Views on 2005, 2 years on [Archive]

nik

5th April 2007, 18:10

Now 2005 has long gone, looking back on it, it has to be the worst season in BTCC history IMO.

What was it? 13 cars for the season opener, only 11 at Thruxton. A badly prepared Astra, 2 Lexi miles off the pace, leaving a handful of cars to do battle. I've recorded every BTCC meeting since 1997, and to be honest i've hardly touched the coverage from 2005.

Now look at the BTCC, 26 cars at the season opener, tons of teams, and looking very healthy.

Views on 2005??

BTCC2

5th April 2007, 18:31

nik, 2001????

That is the worst BTCC season ever. 8 cars for the opening round, Vauxhall winning 25 out of 26 races.

People said 2005 was a great year at the time, but looking back I think they would have to admit it was very poor.

BeansBeansBeans

5th April 2007, 18:52

2001 and 2005 were the weakest seasons in recent history, mainly due to small grids and a lack of genuine challengers. Both however, were slightly redeemed by close title battles. Plato / Muller in 2001, and Neal / Muller in 2005.

SEATFreak

5th April 2007, 19:03

People said 2005 was a great year at the time, but looking back I think they would have to admit it was very poor.

The one thing that amazes me about the BTCC, and at times frustrates, is how fast it evolves. No two seasons are identical. In a few years time we could be looking back to 2007 from a 2009 in which great things that we would only dream of today and saying "I cannot belive we were saying in April of 2007 how great the new season was going to be when we look at who we have competing this 2009 season.

However I still agree that 2005 was very poor. For me it was the poor form of most cars. The only great car was the Integra. Instant sucess. It's two closest rivals, the Toledo and the Astra Sport Hatch, appeared to fall short in terms of being able to win consistently enough to stop the Integra from taking TD to the 2005 title and the MG ZS was never as good under Rob Collard as Anthony Reid. The only car that looked good enough to beat Neal's Integra was Muller's Astra Sport Hatch as BBB mentions.

VkmSpouge

5th April 2007, 19:13

I think the racing in 2005 was quite competitive but beyond the top 11 or so cars there wasn't a lot there.

BDunnell

5th April 2007, 20:58

2005 was awful at the start, but did improve. By the end, at least there was a respectable, if unspectacular, number of cars, and quite a lot of them competitive. There were also some good races. Sadly, there were also several very dirty ones. Some of the moves made in 2005 were amongst the most blatant bits of deliberate contact I've ever seen.

Brown, Jon Brow

5th April 2007, 20:58

BDunnell

5th April 2007, 21:08

The difference between 2005 and now is that back then they didn't have a midfield. We had 10 fast cars then the backmarkers. 2005 missed the likes of Motorbase, Geoff Steel Racing, Quest, Kartworld(for 1/2 the season).
I think that 2005 was better than 2001 and still more competative than 2002.

Agree with the first point, disagree with the last. There have actually been few seasons more competitive than 2002. Virtually the whole Touring-class field was capable of running at the front at some point or another. However, I still think that the very poor first year of ITV coverage lessened the entertainment factor of the series when watched on the box.

cos

5th April 2007, 22:06

At least in 2001 there was the production class which provided more than enough close action!

Iain

5th April 2007, 22:19

2005 was a bad year, on a par with the 2000 season. 2005 was so bad that I was really unenthusiastic about the 2006 season, which thankfully turned out to be a good one. Plus the title fight was a bit one-sided with Neal having the superior car to Muller, which meant it was a foregone conclusion for many.

nik

6th April 2007, 00:44

The difference between 2005 and now is that back then they didn't have a midfield. We had 10 fast cars then the backmarkers. 2005 missed the likes of Motorbase, Geoff Steel Racing, Quest, Kartworld(for 1/2 the season).

That's a very good point, and made the back markers look even slower!

I disagree with a few people, 2001 was better IMO and I enjoyed it more. Atleast with the Production class we had some new talent in the guise of, Pyper, Jackson, Howell, O'Neill and re-introduced us to old faces like Kaye, Moen and Harrison.

cos

6th April 2007, 02:05

I disagree with a few people, 2001 was better IMO and I enjoyed it more.

Agreed... 01 and 05 had the around the same number of "touring" class cars, but at least in 01 there were a healthy grid of BTC-P cars to enjoy, despite the daft "will the touring-class cars catch up the production class cars for the win? (and even if they do it doesn't matter!)" format in the feature races...

SEATFreak

6th April 2007, 08:58

The difference between 2005 and now is that back then they didn't have a midfield. We had 10 fast cars then the backmarkers.

I agree that the field was split between the fast and the rest. But which 10 were the fast cars? I think of 9. The three VXR Astra Sport Hatches, the three Team Dynamics' Integras and the three SEATSport Toledo's (even then not all were as consistent as some I felt. Yvan was a better VXR driver than Gavin Smith and Jase was a better SEAT driver than Luke Hines)? But I struggle to think of the last one. WSR and Arena both stand out as they did well and got on the podium, neither, speaking personally, looked like being a serious threat to TD, SEAT and VXR who I think had a far bigger setup.

On the issue of 2001. Being a long time ago and having began follwing the series about half way through I don't remember much. Was it not because teams like HTML perhaps had a more professional setup to 2005 counterparts like Fast-Tec that 2001 had deacent Production Class teams?

Brown, Jon Brow

6th April 2007, 10:47

I agree that the field was split between the fast and the rest. But which 10 were the fast cars? I think of 9. The three VXR Astra Sport Hatches, the three Team Dynamics' Integras and the three SEATSport Toledo's (even then not all were as consistent as some I felt. Yvan was a better VXR driver than Gavin Smith and Jase was a better SEAT driver than Luke Hines)? But I struggle to think of the last one. WSR and Arena both stand out as they did well and got on the podium, neither, speaking personally, looked like being a serious threat to TD, SEAT and VXR who I think had a far bigger setup.

10 cars was said as a rough guide :rolleyes:

Arena and WSR were still very capable of winnning races and ran at the front all season.

James Kaye was the only midfield runner, untill Hughes joined. At the last few races the Lexus started to become more competitive. I remember them racing with some of the SEATS at Mondello in the wet, and Williams with Hughes at Brands.

I was never interested in the production class. I thought that 2005 was better than 2001 because we had Honda's racing with Vauxhalls racing with SEATs racing with MG's. Intead of Vauxhalls racing with each other Peugeots 1/2 a lap behind and some Alfa 147 breaking down. Another reason why I liked 2005 is becuase it was the first time in 4 years that a Vauxhall didn't win.

Come to think of it in 2002 we had quite a good grid, with new manufacturers
http://usera.imagecave.com/jon-brown/Personal/btcc.jpg

SEATFreak

6th April 2007, 11:35

10 cars was said as a rough guide :rolleyes:

Darn shame that you didn't specicify that. :rolleyes:

Arena and WSR were still very capable of winnning races and ran at the front all season.

Between them WSR and Arena won 6. Arena with 4 and WSR with 2. Plus second and third (though quite a way behind TD) in the Independet Teams Championship was WSR (256pts) and Arena (230pts). So they must have been consistently in the top 10 where they picked up points. I acknowldedge they did well. Just not well enough to be a major threat to TD.

I thought that 2005 was better than 2001 because we had Honda's racing with Vauxhalls racing with SEATs racing with MG's. Intead of Vauxhalls racing with each other Peugeots 1/2 a lap behind and some Alfa 147 breaking down. Another reason why I liked 2005 is becuase it was the first time in 4 years that a Vauxhall didn't win.

I agree. The extra stronger competion to Vauxhall than that which existed in 01' made 05' much better. It is just of those only eventual Champions Team Dynamics outpaced them consistently enough. TD beat VXR to the Teams Championship by a clear 103pts. At SEAT NorthernSouth I felt didn't do as well with the Toledo as RML in 2004.

thetrooper_uk

6th April 2007, 11:51

I'm not sure what year I think is the worse but I know that 1995 was a great year. The most manufacturers and close race for the title then my main man Cleland won outright. Top class.

touringlegend

6th April 2007, 12:54

2005 really was an embarresment in terms of grid sizes, to start off with.

I agree that 2002 was quite a good championship, a good bit of variety.

nik

6th April 2007, 13:33

Darn shame that you didn't specicify that. :rolleyes:

Well no one takes things as literally as you do.

Agreed 2002 was a great year and I preferred it to 2004. Here's my order since 2001. Best season on top.

2002
2004
2006
2001

2003
2005

Brown, Jon Brow

6th April 2007, 14:16

2007Hopefully
2004
2006
2003
2005
2002- don't remember much if it
2001

BDunnell

6th April 2007, 14:32

The main thing is that 2007 has the potential to be the best of the lot.

SEATFreak

6th April 2007, 15:49

I will reserve judgement on 2007. We have only just begun the season. So much more can happen.

So my list is:
1. 2004
2. 2006
3. 2005
4. 2003
5. 2002
6. 2001

2004 wins for me because I will never forget watching, as a WSR fan, Reid at Croft leading Race 1 from start to finish and the sight of Muller's Astra beached in the sand on the very first turn into Clervaux. But also just how competitive it was in terms of the teams. I don't think one team stood out. Maybe I see good in all, or don't see the flaws you see, but I think they all tried their best. Collard's Astra, VXR, Team Honda, WSR, SEAT and Team Dynamics.

racer69

6th April 2007, 17:43

I've longer memory and the likes of 1985-86 were no picnic, infact they make the likes of 2001/2005 look amazingly healthy.

piggy

7th April 2007, 15:12

Surely there couldn't have been that few cars?

racer69

7th April 2007, 18:24

reidy_fan

7th April 2007, 19:17

think 2005 was very much a re-birth year for both the BTCC and support, look at the support race drivers now in btcc. (Mat Allison, Mat Jackson, Tom onslow cole) and those that are doing well in other series

BDunnell

7th April 2007, 21:59

There were more cars, but the quality of the frontrunners was much much less.

There was even a chance that Group A would be dropped for a more production based formula for 1987.... obviously didn't happen, infact Group A got alot healthier from 1987 and in 1989 was attracting 35 odd cars for rounds...

But the top class was in effect a one-make formula, and the multi-class system was confusing to the casual viewer/spectator. Although the Cosworths were spectacular, I think what we have today is better.

Eunos

8th April 2007, 17:09

I actually thought 2005 was quite a good year, Granted the Small Roster was Dissapointing but there was still some Competitive Action and wasnt always the same 2 Guys at the Front.

2001 i felt was probably one of the weakest Seasons they have had but i suppose that was the first non Super Touring Year.

What i like is a Good variety of Different Motors on the Track which is what iam seeing in 2007, Just just a Field of Vauxhall Astra's.

One thing i will say about 2002 is Team Atomic Kitten???!!! WTF?!!

12th April 2007, 12:09

I dunno why but for me 2002 has to be the best BTCC season since the new rules. I think it was because Honda and Proton joined and because there was a huge pre season hype. Im not taking anything away from this season but I just enjoyed 2002 so much. Also the Proton got on the pdium as well!! haha

ATF

14th April 2007, 23:48

2005 was good racing at the front as long as there wasn't a high attrition rate, remember the 3rd race at Oulton Park (when Chilton won), there were very few cars left.

2003 had more cars but isn't very thrilling to watch back (IMO), only the works cars were on the podium all season, and only Honda could steal a couple of race wins from VX.

2001 was the worst of the lot, 4 VXs - mainly Plato and Muller in front, then Pug were always 5th and 6th without any VX retirements. 25 race wins for VX (should have been 26) says it all!!

The even years - 02, 04 and 06 have all been good, 02 was my favourite but only just.

Brown, Jon Brow

15th April 2007, 19:40

2003 had more cars but isn't very thrilling to watch back (IMO), only the works cars were on the podium all season, and only Honda could steal a couple of race wins from VX.

.

Although Vauxhall dominated the first half of the season of 2003, in the last 10 races of 2003 Vauxhall only won thrice and Matt Neal in the Honda Civic got as many wins as anyone. I prefered 2003 to 2002.

2003
Vauxhall-11 wins
Honda---6 wins
MG------3wins

2002
Vauxhall-15wins
Honda---2wins
MG------3wins

nik

16th April 2007, 00:04

2003 had more cars but isn't very thrilling to watch back (IMO), only the works cars were on the podium all season, and only Honda could steal a couple of race wins from VX.

I agree, I couldn't get excited about 03. Maybe it was the pit stops?

ATF

16th April 2007, 13:53

2003 was the year where they got rid of the sprint/feature race format and just had pit-stops in every race. It didn't seem that bad at the time but watching the races back, they didn't seem to be as good as 2002. Honda and Matt Neal (and Alan Morrison!) should probably have had more victories in 2003, but they had failures, slow pit-stops and bad luck!

Iain

16th April 2007, 16:51

And the cars weren't as good with full ballast as the Astra Coupes were.

NoahsGirl

19th April 2007, 19:32

2004 was my favourite season, it had everything and the championship went down to the last lap of the last race. Last year, whilst I enjoyed the 2006 season, I felt kind of souless because my favourite driver (Muller) had left. But i watched the review DVD a couple of weeks ago, and boy was I wrong, 2006 was a great season! Not as good as 2004, but a great season.

2007 has the potential to be the best season yet, purely because no one can say who will be the champ - Neal? Plato? Giovanardi? Turkington? One of the most open seasons for years.