Please discuss here all your remarks and pose your questions about all racing series, except Formula One. Both technical and other questions about GP2, Touring cars, IRL, LMS, ...
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
Great news! =D> It will be great to see better & increased competition between the three German cars Benz, Audi & now BMW. I will be following it even more now, cheering for our French Canadian driver Bruno Spengler. I'm also hoping there will be increased TV coverage here in Canada of the races in Europe. [-o< Races were never shown live here & usually were highlight clips. I wish it was sooner...next yr.
As for the American series, I won't hold my breath.
There's a message here for those willing to hear it:
"F1 should be relevant to road cars" is irrelevant and pointless.
Manufacturers who want to use racing to improve their road cars (or sales fo their road cars) can do so most cost effectively by racing their road cars.
Proof? Just make your own list of the technology used in mundane production cars that are outlawed in F1. I think first of VVT, variable inlet length, direct injection and VSC, but the list is a long one.
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill
good point donskar,
put to be honest, the technology you mentioned is currently also outlawed in DTM racing and BMW lobbied against the use of VTEC in the DTC which is/was a form of Superproduction racing in Germany.
Here teams used a 1.8 ltr engine in the Honda Integra Type R against the 2.0 ltr engine BMW used in the 320 (2.0 ltr was the maximum allowed).
After 2 years of quite even handed competiton (Honda won some races, but never the title), they (BMW & Ford) pushed for a maxium valve lift limit of 10 mm, which made the Honda engine less competetive, being 0,2 ltr down on volume.
Anyway, apart from the door handles and some parts of the lights, there is nothing from the production car on a DTM car.
I think the message is, let´s do racing with some sensible costs, we don´t want to spend xxx-millions on brand promotion, when we can do the same spending xx- million.
Racing in most cases will never be relevant for road car production technology, and it does not has to - IMO.
F1,Indycar, LeMans LMP1 and things like Paris - Dakar in T1 etc., are to build brand awareness and to help shaping the brand image.
DTM, WTCC and WRC are more to promote the individal models used, but still even in WRC the technology is a far cry from the road car used.
I think the main "problem" with F1 is, that it has to be careful, not to price itself "ot of the market".
The manufacturers are not longer willing to pick up the tap.
As seen by there current hestitation to spend xxx-million on the development of the next generation F1 engines.
Costs has to come down, I think this is the paramount factor, you see across many racing series in the world at the moment.
Just my opinion, thanks for your reply
Edit: some typos
Last edited by 747heavy on 16 Oct 2010, 20:45, edited 2 times in total.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
donskar wrote:There's a message here for those willing to hear it:
"F1 should be relevant to road cars" is irrelevant and pointless.
Manufacturers who want to use racing to improve their road cars (or sales fo their road cars) can do so most cost effectively by racing their road cars.
Proof? Just make your own list of the technology used in mundane production cars that are outlawed in F1. I think first of VVT, variable inlet length, direct injection and VSC, but the list is a long one.
When a manufacturer leaves F1 and pursues another series because it has road relevancy, that means that F1 doesn't need road relevancy? I'm not sure your logic is sound on that.
It's one thing what they say and another one why they really left. I'd be surprised if they said 'well we're leaving cause we've poured millions of dollars and haven't accomplished much, so we'll just try something cheaper now'. So eco reasons, road relevancy and all that seem like the PR thing to say.
donskar wrote:There's a message here for those willing to hear it:
"F1 should be relevant to road cars" is irrelevant and pointless.
Manufacturers who want to use racing to improve their road cars (or sales fo their road cars) can do so most cost effectively by racing their road cars.
Proof? Just make your own list of the technology used in mundane production cars that are outlawed in F1. I think first of VVT, variable inlet length, direct injection and VSC, but the list is a long one.
When a manufacturer leaves F1 and pursues another series because it has road relevancy, that means that F1 doesn't need road relevancy? I'm not sure your logic is sound on that.
Sorry I was unclear (typing from work -- always rushing). F1 IMHO will never be as relevant for developing road cars as a series that is closer to road cars and which does not claim to be the ne plus ultra of racing. F1 should be the place where teams display the absolute ultimate in vehicle technology -- regardless of relevancy to production cars. Think of F1 as a manufacturer's "halo car" -- the vehicle that draws crowds into the dealership, even though not one in 100 of them could ever buy the car (think Ferrari Enzo or Dodge Viper -- or the Porsche or Toyota hybrid racers).
All of you are also overlooking my other point (complete with typo ): "(or sales fo their road cars)." I think it's safe to assume that winning races with a car that at least looks something like a production car will sell more of those production cars than winning a race with a vehicle that looks NOTHING like a production car. As the NASCAR boys say: "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday."
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill
Personally, i can see DTM being a force for the future, i can see Fiat wanting to get Alfa Romeo involved, GM wanting Vauxhall/Opel in and i can also see VW trying to get one of their brands in as well.
A 30 car grid for DTM would only be healthy for it, as long as its season was long enough with enough quality race tracks.
Posibly the Europen version of NASCAR in years to come!!!
ESPImperium wrote:
i can also see VW trying to get one of their brands in as well.
I don´t think, the are trying, as Audi is allready there and quite sucessful so.
If the Japanese GT500 series adopt the new DTM reglement for 2012, as is said by some people, I can see Toyota and Honda joining as well as maybe Nissan, after all Germany/Europe is one of the main markets.
It does not cost that much more money to produce 4-6 cars more, from a design you have anyway, and there are enough good teams around, which could un such a car, even on a customer level, with some money from the local importer/dealership ascosiation.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
You raise the great point there, its easy to build up a good team from scratch with those regs. And, alothogh it may not be 2012 or 2013, i can see VW seeing DTM as a future advertising ground. Id say maybe from 2014 onward would be where id see them.
But the fact that the Japaneese equivelent is adoptiond the same regs as DTM, i can see DTM having 3 diffrent formule, DTM Main Series (Mainly Europe based), DTM Americas (Racing on tracks from Interlagos to Montreal) and DTM Asia Series (Racing in Japan, Korea, Bahrain and Abu Dhabi etc...)
The way i see it, if GT2 dont get themselvs in gear ASAP, i can see DTM overtaking over GT2s area in the motorsport hierarchy.
DTM is fast becoming a motorsport class to be reconed with.
donskar wrote:There's a message here for those willing to hear it:
"F1 should be relevant to road cars" is irrelevant and pointless.
Manufacturers who want to use racing to improve their road cars (or sales fo their road cars) can do so most cost effectively by racing their road cars.
Proof? Just make your own list of the technology used in mundane production cars that are outlawed in F1. I think first of VVT, variable inlet length, direct injection and VSC, but the list is a long one.
I don't see your point. The fact that F1 is not relevant to pretty much anything automotive doesn't necessarily mean it shouldn't be.
Also DTM too has zero relevance to road cars. Apart from the lights that is It's not really touring.
): "(or sales fo their road cars)." I think it's safe to assume that winning races with a car that at least looks something like a production car will sell more of those production cars than winning a race with a vehicle that looks NOTHING like a production car. As the NASCAR boys say: "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday."
It's not really touring.