GT2 replaced by GT3 ..... ACO new idea

[dj choc ice]

it would seem ludicrous in every sense of the word to get rid of GT1 when it is on such a high and GT2 when it is on such a high as well.

also AU, on the note of homologation i thought the BMW M6 and mercedes SLR were homologated for racing in the FIA GT or were in the process of being homologated for GT1.

after all wasnt there many rumours that BMW was thinking of stepping into GT1 with the M6 and mercedes the same with the SLR or was i mistaken and losing my mind?

[The Badger]

But choc ice ..... its not really on a high , is it ? I mean , whats new on the horizon .

DBR9 is at least 3 years old , Saleen is older and the C6R is 3 years old too , with nobody seriously intending on building a GT1 car .

[Asa]

I think GT3 can have its own 24 hours race, not necessarily at Le Mans.

The Lotus Exige 300RR is in Malaysia. It won last year's Merdeka 12 Hours race at Sepang. It contested the Zhuhai round of the FIA GT Championship in 2005 in G2 class, not GT2.

[SebringMG]

Originally Posted by The Badger

But choc ice ..... its not really on a high , is it ? I mean , whats new on the horizon .

DBR9 is at least 3 years old , Saleen is older and the C6R is 3 years old too , with nobody seriously intending on building a GT1 car .

Unofrtunately this will always be the case as it largely depends upon the manufacturers building new models - and for this class of car the turnaround will be a 6 to 7 year shelf life.

Add to this the Murcielago, MC12, Koeniggsegg and you have a pretty decent field. Rumoured cars are the M6, new Porsche GT1, SLR?

The same can be said in GT2 and 3 - there is not likely to be any new models for a good few years.......GT3 has lots of cars but IMO they should be kept as they are.....a good entry point for GT racing and gentleman drivers......do not try and make them the new GT2.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by SebringMG

.
Rumoured cars are the M6, new Porsche GT1, SLR?

AFAIK none of these will happen....at least not with factory backing.

[renkadima]

Originally Posted by Asa

I think GT3 can have its own 24 hours race, not necessarily at Le Mans.

We should get our first indication of how GT3 cars fare over 24 hours at this year's Zolder 24, which is being promoted as a 'GT3 Festival'.

[Satorian]

The M6 homologation is already years old and Theissen stated that there are no plans to race the M6.

Perhaps with their future M1 successor. Which would take a few years to materialize.


I would expect a GT3 M3 earlier, which is interesting in itself.

[JAG]

If you look at DSC you will see thay point out the GT3 Corvette Z06 outqualified Enges GT2 F430, 1:52.158 vs. 1:52.268.

This really is all the evidence we need to make GT2 more like GT3.

We could take GT2 cars like the F430, give them 14in tyres, but unlike the 997 GT2, still run at 1125kg, give them 550bhp, finally name them GT1.

You can't give them current GT1 restrictors, as that would massively disadvatage smaller engined cars like the 997 and F430 compared to big V8's/V12's.

[dj4monie]

Neither solution makes any sense really. All it would do is force teams to pony up for new hardware more than likely sooner than they wanted.

The electrics in the cars now are still less than what's in the average road car, so give me a break already!

GT2 is fine and competitive as it stands and there's no reason to mess with it.

GT1 isn't a class that has outlived its usefulness. As the world's biggest GT1 advocate, things just have to fall in place for the class to work and OEM's need to look at the rulebook carefully and try not to gain an advantage by building fewer cars which usually means more racing chassis than actual street cars being built - Shades of GT1 in the 90's

BMW is solely focused on building road cars and trying to win in F1 (fruitless I might add), as much as we would all like to see a M6 GT1 car, the likelyhood at least now isn't good until the next generation model appears.

You do have cars on the horizon however, I don't see how people can't see that.

Next Gen Lotus Esprit
Un-named Lexus Super car
09' Nissan GT-R (official no Skyline name)
Next Gen Dodge Viper

And somebody could come out of the woodwork as well.

Most of these cars will appear before 2010, which if you look at your calendar is only a few years away.

GT1 at Le Mans was the best GT1 field to date. Now Le Mans is its a really long race track so passing isn't a large feature in the race, but at shorter venues like in the FIA series, you get quite a bit of passing and generally close racing by road racing standards.

So as I keep saying, change would be fine, but as always they'll find a way to make the cars faster and they'll have them back to 3:50 second laps soon enough...

Look at WTCC, back when it was ETCC, you had to use OEM style transmissions and that's a disadvantage for a powerful FWD car as OEM suppliers don't build these transaxles to withstand 300hp and 250lbs of torque and I don't know how many shifts per lap.

They allowed racing boxes in FWD with a weight penalty it didn't matter because Alfa's continued to win, until they withdrew from the series. As with everything in racing, somebody will always outspend you.

Now the WTCC are barely slower than the Super Tourers of the 90's they replaced.

And don't even mention spec racing, see NASCAR and related cost of keeping everybody "EQUAL"

GT2 and GT1 are fine as-is

[JAG]

This isn't about speeds, but costs.

GT1 is as expensive as LMP1, but LMP1 offers the chance for overall wins, alternative technologies etc.

GT2 cars are almost double the cost of more standard GT3's, but no quicker, somethings wrong somewhere.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by JAG

If you look at DSC you will see thay point out the GT3 Corvette Z06 outqualified Enges GT2 F430, 1:52.158 vs. 1:52.268.

This really is all the evidence we need to make GT2 more like GT3.

We could take GT2 cars like the F430, give them 14in tyres, but unlike the 997 GT2, still run at 1125kg, give them 550bhp, finally name them GT1.

You can't give them current GT1 restrictors, as that would massively disadvatage smaller engined cars like the 997 and F430 compared to big V8's/V12's.

Sorry, but comparing the times of the fastest FIA GT-3 to one of the slowest FIA GT-2's (at that particular event) is not an indicator of the same speed for the whole of both classes. And speed is an issue, as in safety due to larger variation of pace, closing speeds etc..

L.P.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

Sorry, but comparing the times of the fastest FIA GT-3 to one of the slowest FIA GT-2's (at that particular event) is not an indicator of the same speed for the whole of both classes. And speed is an issue, as in safety due to larger variation of pace, closing speeds etc..

L.P.

I agree with Horndawgy. Top running F430s are blistering fast, same with the 997s

[vw_nut]

i personally thing the le mans 24 hrs should have more cars so you could have gt3 included as well closing speed could be an issue but with the lmp ive heard going toward more road cars bases this could be a great idea why only fifty there room for more ok maybe more garages needed

[JAG]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

I agree with Horndawgy. Top running F430s are blistering fast, same with the 997s

The difference is a handful of seconds, as can be seen, there's an overlap between the slowest and quickest in each class.

GT3 isn't a set of regs, they are performance balanced individually.

A new GT2 class could be as quick as current cars, but simpler.

Cars are constantly hit with more weight and smaller restrictors, why not keep chassis closer to stock, but with bigger restrictors and lower weight.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by JAG

A new GT2 class could be as quick as current cars, but simpler.

Cars are constantly hit with more weight and smaller restrictors, why not keep chassis closer to stock, but with bigger restrictors and lower weight.

Do you really think a "stock" car could take the punishment of racing?

[gucom]

Originally Posted by JAG

GT3 isn't a set of regs, they are performance balanced individually.

I was wondering about this when i read this topic... are the cars balanced on acceptance in the series, and "set free" to develop after that? Or should they remain balanced for each race?
I think this last strategy, although great for keeping costs down, would not enthuse any manufacturers to build cars specifically for this GT3-turned-GT2 class at Le Mans, so you would either be stuck with the current group of cars forever, or have to depend on private teams to develop racecars... Which, come to think of it, wouldn't be all that impossible as long as the manufacturers keep providing the cup racers but should Le Mans have a completely performance-balanced class??

So what would be the top GT class? Current GT2 moved to GT1? Or still the current GT1 class?
I'm wondering how viable current GT1 would be to a manufacturer like BMW (if GT3/2 wouldn't be attractive to them for reasons mentioned above) with its M3, could this compete against the big-displacement cars that currently fill up GT1?

[JAG]

The US idea of stock is different to the European view.

To me GT3 cars are 'stock', and they are quite capable of running for 24hrs.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by gucom

I was wondering about this when i read this topic... are the cars balanced on acceptance in the series, and "set free" to develop after that? Or should they remain balanced for each race?
I think this last strategy, although great for keeping costs down, would not enthuse any manufacturers to build cars specifically for this GT3-turned-GT2 class at Le Mans, so you would either be stuck with the current group of cars forever, or have to depend on private teams to develop racecars... Which, come to think of it, wouldn't be all that impossible as long as the manufacturers keep providing the cup racers but should Le Mans have a completely performance-balanced class??

So what would be the top GT class? Current GT2 moved to GT1? Or still the current GT1 class?
I'm wondering how viable current GT1 would be to a manufacturer like BMW (if GT3/2 wouldn't be attractive to them for reasons mentioned above) with its M3, could this compete against the big-displacement cars that currently fill up GT1?

Cars are balanced, the Carrera Cup car is the base for all of this.

The ACO never said they'd adopt GT3 cars, but these basic cars show GT2 cars are overkill in terms of technology etc.

[HORNDAWG]

I think this has some very interesting dualities with the 'The new GTx class structure 2009-' thread, and while being discussed seperately should be considered in the whole!

L.P.

[Jonerz]

I think when the SRO, FIA and ACO are doing all these rule changes it would be wise for IMSA to not so much step out on a ledge, but defend the teams that can't afford these new car purchases with aims to reduce costs in the long run. Almost in the way the ALMS acted as a safe haven for Grand-Am teams unwilling to bare the cost of the DP change and GT eliminations. Wouldn't it be great to see a re-born ballsy IMSA like in the old days? We've seen signs of it what with the P2 rules, LMP1H rules and all that. I think switching GT2 to GT3 as a long run solution isn't all that ridiculous. So long as GT1 doesn't change and make everything radically different, I think the GT3 cars are just quick enough to be safe while on track with the P1's and there is, presumably, wiggle room under the target lap times for development of the cars by keen teams like Flying Lizard, Tafel, Risi and such. Idealy I'd like to see the classes stay essentially as is for a LONG period of time and let manufacturer development lead to the technological changes and subsequent rules amendments required. Though that is very much impossible I do want to see consistent long term rules packages.

Chris

[bil588]

I just don't want the performance of the cars balanced in a new LMGT class.

[gwyllion]

I think ACO only said they wanted GT2 with less electronic to make the cars cheaper.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by JAG

The US idea of stock is different to the European view.

To me GT3 cars are 'stock', and they are quite capable of running for 24hrs.

Your exactly right. To me Stock means take the whole thing apart blueprint balance, lighten and put back those ORIGINAL Stock parts.

One of the Challanges with LESS Electronics are the emmission and safety laws of countries. So many contries have or will have by 2009 new anti polution devices and computer controls, Active handling & Traction control, torque managment and vehical location sensors, tire pressure sensors, assisted brake sensors ( for ppl who dont know how to brake) side impact sensors, this crap that crap more BS here and there. That STOCK sports cars will run like garbage.

There are not too many cars right off the show room floor that can go racing. The F430 and 997 cup( Rs & RSR) are all purpous built race cars and are not show room stock.

[Spyderman]

An interesting read: http://www.sportscarpros.com/cottonb...is/default.htm

[paul-collins]

Originally Posted by bil588

I just don't want the performance of the cars balanced in a new LMGT class.

I believe this is the position of IMSA. Whether it will translate well into French is another matter, I suppose.