IMSA Should we be worried about the future of GTD?

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by RedSquirrel

I was going to disagree with replacing GT3 with GT4 in WSC. The speed differential seems just too big between GT4 cars and what are effectively (pace-wise) first-gen Audi R18s. But at Sebring in 2003, the Bentleys were doing 1:48s in qually, many of the GT2 Porsches and Ferraris were doing 2:09/2:10. GT4 pole at the weekend was 2:11. So it's plausible.

And that 2:11 is on Contis... with Michelin coming in, 2:09/2:10 should absolutely be in reach,

[jjvincent]

I'll use Sebring for an example.
1990 Qualifying:
GTP: 1:55.7
GTL: 2:06.4 (+10.7)
GTO: 2:10.2 (+14.5)
GTU: 2:20.1 (+24.4)

2018 Qualifying
DPi: 1:47.4
GTLM: 1:55.8 (+8.4)
GTD: 1:58.7 (+11.3)
GS: 2:11.6 (+24.2)
TCR: 2:16.4 (+29.0)

So, I know the track is a bit different but it gives you an idea of the speed differential. If GS is too slow today, then GTU was too slow in 1990. If you were standing at turn 10 in 1990, a GTO car would go past you only just over 1 second per lap faster than a GS car today. That TCR car was passing you just under 4 seconds per lap faster than a GTU car.

[JorritVD]

To be clear, the GT3 cars not became more expensive at all.

In 2006 you could buy an Aston Martin DBRS9 for 300.000 euro
In 2015 you could buy an Audi R8 LMS for 350.000 euro. With a starters and parts pack it comes about 400.000 euro.

The first GT3 cars were purely made for sprint racing, and even than they had troubles to even finishing an hour sprint race without issues. I remember the GT3 for the first time participating the 24 Hours of Spa, in which a GT3 team could enter three GT3 cars under one number. Every car would do 8 hours. Nowadays the GT3 cars can do a full season/endurance race as if it is a sprint race. In that case I think the extra costs is worth the money.

In contrary the environment of drivers / teams / facilities have become completly become different. This proffesionalism hasn't been a bad thing and also brought good things:
- Cars are more reliable, so basically lower running costs, less time on maintance
- Cars are run basically easier to run (more arrive and drive)
- A manufacturer has a spare parts truck at events, so teams not need to bring their own truck with spares and have a huge load of spares that all costst money.

The problem is, is that "customer sport" has been abused by certain brands. This has become kind of a cold war and an arms race and the privateer teams have become innocent victims of it, which is strange.

jjvincent can say GT3 needs to be dropped, and GT4 needs to take its place. But If a GT4 season in PWC is already on the same lever of a PWC GT3 season in 2014, than surely something fundamentally else is wrong than just pointing at the GT3 cars, also because a GT4 car its selling prize is around 200.000. So basically the running costs therefore of a GT4 in 2018 is higher than a more expensive GT3 in 2014. That doesn't make sense to me, and imo that is the blame of manufacturers abusing "customers sports".

What series possible can do is to change the sporting regulations. They should be able to deny entries if there is to much factory involvement in it.
- Land Motorsport basically abuses the silver driver rating (like a lot of other teams and series do). They not have a Keating or a Potter, they got a talented youngster behind the wheel who is a factory driver.

Maybe it looks like PWC has done a wrong decision to not allow factory GT3 involvement anymore. But this could in the end be a very good decision and this year maybe is only a transition year for that championship's GT3 classes that the heated budgets become slowly lower. During the season a lot of privateer GT3 teams might realize that this might be the series for them.

[carbsmith]

There's definitely starting to be some pushback from the SRO in general now. They let a lot slide while things were still blowing up but in addition to PWC kicking out factory teams this year we've seen new regulations about car production to prevent factory specials and significant effort to prevent a new evo car outperforming the old model. As long as GT4 exists and is a viable alternative for many series and teams it will never be what it was though.

[tux]

One easy thing that can be done is to stop manufacturers bringing out a yearly upgrade kit.

[MaskedRacer]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

And that 2:11 is on Contis... with Michelin coming in, 2:09/2:10 should absolutely be in reach,

Also if a series mandated a bigger and flatter spec rear wing for GT4 cars rather than that ugly little curved one they use now. It could be 2 min 7 at Sebring perhaps.

[MaskedRacer]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

There's definitely starting to be some pushback from the SRO in general now. They let a lot slide while things were still blowing up but in addition to PWC kicking out factory teams this year we've seen new regulations about car production to prevent factory specials and significant effort to prevent a new evo car outperforming the old model. As long as GT4 exists and is a viable alternative for many series and teams it will never be what it was though.

At least GT4 being around keeps them honest with making sure GT3 stays reasonable. I love GT3 and hope it remains viable for a long time to come. After thinking about it I am starting to warm up to the idea for IMSA to make the Daytona 24 a non points paying race for the full season championship. Teams like CJ Wilson and HART could really benefit from something like that.

[jjvincent]

You guys have brought up some good points. As we have seen with actual drivers that post here, it's not just one thing that is the magic bullet that will fix the problem. It's a combination of things. As I have covered before, the inflation rate in racing is completely out of whack from reality. This the reason why those rich guys that have X amount to spend each year on racing, drop GT3 and go to GT4. Thus GT4 is a global hit and GT3 is not looking so hot. Thus the reason why most of the GS guys from a few years ago are gone completely. They were used to spending $50K per weekend and when it turns into $80K, that's beyond their budget.

One of the issues with having GT3, GT4 and TCR are things like undercover factory teams. Other issues are manufacturers that show up to run and need a year for development under race conditions (why not do that at home like others do). Then those $50K update kits. Why update a car only to slow it back down again? I'm all for a reliability update of certain parts (i.e. uprights, transmissions, engines) but there's no need at all for an aero update and revised pickup points. Yet that's what we do. Another issue is that when the model comes to an end, the manufacturer comes up with the race version within a few months, thus they want you to race the new one, not the old one. A good example of that are all of these Golf TCR cars. If you buy one today, it has a year of life and then VW will have the MK8 (due to go into production in June 2019). By the end of 2019, your TCR car will be worth 30% of what it is today. You will have to buy a new one because VW sure wants to sell those MK8's because their racing program is a profit center.

This is not even getting into the price of admission to pro racing. It's literally double as to what it was 5 years ago. This is what you pay the sanctioning body. How can double be something that is justified? Then the point of the level of professionalism has only to do with presentation and not quality. The problem is, IMSA and PWC reward that in how you are treated. There was a time they were happy when you were giving it your best shot and wanted you to feel welcome. Not any more. So, teams have to spend money on fluff which that budget is exceeding the R&D budgets of when we had to do all of the R&D ourselves. In the end, we reduced one line item and increased another by 2X. This is why doing a budget in the real world for over 30 years makes you see where the trend is going. More show and no go.

Then there's one other thing pro racing will never tell you about. All of the other startup series' that are taking this money from those rich guys. It's happening right now and it's literally only growing those series'.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by MaskedRacer

Also if a series mandated a bigger and flatter spec rear wing for GT4 cars rather than that ugly little curved one they use now. It could be 2 min 7 at Sebring perhaps.

Bring back the Crawford wing from Rolex GT!

Gesendet von meinem SM-A320FL mit Tapatalk

[MaskedRacer]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Bring back the Crawford wing from Rolex GT!

Gesendet von meinem SM-A320FL mit Tapatalk

In relation to the GT3 cars, I was never a fan of those spec rear wings from Grand Am GT and the first year of GTD. Another reason why I was never a Grand Am fan in addition to those ugly Gen 2 Rileys. The Grand Am GT category was extreme minor league compared to ALMS GT (now GTLM).

With that said, the Crawford wing idea might work for the GT4s.

[WolfsburgRS]

Originally Posted by jjvincent

This is not even getting into the price of admission to pro racing. It's literally double as to what it was 5 years ago. This is what you pay the sanctioning body. How can double be something that is justified? Then the point of the level of professionalism has only to do with presentation and not quality. The problem is, IMSA and PWC reward that in how you are treated. There was a time they were happy when you were giving it your best shot and wanted you to feel welcome. Not any more. So, teams have to spend money on fluff which that budget is exceeding the R&D budgets of when we had to do all of the R&D ourselves. In the end, we reduced one line item and increased another by 2X. This is why doing a budget in the real world for over 30 years makes you see where the trend is going. More show and no go.

Then there's one other thing pro racing will never tell you about. All of the other startup series' that are taking this money from those rich guys. It's happening right now and it's literally only growing those series'.

Do you think AER / Champ car and the like are ever going to be in a position to challenge IMSA or PWC when it comes to eyeballs and marketing dollars? Or are we strictly talking drivers having fun, exposure be damned? I suppose the only real selling point of the IMSA/PWC experience over the fledgling series is that you are in "the big show." I know a handful of people doing AER and it's stupid cheap, relatively speaking, when it comes to racing.

[jjvincent]

Originally Posted by WolfsburgRS

Do you think AER / Champ car and the like are ever going to be in a position to challenge IMSA or PWC when it comes to eyeballs and marketing dollars? Or are we strictly talking drivers having fun, exposure be damned? I suppose the only real selling point of the IMSA/PWC experience over the fledgling series is that you are in "the big show." I know a handful of people doing AER and it's stupid cheap, relatively speaking, when it comes to racing.

You do realize that IMSA and PWC have 95% of the seats paid for by rental drivers. That 95% are only concerned that they get a pic of their car with the company name on it and that satisfies the IRS for advertising expenditures. Part of that 95% are rich parents that have a certain budget because their budding Michael Schumacher will get signed on by a factory team. When that doesn't happen, then they are on their own.

Right now PWC is at COTA. Go on their site and look at the lap record holders for that track in PWC are today. You'll find that they are probably back in Europe or driver coaching. Driver coaching actually means, "convincing a rich guy to pay for me to go pro racing again".

The marketing and eyeballs is just a thing to make the renters feel good about what they spend. That is all. If it wasn't then these other "club" series' would have about 10 cars per event. Looks like they don't and if you notice, AER has gone from Chumpcar +1 to a bunch of racers that gave up on IMSA and PWC over the last 10 years.