Touring cars should be a lot more popular with manufacturers - agree?

[Charlie]

It's odd when I think about Touring Cars (wtcc + btcc) and why there are praticaly no Manufacturers in the sport (I believe it tallys up to 5 if you add up btcc + wtcc).

Then I realised that it seems Formula 1 is alot more attractive manufacturers, yes it is the piniacle of motorsport and I am a fan myself. Yet surely their can be no better promotion and publicity for a car company than to see a modified sports version of it's saloon car up against it's closest market rival. I mean I don't understand how a company thinks competing in Formula 1 is going to boost sales because an F1 car bares no physical resemblance to a standard road car.

Honda pulled out F1 due to costs and fall of sales but when they were in F1 their aim was always to beat Toyota. So why can't we have a cost effective touring car series (lets call it btcc and keep it in Britain!) with a Toyota Avensis vs Honda Accord, BMW 3s vs Audi A4 etc.

Touring cars are alot more exciting than F1 on a good day, so with the right publicity and promotion, manufacturer support and a good finacial reward, it could be a great series for fans. Because in the current state, drivers like Thompson and Plato can't get drives and no legends are created becausce any exciting young driver can't get the funds to drive an independant entry.

[wedge]

You have to blame Bernie. He's turned F1 into thee premier racing series in the world and you get silly shenanigans with messing with engine rules in Group C; killed off DTM/ITC knowing full well their regs were unsustainable; and sweet talking manufacturers like Toyota into committing to anything but F1.

Conversely you have BMW who have an excellent motorsports program despite the financial climate.

Regards to Toyota vs Honda - Japan never caught on to S2000 regs as they did with Super Tourers after Group A cars and they ended up concentrating on JGTC/Super GTs when Super Tourers were a dying breed.

Come to think of it, the 90s seems to be the last in the great era of motorsports since now we equalisation regs such as silhouettes in NASCAR, success ballast and/or reverse grids in Touring Cars and GTs.

[MrJan]

More people watch F1. Simples.

[MrJan]

Come to think of it, the 90s seems to be the last in the great era of motorsports since now we equalisation regs such as silhouettes in NASCAR, success ballast and/or reverse grids in Touring Cars and GTs.

But success ballast was originally brought in because one team had a huge advantage over the others because Audi ran a 4WD system. Okay it's mutated from there but when it first came in it was for a good reason :)

I personally think that it was the change in rules which has killed the series, the current crop don't really resemble the road car like they did in the mid-90s. The same can be said for the WRC, back when Subaru and Mitsubishi ran cars which looked exactly the same as the road car then people could relate to the easier than, say, a C4 of today.

[tdb]

So why can't we have a cost effective touring car series (lets call it btcc and keep it in Britain!) with a Toyota Avensis vs Honda Accord, BMW 3s vs Audi A4 etc.

Touring cars are alot more exciting than F1 on a good day, so with the right publicity and promotion, manufacturer support and a good finacial reward, it could be a great series for fans. Because in the current state, drivers like Thompson and Plato can't get drives and no legends are created becausce any exciting young driver can't get the funds to drive an independant entry.

Right, let's do it then, i'll phone ALL the manufacturers and tell them to build cars!
All you need to do is find the £50 MILLION to set up and promote the championship.

Easy isn't it??
I can't imagine why nobody's done it sooner!

[AndyRAC]

Seem to remember reading recently in one of the monthly car mags about the demise of the WRC, in it the writer (might have been Mark Walton) saying/implying, that Bernie thinks that any Manufacturer thinking about entering Motorsport should enter F1, and nothing else. Sadly, it seems the FiA agree - a lot of the strong Motorsport series of the 90's have gone to pot, and are struggling. These changes appear to have stopped F1 losing it's mojo. Coincidence??

Just look at media coverage - Motorsport is F1. The rest get the crumbs.

[wedge]

I personally think that it was the change in rules which has killed the series, the current crop don't really resemble the road car like they did in the mid-90s.

Were you referring to WRC or Touring Cars?

Anyway, its the life cycle of any series - manufacturers will build and destroy a series with its money. The Super Tourers and new WRC regs were originally supposed bring the cars back down to earth - which they initially did but then you had air dams and splitters made of carbon fibre in the former and crazy rear wings on the latter.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I think the current S2000 regs are too restrictive for manufacturers to be interested. Even if one manufacturer builds a faster car the rules handicap them. The competitive element of building and fast car isn't there (touring cars) as it is in F1.

[wedge]

I think the current S2000 regs are too restrictive for manufacturers to be interested. Even if one manufacturer builds a faster car the rules handicap them. The competitive element of building and fast car isn't there (touring cars) as it is in F1.

I used to think the same but the cars are similar to early 90s BTCC when cars were more production based. The problem with S2000 aren't the cars themselves, its the crazy ballast systems in WTCC.

Even F1 is dumbing down with homologated engine and transmission, spec front wing (mid section under the nose), spec ECU, spec tyres, restrictive aero which is all bad from a designers perspective.

[Sonic]

I think the current S2000 regs are too restrictive for manufacturers to be interested. Even if one manufacturer builds a faster car the rules handicap them. The competitive element of building and fast car isn't there (touring cars) as it is in F1.

I agree.

On top of that the cars are just sooooo slow, not very entertaining to watch and listen to. Why on earth would a manufacturer want in?

[BDunnell]

I'm not bothered about the speed of the cars, which seems fine to me, and even less so about what they sound like. I certainly agree about the WTCC rules being a problem. Also, good S2000 touring cars are still expensive to run - maybe too much so.

As for the cars not looking like road cars, any pretence at that was eliminated by the Super Touring wings and splitters, so I think the appearance of the cars today ought not to be a problem. More of a difficulty is the aforementioned FIA and thus manufacturer obsession with F1, coupled with the squeeze on budgets of all car manufacturers. At least the BTCC has very good independent teams like WSR and Team Dynamics that are genuinely able to run with and beat the works cars driven by the top drivers.

[Sonic]

Not bothered about the sound???? What kind of Motorsport fan are you??? :p :

[BDunnell]

Not bothered about the sound???? What kind of Motorsport fan are you??? :p :

It has its place, and I love the sounds to be heard at the Goodwood Revival, for example, but I'm not bothered about it in touring cars.

[Sonic]

Think you just made my point ;)

Thanks :up:

[BDunnell]

How so? I wouldn't have thought any manufacturer's decision on whether or not to enter a championship has anything to do with what the cars sound like.

[KILOHMUNNS]

How so? I wouldn't have thought any manufacturer's decision on whether or not to enter a championship has anything to do with what the cars sound like.

Especially if you are SEAT with that diesel engine!

[kmchow]

I think there are many "touring and/or silhouette series" around, but I think the problem lies more with the fact that each country has gone with their own "rules". Every manufacturer backs the series which flatters/benefits their products the most. This has gotten worse/become more apparent due to shrinking motorsport budgets/profits.

It's very difficult to get manufacturers to compromise to a global set of rules. B/c a set of common rules that may benefit them in 1 country's tracks, could hurt them in the other 10 countries.

Yet if they're willing to compromise, there are immense savings of building cars that can be used in 15-20 countries. For a few years. ST did seem to enjoy that status, like the Soccer World Cup, everyone could relate to it! Sighhh...

[BDunnell]

I think there are many "touring and/or silhouette series" around, but I think the problem lies more with the fact that each country has gone with their own "rules". Every manufacturer backs the series which flatters/benefits their products the most. This has gotten worse/become more apparent due to shrinking motorsport budgets/profits.

It's very difficult to get manufacturers to compromise to a global set of rules. B/c a set of common rules that may benefit them in 1 country's tracks, could hurt them in the other 10 countries.

Yet if they're willing to compromise, there are immense savings of building cars that can be used in 15-20 countries. For a few years. ST did seem to enjoy that status, like the Soccer World Cup, everyone could relate to it! Sighhh...

There ought to be those savings now with S2000, which I think is probably a better technical formula for keeping costs down over a longer period than was Super Touring, which became completely unsustainable when the big-budget manufacturer efforts came along.

[kmchow]

There ought to be those savings now with S2000, which I think is probably a better technical formula for keeping costs down over a longer period than was Super Touring, which became completely unsustainable when the big-budget manufacturer efforts came along.
S2000 maybe cheaper, but then you recall how many dispensations some manufacturers have been given? H pattern/sequential, engine, etc... Tryingn to compromise yet keeping everyone happy at the same time is very difficult.

[wedge]

I think there are many "touring and/or silhouette series" around, but I think the problem lies more with the fact that each country has gone with their own "rules". Every manufacturer backs the series which flatters/benefits their products the most. This has gotten worse/become more apparent due to shrinking motorsport budgets/profits.

It's very difficult to get manufacturers to compromise to a global set of rules. B/c a set of common rules that may benefit them in 1 country's tracks, could hurt them in the other 10 countries.

Yet if they're willing to compromise, there are immense savings of building cars that can be used in 15-20 countries. For a few years. ST did seem to enjoy that status, like the Soccer World Cup, everyone could relate to it! Sighhh...

The manufacturers and governing bodies had become more protectionist and domesticated to cater their own needs. Good examples being Trans Am and Aussie V8s which 'banned' foreign cars competing.

[BDunnell]

S2000 maybe cheaper, but then you recall how many dispensations some manufacturers have been given? H pattern/sequential, engine, etc... Tryingn to compromise yet keeping everyone happy at the same time is very difficult.

Absolutely, and Tim Harvey wrote recently that, for instance, a Chevy is a very costly option for a privateer team, so maybe the right balance hasn't quite been struck with the S2000 cars. However, I still feel S2000 represents a good technical formula for touring cars.

[Rollo]

All you need to do is find the £50 MILLION to set up and promote the championship.

Easy isn't it??
I can't imagine why nobody's done it sooner!

And what did Sky pay for the rights to the Premier League?

Why not get Elton John to pay for it? He spent 8 million quid on flowers like

[MrJan]

Were you referring to WRC or Touring Cars?

Anyway, its the life cycle of any series - manufacturers will build and destroy a series with its money. The Super Tourers and new WRC regs were originally supposed bring the cars back down to earth - which they initially did but then you had air dams and splitters made of carbon fibre in the former and crazy rear wings on the latter.

Both really, rule changes which were designed to open the sport up meant that manufacturers had to plough loads into new development which didn't translate to sales. You can't look at the C4 or Vauxhall Vectra of the WRC and BTCC of today and make the same connections that you could with the Subaru Impreza and Vauxhall Cavalier of around '95. Back then the cars at least looked something like their road going counterparts. Without people making those links between their car and the racing car the old 'win on Sunday, sell on Monday' adage has gone out the window and motorsport just can't sustain itself properly.

[VX_Rules]

I dont really agree with that analysis, a fact is a car in motorsport is never going to look exactly like its showroom counter part. But I would say when Joe Bloggs walks into a BMW showroom on Monday, after Sunday on which day Priaulx won a race and Kubica won a race, I would say Priaulx is more likely to shift that 3-Series. At the end of the day, that car resembles its motorsport counter more than any F1 car.

And if you're referring to how Scooby have huge intakes and spoiler just like the Rallying counterpart then there are many road car that are still just like that. I would say visually the Honda Civic Type R and Team Dynamics Civic are extremely similar. Seat Leon FRs are also distinctly similar with their bodykits and paint schemes. The WRC cars have recently gone down more of a disimlar looking route, but with the introduction of S2000 rules I believe this will help.

[AndySpeed]

I would say visually the Honda Civic Type R and Team Dynamics Civic are extremely similar.

Except for the fact that the Type-R is a 3-door and the Team Dynamics car a five door!

[VX_Rules]

Given :P But the Honda has very well hidden doors in 5 door guise :P

[tdb]

Absolutely, and Tim Harvey wrote recently that, for instance, a Chevy is a very costly option for a privateer team, so maybe the right balance hasn't quite been struck with the S2000 cars. However, I still feel S2000 represents a good technical formula for touring cars.

The chevy is only costly due to RML's pricing structure and it's engine lease deal. which is REALLY costly!

[F1boat]

I agree.

On top of that the cars are just sooooo slow, not very entertaining to watch and listen to. Why on earth would a manufacturer want in?

That's the problem IMO. Sometimes I watch the WTCC and this SEATS are just dull to me. Little funny cars, not cool machines. At least for me. The DTM cars look gorgeous, but the races are so-so.

[wedge]

I dont really agree with that analysis, a fact is a car in motorsport is never going to look exactly like its showroom counter part. But I would say when Joe Bloggs walks into a BMW showroom on Monday, after Sunday on which day Priaulx won a race and Kubica won a race, I would say Priaulx is more likely to shift that 3-Series. At the end of the day, that car resembles its motorsport counter more than any F1 car.

And if you're referring to how Scooby have huge intakes and spoiler just like the Rallying counterpart then there are many road car that are still just like that. I would say visually the Honda Civic Type R and Team Dynamics Civic are extremely similar. Seat Leon FRs are also distinctly similar with their bodykits and paint schemes. The WRC cars have recently gone down more of a disimlar looking route, but with the introduction of S2000 rules I believe this will help.

Agreed.

Only the Japanese manufacturers got into the true spirit of the old Group A rally homogolation. Even the new Focus RS doesn't have 4WD let alone C4, 206, 307CC. I'd say the JWRC has better links to its hot hatch equivalents.

[Caroline]

That's the problem IMO. Sometimes I watch the WTCC and this SEATS are just dull to me. Little funny cars, not cool machines. At least for me. The DTM cars look gorgeous, but the races are so-so.

I know what you mean. I know the Seats are fast, race (and championship)winning cars but to me, they look incredibly out of place on GP tracks. I still hold the belief that a car entered into a Touring Car competition should look the part, irregardless of the manufacturer's desire to push a certain brand. Perhaps I should get with the times. :p

[Mark]

Manufacturers, just like sponsors, look for a return on their investment. Any involvement in BTCC will have to be seen as a real increase in the sales of cars.

Unfortunately the BTCC just doesn't have good enough exposure in the marketplace to allow this to happen. Pretty much zero terrestrial TV coverage, no mention in the news and very little if any in the newspapers.

ITV4 all day coverage is great for the hard core fans but ask most people what's going on in BTCC, they wouldn't know. But I bet they could tell you all about F1.

[MrJan]

I dont really agree with that analysis, a fact is a car in motorsport is never going to look exactly like its showroom counter part. But I would say when Joe Bloggs walks into a BMW showroom on Monday, after Sunday on which day Priaulx won a race and Kubica won a race, I would say Priaulx is more likely to shift that 3-Series. At the end of the day, that car resembles its motorsport counter more than any F1 car.

And if you're referring to how Scooby have huge intakes and spoiler just like the Rallying counterpart then there are many road car that are still just like that. I would say visually the Honda Civic Type R and Team Dynamics Civic are extremely similar. Seat Leon FRs are also distinctly similar with their bodykits and paint schemes. The WRC cars have recently gone down more of a disimlar looking route, but with the introduction of S2000 rules I believe this will help.

I'm saying that neither the Scooby nore the BTCC cars of today look like the road cars because they are festooned in aerodynamic tweeks. Back in the days of Soper, Cleland et al there was very little in the way of spoilers (well they didn't have them). In '92 (? Harvey won I think) the beemers looked far more like the road car than the 3-series does now with it's wide arches and rear spoiler.

Here's an example, Seat Leon BTCC

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00460/Jason_Plato_460277a.jpg

Seat Leon FR
http://www.swotti.com/tmp/swotti/cacheBGVVBIBMCG==QXV0B21VDGLVBI1DYXJZ/imgleon%20fr1.jpg

versus BMW 318iS Coupe BTCC

http://www.stillphotography.co.uk/gallery/d/15766-3/btcc92_01.jpg

BMW 318is COupe
http://www.caranddriving.com/pix/UBMW3SeriesCoupe9298.jpg

The Seat road car is a lot narrower at the wheel arches whereas the BMW BTC just looks as if it's a lowered version of the road car with a paint job.

Until Alfa came in with their aero package then you could really see the resemblance, and indeed right up to the rule changes in 2001 (??) the cars racing in the BTCC looked a lot more like their road counterparts than they do now.

Same goes for WRC up until the rule change allowed cars that were 2WD on the road to enter with 4WD. I'm not saying that the cars are massively different in all cases, just that when a car has a widebody and rear wing then it doesn't look as close to the car it is based on :)

[AndySpeed]

Being someone who was born in 1988, and thus was a child during the 'wing-less' days of the BTCC, I in many respects fail to see why it matters. To me, wings and splitters are just a part of motorsport, and indeed these days sporty versions of cars nearly always come with them.

Plus, the effect of growing up with wings and flared arches means that I actually like them on road cars sometimes.

[BDunnell]

ITV4 all day coverage is great for the hard core fans but ask most people what's going on in BTCC, they wouldn't know.

Would they really have known in the mid-1990s when the championship was supposedly at its peak, though? I doubt it.

Personally, I think a move back to the BBC would do the BTCC a massive amount of good, as excellent as ITV's coverage has become.

[VX_Rules]

I totally agree with the exposure, and BBC1 will not have it, it will clash with live F1, ITV won't be having it on ITV1 again anytime soon. Channel 4 wouln't have it for Sundays and Channel 5 would never be a step in the good direction. I don't personally see a solution. :/

[BDunnell]

I totally agree with the exposure, and BBC1 will not have it, it will clash with live F1

Not if the BTCC was scheduled not to clash with F1 races that take place in the afternoon UK time.

[VX_Rules]

I don't see it happening even with rescheduling. The BBC will only want F1 anyway. I can't imagine they'd want the BTCC even if they ran it on BBC3 or BBC4.

[woody2goody]

I'm surprised about this too, because when I first started watching the BTCC, you had Nissan, Renault, Volvo, Honda, Audi, Ford, Vauxhall and Peugeot. and in addition it was a very competitive championship.

I reckon it would promote the cars better than F1, because actually seeing, for example, a BMW 3 Series in BTCC has made me really like the car, and I woud consider getting one as a result.

Get some ex-F1 drivers in there! Mansell certainly provided entertainment when he was there, as did Derek Warwick. No straight panels on his cars...

[AndyRAC]

I don't see it happening even with rescheduling. The BBC will only want F1 anyway. I can't imagine they'd want the BTCC even if they ran it on BBC3 or BBC4.

Which just proves what I've said for a long time - in the eyes if the British media, F1 IS Motorsport!! Nothing else counts...

[MrJan]

Being someone who was born in 1988, and thus was a child during the 'wing-less' days of the BTCC, I in many respects fail to see why it matters. To me, wings and splitters are just a part of motorsport, and indeed these days sporty versions of cars nearly always come with them.

Plus, the effect of growing up with wings and flared arches means that I actually like them on road cars sometimes.

I was only born in '85 so didn't spend many years watching the wingless cars. I agree that they are part of motorsport but they have morphed to something which you wouldn't see on many road cars and certainly not on normal production models. My main point about the spoilers is that back in the day cars looked virtually the same bar some different wheels, decals and being lowered. People could make an easier association between the BTCC car and the road car, now the BTCC cars all look like out and out racers and the association is weakened.

TBH I'd rather see the wings out of the sport, or at least firmer rules. The racing used to be so much better than it is now and I believe that a lot of that is down to the amount of time teams can spend sorting downforce.

[BDunnell]

I was only born in '85 so didn't spend many years watching the wingless cars. I agree that they are part of motorsport but they have morphed to something which you wouldn't see on many road cars and certainly not on normal production models. My main point about the spoilers is that back in the day cars looked virtually the same bar some different wheels, decals and being lowered. People could make an easier association between the BTCC car and the road car, now the BTCC cars all look like out and out racers and the association is weakened.

Back in which day? Certainly not the days after 1994, so we're talking ages ago. That was when the BTCC gave up any pretense of the cars looking like their showroom counterparts. In fact, any spectator with half a brain would have realised that the resemblance was purely cosmetic well before that. Personally, I think that a BTCC/WTCC 3-series of today is just as easily recognisable as a 3-series as were those of yesteryear. Maybe the marketing was more clever then.

And I can't help wondering why this matters, given that the Ford Galaxies and Falcons and the Chevy Camaros that were British Saloon Car mainstays of the 1960s and '70s weren't exactly staples of the High Street showroom, yet this is now forgotten.



TBH I'd rather see the wings out of the sport, or at least firmer rules. The racing used to be so much better than it is now and I believe that a lot of that is down to the amount of time teams can spend sorting downforce.

Blame the FIA, not TOCA. They made the regulations. When the BTCC launched the BTC Touring regulations, it was stated that wings and spoilers were purely cosmetic. How true this ever was I don't know.

[wedge]

Blame the FIA, not TOCA. They made the regulations. When the BTCC launched the BTC Touring regulations, it was stated that wings and spoilers were purely cosmetic. How true this ever was I don't know.

BTC cars weren't far off being DTM-lite with the flared wheelarches and skirts.

S2000 is very much like the 1995 cars but without the intricate front air dams/splitters. The rear wing I can live with but the whole aero kit ie. front end downforce is far more acceptable than in the mid-late 90s.


TBH I'd rather see the wings out of the sport, or at least firmer rules. The racing used to be so much better than it is now and I believe that a lot of that is down to the amount of time teams can spend sorting downforce.

I think the cars have been as good as they've ever been. Certainly a lot better than in the late 90s when the sport faced the same criticism but on a larger scale.

[MrJan]

Back in which day? Certainly not the days after 1994, so we're talking ages ago. That was when the BTCC gave up any pretense of the cars looking like their showroom counterparts. In fact, any spectator with half a brain would have realised that the resemblance was purely cosmetic well before that. Personally, I think that a BTCC/WTCC 3-series of today is just as easily recognisable as a 3-series as were those of yesteryear. Maybe the marketing was more clever then.

Back around the beginning of the '90s and to a certain extent right up to around 1997 when the car were running splitters and wings but not rolled arches and all that like they do now :) And while the 3-series is still recognisable I don't believe it looks as close to the road car as when Harvey and Soper were in it or even when Smokin' Jo came along :) Just MHO.


And I can't help wondering why this matters, given that the Ford Galaxies and Falcons and the Chevy Camaros that were British Saloon Car mainstays of the 1960s and '70s weren't exactly staples of the High Street showroom, yet this is now forgotten.

This is true, can't explain it myself, or even offer an idea, but I'm no marketing man.



Blame the FIA, not TOCA. They made the regulations. When the BTCC launched the BTC Touring regulations, it was stated that wings and spoilers were purely cosmetic. How true this ever was I don't know.

I'm not blaming anyone, just saying that I believe the series would benefit from less aero stuff. If that's down to the FIA, TOCA or even the BBC I don't care :p :

[BDunnell]

Back around the beginning of the '90s and to a certain extent right up to around 1997 when the car were running splitters and wings but not rolled arches and all that like they do now :)

I really can't agree with this, I'm afraid.

[MrJan]

I really can't agree with this, I'm afraid.

Really? So you don't think that something like the Cavalier of '95 or the Vectra (in the years up until the Astra) looked more like it's road counterpart than the current Vectra?

[BDunnell]

Really? So you don't think that something like the Cavalier of '95 or the Vectra (in the years up until the Astra) looked more like it's road counterpart than the current Vectra?

I think they are entirely comparable, especially when one bears in mind the significant differences between the '95 Cavalier and anything on sale at the time.

[Clark Trent]

I remember having to bring my MG ZS mk2 into the paddock one time to prove the fins on the front wings were open. WSR found that it improved the handling but other teams were complaining that it wasn't on the road car. Unfortuneatly they were originally open but the criminal fraternity discovered that the wires for the alarm could be accessed through the slots so MG had to seal them up again.
I just use this as an exsample of how close to the original they have to be.