many teams committing to constructing new cars in 2011. The whole point of moving back to S2000 in 07 was to bring it inline with elsewhere and now they've decided they don't want to anymore. A stand-alone series will cost more somewhere along the line long-term because of the development of specialist parts, so they do need others to take up the idea like with ST. If they don't, I fear that we could be going back to the BTC days - ironic given that it'll be 10 years on

[werner]

Well, I'm sure Gow, and the BTCC-teams fear the same things, but they have to choose between 2 options, which both are not ideal.
-keep going with the worldstandard of S2000, with the advantage of interchangability between championships. This has the disadvantages of being dependent of the FIA's whims, it is unsure how long the S2000-rules and the backing of them by a World championship, some manufacturers and a governing body wil exist, and the rules might just suck in terms of cost/performace/equality/reliability-outcomes
-making new rules, with the risk that you are alone in the world, like in 2001, but with the advantage that you can make the rules tailored to the needs of Britisch teams, drivers and audience.
The more uncertainty about S2000, with it's ongoing political changes, threats of quiting from the manufacturers, and the less desirable the cost/benefits of the S2000-cars, the more interesting making your own rules becomes. Apparantly that treshold is reached.

[Aunt Sally]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

In the meantime, lets concentrate on a set of rules that can be raced with by teams not requiring a manufacturer to fund any development.

And the list of teams that can fund building their own cars are????

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

as I can't see many manufacturers investing heavily in National Touring Cars for a few years yet.

Which is where the bulk of the money for developing this new series must come from, without them who is going to pay?

[gregc]

Originally Posted by Aunt Sally

And the list of teams that can fund building their own cars are????

Right now, Arena and Dynamics are running self built cars without manufacturer backing. As someone else has already pointed out, RML WSR and 888 all have the capability of building S2000 equipment, and I expect would be able to fund a NGTC programme (given that the costs are going to be slashed). I don't know enough about other UK race teams to know of anyone not currently involved with the BTCC that might have that sort of capability, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were a few more.

Add to that the fact that these regs have been developed with input and collaboration from all the current BTCC teams, and they have been unanimously agreed by those teams, and I can only conclude that the teams believe that they can compete effectively under the new rules, including building cars if necessary.

Also, S2000 cars are going to be allowed to compete under equalisation from 2011 to 2013, which gives all the teams plenty of time to make the transition to NGTC spec. That means Arena, for example, can get their moneys worth out of the development of the Focus before moving on to the new rules. That also means, incidentally, that BMW's will be able to compete, effectively, for the next four years.

Having had a chance to look at the more detailed overview of the rules, and also the Q&A with Alan Gow, I think these regs are actually very well thought out, and I think the way they are being phased in is spot on. I wouldn't be at all surprised if other national championships were to adopt these rules over the next few years.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by jab

Not right now, though. Having checked the 07 thread, I got mixed up with the Swedish thing as that was where the original show car was from, but they haven't been fully constructing the BMWs themselves

WSR haven't designed/built their own S2000 car because as things stand currently it's better for them to buy in an existing model and run that.

I don't know that they would definitely build their own NGTC car but they are more than capable of doing so. In fact once you take out the necessity to design and build your own suspension, engine, etc there's a lot more teams capable of doing the same, just look at Britcar, British GT and some of the other higher level club series.

As we've said before, the days of multiple works teams are long gone, the future is going to be independent entries which longer term is not a bad thing.

The whole point of moving back to S2000 in 07 was to bring it inline with elsewhere and now they've decided they don't want to anymore.

What's the future if we stay with S2000 and whatever the FIA/WTCC come up as a replacement, if indeed they ever agree on a replacement. At this point in time it's difficult to see any international FIA TC formula in a couple of years time.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by Aunt Sally

Which is where the bulk of the money for developing this new series must come from, without them who is going to pay?

Exactly whoever payed for the Honda Civic and the Ford Focus, except that they have to pay half the budget.
Guys, I think we're counting looking at our pockets, but for someone who's going to race 100,000£ are not that much. A S2000 car, say, the Lacetti Harry Vaulkhard bought, should cost around 200,000/220,000. Those cars are not new, and yet Harry bought 2 of them and is racing with one of them. With that money, he could well organize a one-make series!!!!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Aunt Sally

And the list of teams that can fund building their own cars are????

(is) longer than present with a reduced cost and we already have a healthy number of cars around.

Originally Posted by Aunt Sally

without them who is going to pay?

Every privateer who currently buys a car and funds a team to run their car, the number of which should also increase if costs are reduced.

[Aunt Sally]

We have the cars now.. but what current cars would be allowed? The Vectra! I suppose it's a start!

Originally Posted by gregc

Arena and Dynamics are running self built cars without manufacturer backing. As someone else has already pointed out, RML WSR and 888 all have the capability of building S2000 equipment, and I expect would be able to fund a NGTC programme.

Sorry, but ALL af the mentioned teams built cars with either financial help from or they have built the cars for a Manufacturer! Arena and Dynamics are the only two that have recently built cars with help from a manufacurer and without Mr Pinkney's money this year Dynamics would be struggling.

Why does everyone think that the race teams are rolling in money?

[FIRE]

The fact they increase the minimum length forces the teams to use bigger cars which will result in saloons only is great (or is the Renault Laguna a hatchback? ).

The only thing I really don't like is the banning of RWD. IMO BMW belongs to touring car racing and to exclude them from entering is wrong. Super Touring has showed FWD and RWD can race together, especially if all cars are saloons instead of mix of hatchbacks and saloons.

Time will tell if the costs stay at this level (115.000 Euro) and if manufacturers and teams will develop cars. The previous BTCC-only rule set wasn't a success. Gow should talk with other series like STCC, DTC and maybe Procar and convince them to use this rule set too. I think the main reason BTC-T failed was because it was BTCC-only.

I am curious about the look of the cars. Never been a fan of the BTC-T cars.

[gregc]

Originally Posted by Aunt Sally

Sorry, but ALL af the mentioned teams built cars with either financial help from or they have built the cars for a Manufacturer! Arena and Dynamics are the only two that have recently built cars with help from a manufacurer and without Mr Pinkney's money this year Dynamics would be struggling.

I'm not disputing any of that, and my point was about teams that have the capability to build a new race car as well as just money. Teams and drivers will still need to find sponsorship and/or other outside funding just as they do today. The big difference is they will have find about half the amount - that's a significant reduction, and it lowers the barriers to entry massively.

In reality, I suspect that what will happen is that in 2011 only 2 or 3 teams will actually bite the bullet and build NGTC cars, the rest will continue to run S2000 (I would imagine Arena, in particular, will want to get at least 3 years out of the Focus assuming they get it competitive). Over the following couple of years a few more teams will start building cars, plus other teams will use second hand 2011/12 cars, and come 2013 we will probably see the same sort of balance between NGTC/S2000 as we currently have between S2000/BTC-T. You're welcome to archive this and come back in a few years to tell me how wrong I was

A question for you... Given that you seem very opposed to these regs, what do you think should be happening? Gow & Co seem to think that S2000 is unsustainable given the costs and lack of clarity from the FIA on where they want to take the formula, and I have a lot of faith in his judgement based on his record. To reiterate a previous point, the teams have unanimously approved the changes, and were actively involved in their development, so they obviously see them as a good thing. So what should be happening, if not this?

Why does everyone think that the race teams are rolling in money?

I don't think anyone is suggesting this for a minute. One of the main objectives of these rules is to achieve big cost reductions - if you haven't already I suggest you have a look at the more detailed overview on the official site, some of the detail is IMO very important. One example: spares for the standardised parts will be available, at event, from the suppliers meaning that the teams won't each have to carry large stocks of spare parts - I can see this on it's own resulting in big cost savings.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by gregc

To reiterate a previous point, the teams have unanimously approved the changes, and were actively involved in their development, so they obviously see them as a good thing.

I agree with pretty much all of your post but do want to flag this. The teams may have been involved in the discussions but that doesn't mean it has unanimous approval.

Take a look through some of the recent treads her that have discussed which way the BTCC/WTCC regs should go. Not much in the way of a unanimous conclusion there. The BTCC teams discussion will probably have been less vocal but a doubt they were any nearer all agreeing that we were.

[Aunt Sally]

Originally Posted by gregc

A question for you... Given that you seem very opposed to these regs, what do you think should be happening?

I am not opposed to the new regs, at the moment there are too many unanswered questions and the emphisis is on the independant teams to build the cars.... Put it this way, IF assuming as suggested by TOCA we have no manufacterers and only Team Dynamics, 888 and WSR decide to build these new cars, who is going to supply cars to the rest of the grid?
Arena will tell you that you can't just design a car and race it... it needs development.

To reiterate a previous point, the teams have unanimously approved the changes, and were actively involved in their development, so they obviously see them as a good thing. So what should be happening, if not this?

It's a pity not all teams are aware of this!!!
As redshoes has said.. they were part of the discussion, but I very much doubt it was unanimously approved. In fact I know it wasn't.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by gregc

I wouldn't be at all surprised if other national championships were to adopt these rules over the next few years.

DTC was already looking for an alternative to S2000 and if WTCC implodes, chances are high STCC would pick up the rules as well. For sure a lot of the smaller European TCC would follow suit as well, since it would be cost effective to buy cars.

[gregc]

Well, regarding the unanimity thing - that's me taking a press release at face value Given that I have very little insider knowledge, that's all I can really do - if anyone knows something different (and is in a position to share it, obviously...) then I'm all ears.

On the car supply issue, as I suggested earlier on, in the first couple of years I would expect the majority of cars on the grid to still be S2000 - the Civics, Vectras, BMWs, Leons, Lacettis will all still be eligible and should be competitive assuming that the equalisation is done properly. Pulling numbers out of the air here, but let's say that by the start of the 2013 season, when S2000 will stop being competitive, we have 5 constructors each running 2 cars. If 3 of those have been going since 2011 then there are going be a few second hand cars knocking about, so at a guess at least 15 plus running to the new regs, with the "second division" S2000 cars making up the rest of the grid. That's not great numbers, although I personally expect more, but the question then is where would we be if we stuck with S2000. Of course, this is all utterly pointless crystal ball gazing...

You're right of course, there are many unanswered questions and ultimately only time will tell - then again, they only made the announcement this morning. I'm sure more detail will emerge, and I'm also sure that between now and 2011 there will be changes. But I think this is a pretty good starting point, and this is coming from someone who has been pretty consistently arguing against regulation changes recently.

[helterskelter]

Just to clarify:

From the Btcc press release I received earlier this afternoon:

The regulations will move the BTCC away from the Super 2000-specification cars used in the championship in recent years (based on those in the FIA's World Touring Car series) and have been voted through unanimously by teams in the championship.

[touring fan01]

Its pretty amusing to read through a lot of these posts.

Let's face it, we are all just opinionated "keyboard experts" and don't have anywhere near the knowledge or expertise that TOCA or Gow have in running a championship or the teams have in deciding the way the regulations should go (as was stated in the release, the 'brains' from the teams actually put together the new regs).

So I'm happy to leave it to the real experts. They actually know what they are doing far better than us here.

[Sodemo]

As long as they haven't got those ridiculously oversized rear wings the BTC cars had, im sure they will look fine.

[Félix]

Isn't anyone else worried about spec suspension elements mounted on spec subframes? I fear it would mean all cars will have the same suspension design, negating the advantages coming from a MacPherson or A-Arm setup over a live axle or whatever. In fact, with everybody riding on the same suspension, the only mechanical variable affecting a car's handling will be the wheelbase, the team's race-to-race suspension adjustments and the subframes-chassis links' rigidity. I think real racing should have rules where an hi-tech Volvo has an inherent technical advantage when compared low-tech Kia. Now you can slap a spec suspension and a spec engine on your Kia and you're fighting in the same class as the others!

I'll be curious to see what they do about the car's look; it has to be a fine mix of reminding of a road car (no super-trick aero like DTM) but still keep the "tuned" look that most race fans like (hints of Super Touring?) and still allow for overtaking and close running.

And finally, why mandate an air restrictor on top of all the other engine rules? I've heard it gets really expensive to extract maximum performance from them and that the engines still have to work a lot to make restricted power (not so good for reliability). In GT racing they tried replacing a Ferrari 550's air restricted V12 with an electronically-limited unit. It still made the 600 horses and was much closer to stock. Why not try to scale it down to 300 horses and tourers.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Félix

I think real racing should have rules where an hi-tech Volvo has an inherent technical advantage when compared low-tech Kia. Now you can slap a spec suspension and a spec engine on your Kia and you're fighting in the same class as the others!

I think the scneario you paint here is exactly part of what the rules are trying to achieve.
If one particular marque had an advantage, we would see little competition or a one-make series. By making as many different marques as competitive as possible, the variety can be maintained in the field.

The BTCC grid looks better for variety than many other series'. A complaint about F1 is regularly made that 'they all look the same'. I also hear the same comment regularly now when people see clips of WTCC and DTM.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by touring fan01

Its pretty amusing to read through a lot of these posts.

Let's face it, we are all just opinionated "keyboard experts" and don't have anywhere near the knowledge or expertise that TOCA or Gow have in running a championship or the teams have in deciding the way the regulations should go (as was stated in the release, the 'brains' from the teams actually put together the new regs).

So I'm happy to leave it to the real experts. They actually know what they are doing far better than us here.

In case you didn't know, there are ex-team members posting here... so while we may not have the power to effect changes here, many of the posters here have significant expertise and do know what they're talking about.

[Scotracer]

Originally Posted by Félix

And finally, why mandate an air restrictor on top of all the other engine rules? I've heard it gets really expensive to extract maximum performance from them and that the engines still have to work a lot to make restricted power (not so good for reliability). In GT racing they tried replacing a Ferrari 550's air restricted V12 with an electronically-limited unit. It still made the 600 horses and was much closer to stock. Why not try to scale it down to 300 horses and tourers.

You are correct. A car with an air-restrictor works just as hard as one without. That is the main problem with the S2000 engines - they have to run themselves into failure to produce the puny 270BHP they have.

The thing is with air-restrictors it is almost impossible to cheat them - the fluid dynamics of them are set by shock theory. 300BHP isn't very much anyway for a 2.0 Turbo so maybe they are trying to get the engines lower strain.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by Scotracer

The thing is with air-restrictors it is almost impossible to cheat them

Toyota WRC team may disagree with you there