Flash Nilsson's views on touring car racing

[racer69]

My post had nothing to do with S2000, i was saying that it is generally accepted that a touring car it needs 4 seats. The RS4's & 5 series are found in Superstars, thats what started the whole debate.

I'm just wondering why some posts are so narrow-minded nowadays when it comes to what are & aren't considered touring cars.

[Fechna]

Originally Posted by racer69

My post had nothing to do with S2000, i was saying that it is generally accepted that a touring car it needs 4 seats. The RS4's & 5 series are found in Superstars, thats what started the whole debate.

I think you´re right, they are Touringcars, alot more than the DTM Prototypes.
And I would also love to see them in a kind of S3500 or something but there is one big problem:

The Audi is AWD, thats O.K.
The BMW or a AMG Mercedes are RWD, thats o.k.

But most car manufacturers have no matching RWD cars, or AWD. And the main opinion is, that cars with over 350hp can´t be competitve on track with FWD.

So any championship, that trys to get good grids, searches for a lot of matching cars, and that would be clearly impossible, as all of the manufacturers, that have matching cars would have to compete. And I think that is not possible.

So every championship with homologated roadcars from lots of different manufacturers as the base, have to have good cars with FWD, and that means that 320- 330 hp are the maximum limit here.

[Subaru_WRX_STi]

for me the RS4, BMW M5 and other AMG C Class, are more "GT" and high perfomance sedans, than real touring ! they have nothing to do with TC racing !

[KA]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

I don't see why anyone wants touring cars to have any larger engine capacity - for the umpteenth time, touring cars are supposed to be based on normal family cars like the Astra, Civic, SEAT Leon and so-on. Not excessively large executive-car-cum-tanks like the RS4, S-Type and 5-Series. DTM and Superstars, that's you.

Where are people getting this idea from? The idea that a touring car can only be a 4-door 2-litre saloon is a complete myth, based on what's happened in touring car racing since the early 90's....

Historically, touring cars had included everything from big V8 American 'tanks' to Minis. I started watching touring cars in the 80's, when grids included stuff like these:


http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-09-09-015.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-09-09-019.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-09-09-052.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-09-09-061.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-09-09-071.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-04-06-027.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-04-06-032.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-04-06-105.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-04-17-021.jpg
http://www.racingsportscars.com/etcc...-04-17-066.jpg

[KA]

Originally Posted by Subaru_WRX_STi

for me the RS4, BMW M5 and other AMG C Class, are more "GT" and high perfomance sedans, than real touring ! they have nothing to do with TC racing !

but for years they did- for example the BTCC started in the late 50's (1958?) so in the UK we have nearly 50 years of touring car racing history- the idea that a touring car can only be a 2-litre mid-sized saloon/coupe/hatch has come from a period of barely a fifth of that time. It's a bit like saying that because the current regs in the WRC are for 2-litre turbo 4WD WRC cars, than anything else outside those specific rules has nothing to do with rallying....

Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not intending to have a go at anyone, it's purely an observation, but having looked at a few people's profiles in this thread, I reckon it could be age-related thing, rather like the argument over coupes/hatches v 4-door saloons. For people who first saw TC racing in the 90's, then TC racing naturally does fit into that '2-litre saloon' box, because ST/BTCC/S2000 rules cars are what they're used to, and therefore what they define a touring car as being.

[Subaru_WRX_STi]

Originally Posted by KA

Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not intending to have a go at anyone, it's purely an observation, but having looked at a few people's profiles in this thread, I reckon it could be age-related thing, rather like the argument over coupes/hatches v 4-door saloons. For people who first saw TC racing in the 90's, then TC racing naturally does fit into that '2-litre saloon' box, because ST/BTCC/S2000 rules cars are what they're used to, and therefore what they define a touring car as being.

seems you're right, I am 27 and first time I loved TouringCar racing, was back in 1998 with the exellent Toca Touring Car on the old Playstation

[crmalcolm]

I am a relative newcomer to the sport, and as such I don't hold a long-term view of what a Touring Car is.
My view is that there are many differing form of touring cars, the only proviso to being called a Touring Car championship is that the cars represent what the general public consider to be within their reach.
Exotic supercars are obviously not touring, but a GT by definition is Grand Tourer.
As long as a championship allows for close racing, and involves models available in a showroom, then I consider it to be Touring.
Obviously everyone's view is different, but a 4-door car is more reflective of my ideal 'Touring' format regardless of engine size.

[Averell]

I am like most of you on this forum a true race fan. I want to see great racing that many times is best displayed in support classes. But Janne Flash Nilsson unfortunately has a big point when he says that it has to be a great show around the racing. Here in Sweden (and in my opinion in many other countries) a big chunk of the spectators are not true race fans, they have been invited by their employer, a big supplier to their company etc. For them to come back and keep spending money as sponsors and on the track, the show unfortunately has to go on.
I live in Falkenberg on the swedish westcoast were we have a great track that STCC visits every year in the middle of the summer. This year Volvo had invited every single employee and a big part of the best place to watch the racing was cut off only for them. I certainly don´t like that kind of thing but I understand that for me to see as good racing as possible, I have to accept at least some of it. This track is not owned by a company but a local motorsport club and on other times of the year Volvo hires the track for their own events and give them great income, so they accept this as well, for a chunk of money. Racing is unfortunately to often about economics and who has the biggest wallet.
Here in Sweden I think they sometimes forget about us that come rain or sunshine sits at the track from dusk til dawn, STCC or historic. And I think that´s a big mistake in the long run...

[Alex K]

I can't agree with you. There is nothing wrong in companies buying tickets for their staff events its company is participating in. No matter if employee with wife and child are interested in motorsport, hockey, football whatever, this is part of staff award. What's wrong in having more attendance at the track? Even though they might not known much about the sport their watching, but this is their award for work for this or that company, which backs one of the teams, or field the team.

I remember discussion on one of the Polish boards when Kubica became F1 driver, die-hard fans reserved the right watch and comment races only to fans who know and understand the sport. Why?

We, members of motorsport family, who know and understand the sport, and in many occasions working in the motorsport shouldn't have reserved the right to be critics, supporters because we know the sport.

Welcome to 10-10s, Falkenberg is really nice circuit.

[Jimmy Magnusson]

Averell, you haven't been to any international events (like WTCC) have you? STCC's care for the general public is quite frankly absolutely amazing. We've got grid shows and open access to the paddock, and can see the teams in their tents without any troubles. I've been to both ETCC and WTCC, and they charge you to enter the paddock, and to see what? Some VIP buildings (which you can't enter because you're not a VIP), a few commercial tents (oh how exciting) and the support classes. All WTCC teams are hiding away in the big pit building with the transporters set up as if they're expecting an indian attack... The programme had no information about when they autograph session was, and I later found out that it was at the same time as the Formula Masters race. Hello, great planning? And no grid show of course. What a relief it was to come back to a regular Swedish event!

[Bump Buddy]

Originally Posted by Subaru_WRX_STi

and who care about the facilities, the BTCC isnt F1

People actually do care about the facilities, I wouldn't go to a track and watch a race with facilities from the 60's and I think most people (especially those who aren't really "in" for racing, like the average car enthusiast) would agree with me. The track facilities means a lot for the track and I think STCC got a good increase of spectators by renewing the facilities at Anderstorp, Mantorp and Falkenberg.

Then of course the racing is important, sure, but you can't just have good racing and use "crappy" tracks if you want to get spectators, you need all those extra things beside the track and the racing itself.

[Alex K]

And now tell me Jimmy, what differences in level of racing and competition you can see in between WTCC and STCC? I can't see many of them, maybe only they've got some fully factory teams ad few drivers with F1, IRL, CCWS past... oh, and F1 like trailers :-D.

[Averell]

Originally Posted by Alex K

I can't agree with you. There is nothing wrong in companies buying tickets for their staff events its company is participating in. No matter if employee with wife and child are interested in motorsport, hockey, football whatever, this is part of staff award. What's wrong in having more attendance at the track? Even though they might not known much about the sport their watching, but this is their award for work for this or that company, which backs one of the teams, or field the team.

I remember discussion on one of the Polish boards when Kubica became F1 driver, die-hard fans reserved the right watch and comment races only to fans who know and understand the sport. Why?

We, members of motorsport family, who know and understand the sport, and in many occasions working in the motorsport shouldn't have reserved the right to be critics, supporters because we know the sport.

Welcome to 10-10s, Falkenberg is really nice circuit.

I realised when I read what i had written that it didn't really came out the way I wanted.

First I believe that in most sport corporate sponsorship is a must for it to be on the highest level, and I didn´t mean to puke on the non-hardcore fans as I did.
What I mean is that there can be a fine line between giving the corporate side what they want on the one side and us hardcore fans on the other side. Money always talk but sometimes the lack of respect for people that paid with their own money is just that bit over the line.
When I´ve been on F1, WTCC and DTM I almost expect that kind of treatment but I´ve always been able to get the kind of seating on the stand I wanted. Of course you have to pay for it, but you don´t get closed out.

To Jimmy: I agree with you that STCC gives great access and that international racing almost always hide away. I remember when I was in Anderstorp and watched, well now I don´t remember the name, there was a mixture of old F1´s and Indycars and GT. There was true access, I stood half a meter from Carl Rosenblad´s Jordan F1 from -91 when they fired it up in the pits, ooooh what a sound.....and what a feeling in your body!!

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Averell

I remember when I was in Anderstorp and watched, well now I don´t remember the name, there was a mixture of old F1´s and Indycars and GT. There was true access, I stood half a meter from Carl Rosenblad´s Jordan F1 from -91 when they fired it up in the pits, ooooh what a sound.....and what a feeling in your body!!

EuroBoss?

[Bezzen]

I'm guessing the Interseries.

[PorscheFanNo1]

Dont think EuroBoss has ever been to Anderstorp, I know Interserie has been a few times tho.

[Averell]

Originally Posted by Bezzen

I'm guessing the Interseries.

remember! Interseries is correct.

[JRM]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Magnusson

. All WTCC teams are hiding away in the big pit building with the transporters set up as if they're expecting an indian attack...

Well, isnt this what is happening in STCC aswell?? Falkenberg, Mantorp, Anderstorp..

[kristof14]

Originally Posted by JMeissner

BTCC. England has been, think they are, wants to be number one in motorsport. What I met only 120 km from Piccadilly Circus in London should have been a great final of a fantastic championship in a country with a population of 60 million, but it was awful.

I think this part of his response goes to show that when people think of the UK they are actually thinking of London.

Thruxton is a big trek for a large part of the country to be getting to (and back from) on a sunday. Especially when the BTCC has rounds nearer to home over the course of a season. In a country where it's hard for football teams to get fans to travel great distances on a work night I think it's fantasy to expect huge crowds at every BTCC round including the finale.

[Jimmy Magnusson]

Originally Posted by JRM

Well, isnt this what is happening in STCC aswell?? Falkenberg, Mantorp, Anderstorp..

I was at Mantorp this year, but I saw nothing different?

[JAG]

I've written off the DTM, it isn't a touring car series any longer, but I am warming to the WTCC.

If they had 2.5 V6's or air retricted 2l turbos with 320-350 BHP they'd be perfect.

We need a modern equivalent of this, obviously roadcar derived, but still a dream machine and exciting to watch:-

[duke_toaster]

JAG, the problem with 2L+ cars is circuit licencing - if we were to go to larger cars, we wouldn't be able to have as many racing, unless that formula goes WTCC only, which would shaft the national series as no-one would develop cars for that formula. In most countries and the FIA, the cutoff between small and large engined cars is 2 litres. In the BTCC this would cause some cars to not qualify on some tracks.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

JAG, the problem with 2L+ cars is circuit licencing - if we were to go to larger cars, we wouldn't be able to have as many racing, unless that formula goes WTCC only, which would shaft the national series as no-one would develop cars for that formula. In most countries and the FIA, the cutoff between small and large engined cars is 2 litres. In the BTCC this would cause some cars to not qualify on some tracks.

Most of todays small cars have versions with turbos or bigger engines, though. So a formula that would allow turbos would be an option to avoid leaving out the smaller cars.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by duke_toaster

JAG, the problem with 2L+ cars is circuit licencing - if we were to go to larger cars, we wouldn't be able to have as many racing, unless that formula goes WTCC only, which would shaft the national series as no-one would develop cars for that formula. In most countries and the FIA, the cutoff between small and large engined cars is 2 litres. In the BTCC this would cause some cars to not qualify on some tracks.

Which UK circuits do the BTCC race on that British GT doesn't....Thruxton?

Oulton, Knockhill etc. all have British GT rounds.

S2000 is soon going to have a real credibility problem as even mid range saloon cars have 200-250bhp+, even small hot hatches.

[Bramzel]

Originally Posted by JAG

I've written off the DTM, it isn't a touring car series any longer, but I am warming to the WTCC.

If they had 2.5 V6's or air retricted 2l turbos with 320-350 BHP they'd be perfect.

We need a modern equivalent of this, obviously roadcar derived, but still a dream machine and exciting to watch:-

Couldn't agree more