The GT3 rules- already past their prime?

[Speed-King]

cmk's comment from the Zolder thread got me thinking:

GT3 was suppossed to be the savior of national GT racing in Europe and elsewhere, but right now there are a number of championships out there that look - after a quick boom - at lot worse than they did before the introduction of the GT3 rules. Notably the British and Belgian series come to mind, but race reports on GT-eins.de also suggest that the Brazilian series is in similar trouble with only about 10 cars on the grid and GT-Open's GT3-category only had a pityful 6 cars entered at the last race at Donington.

Then, there have been people who have been complaining about costs in GT3 getting out of hand for a couple of years now, notably some people from the upper echelons of Porsche Motorsport. The "common and garden" 911 Cup car was suppossed to be the baseline for GT3-racing, but since then, Porsche had to develop the Cup-S, which is in turn falling further and further behind the newer GT3 machines.

There are, however, some series where GT3 does well, like our ADAC GT-Masters series here in Germany or the GT3-class in FFSA GT in France - not to forget the European championship, which still has healthy 30+ car fields...

So what is the problem? Has GT3 as a concept failed or are these just the results of too many rivaling series or shortsighted management decisions in certain countries that result in low GT3-grids?

And if GT3 is not the future for national GT-racing, what is it?

[cptkablamo]

Australia had also come under the same pressure after using the GT3 rules. It did look for a while like the Series was to collapse but after restructuring and introducing a proper multi-class system, it seems to have a fairly good bill of health...

So I do put it down to poor management - it is no problem if you don't have the range of rich guys to put a GT3 car on the grid - you can have a good GT3 race if you have something else there to flesh out the grid as well...

[geeteeone]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

And if GT3 is not the future for national GT-racing, what is it?

I must admit that the current state of British GTs in particular is pitiful. I used to watch it back in the late 1990s when McLarens, Listers and Porsche GT1s used to head the field - if nothing else it was always spectacular, and always drew the crowds - it was being talked of as a major competitor to the BTCC at one point. I remember the first round of 1999 had a 15 car grid which was seen as disappointing then, but still had two McLarens, three Porsche GT1s and a Lister. Now the series struggles to get barely a double figure grid and that's with GT3 cars!

The one thing I miss the most about the old days of national GT racing is the 'Formula libre' feeling it had - British GT didn't follow international rules too closely, and allowed in all sorts of weird and wonderful machines that never saw the light of day elsewhere. These days there is no way for someone to build and run their own oddball car - you have to buy a GT3 off the shelf, and with prices now skyrocketing the future is looking bleak.

My favourite national series at the moment is the Dutch Supercar Challenge - it seems to manage to combine the oddball stuff and GT3s with a fair amount of success, reminds me a lot of British GT about 10 years ago.

[EuropaBambaataa]

Brazil is not exactly the best place to have a GT series, not when they have a thriving stock-car championship and most gentleman drivers are in their endurance cup with homemade sports-prototypes.

The problem with the British and Belgian series is that there were a lot of homemade small projects and a lot of cup cars that were competitive in their respective classes. Those teams just disappeared. France and Germany, on the other hand, seem to be thriving under those conditions.

As for the pan-European championships, the International GT Open is primarily geared towards GT2 and most of the GT3 teams are Italian and don't want to go to as far away as England. And GT3 is going to be prevented from growing on a national level as long as the European GT3 Championship keeps "stealing" 35-40 entries. Divide that among the UK, Belgium, Germany, France, Italy and Spain, and you have six or seven extra cars for each national championship.

So I believe GT3 is still the ideal technical regulation. Now if you want to talk failure, let's talk about GT4. So many projects that nobody's interested in, and the only thing people want to buy is Ginettas, which cost half of everything else.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by geeteeone

The one thing I miss the most about the old days of national GT racing is the 'Formula libre' feeling it had - British GT didn't follow international rules too closely, and allowed in all sorts of weird and wonderful machines that never saw the light of day elsewhere. These days there is no way for someone to build and run their own oddball car - you have to buy a GT3 off the shelf, and with prices now skyrocketing the future is looking bleak.

I think it was pretty much the same thing in Belgium. While people either raced old American GT1-cars, Porsches or BMWs, they would go completely crazy on the Porsches and the bimmers:

With crazy rearwings!

More crazy rearwings!

Wide-body-kits and sidepipes!!

And when they were feeling especially crazy, they'd stuff an M3-powertrain into a Mini-bodyshell!!!

GT3 is just so sanitized. There's not nearly enough madness in there. If I had more money than brains I'd want to built my own crazy oddball special and not run a prepackaged GT3-car.

[HORNDAWG]

You can blame it all on the Rat!! Now if the natural progression was allowed and GT-2 becomes the new GT-1, and GT-3 to GT-2, then GT-4 could become GT3 and maybe a little loosening of the "Marques" allowed in the class then you would have a place for the 1 off racer to do his thing(?). Anyways, gotta love that Rat for bringing such good, strong racing to GT around the World!



L.P.

[johntt]

I'd say no for two reasons:

1) People haven't stopped building GT3 cars in the way they have with GT1

2) GT3 is quite good with the exception of one thing: the equalisation applied to it (i may have mentioned this before ).

Some performance balancing is required otherwise we end up with a spec series, but the total levelling out of the GT3 cars eliminates all the work the engineers do in building the cars to go fast.

If one marque is pulling out a big advantage trim it back to the speed of the second fastest car, otherwise leave it be. If there are two manufacturers in close competition ahead of the other manufacturers (e.g. Porsche and Ferrari in LMS GT2), then leave it be.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

You can blame it all on the Rat!! Now if the natural progression was allowed and GT-2 becomes the new GT-1, and GT-3 to GT-2, then GT-4 could become GT3 and maybe a little loosening of the "Marques" allowed in the class then you would have a place for the 1 off racer to do his thing(?). Anyways, gotta love that Rat for bringing such good, strong racing to GT around the World!



L.P.

Thank you for such an informative and completely unbiased comment!

Make no mistake, for a while GT3 and the idea behind it worked great and in the short term a lot of series looked a lot better than they did before GT3. Heck, Germany only got a national GT-series due to the GT3-rules (quite a joke when you think about it, with this being the home country of Porsche and BMW)!
But somewhere along the way, things got pretty much out of hand. The idea behind GT3 is imho pretty sound, but it was an unexcusable mistake to let the 911 Cup-Cars fall so far behind.

Oh, and what they did to Belcar was cold-blooded murder, but then the rules-changes made in 05 to bring the cars closer to FIA GT spec had already heavily wounded that series...
Talk about fixing something that isn't broken...

[Dead-Eye]

Originally Posted by johntt

Some performance balancing is required otherwise we end up with a spec series, but the total levelling out of the GT3 cars eliminates all the work the engineers do in building the cars to go fast.

If one marque is pulling out a big advantage trim it back to the speed of the second fastest car, otherwise leave it be. If there are two manufacturers in close competition ahead of the other manufacturers (e.g. Porsche and Ferrari in LMS GT2), then leave it be.

If GT3 is already on the verge of becoming too expensive, that would definitely kill it. Everyone would have to go out and buy one of the two fastest cars to have a chance, and the manufacturers would have to spend lots of money to keep up with development.

[Purist]

The automakers taking the class seriously are already spending the big bucks to try to keep pace, and tightening the rules just makes getting every little bit of extra speed that much more expensive (especially when you spent the money to go fast and had those gains taken away).

[Félix]

The races I get to see have Aston (1), Audis (2), Ford GTs (3), Alpinas (4), Morgans under the right conditions and well driven Porsches when it's raining... all leading.

Is there any other series out there where there are so many potential winners.

[Danny_GT2]

I like GT3 racing! It's fun watching heavy, powerful cars (Ford GT) against light & nimble cars (Porsche 997). I don't know about it saving GT racing but it's for sure a stepping stone!

[Subaru_WRX_STi]

why saying GT3 is a failure ? it has close racing, many constructors and tuners, a lot of fun too, yes maybe the cars are becoming more and more expensive, and as fast the GT2 are now (Silverstone, the Morgan did a quicker lap than the ProSpeed Porsche), but I like it, the one I "hate" is GT4, absolutly rubbish !

[johntt]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

If GT3 is already on the verge of becoming too expensive, that would definitely kill it. Everyone would have to go out and buy one of the two fastest cars to have a chance, and the manufacturers would have to spend lots of money to keep up with development.

Good point, and I suppose it has always been something of a Pro-Am category.

Originally Posted by Subaru_WRX_STi

why saying GT3 is a failure ? it has close racing, many constructors and tuners, a lot of fun too, yes maybe the cars are becoming more and more expensive, and as fast the GT2 are now (Silverstone, the Morgan did a quicker lap than the ProSpeed Porsche), but I like it, the one I "hate" is GT4, absolutly rubbish !

I think theres a reason why GT3 cars were quicker than GT2 cars around Silverstone, something to do with the way FIA-GT runs their GT2 cars, can't remember what exactly.

GT4 can be entertaining, can be not. In British GT, its effectively Formula Ginetta. I saw some highlights from the the European series from Oschersleben in the wet the other day and it looked very entertaining with a Porsche 911 and a BMW M3 racing all the way to the line.

[helgi]

I'm not a long-standing GT fan and maybe my opinion is wrong.
GT racing is a real world. Keep it natural and it will live forever. I can not understand that standardization processes. Why Italian GT3 MUST = British GT3? Just put some standart classes and let other national classes to live and grow. Why should every GT3 champ be ruled by SRO? This standardization is awful.
OK.There're some teams that would like to start in different GT3 championships on that standardized basis. But maybe there're even more teams that don't want or have no reason to travell in other countries. Or maybe they want to use some non-standard cars. Look at Mosler. Where should they go next year when it's not allowed to compete in British GT? This murder of unique character of national racing and world wide standardization is awful. And new world gt championship is a real joke with closed entry list and that Airbus that will carry a new circus around the world.
Of course, I make a mistake,but just think it's better to keep national racing natural as possible with multiclass entry lists and fewer equalization stupid rules. Were there any ballast systems in 70-80's? And why do we call it the Golden Era then? It's my opinion but with all that standardized, purified, sterile present day racing I'd better dig some information about old days racing rather than waste an hour of my life watching entertaining equalized events.

[Purist]

If the cars are standardized by class, a manufacturer or constructor can build more of a given type of car, which makes the proposition better for them as they make more money. This in turn makes it easier to provide fields of GT cars across the board. And with greater volume, the unit price on each car should be reduced (as well as prices on parts and maintenance), which allows for more participants to get involved.

[dj choc ice]

what a load of tosh, GT3 failed has the OP had their head up their rear for the past 3 years?
GT3 is the biggest success story in sports car racing for a very long time, costs have gone up but thats going to happen when you have many big constructors competing in the same championship, the car's represent pretty good value for money, the problem is that having one class for the national championships does not work, national GT series should be open to GT2, GT3, GT4 and a local odd ball motors, remember the TVR Speed 12 in British GT around 2000/2001, the TVR T400 Tuscan things around 2001/2002 and the Morgan Aero 8 as well?
There is a prime difference between a International/European championship and a national championship, what works for one doesnt necessarily work for the other, the blame hardly lies with GT3, it lies with poor management, the British GT is a prime victim of this, it saddens me that the championship has become a mere shadow of its former self.
Now if you want to talk about failures, lets talk about GT4, dull, uninspiring, very slightly raced up road cars posing as GT racing car's, no thank you, British GT, Belgian GT etc should follow the example of the GT Cup over here in the UK, that championship is doing very very well!

[MJ_N_09]

If GT3 is a failure, then I'm Michael Schumaker. Multiple teams have dropped down to here from GT1 and 2. I think that's enough indication that GT3 is the strongest overall.

[cmk]

Originally Posted by MJ_N_09

If GT3 is a failure, then I'm Michael Schumaker. Multiple teams have dropped down to here from GT1 and 2. I think that's enough indication that GT3 is the strongest overall.

The point is not how GT3 is doing on the European scale so much as how it has affected the various national championships that have adopted it. That is an open question to me at this juncture - I find it tempting to make some statements in light of 2009 developments but it is easy to be pessimistic in the climate we found ourselves in at the beginning of the racing season. I think the fate of GT3 national championships in 2010 will likely be the most telling.

[Mike Sweeney]

It must be really tough to try and balance all the necesary factors, and holding back the inevitable arms race must be especially hard work for SRO/FIA. I think FIA GT3 is about right, grid sizes and variation of marque must be the yardstick...considering all that's going on in the world I think it's doing pretty well.

As for National GT, all sounds rosy now but looking back but I don't remember it always being so great or so popular; as for the eclectic mix of cars...well, at times GT in the UK resembled a kit car meeting more than a credible national GT championship, often with what felt like endless bickering about rules/eligibility/definitions, etc.

Fact is, SRO have done a great job to make GT racing credible, certainly across europe and possibly worldwide. Maybe they're lost in the woods a bit with GT1/GT2 currently (another topic) but for me, GT3 is a great platform and I hope they continue to keep it so.

[rich07]

The problem with some national championships is that the management and orgnaisation of some national championship isnt good enough which leads to conflict and potential entrants not joining the national championship which leads to smaller grid sizes. I'm looking in my own backyard and I'm not liking what I see...
There's plenty of GT3 cars out there, not all of them are being raced which is a shame as GT3 is a wonderful idea, SRO are on a winner.

Close racing, variety of marques, cheaper then GT1+GT2, I hope GT3 will be around for years to come.

[KA]

Originally Posted by Mike Sweeney

It must be really tough to try and balance all the necesary factors, and holding back the inevitable arms race must be especially hard work for SRO/FIA. I think FIA GT3 is about right, grid sizes and variation of marque must be the yardstick...considering all that's going on in the world I think it's doing pretty well.

As for National GT, all sounds rosy now but looking back but I don't remember it always being so great or so popular; as for the eclectic mix of cars...well, at times GT in the UK resembled a kit car meeting more than a credible national GT championship, often with what felt like endless bickering about rules/eligibility/definitions, etc.

Fact is, SRO have done a great job to make GT racing credible, certainly across europe and possibly worldwide. Maybe they're lost in the woods a bit with GT1/GT2 currently (another topic) but for me, GT3 is a great platform and I hope they continue to keep it so.

Something that doesn't seem to have gone away under the current regime either:
http://www.msauk.org/site/cms/newsar...ter=1&nid=1271
http://www.mosler.co.uk/mosler/news_final.asp?id=81
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=117690

'credible' isn't a word that comes to mind in connection with the British series right now.....

As you say, the GT3 rules are a great platform- SRO's administration of them, in the UK at least, is another story- we had the ProSport saga a couple of years back, the GT4 Ginetta controversy last year, and now 'Mosler-Gate'. Maybe whoever looks after the British series for Ratel ought to take a week or two off and take their own regulation book with them as holiday reading....

[Simon S]

Personally I hated the idea of GT3 from the off...

basically, my beef is how can you have a class with NO TECH REGS?

GT1 and GT2 both have fixed and enforceable tech regs, GT3 is just open season, (wait's for the inevitable holomogation argument yet again!)

so, every year every car then get's 'upgraded' and the goalposts move such that if your car is not upgraded (at VAST cost) your nowhere.

then we get to equalisation, what a joke!

what really illustrates the point is when FIA GT3 times at Silverstone were ahead of the GT2 times.

I remember the whole argument for GT3 was to cut costs, err... epic fail on that front then.

[d.rocky]

Originally Posted by Simon S

I remember the whole argument for GT3 was to cut costs, err... epic fail on that front then.

dont the higher profile championships always end up having increasing costs as competition grows?

I'm not disagreeing with you by the way its just the way it seems to go.

as for the GT3 times being quicker than GT2 times.... thats a little backwards!

[ger80]

Agree with Simon.
About cost, well, if they would balance all cars around a 996 cup (which gets no development anymore), it would be much cheaper