The 24 hrs & British GT
Discussion
Not quite as simple as that - apart from the different promoters - the cars running in Britcar are quite different from BGT - and there's technical matters like mandated fuel and tyres that are different too.
BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT whereas Britcar has EERC's philosophy of 'run what yr brung' type with GTs, saloons, V8s etc all running together.
Anyway wouldnt want to bring down the Britcar quality .............!
BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT whereas Britcar has EERC's philosophy of 'run what yr brung' type with GTs, saloons, V8s etc all running together.
Anyway wouldnt want to bring down the Britcar quality .............!
kenthardy said:
Not quite as simple as that - apart from the different promoters - the cars running in Britcar are quite different from BGT - and there's technical matters like mandated fuel and tyres that are different too.
BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT whereas Britcar has EERC's philosophy of 'run what yr brung' type with GTs, saloons, V8s etc all running together.
Anyway wouldnt want to bring down the Britcar quality .............!
LOL at the comment "BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT"BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT whereas Britcar has EERC's philosophy of 'run what yr brung' type with GTs, saloons, V8s etc all running together.
Anyway wouldnt want to bring down the Britcar quality .............!
you must be joking?
you ever rear the FIA GT3 regg's (hint, there are none techincally!)
GT3 is a joke, you basically take a car, do what you want with it, then homologate it, job done - only catch is that you have to do all this without the exsisting makes wineing about it (see Mossler for details).
Scuffers said:
LOL at the comment "BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT"
you must be joking?
you ever rear the FIA GT3 regg's (hint, there are none techincally!)
GT3 is a joke, you basically take a car, do what you want with it, then homologate it, job done - only catch is that you have to do all this without the exsisting makes wineing about it (see Mossler for details).
I understand what you mean here, but...you must be joking?
you ever rear the FIA GT3 regg's (hint, there are none techincally!)
GT3 is a joke, you basically take a car, do what you want with it, then homologate it, job done - only catch is that you have to do all this without the exsisting makes wineing about it (see Mossler for details).
The tech regs for GT3 are very tight indeed, but in different ways to the ones you're perhaps thinking of. The homologation document (which I have a copy of for the Mosler) is huge and very detailed - you can't do anything to the car that isn't on the document.
It is true to say that GT3 cars don't follow a set of technical regs in the same way as GT1 or GT2, but it is wrong to claim that GT3 has no regs - especially when mentioned in the same thread as Britcar, which has no proper technical regs at all!
kenthardy said:
Not quite as simple as that - apart from the different promoters - the cars running in Britcar are quite different from BGT - and there's technical matters like mandated fuel and tyres that are different too.
BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT whereas Britcar has EERC's philosophy of 'run what yr brung' type with GTs, saloons, V8s etc all running together.
Anyway wouldnt want to bring down the Britcar quality .............!
I did say that I knew it would never happen! There's too much politics, too many vested interests, too many exclusive tyre delas etc. I just think that the British GT series should be part of the premier endurance event in the UK. Both would benefit, although you would not want a situation where there ends up being a small field of GT cars and no place for the "clubman". BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT whereas Britcar has EERC's philosophy of 'run what yr brung' type with GTs, saloons, V8s etc all running together.
Anyway wouldnt want to bring down the Britcar quality .............!
Ahonen said:
I understand what you mean here, but...
The tech regs for GT3 are very tight indeed, but in different ways to the ones you're perhaps thinking of. The homologation document (which I have a copy of for the Mosler) is huge and very detailed - you can't do anything to the car that isn't on the document.
not quite the saem is it?The tech regs for GT3 are very tight indeed, but in different ways to the ones you're perhaps thinking of. The homologation document (which I have a copy of for the Mosler) is huge and very detailed - you can't do anything to the car that isn't on the document.
as a manufactuer, you can put what you like in the homologation document, then every year you can homologate 'updates'.
the mear fact that there is no starting point or overriding tech regs says it all.
Look at the Porka's, GT3 was supposed to be based on their level of performance, well, even with all the updates etc etc, they are nowhere. looking at the real situation, the Viper is streets ahead, even with it's balast and handicap, it's not on the same ball park as the rest.
having a formular that relies on 'equalisation' is always going to be a political joke, look at the winging RPM did are the start of the year, and look were they are now...
It was bad enough with Cup class, but at least there were target's technically to meet (P/W etc).
then you get to the disparity in tyres, and it all just becomes one VERY expencive joke.
Ahonen said:
Scuffers said:
LOL at the comment "BGT has cars that are pretty strictly within the framework of SRO's similar categories in FIA GT"
you must be joking?
you ever rear the FIA GT3 regg's (hint, there are none techincally!)
GT3 is a joke, you basically take a car, do what you want with it, then homologate it, job done - only catch is that you have to do all this without the exsisting makes wineing about it (see Mossler for details).
I understand what you mean here, but...you must be joking?
you ever rear the FIA GT3 regg's (hint, there are none techincally!)
GT3 is a joke, you basically take a car, do what you want with it, then homologate it, job done - only catch is that you have to do all this without the exsisting makes wineing about it (see Mossler for details).
The tech regs for GT3 are very tight indeed, but in different ways to the ones you're perhaps thinking of. The homologation document (which I have a copy of for the Mosler) is huge and very detailed - you can't do anything to the car that isn't on the document.
It is true to say that GT3 cars don't follow a set of technical regs in the same way as GT1 or GT2, but it is wrong to claim that GT3 has no regs - especially when mentioned in the same thread as Britcar, which has no proper technical regs at all!
Porsche is the only company really producing a GT3 spec car though. The rest are all being prepared and homologated by privateers and GT3 allows them to do that.
I can see how purists would hate it and to some extend I call myself a purist, but it has some merit in an environment where manufacturers are not producing homolgation racing cars. They're out blowing their cash in F1 instead.
I can see how purists would hate it and to some extend I call myself a purist, but it has some merit in an environment where manufacturers are not producing homolgation racing cars. They're out blowing their cash in F1 instead.
Yes your right Scuffers the Viper has run away with it this year...
When the Aston, Porsche or Ferrari haven't been winning or the Mosler, Lamborghini or Ascari haven't led/claimed pole.
Agree things have gone to far away from the Porsche, but that car was ridiculously hampered by Porsche in the first place. To get some of the cars involved down to the Porsche level of performance, they would need to be running seriously dangerous levels of ballast and run on stilts! That car has much smaller tyres and much less power than the other cars, Porsche could rectify both fairly easily but seem determined not to, a strange attitude in my eyes!
GT3 isn't perfect but there is only 1 point seperating the leaders in the title race (both Astons) and Dodge, Ascari and Ferrari are in the Top 5.
Sorry my intro is probably a little provocative!
When the Aston, Porsche or Ferrari haven't been winning or the Mosler, Lamborghini or Ascari haven't led/claimed pole.
Agree things have gone to far away from the Porsche, but that car was ridiculously hampered by Porsche in the first place. To get some of the cars involved down to the Porsche level of performance, they would need to be running seriously dangerous levels of ballast and run on stilts! That car has much smaller tyres and much less power than the other cars, Porsche could rectify both fairly easily but seem determined not to, a strange attitude in my eyes!
GT3 isn't perfect but there is only 1 point seperating the leaders in the title race (both Astons) and Dodge, Ascari and Ferrari are in the Top 5.
Sorry my intro is probably a little provocative!
dino ferrana said:
Yes your right Scuffers the Viper has run away with it this year...
When the Aston, Porsche or Ferrari haven't been winning or the Mosler, Lamborghini or Ascari haven't led/claimed pole.
Agree things have gone to far away from the Porsche, but that car was ridiculously hampered by Porsche in the first place. To get some of the cars involved down to the Porsche level of performance, they would need to be running seriously dangerous levels of ballast and run on stilts! That car has much smaller tyres and much less power than the other cars, Porsche could rectify both fairly easily but seem determined not to, a strange attitude in my eyes!
GT3 isn't perfect but there is only 1 point seperating the leaders in the title race (both Astons) and Dodge, Ascari and Ferrari are in the Top 5.
Sorry my intro is probably a little provocative!
Not really - I don't think; all of the others seem to still have a certain "brand promotion" mentality, Porsche's GT3 Racecars seem to be bought in a similar manner to the road cars and are money spinners in their own right. I'd wager Porsche have simply decided that developing a car that sells happily already is a waste of cash it could use better.When the Aston, Porsche or Ferrari haven't been winning or the Mosler, Lamborghini or Ascari haven't led/claimed pole.
Agree things have gone to far away from the Porsche, but that car was ridiculously hampered by Porsche in the first place. To get some of the cars involved down to the Porsche level of performance, they would need to be running seriously dangerous levels of ballast and run on stilts! That car has much smaller tyres and much less power than the other cars, Porsche could rectify both fairly easily but seem determined not to, a strange attitude in my eyes!
GT3 isn't perfect but there is only 1 point seperating the leaders in the title race (both Astons) and Dodge, Ascari and Ferrari are in the Top 5.
Sorry my intro is probably a little provocative!
randy said:
Homologation is different to regulations. before a car is put in for homologation it can have whatever changes from the road car varient that the manufacturer chooses. There are no regs to nailed down modifications at all.
In GT3 the homologation papers are the limit of the technical regs, if that makes sense. There are no technical regs regarding the limit of modifications because there are no permissible modifications. You get three approved spring rates for each end of the car, plus the standard range of adjustment that the rest of the chassis offers.You can't tweak engines, re-map, design different aero parts. Nothing. What is on the form is what you race.
There is a set of FIA GT3 tech regs (Article 257A), but they only cover the basics (like cockpit cooling ducts) and, in most cases, refer you back to the homologation document.
Homologation for GT2 and GT1 is totally different - in those classes it acts as a baseline from which you can work (as per most other forms of racing), but GT3 is different.
I don't think I ever written the word 'homologation' so many times in four paragraphs...
Rumour has it Porsche is developing a dedicated GT3 car (rather than a Cup variant) for next season, which will have more in common with their GT2 car. They're smarting a little after this season...
Ahonen said:
randy said:
Homologation is different to regulations. before a car is put in for homologation it can have whatever changes from the road car varient that the manufacturer chooses. There are no regs to nailed down modifications at all.
In GT3 the homologation papers are the limit of the technical regs, if that makes sense. There are no technical regs regarding the limit of modifications because there are no permissible modifications. You get three approved spring rates for each end of the car, plus the standard range of adjustment that the rest of the chassis offers.You can't tweak engines, re-map, design different aero parts. Nothing. What is on the form is what you race.
on this basis, if I was a manufacture I would start witht he bar so high that my development programe for year two and three would be just removing the balast I will get landed with year one. (Viper anyone??)
it's a joke to say this is open and fair competition (compared to GT-1/2 etc) as you are totally int he hands of the package the manufactuer put forward in the first place.
the other issue I ahve with it is that as a team, you have both your hands tied, you can do nothing outside of what has been homologated, so what's left for a team to do? put fuel in it and wash it is all you are left with (where's the motivation for proper race teams to run one?)
In my mind this is exactly the problem with racing today! Everybody wants to buy a car "off the shelf" and go racing. Fair enough but the UK did not get to be the best in the world by simply buying racing cars. The likes of Chapman, Postlethwaite, et al got to be the best because they designed and altered cars.
There should be an affordable championship that allows development. For me its all part of the game. To be able to identify problems and design solutions is surely part of the racing drivers repetoire - or am I being all old fashioned?
Come to think of it there is a championship that does allow this - Britcar. Trouble is they have regulations but dont police them. This is the worst of both worlds!
As for British GT cars in the 24 hours, well, I think they should be welcomed but they would have to run under the Britcar rules. If they can be made competive for the race is another question but that is surely down to the individual team and their budget.
Off topic but is there going to be a winter Britcar series this year? I've got to rebuild and modify my car for next year but if there aresome rounds that look good I might delay the big strip down!
Cheers,
Richard.
There should be an affordable championship that allows development. For me its all part of the game. To be able to identify problems and design solutions is surely part of the racing drivers repetoire - or am I being all old fashioned?
Come to think of it there is a championship that does allow this - Britcar. Trouble is they have regulations but dont police them. This is the worst of both worlds!
As for British GT cars in the 24 hours, well, I think they should be welcomed but they would have to run under the Britcar rules. If they can be made competive for the race is another question but that is surely down to the individual team and their budget.
Off topic but is there going to be a winter Britcar series this year? I've got to rebuild and modify my car for next year but if there aresome rounds that look good I might delay the big strip down!
Cheers,
Richard.
Scuffers said:
Exactly my point, as a manufacture, you can do what ever you like, then homologate it.
on this basis, if I was a manufacture I would start witht he bar so high that my development programe for year two and three would be just removing the balast I will get landed with year one. (Viper anyone??)
it's a joke to say this is open and fair competition (compared to GT-1/2 etc) as you are totally int he hands of the package the manufactuer put forward in the first place.
the other issue I ahve with it is that as a team, you have both your hands tied, you can do nothing outside of what has been homologated, so what's left for a team to do? put fuel in it and wash it is all you are left with (where's the motivation for proper race teams to run one?)
It is, undoubtedly, a very difficult situation to equalise performance in GT3 - as proven this year in BGT, where Mosler ride heights and other restrictions have been based around the results from the Belcar series, where a professional driver (arguably the best in the Championship), running on Michelin tyres, has beaten the Porsches handsomely. Those penalties don't work on British cars, running on rock hard Avons, against Ferraris and the Lambo...on this basis, if I was a manufacture I would start witht he bar so high that my development programe for year two and three would be just removing the balast I will get landed with year one. (Viper anyone??)
it's a joke to say this is open and fair competition (compared to GT-1/2 etc) as you are totally int he hands of the package the manufactuer put forward in the first place.
the other issue I ahve with it is that as a team, you have both your hands tied, you can do nothing outside of what has been homologated, so what's left for a team to do? put fuel in it and wash it is all you are left with (where's the motivation for proper race teams to run one?)
Your comment about 'proper' race teams having no motivation to run them is debatable though (and thanks for the insult, by the way!). Look at cars like the GT1 Aston and the various GT2 430s and 997s - the teams running them don't do too much redesigning because they're good cars, designed by manufacturers to be quick out of the box. Yes, there's plenty of damper and tyre development, but a private team would struggle to better the aero package, while the engines are mostly looked after by the manufacturers. GT3 cars (speaking from the Mosler angle, of course) are fully adjustable racecars, with 4-way dampers and all the adjustability you'd expect on a racing car - and they still need a proper set-up in order to work well. You could level the same accusation at GP2, for example, which has plenty of proper teams running in it. Or Porsche Supercup.
One thing is for sure though, if the FIA intends to use GT3 as a basis for new GT1/GT2 regs, they really need to rethink their approach to equalisation - as soon as you introduce different tyre manufacturers the whole thing is going to fall apart. The FIA has yet to fully answer how it is going to sort that one out...
935 said:
In my mind this is exactly the problem with racing today! Everybody wants to buy a car "off the shelf" and go racing. Fair enough but the UK did not get to be the best in the world by simply buying racing cars. The likes of Chapman, Postlethwaite, et al got to be the best because they designed and altered cars.
But it's the cost angle that's so important these days. Look at GT2 as an example. Ferrari and Porsche have a huge customer programme and there's simply no way a private team could develop a car to beat them for the price of a customer car. Spyker have come close on occasions with their works team, while Panoz won Le Mans in '06 by being incredibly consistent, but the 430 and 997 have really moved the game on too far. There's a Danish team in LMS (who we shared a garage with on occasion this year) with a home-built Corvette. They have ex-DTM star Kurt Thim driving, yet haven't got within 7 seconds of the GT2 pole time at any circuit.It is a shame, undoubtedly, that the ingenuity side is disappearing from GT style racing, but development has to be funded and, well, the manufacturers have the deepest pockets. I recall the days of Group C very fondly, where teams like Kremer, RLR and Joest would regularly wheel out revised bodywork to beat the factory cars, but those days are gone, sadly.
935 said:
There should be an affordable championship that allows development. For me its all part of the game. To be able to identify problems and design solutions is surely part of the racing drivers repetoire - or am I being all old fashioned?
Come to think of it there is a championship that does allow this - Britcar. Trouble is they have regulations but dont police them. This is the worst of both worlds!
The words 'affordable' and 'development' are uneasy bedfellows. If someone really wanted to spend the money, they could built a car that would walk Britcar. The rules structure is wide open for abuse. Take a current GT2 car or some of the better GT3s, add a bigger aero package and you're off and running.Come to think of it there is a championship that does allow this - Britcar. Trouble is they have regulations but dont police them. This is the worst of both worlds!
935 said:
As for British GT cars in the 24 hours, well, I think they should be welcomed but they would have to run under the Britcar rules. If they can be made competive for the race is another question but that is surely down to the individual team and their budget.
A few of us were out there this year, running BGT cars on Dunlops (but with reduced ride heights), and we were fairly quick. Rollcentre were hobbled by an alternator and we were held back by two driveshaft changes, but we were certainly competitive. Now if we could convince James to make everyone use proper refuelling rigs we could save around 3 minutes per fuel stop...
All the above is said in good spirit. I'm not having a pop at Britcar in any way - we had a great time at the 24 and will, of course, be back next year.
Ahonen said:
Your comment about 'proper' race teams having no motivation to run them is debatable though (and thanks for the insult, by the way!). Look at cars like the GT1 Aston and the various GT2 430s and 997s - the teams running them don't do too much redesigning because they're good cars, designed by manufacturers to be quick out of the box. Yes, there's plenty of damper and tyre development, but a private team would struggle to better the aero package, while the engines are mostly looked after by the manufacturers.
Sorry, you were not the taget of that comment....that said, think about it, why can't a decent team develop their own car(s)? people have always done this, from Kramer to Creation, and lower down the scale, people like Chris and myself developing the Lotus. in the comtext of GT3, we cannot enter a Lotus (and please don't even think about suggesting the current Lotus GT3!).
Plenty of teams out there are capable of making real progress developing platforms, but within the conext of GT3, they can't, so what's the point??
as Richard has said, there are many sides to why we race, and developing a car is one of them for people like me.
Ahonen said:
A few of us were out there this year, running BGT cars on Dunlops (but with reduced ride heights), and we were fairly quick. Rollcentre were hobbled by an alternator and we were held back by two driveshaft changes, but we were certainly competitive. Now if we could convince James to make everyone use proper refuelling rigs we could save around 3 minutes per fuel stop...
All the above is said in good spirit. I'm not having a pop at Britcar in any way - we had a great time at the 24 and will, of course, be back next year.
And I for one think the 24 is better for enttries like the Moslers etc... (although you can sod off with your fuel riggs! - without the 'slow' pumps, people like us would have no chance...)All the above is said in good spirit. I'm not having a pop at Britcar in any way - we had a great time at the 24 and will, of course, be back next year.
I believe they are going to run equalisation tests on the Avons in the UK with the current cars. This sounds like only a sensible thing to do as there are likely to be differences between the tyres used in the various series. That should sort out some of the arguring, some possibly justified, much probably not.
I think the GT3 idea is good, as soon as you allow private development of cars then somebody comes in with silly money and buys the championship. I think you can still do that to a certain extent, because employing a really good team means the car will be well set-up and well run. I think Barwell have proved that this year in BGT, they are extremely well drilled in their pitstops and seem to get the cars running well and consistently.
The Moslers have still been quick in the UK, often they have been hampered by reliability issues, especially with the hubs. When Flux and Riley have come in with the Rollcentre car, Fluxie has been on the pace.
I think the GT3 idea is good, as soon as you allow private development of cars then somebody comes in with silly money and buys the championship. I think you can still do that to a certain extent, because employing a really good team means the car will be well set-up and well run. I think Barwell have proved that this year in BGT, they are extremely well drilled in their pitstops and seem to get the cars running well and consistently.
The Moslers have still been quick in the UK, often they have been hampered by reliability issues, especially with the hubs. When Flux and Riley have come in with the Rollcentre car, Fluxie has been on the pace.
dino ferrana said:
I think the GT3 idea is good, as soon as you allow private development of cars then somebody comes in with silly money and buys the championship.
- cough*
you any idea what an aston/lambo/etc cost (with all the must have options??)
GT3 cars are far from cheap, it all started with the ideas of a ~£120K car and they are double that now (Viper asside!)
I am dam sure for way less than this I could put up a competative car, but within the current framework, that's just not possible.
how sustainable is all this is my question?
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff