World GT1 Championship

[Adam43]

GT3 is the future until the future comes and then we'll have the same problems again. At that time GT4 will replace it, except that by then GT3 will be called GT1 and be replaced by GT2 or 3.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

GT3 is the future until the future comes and then we'll have the same problems again. At that time GT4 will replace it, except that by then GT3 will be called GT1 and be replaced by GT2 or 3.

I am afraid you are right...

[JAG]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

no offence but GT3 cars are crap in my view they are so slow and uninspiring i mean seriously those cars replacing GT1 or GT2? not likely lots of fans will go against the FIA or SRO on that decision i would strongly advise the FIA or SRO or ACO or even IMSA not to do that would be a very bad move indeed

GT3 cars often lap within a second or two of leading GT2 cars.

For a GT3 'plus' category, add 150-200BHP to the 500 odd bhp DBRS9, Z06 and Viper, put them on a sensible diet, and they'd be as quick as back marking GT1 cars.

Obviously engine costs would increase, more expensive carbon body panels would be required, but still, that would be far cheaper than a current GT1 car which seemingly needs to be modified from top to bottom.

We need to get back to 'basic', production chassis, with big, powerful engines and a minimum weight of 1100-1200kg as in the BPR days.

I wonder how much a 1996 GT1 spec Esprit V8 Turbo (580bhp, 900kg) cost to build and run compared to a 2006 spec Aston Martin DBR9 (1150kg, 620bhp)?

[davemk7]

by the time gt3 is gt1 there will be a new gt3? 7 years ago there was gt1 and then gt2 became gt and added ngt and now gt1 vanished and now we have gt1, gt2 and gt3 and it looks like gt3 will be the new gt1 after a rebranding.

anybody confused I am. Still I like gt3, 8 current cars plus at least 2 or 3 more coming soon, keep the current format with spa (and get the national championships involved for the 24 hour and you've got a really good championship, I think? (hope it'll be good)

[F360]

Originally Posted by mirkob

SMALL UPDATE:

SportAutoMoto, tell also that Kuteman (JMB) owner of a MC12 could be interested to come back in GT1 with the Maserati car; I know that one of 2005 JMB cars is Kuteman's car; who is the owner of the other MC12 ? And where is it ?

I believe the other car is owned by Dick Waiijenberg in Holland...
Peter Kutemann's car was the #16 Red Bull entry last year in FIA GT.

[Garp]

We need to get back to 'basic', production chassis, with big, powerful engines and a minimum weight of 1100-1200kg as in the BPR days.

nag nag............ Sounds like a DB9R

You still don't get it do ya. Costs are determined by competition level not by rules.



I hope that LMP1 will become LMGTP1
with GT2 as backing from small mfg's and privateers.
With GT3 as ful privateer backing,

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Garp

nag nag............ Sounds like a DB9R

You still don't get it do ya. Costs are determined by competition level not by rules.

Costs are determined by how fast you want to go; entry level prices are determined strictly by how confining the rules are.
The more controlling the rules, the more it costs to go fast.

The GT cars do not need expensive light weight body panels; they need for the wings and diffusers that have zero to do with street cars, to be eliminated.
The cars will be slower and therefore, at minimum, will need fewer contrived rules to keep them slower than the prototypes, they have quickly approached, only to be hit with new, slow-them-down, contrived rules.
Bob

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Garp

nag nag............ Sounds like a DB9R

You still don't get it do ya. Costs are determined by competition level not by rules.

Upto a point.

Current GT1 cars are built to a technical standard that is totally uneccessary.

For a GT1 chassis to cost $1m is over the top, there is far too much freedom in the chassis construction/design.

Of course competition drives up costs, but if technical regulations were as restrictive as GT3, but with more power, less weight, start-up costs would be reduced dramtically.

Is there really any need for much of the exotic materials, technology and freedom to relocate the engine etc?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by JAG

Upto a point.

Is there really any need for much of the exotic materials, technology and freedom to relocate the engine etc?

What are the engine location rules for GT1?

[Asa]

Now that FIA GT is likely to be going down the 2 hours route, is there any chance it can join back the WTCC to form the Super Racing Weekend again? OK some of the races are held overseas now and will be hard to join, but at least they can join back for the European rounds?

GT will be able to get back Eurosport coverage then, won't it?

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by Garp

I hope that LMP1 will become LMGTP1
with GT2 as backing from small mfg's and privateers.
With GT3 as ful privateer backing,

LMP1 stays as it is with a seperate class for GTP , why not ?

LMP2 stays as it is . Its really starting to get interesting .

GT1 stays as it is with GT2 as it is as well . They work fine .

Why fix it if it aint broken ? There is plenty of support for GT1 and full grids too with the exception of the ALMS , and there would be a lot more if American car manufacturers (exception GM ) would support their own series too , but the Eurpoeans support the ALMS , so why bother is the attitude from across is the pond , imo . There is 4 American chassis in the whole ALMS series , there needs to be something done about that .

I think GT3 should be a support series or a national series . Its "not" spectacular enough imo .

A lot of people do not take into account what the drivers want , thats more speed . Then let them have it . After all , I dont like somebody trying to tell me how to do my job , when they no , no better themselves .

Sportscar racing has always been controversial and the biggest thing for stability is consistancy ..... and not chopping and changing rules every other year .

Im not surprised that teams like Acemco and others get Pixxed off when the goal posts get moved around all the time .

As Reinhold Jöest once said ..... " If it is not broken , dont fix it !!!

[davemk7]

Originally Posted by Asa

Now that FIA GT is likely to be going down the 2 hours route, is there any chance it can join back the WTCC to form the Super Racing Weekend again? OK some of the races are held overseas now and will be hard to join, but at least they can join back for the European rounds?

GT will be able to get back Eurosport coverage then, won't it?

I really hope not, eurosports coverage was very poor for most of last year, and keep them away from the wtcc please. I believe they have a multi year contract with ? (bravo2 / player)'s parent company anyway?

[davemk7]

Originally Posted by The Badger

LMP1 stays as it is with a seperate class for GTP , why not ?

LMP2 stays as it is . Its really starting to get interesting .

GT1 stays as it is with GT2 as it is as well . They work fine .

Why fix it if it aint broken ? There is plenty of support for GT1 and full grids too with the exception of the ALMS , and there would be a lot more if American car manufacturers (exception GM ) would support their own series too , but the Eurpoeans support the ALMS , so why bother is the attitude from across is the pond , imo . There is 4 American chassis in the whole ALMS series , there needs to be something done about that .

I think GT3 should be a support series or a national series . Its "not" spectacular enough imo .

A lot of people do not take into account what the drivers want , thats more speed . Then let them have it . After all , I dont like somebody trying to tell me how to do my job , when they no , no better themselves .

Sportscar racing has always been controversial and the biggest thing for stability is consistancy ..... and not chopping and changing rules every other year .

Im not surprised that teams like Acemco and others get Pixxed off when the goal posts get moved around all the time .

As Reinhold Jöest once said ..... " If it is not broken , dont fix it !!!

I agree with that, GT1 and GT2 are great, I like all of it the way it is, but the lack of entries will be what brings it down, Persoannal no change would be better, but there isn't the support for it.

[mirkob]

I agree with davemk, Sky Sport Italy had a perfect coverage of the all events of FIAGT 2006; also for the 24h Spa, thay showed all images available from SRO Production.

Also in my home SKYSPORT digital-signal is better then Eurosport signal (I think is bad bitrate form Eurosport)

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

What are the engine location rules for GT1?

You can lower and move engines back by a small amount, which I'm assuming gives a very small performance advantage, but costs a great deal to implement.

It comes down to this, if you gave Prodrive a DB9 road car, could they build a competition version thats quicker than a current GT2, but with a pricetag of £250,000?

[JAG]

Originally Posted by The Badger

LMP1 stays as it is with a seperate class for GTP , why not ?

LMP2 stays as it is . Its really starting to get interesting .

GT1 stays as it is with GT2 as it is as well . They work fine .

Why fix it if it aint broken ? There is plenty of support for GT1 and full grids too with the exception of the ALMS , and there would be a lot more if American car manufacturers (exception GM ) would support their own series too , but the Eurpoeans support the ALMS , so why bother is the attitude from across is the pond , imo . There is 4 American chassis in the whole ALMS series , there needs to be something done about that .

I think GT3 should be a support series or a national series . Its "not" spectacular enough imo .

A lot of people do not take into account what the drivers want , thats more speed . Then let them have it . After all , I dont like somebody trying to tell me how to do my job , when they no , no better themselves .

Sportscar racing has always been controversial and the biggest thing for stability is consistancy ..... and not chopping and changing rules every other year .

Im not surprised that teams like Acemco and others get Pixxed off when the goal posts get moved around all the time .

As Reinhold Jöest once said ..... " If it is not broken , dont fix it !!!

Realistic options in GT1 are limitied to Aston Martin, Saleen and Corvette.

GT3 isn't spectacular or quick enough to replace GT1, but would a 'GT3' DBRS9, with a GT1 spec engine (designed to run 3-4 race weekends) and less weight, be spectacular enough?

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by JAG

You can lower and move engines back by a small amount, which I'm assuming gives a very small performance advantage, but costs a great deal to implement.

Realistic options in GT1 are limitied to Aston Martin, Saleen and Corvette.

GT3 isn't spectacular or quick enough to replace GT1, but would a 'GT3' DBRS9, with a GT1 spec engine (designed to run 3-4 race weekends) and less weight, be spectacular enough?

In the original AAGT-GTX classes, the engine could be moved six inches, left to right, and twelve inches front to rear in the IMSA.
In T-A Cat. II, the engine had to remain centered but could be moved six inches front to rear.
The Firewall, which could not be altered in any way actually was the determining limit.
The new Corvette does not have a block mounted tranny, so I imagine they can move it back a small amount, but not too much as it is the location of the engine to the firewall that prevented Chevy from installing a Big Block engine without some redesign.

Moving the engine makes header location much simpler task, and is not that expensive to incororate.
Cars that ran both IMSA and T-A during mod. prod. days, had to relocate the engine for the T-A, and more than a few ran both series, switching back and forth.

As I said before, they do not have to be any lighter, at least do not let them use body panels not made from prod. material.
The greenhouse and doors should be directly off of a prod. car and ban non-stock rocker panels shape, which are far more important to make aero aids work, than many relize.
If they give them wider tires, remove the aero aids, and eliminate restrictors, they will be quite spectacular to watch.
They will not corner as fast as now, but their acceration from corners will increase.
They will take a few years to get back seconds lost by the removal of aero aids, and added weight, but will be far more entertaining to watch, plus such rules give each team its own chance to find an advantage unique to that team.

Bob

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by JAG

Realistic options in GT1 are limitied to Aston Martin, Saleen and Corvette.

GT3 isn't spectacular or quick enough to replace GT1, but would a 'GT3' DBRS9, with a GT1 spec engine (designed to run 3-4 race weekends) and less weight, be spectacular enough?

personally i would replace GT1 with GT2 cars with wider tyres, carbon brakes a bit more downforce and around 550bhp should be much cheaper then the current GT1 cars and have GT2 as modified GT3 cars with less weight improved aero and bigger brakes and so on and so forth

LMP1 well thats fine bar the gurney flap which kills the cars striaght line speed remove the gurney flap and watch speeds reach over 210mph atleast and keep LMP2 as it is looks great in LMP2 with customer porsche RS spyders making there way out next year and the new honda/acura LMP engined cars and honda's own LMP car and also the new courage LC75 LMP2 is looking to be epic next year and there will also be a slew of current lola B05/40's modified to the new 2007 spec car with improved aero's and so on and so forth

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by JAG

Realistic options in GT1 are limitied to Aston Martin, Saleen and Corvette.

GT3 isn't spectacular or quick enough to replace GT1, but would a 'GT3' DBRS9, with a GT1 spec engine (designed to run 3-4 race weekends) and less weight, be spectacular enough?

It certainly would look spectacular ..... but im a fan of difusers and big wings and big wheel archs and I like the thought of a car that looks like a road car , but beefed up considerably . Like the 911 to the 935 .

[pitviper]

Which is why i love the looks of the Super GT cars...

pit

[old man]

Just found this forum site and am enjoying the comments, a few views of my own;

The organisers have moved the class structure down over the years, the old GT1 went away and we lost glorious cars like the McLaren and GT1 Porsche and they then called the old GT2 the new GT1 and NGT became GT2. The problem for Ratel would seem to me to be that he could never get enough entries for any class to make the series tie up financially and so he has to have two classes to get the income to run the FIA series.

GT3 cars were fun this year but not seious world class racing because top drivers were not allowed in, the Porsche GT2 car is actually called a GT3 RSR.

And what does it cost to run these cars? Most cars in any of the 4 LM classes cost a £million or more to run for any season (more in the USA I expect because it is such a big place) plus the cost of the car and equipment and the teams need some return for their sponsors, sorry marketing partners, in TV viewing figures, spectators and press coverage. Autosport really gets my goat when it puts GT cars as an afterthought, after Jarama GT2 got about 30 words if that. There were 15 cars in that class, more than any other but the teams got nothing to show their sponsors for paying about £100K per car to do that race. Despite this Panoz took out a double page ad, if the readers of Autosprt are not interested in GT2, which you would think by the scant attention it gets, why did Panoz advertise there?

Leave the class structure as it is, keep Eurosport right out of it because their coverage was lousy, give the press coverage a boost and the spectators some information when the race is on.

They are exciting cars mostly well driven and if spectators know what is going on the races have more interest than certain single seater series.

[bonedome]

I agree with the point about coverage in Autosport both print and web formats, although I still buy it as another source of info however limited. More promotion is the key thing. If the series has more presence will this make the Autosports of the world dedicate more column inches? Hope so

[AU N EGL]

Racing on a world circuit is very expesive. Look at the F1 team budgets.

Manufacures may support but wont pay for a whole team.

Racing on any continental circuit for any team is expesive.

Arn't most of the GT3 Teams run by very wealthy ppl vs sponsors or factory support?

[old man]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Racing on a world circuit is very expesive. Look at the F1 team budgets.

Manufacures may support but wont pay for a whole team.

Racing on any continental circuit for any team is expesive.

Arn't most of the GT3 Teams run by very wealthy ppl vs sponsors or factory support?

Yes, the further you go, the more it costs but I don't think the teams in FIA GT that have so called "factory support" get much more than some spares and the loan of contracted drivers, mostly the money comes from the team owners it seems to me with whatever support from "Marketing Partners" they can get. Factory entries were banned after Mercedes swept the board in about 1993 or 4, GruppeM did it last year and they changed the rules to discourage 2 professional drivers so the attitude to factory entries would have to change if they are to get involved in a World Championship

In GT3 the cars have to be bought by either a driver or the team running him and they are all paid for by the drivers own money so far as I can see as no professionals are allowed.

In my younger days were such things as start money, prize money, travel funds and even appearance money for famous drivers that would bring in the crowds. Those days are gone, now the entrants pay the bills, look at the entrance fee for Le Mans, what is it £30,000 or was that Euro just to enter?

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by old man

Yes, the further you go, the more it costs but I don't think the teams in FIA GT that have so called "factory support" get much more than some spares and the loan of contracted drivers, mostly the money comes from the team owners it seems to me with whatever support from "Marketing Partners" they can get. Factory entries were banned after Mercedes swept the board in about 1993 or 4, GruppeM did it last year and they changed the rules to discourage 2 professional drivers so the attitude to factory entries would have to change if they are to get involved in a World Championship

Only GT1 may have all drivers with factory support. GT2 may have one of two drivers or two of three drivers with factory support IIRC

In GT3 the cars have to be bought by either a driver or the team running him and they are all paid for by the drivers own money so far as I can see as no professionals are allowed.

Plus must be over 40 or 50 years old and no former world champions. GT3 is 'Gentlmans' racing.

In my younger days were such things as start money, prize money, travel funds and even appearance money for famous drivers that would bring in the crowds. Those days are gone, now the entrants pay the bills, look at the entrance fee for Le Mans, what is it £30,000 or was that Euro just to enter?

Here in the states there is 'contigancy money." the team puts a product sponsors sticker on the car, in appropate places, and used that product which the team initally purchased and if and only IF, or Contigent on top three Placing is any money or free product given back to the team.

Many teams request 'funded' drivers. a driver must pay or bring a sponsor to pay for that race. Not un common for funded drivers to bring $10,000 to $30,000 per race to a team. Plus if the funderd driver crashes the race car they pay to repair it too.