2024: BTCC chat & discussion
Discussion
Sebring440 said:
That's an interesting one Milkyway. He's been chasing the WSR seat (so I believe), but they want huge money.
And there's the problem with the BTCC. It's simply costing too much. The NGTC formula was brought in to address that. But it has now spiraled out of control, with the "hybrid" system a recent accomplice.
To TOCA: Maybe time for a re-think?
It doesn’t have to cost this much. It’s mostly a money grab by the teams, and now there is fewer of them but the same number of drivers they can put the prices up. Highest bidder wins. And there's the problem with the BTCC. It's simply costing too much. The NGTC formula was brought in to address that. But it has now spiraled out of control, with the "hybrid" system a recent accomplice.
To TOCA: Maybe time for a re-think?
Personally I think the BTCC needs to limit the number of people on an event, 3 techs per car, 1 race engineer per team and all hospitality people and rooms are employed by the driver as required. Limit the tyres to 1 set of wets or dries per day. No engine rebuilds during the season (maybe allowed 1 spare) .
Allow the drivers to use track’s side footage for their own media channels.
Mr MXT said:
What actually is the Jack Sears trophy for? I cant find any firm information. I figure its for rookies, but what's the definition?
At the start of a season, a driver hasn’t had a BTCC podium or been a previous winner of the trophy.So, yes Rookies, newbies or returnees who are waiting in the wings... so to speak.
(So, in effect, a separate Championship for them to contest. & no doubt enhances their CV).
NB: Rules out ‘Huffy’ then... if he returns.
Edited by Milkyway on Sunday 28th January 12:27
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
Personally I think the BTCC needs to limit the number of people on an event, 3 techs per car, 1 race engineer per team
One race engineer per driver, surely? It's meant to be a professional championship. One race engineer for two (or more) drivers is a very poor compromise.Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
Limit the tyres to 1 set of wets or dries per day.
So a tyre blowout or similar damage means you stop racing?Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
No engine rebuilds during the season (maybe allowed 1 spare) .
So engine damage means you stop racing? For the rest of the season? Damage in Race 1 of the first round at Donington means you can't race for the rest of the season?Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
Allow the drivers to use track’s side footage for their own media channels.
That was introduced last year.I'm glad you're not in charge of the championship!
1 engineer per team, driver still can decide what he wants but it reduces the cost having one per driver
Tyre blow outs, perhaps one set per race weekend with an option to start at the back with a replacement tyre.
Engines will be built to last so won’t blow up as much, take a penalty if you do blow one up. So you can keep racing but the onus is on one engine per season
Glad track side media is allowed , pity no one uses it.
I’d make a great championship coordinator, thanks. My suggestions would cut the cost by at 60 percent.
Tyre blow outs, perhaps one set per race weekend with an option to start at the back with a replacement tyre.
Engines will be built to last so won’t blow up as much, take a penalty if you do blow one up. So you can keep racing but the onus is on one engine per season
Glad track side media is allowed , pity no one uses it.
I’d make a great championship coordinator, thanks. My suggestions would cut the cost by at 60 percent.
DanielSan said:
So one race engineer and a coupke of mechanics regardless or whether the team has one or four cars? And you then expect to see a full grid in each of the three races on Sunday?
Can you explain how that'll work?
One race engineer for the team. A three mechanics per car. like I said. Clearly if you bend it the. Maybe all the mechanics jump on one car to fix it. However the more options you have to fine tune the car the more money it’ll cost. So less mechanics less cost. Can you explain how that'll work?
It works fine in club racing. And with all due respect whilst the top 6 or so drivers are absolute aces significant numbers of the rest are no better than a good clubman. And as most are paying to be there it’s only slightly more professional than a top tier club championship
Edited by Dynion Araf Uchaf on Sunday 28th January 20:15
Or do we want it to be the absolute pinnacle of professional saloon car racing instead?
All the old giffers bang on endlessly about Super Touring being so good and that had budgets that would make Napa's current spend look like a season in Bambino Karts so why are we now suddenly desperate to drag the series down into amateur mediocrity instead with cost caps?
OK, so team hard has finally gone to the wall after years of death throes. So what? There are four works teams at the other end of the grid that are doing just fine, and you can be damn sure they wouldn't be there if there was some arbitrary rule about numbers of engineers or how many teacups you can have per race truck.
The big teams need to be able to invest and make a return on it, and if because of the rules they can't invest more than the team that's floundering at the back of the grid then they'll simply go somewhere else and we'll be left with a series that's full of no-hopers just like when it damn near died out in the early/mid 2000s.
All the old giffers bang on endlessly about Super Touring being so good and that had budgets that would make Napa's current spend look like a season in Bambino Karts so why are we now suddenly desperate to drag the series down into amateur mediocrity instead with cost caps?
OK, so team hard has finally gone to the wall after years of death throes. So what? There are four works teams at the other end of the grid that are doing just fine, and you can be damn sure they wouldn't be there if there was some arbitrary rule about numbers of engineers or how many teacups you can have per race truck.
The big teams need to be able to invest and make a return on it, and if because of the rules they can't invest more than the team that's floundering at the back of the grid then they'll simply go somewhere else and we'll be left with a series that's full of no-hopers just like when it damn near died out in the early/mid 2000s.
agent006 said:
Or do we want it to be the absolute pinnacle of professional saloon car racing instead?
All the old giffers bang on endlessly about Super Touring being so good and that had budgets that would make Napa's current spend look like a season in Bambino Karts so why are we now suddenly desperate to drag the series down into amateur mediocrity instead with cost caps?
OK, so team hard has finally gone to the wall after years of death throes. So what? There are four works teams at the other end of the grid that are doing just fine, and you can be damn sure they wouldn't be there if there was some arbitrary rule about numbers of engineers or how many teacups you can have per race truck.
The big teams need to be able to invest and make a return on it, and if because of the rules they can't invest more than the team that's floundering at the back of the grid then they'll simply go somewhere else and we'll be left with a series that's full of no-hopers just like when it damn near died out in the early/mid 2000s.
We'd all love it if it was the absolute pinnacle of professional saloon car racing, but even F1 has recognised that budgets need to be at a level that's sustainable over the long term and implemented a cost cap. Do you feel that F1 has become amateurish and mediocre?All the old giffers bang on endlessly about Super Touring being so good and that had budgets that would make Napa's current spend look like a season in Bambino Karts so why are we now suddenly desperate to drag the series down into amateur mediocrity instead with cost caps?
OK, so team hard has finally gone to the wall after years of death throes. So what? There are four works teams at the other end of the grid that are doing just fine, and you can be damn sure they wouldn't be there if there was some arbitrary rule about numbers of engineers or how many teacups you can have per race truck.
The big teams need to be able to invest and make a return on it, and if because of the rules they can't invest more than the team that's floundering at the back of the grid then they'll simply go somewhere else and we'll be left with a series that's full of no-hopers just like when it damn near died out in the early/mid 2000s.
Even BMW don't seemingly spend enough to cover the full budgets of all the WSR cars that run under the 'Team BMW' banner, with some drivers having to pay their own way still for a seat with the 'works' team. And unless I'm forgetting someone, the only other team with official ties to a manufacturer is Speedworks and Toyota, and it seems to me as a spectator that Toyota probably provide a smaller share of the total budget needed than BMW do.
The manufacturers spend the amount they feel gives them value for money on the exposure and marketing return generated by the profile of the series. So unless the public visibility and marketing return of the BTCC can be dramatically increased somehow to coax more money out of the manufactures, the only way to make the series more professional by attracting more manufactures willing to have a 'works' team and pay a salary to a professional driver, is to reduce the costs.
There must be cost cutting measures that could be introduced without affecting the overall quality of the racing and marketability of the championship.
Edited by clubracing on Monday 29th January 09:16
agent006 said:
OK, so team hard has finally gone to the wall after years of death throes. So what? There are four works teams at the other end of the grid that are doing just fine
Not being dense, isn't there just two works teams at the moment? Unless I'm having a brain fart, isn't it just BMW and Toyota with works efforts?Would the manufacturers like Toyota be involved if hybrid wasn't there though? Hybrid is a pretty low cost in comparison to the overall budget.
There does seem to be a very clear divide starting/started in BTCC with some teams running a tight commercial operation with excellent sponsors funding the team and others utterly dependent on drivers doing all the sponsorship work for them.
I look at it like an online shopping platform. If you have sellers on that platform who are making a very nice living and others who are struggling do you start changing the way the platform operates or accept that those who are struggling are doing something wrong and it's them who need to change?
There does seem to be a very clear divide starting/started in BTCC with some teams running a tight commercial operation with excellent sponsors funding the team and others utterly dependent on drivers doing all the sponsorship work for them.
I look at it like an online shopping platform. If you have sellers on that platform who are making a very nice living and others who are struggling do you start changing the way the platform operates or accept that those who are struggling are doing something wrong and it's them who need to change?
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff