FIA/ACO to create universal GT class

[Koenigsegg]

I agree there should be 2 GT classes. At the moment we have 3: GTE, GT3 and GT4. So IF GTE and GT3 will be combined into a new GT class, then I think GT4 should have some rules changes to make them a bit quicker so it can be a proper 2nd GT class. And hopefully make GT4 attractive.

[urdragon]

Originally Posted by Koenigsegg

I agree there should be 2 GT classes. At the moment we have 3: GTE, GT3 and GT4. So IF GTE and GT3 will be combined into a new GT class, then I think GT4 should have some rules changes to make them a bit quicker so it can be a proper 2nd GT class. And hopefully make GT4 attractive.

That means eliminate the less powerfull brands of current Gt3, or force them into GT4, new development costs.

[urdragon]

And why not a single class with a cheap basic car, and a portfolio of (forced sale available) update where you can purchase the original car and then the upgrade kits of each year, only permitted into the pro classes, but the brand is forced to sell the base car at the base price specified by rules, same the upgrades of a max cost specified by rules (and forbidden to AM's), only a idea coming from my mind.

[joeb]

This morning, Dagys tweeted a that new Corvettte C7R will be designed to GTE rules and Fehan didn't know about the GT class merger proposal.

So didn't the ACO/FIA consult with manufacturers before announcing the GTE/GT3 tie up? Seems wierd they would forget to invite one of the strongest GT team/manufacturers in the world...

[johntt]

They've announced their intentions and will be consulting with the manufacturers on how best to do it, that was how I read it anyway.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by johntt

They've announced their intentions and will be consulting with the manufacturers on how best to do it, that was how I read it anyway.

I was under the impression (perhaps wrongly) that the manufacturers were in on the decision making.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by joeb

This morning, Dagys tweeted a that new Corvettte C7R will be designed to GTE rules and Fehan didn't know about the GT class merger proposal.

So didn't the ACO/FIA consult with manufacturers before announcing the GTE/GT3 tie up? Seems wierd they would forget to invite one of the strongest GT team/manufacturers in the world...

"A new GT class will replace GTE and GT3, possibly as early as 2015."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/103398

So the C7 is going to be designed for the current rule set. With grandfathering, if necessary, to any later rule sets.




L.P.

[MitchZ06]

Still 2 years before 2015, that's a damn long time....and even then current GTE and GT3 cars would be grandfathered into the new regs so any new car built this year or next would be viable.

[aneesh99]

The SRO doesn't seem to taken by the idea, but as before mentioned, I'm not sure Ratel's proposal is any better.

Porsche can't be to happy about it either, better for them to flog separate GTC and GT3 cars.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by MitchZ06

Still 2 years before 2015, that's a damn long time....and even then current GTE and GT3 cars would be grandfathered into the new regs so any new car built this year or next would be viable.

Glad we agree.





L.P.

[urdragon]

If the manufacturers propose themselves to sell tons of cars, then a single class is ridiculous cause those clients may not have as resources as the manufacturer to keep investing in their cars, the manufacture's built must be very low (number of cars) into factory efforts or manufacture battles, like GT1 was (4 JRM GTR exists, 4 Murcielago 670, 4 Matech ford GT.. ), that implies few cars and makes a single class impossible if you don't want a base car (for everyoneelse but the manufacturer) with kits market.

[Osella]

Allow me the following observations, in no particular order; I don't see one class working just yet because (directed at GT3, E and anyone who'll listen)

GT3 has the numbers but endurance (Blancpain, Le Mans) has the spectators and the entries;
performance balancing is irksome; GT cars less powerful than their roadgoing counterparts for any reason other than longevity seems plain wrong to me; penalising Ferrari (for example) for making a more economical car, when it is based upon the roadgoing spec., is silly; likewise, not allowing 4WD when it's available in production; no-one races old GT3 cars
competitively so again performance balancing doesn't work;
ACO make a rod for their own back in designing rules that mean a GT cannot win outright (or at least it's incredibly unlikely); no-one has rules that attract Veyron, Aero or Koenigsegg type-vehicles, which costs in specators (though I suppose the VLN classes may accomdate these); what about locally-homologated cars such as the Mosler, Ginetta, Aquila, Chevron, Ultima etc; what about the Caparo, the Atom, some Radicals, which, whilst not classically 'Grand Touring' are no less 'honest' road cars than a 911GT2/3 for example; cost-capping and spec parts remind me of the markets for printers and ink;

For future consideration in GT racing I'd like the following considered

-weight and fuel tank size to be determined by the standard road model
-minimum of one roadgoing model (both measures to help small manufacturers)
-as per old LM regs., touring cars must arrive under their own steam (providing valuable publicity) - maybe award points (as per racing) for highest mileage achieved on road (eg legally and with race driver on board)
-as above, tyre changes must include one wheel / tyre combo that was carried onboard

anyway, that's my twopenneths' worth, thanks for listening

[juicy sushi]

I actually really like the idea of a single GT class. Deeper grid, more variety and less confusion will help the sport as a whole. Yes, there are a lot of series, but that's a good thing if they have common rules. The best organizers, promoters and events will win out, and as weaker events/sanctions drop out, a stronger overall GT racing scene would emerge.

[Purist]

It's not going to seem like so much variety when you have the exact same set of cars in WEC, ISCAR, SuperGT, Blancpain, etc. Just as, I'm not so keen on having the exact same cars in GT500 and DTM. Then no one series can have nearly so much of an individual identity, and I may well watch fewer series because of this "universal" rules set.

I do think you need two GT classes, because of the different needs of factories and privateers, as well as the sheer range of cars that might be included.

And trying to hold back factories too much (cost caps, too much restriction technically) WILL backfire. They will either leave, or promote your series on the cheap, to complement participating on the cheap. If your series loses that manufacturer money, you're in trouble, because they're generally the ones paying for a hell of a lot of your media exposure.

Sorry, Osella, we're not going back to the '30s for GT rules.

And in general, if you try to force the cars to be too close to the road cars, you won't have variety in the field for long, because ONE car will likely be THE BEST, and could be so by quite a margin. That's part of why things like weight and road car fuel capacity aren't realistic parameters for a racing car. You must consider, as well, that if the manufacturers do take those rules into account, all the cars will become more similar to begin with, which kind of ruins the point, and the real variety, of the class. Also, if you allow 4WD, then you will end up with a class of ONLY 4WD cars. Why do you think Audi got booted from Trans-Am and IMSA GTO with their Quattro? This is especially an issue because there aren't many supercars with 4WD, so most of the players would have to do major redesigns, which they do NOT want to do anyway, because of the cost and the added weight.

I think someone mentioned the Veyron earlier. i haven't heard any particular intent to race it, but even if there was, it's not practical. Yeah, it has MASSIVe power and 4WD, but it's big and heavy. It loses, on the Top Gear Test Track, to cars with 300-400hp less than the base Veyron, because the handling is just that bad.

Speaking of weight, how sad would it be if the cars were at production weight, and hence, were heavier than a Sprint Cup car?!

[MJ_N_09]

They were going to have to do this at some point, since the GT3s were developing enough to have similar pace and times as GTEs. Would they or someone else make a lower, but internationally known class, like a GT3.5?

[lms]

Originally Posted by MJ_N_09

They were going to have to do this at some point, since the GT3s were developing enough to have similar pace and times as GTEs. Would they or someone else make a lower, but internationally known class, like a GT3.5?

Ratel wants to resurrect gt4, but it would be just a european championship

SRO Sees Positive Future For GT4 In Europe European Cup Set For Relaunch
(dsc)

[MJ_N_09]

Originally Posted by lms

Ratel wants to resurrect gt4, but it would be just a european championship

SRO Sees Positive Future For GT4 In Europe European Cup Set For Relaunch
(dsc)

Was never into GT4. There'd also be too much of a performance gap in between where GT2 and 3 had been. There'd be nothing in between. Still I hope GT4 does come back because racing could still use something like that, at least anywhere.

[Marcus666]

Im quite a noob at GT-racing but what the hell happened to GT1?
This year, they only allow GT3 cars in the GT1 class!
What was the argument for dumping those beautiful GT1 cars?

[MJ_N_09]

The cars were just too old and expensive to run. The intended idea was to tune GT3 cars up to GT1 performance, but it seems it will go to the wayside too because of a lack of interest from teams and manufacturers.

[HORNDAWG]

Yeah, make GTE<>GT-1 unleash them a little and make GT-3 <>GT-2 with more natural progression upwards left. Allowing for the mfgs to have a devel class in which the Werks and Werks blessed teams still can run and not pound on the customers.

Not a fan of the single class concept here. I would be rather suprised if the mfgs were also. I can see them (mfgs) happy to see a 2 class system where the vast majority of the GT market was unified in a single (per mfg) base model that could easily be utilized across most of the GT series World wide though.




L.P.

[Purist]

There were few "real" GT1s left, and FIA GT1 was the ONLY place left running them as their own class. A few other series may still have them BoPed with other stuff, but that's a whole other kettle of fish, and doesn't provide for the accommodation of that many cars.

Again, I'm really not seeing a great way to address the needs of privateers and factories in one class. And making the factories take part inexpensively just means you'll have a cheaper, less interesting class, with substantially less marketing/promotional money from the manufacturers to advance the series.

Finally, the reason GT3 is still less expensive than GT2 is the lack of full works programs. Once the factories come in in force, that budget gap will close VERY quickly, and there really isn't an existing class to take up the cudgels should/when GT3 (or whatever) folds.

[Fogelhund]

With a two tier GT category in the future series, I think it would make sense to go with GTE, and what follows it, along with GA/GX... the cars list is pretty good as is, move the current GA/GT cars into GX, with a grandfathering period. The Camaro and Mustangs would be welcome additions to GX.. The Porsche brigade could choose to move up, or to Caymans.

http://www.grand-am.com/Portals/0/Im...%20cars_gx.pdf

GX list for those who haven't seen it.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

With a two tier GT category in the future series, I think it would make sense to go with GTE, and what follows it, along with GA/GX... the cars list is pretty good as is, move the current GA/GT cars into GX, with a grandfathering period. The Camaro and Mustangs would be welcome additions to GX.. The Porsche brigade could choose to move up, or to Caymans.

http://www.grand-am.com/Portals/0/Im...%20cars_gx.pdf

GX list for those who haven't seen it.

GT-1<> ALMS GTE/GTE-Pro (Werks/Semi Werks)
GT-2<> GA-GT/GT-3 (GT-3) with GX as a sub class.




L.P.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

With a two tier GT category in the future series, I think it would make sense to go with GTE, and what follows it, along with GA/GX... the cars list is pretty good as is, move the current GA/GT cars into GX, with a grandfathering period. The Camaro and Mustangs would be welcome additions to GX.. The Porsche brigade could choose to move up, or to Caymans.

http://www.grand-am.com/Portals/0/Im...%20cars_gx.pdf

GX list for those who haven't seen it.

Thanks. Looks like a support series, not something that should be in a top level Pro series. That should be the headlining class for the Conti series. Should make for some good racing though. Man I hope they kill the Prep 2 rules for the GT class.
EDIT: Wasn't GX supposed to be for exciting new technologies? Ford Focus??? Chevy Cruze??? Meh...

[Danske]

Originally Posted by Canada ALMS fan

EDIT: Wasn't GX supposed to be for exciting new technologies? Ford Focus??? Chevy Cruze??? Meh...

At the time, I just read the press release as meaning cars not seen/not fitting in GT (non NA V8 petrol) and, by the way, also allowing alternative power, and didn't think it meant the class was defined by just that. I don't know if that aspect was talked-up more elsewhere that I didn't see, or if people were just distracted by that being the one specific mentioned and the X in the class name, but I'm surprised by the number of approved cars already, not their character. Now if the GX cars can make enough power to go with their lower weight relative to GT, could be some inter-class battling on the slower tracks.