Skip to Content

Change Language

Listen Live in your browser

Travel Club

Travel to the world's biggest sportscar races with the Travel Club!

New unified GT class for 2015

Chiana's picture

So there's gonna be a "merger" of the GT categories (GTE/GT3) into one 'universal' class in 2015... look at the initial comments here

I have no idea how this will be done... well as long as it not dictated entirely by BoP it has a chance to succeed I guess. But I'm saying it again, if you force all manufacturers to follow the same rules and have both high and lower performance base production cars running to the same regulations, it will become very messy with balancing... as it already has

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"Reduced costs of GT3" What? Haven't the GT3 budgets been skyrocketing like crazy in the past few years?

I strongly appreciate that they are planning to have the class with actual regulations in place, now if only would they get rid of the waivers and other artificiality. That's probably just daydreaming but it does sound a little promising at least.

There are like 30000 GT3s running around the world so this transition could become kinda problematic with the old cars in national series - I guess they could retain GT3s if there is no need for change

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Should have little to no effect on the current batch of GT3 series. While they are FIA members, neither FIA nor ACO have any day to day control on rules in these series. One of the reasons for the changes is so that FIA/ACO could gain control of or kill off the GT3 class. You have a some very successful series throughout the world which do not rely on FIA nor the ACO for their rules. DTM, Super GT, Blancpain, Grand-Am all have very successful series and neither the FIA nor ACO have any control of the rules these series run. I seriously doubt the new GT class will have cost in the same area as the GT3 cars. Even if they manage to do so it will not remain there for long. These other series have been able to keep cost down while FIA and ACO class cars have seen cost skyrocket every time they introduce something new.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

DTM doesn't fit into this comparison though; the true cost of such a car is only known to ITR. No privateer can enter the series. And the car spec is frozen with no development going on. That's not a natural competitive environment.
Cost in GT3 keeps going up so maybe Blancpain isn't the best example for a cost efficient series either. It lives and dies with GT3. Maybe some sort of outside control is exactly what the class needs. If GT3 goes kaputt, so will Blancpain.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

I don't think this rationalisation is a land grab by the FIA and ACO. Everyone involved in GT racing will win - the fans, the teams, the manufacturers, the promoters, the media because everything is simpler and the "you can race that car here but not here" confusion/frustration will go. To say the FIA and ACO only have their own interests at the heart of this, is possibly a bit cynical in-my-opinion.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015


2012 LMGTE
Regulations are in place but they mean pretty much nothing anymore because of waivers and BoP
Eglibility only for ACO/IMSA series and IGTO
High costs

2012 GT3
No regulations + everything controlled by BoP
Eglibility for every GT championship except ACO ones and American series
High costs

2015 GT???
Regulations are in place?
Eglibility for every championship?
Lower costs?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Spaceframe Fibreglass Cars, 'Project Blueprint' Style Aero regs and Power to weight limitations. Maybe Group 5 mixed with GT3?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

An overdue, sensible and rational move. The regulatory spirit of GTE with running costs under current GT3. All very promising. Let's hope they get it right! I for one, certainly don't want to see tube frame silhouettes, they're not GT cars.

"We have three main targets: to keep the technical credibility of GTE; to achieve the reduced costs of GT3; and to allow the manufacturers to develop one car rather than the two that they have to today."

They're certainly saying the right things, I hope they walk as well as they can talk.

What it will mean is that it will force a rationalisation of GT racing in Europe. There won't be space for an ELMS GT class, Blancpain and GT Open if they all run to the same GT regs. Good news for the national domestic series though. In time, I would imagine, they'll have to adopt this new class too, providing a clear and good value path (by negating the need to buy a new car) from national and continental GT, to Le Mans and WEC.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

When's the last time we had a GT Class which ran both as National Series' and Le-Mans?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

lol... GT1 and GT2

In addition to international series like ALMS and FIA GT those cars were running on French GT, British GT etc for numerous years

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Hmmm, I wasn't really into GT racing back then outside the Aus GT, Which was a real mishmash of stuff (I miss the Diablos v NSX v Porsches, Also the Monaros) So i'm claiming ignorance.....

Edit: Nations Cup! That's what it was called, was Nations Cup through late 90's to about '07\'08? when it went to GT3....Guess i'm not quite as ignorant as i thought :P

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Very exciting! Maybe we see someone big like Corvette decide to run a grand season of all the major endurance races on the planet??

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

I agree this is a really exciting project, but surely we could end up with manufacturers producing Sprint and Endurance Aero kits, potentially increasing costs? Furthermore, what happens with the homologation if a car needs a certain piece for sprint racing, yet a very different design for longer durability?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Or a GTE kit and a GT3 kit? One for Le Mans, one for Blancpain and all other GT3 based series. Who says GT3 will disappear?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

GTE and GT3 kits? So essentially, nothing whatsoever would change.... All series would have to go the this formula to make it worthwhile, otherwise all we've done is dilute the field even further.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Dagys saying on twitter that SRO strongly disagrees with this proposal...

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

the current GT3 has no place at Le Mans or in International series like the WEC - National and regional OK. I ahve always had issues with a series that effectivley has no technical regulations and relies on a series of 'test runs' to balance the performance of the cars.

GTE may not be perfect (don't get me started - I hate the waivers thing - but at least that has to be supported by dats) but it is producing great racing, great FACTORY BACKED racing and that is where the works teams should be, Le Mans, in the WEC, not pot hunting against amateur drivers in national or regional series. Surely that is what GTE-AM is all about and givne what I have heard from a umber of GT3 teams, it may actually be cheaper (in some cases) to buy and race a GTE-AM car than a GT3.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

the real problem is that GTE and GT3 were basically 95% same class in 2012 - both controlled entirely by BoP (not waivers), whether you have factory involvement or not. yes, the four-car GTE-PRO class in WEC sure is exciting once you see what 911 and Vantage are running under the hood... what's the point of building a car to the rule set if it doesn't matter? the only major thing missing now are the pre-season BoP tests Gt3 performs, plus obviously the difference in costs

I hope Hindy and Graham take this into account when they do the annual sportscar review show. It wasn't much in 2011 I give you that, but at least something

sorry for rambling about the same thing over and over again, but my GT interest has decreased massively during the last couple of years due to this growing insanity. what happened to pure racing?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Pure racing has been dead since ca. 1920. Unless you stick to single make racing where the driver (and the particularly clever engineer) is what counts.
"yes, the four-car GTE-PRO class in WEC sure is exciting once you see what 911 and Vantage are running under the hood... " - but it isn't exciting anymore if two of the four exit the race, which is possible, and we don't even have a complete podium. That's not what a world championship wants to see. But, no manufacturer is going GTE racing anymore. GT3 has plenty of manufacturers. The temptation to emulate that success is understandable.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

when is say that the current WEC GTE-PRO is "exciting", I don't actually mean exciting Johannes ;)

and by pure racing I do not mean 100% pure of course, as that simply does not exist in the world of motorsports. but a manufacturer vs manufacturer battles we had in GT1 and GT2 for the most part of last decade. classes that DID have some minimal BoP yes, but it was more like this:
* During the season, changes will be made first to weight, and only if the
changes required exceed the available weight changes, will Engine restrictor / boost be used.
* During the season, the maximum single weight step for any single car shall be 25kg
* [Minimum restrictor BoP] Engine restrictor / boost pressure change up to +/- 10% restrictor area and / or 9% of absolute permitted pressure
* [Minimum weight BoP] Up to plus 50kg and minus 50kg (GT1 cars), Up to plus 50kg and minus 25kg (GT2 cars) - The above changes are the total maximums that could be applied in the season, not the maximum change per adjustment. [two in-season adjustments allowed]
* [Basis for making changes] Being outside approximately 1% of the fastest average green flag race stint lap time of the reference car during each race in the evaluation period

again, NOT PERFECT, but less random than the current mess. prior 2005 most of the GT champs didn't even have those

in some championships BoP was even replaced by success ballast, which is about the only thing I like about on Ratel's new FIA GT2 suggestion

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"when is say that the current WEC GTE-PRO is "exciting", I don't actually mean exciting Johannes ;)" - well it IS good racing but the car count simply isn't there anymore. For manufacturer vs. manufacturer racing, you need manufacturers. Not just two of them, either.

Performance balancing can simply be ruled OUT. But why was it ruled IN in the first place? Everyone will gravitate toward the car that's best for the formula. Porsche Cup, anyone?

The kind of racing you want to see, and I wouldn't mind seeing either, with constructors out-constructing each other, has gone away fourty years ago. Ours is the era of performance balancing, directly with very restrictive regulations, or indirectly with equalisation à la BoP. It's not BoP that will kill GT3, it's the lack of cost control. Sorry.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Oh yes I agree that it will be costs that will destroy GT3 - why would BoP kill a BoP class? ;)

what I never understood is that whenever someone wishes to see LMP1s totally performance balanced (ie Audi and other manufacturers directly battling against the Domes and Lola AERs) it is gunned down by everyone, claiming that it is insane - which is what I obviously think too but that's not the point. but with GTs is perfectly okay, as apparently it's mandatory with production based vehicles. don't give us that "it is impossible for different shaped cars and power outputs to race together without having severe inparity, so that's why balance of performance is there". Well, that's why you have MULTIPLE GT classes, multiple structures so you don't have to throw everything into one messy basket. and that's why you have like 200 classes at events like N24 - they could not possibly race all in one category. with the proposed GTE/GT3 merger we have solved nothing, the same vicious cycle will continue

Now, on the other hand, what if Audi had received massive BoP breaks when they were behind Peugeots in 2010 when the French were like 4 seconds a lap faster at Le Mans? would everyone had still smiled at that? is it perfectly acceptable to have BoP in LMP1 privateers, LMP2 and LMGTE, but not in LMP1 factory battle?

Big budget GTE factory vs big budget GTE factory, controlled by BoP - it's fiiiine!
Big budget P1 factory vs big budget P1 factory, controlled by BoP - blasphemy!

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

There IS performance balancing in the prototype categories. Otherwise, do you really think a diesel ever would have been competitive? - It just hasn't been done right for years.
The days of "here's the car, now race it" are over.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

I know this

Diesel-petrol BoP
P1 Privateer BoP (mild)
P2 BoP (mild, but may change next year)
GTE-PRO BoP/waivers (heavy)
GTE-AM BoP/waivers (heavy)
BoP between classes to maintain category structure (somewhat rarely used)

what is missing? ah yes...

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

This is a broad church - keep grinding that ax till there is nothing left but the stick, and have a nice day ;-)

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

don't worry, that was all... for today :)

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

This is a great thread and the only thing I can add is that back in the 80s & 90s we in the States had IMSA GTO (GT Over 3.0L) and GTU (GT Under 3.0L) for space frame cars. The regs were fairly open for awhile until Audi and Nissan cleaned house and they regulated out the turbo motors. That forced Nissan to run a V8 300ZX, which most people ignored so it was still a 300Z winning races... but the purist 12 yr old in me did not like it.

The problem [not really a problem] I see in GT racing is that it is almost impossible to ensure diversity without a BoP. Sportscar manufacturers do not adhere to a formula for engine capacity, intake (NA v T), etc and having set regulations will only serve to limit the cars that can take part. Maybe we are being far too critical and over thinking this as purists? Maybe people just want to see good racing, great variety and large grids? I have a feeling the only way to get that is via BoP/waivers and any set regulations will result in races with only three or four different marques or models competing. Why administer such limitations?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"...and they regulated out the turbo motors" - which became a real problem for GTO, and incidentally for Trans-Am as well; it became a NASCARised spec series.
(I liked the Lincoln-Mercuries, though. :-D)

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

I agree you either need BoP of a single class or you need multiple GT classes. To have multiple GT classes based on technical diversity of the cars participating, you need to have the car counts in all classes high enough so not everyone is on the podium. Then the kicker comes in with the politics. Would Porsche want to continue supporting a 911 for GT2/GTU whichever with GT1/GTO whichever being dominated by Astons, Corvette's, and Vipers?

Personally, I think they've got the equation pretty accurate in GTE for good competition between the different makes, even the massive engined Viper. However, I would also say that the waiver process should result in a codification process in the rules so everyone's treated equally. For example, if a team is given a larger restrictor because it's only got 2 OHV per cylinder, then all engines with 2 OHV's per cylinder should expect a one size larger restrictor. Consistency is key to trust and validity.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"Then the kicker comes in with the politics." - But you have that already. the viper is so clearly outside the rules (and there are clear rules in GTE), yet it was allowed in. A diplomatic victory for Chrysler.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"Clear rules" in GTE are not the same sort of rules you may attempt to bypass in F1 (Red Bull actively searching for minor loophoples and FIA bans it next time round etc), they are the sort of rules that are only there to give a false impression of real rules. in other words, they are just words without much of a meaning nowadays

for example, the article CCV section 2 mentions that you cannot install laser cannon next to the windshield wiper
-> manufacturer does it nevertheless
= ACO gives up as they don't wanna frighten their newest ally, but all the older allies are ignored (until someone starts crying, then usually cousin Bop comes to pay a visit)

another thing, the ACO website says that the minimum weight of LMGTE cars is 1245kg
= 90% of the cars do not comply which makes this a lie*

* this is a random point but something that always buggs me: while the regulations do confirm that the ACO controls weight and other BoP variables as it wishes, it IS neverteless a blatant, stupid lie nowadays: it is not a minimum weight by all means, just a random kg number that most of these cars will never even reach

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

That'll teach me.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

I know I'm going to be excoriated for this and have almost deleted the post, but what the heck. This forum is generally tolerant of varying opinions.

The Viper really isn't that far outside the rules other than the 5.5L limit that got appended to the GTE rules. The Viper is running with a production engine. Probably far more production than the Porsche. It's running really small air restrictors that still appears in Appendix 1 (though I see they've revised again and taken them out).

So what's the alternatives?
1. Tell SRT they can't play? Not acceptable in the current environment with tenuous car numbers.
2. Manufacturers design and build road cars to match the rules of some series? Yeah, right.
3. The race cars become a mishmash with no basis on the road car at all and we have Grand-Am GT. Personally, I like GTE and GT3 better than tube frames sillouettes, but maybe I'm in the minority.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"It's running really small air restrictors"

No it's not, the 1,4mm restrictor break means that only the Evora and Vantage are running with bigger ones. And even if they wouldn't have those breaks, the 28,1mm base restrictor is still bigger than the displacement of that engine should allow. I mean, Corvette's base (before BoPping) restrictor for the 5,5 liter is 27.9mm. Yeah they essentially gave some extra weight for the Viper (that has now almost completely diminished due to BoP) but the point is, why give extra weight if you could've just issued correct restrictor size in the first place?

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

But the rule makers do have to account for differences in engine architecture. With 2 OHV per cylinder, the Viper's not going to have the high end breathability that a DOHC engine has and still has to fill the combustion chambers so the restrictor is still relatively small. It's not like the Viper ran away with the field in the races it participated in.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

"The proposal to merge the two platforms, set forth back in October, was vetoed by manufacturers on the grounds of costs, particularly for privateers wanting a reasonably priced way to go racing. Instead, talks have since centered on the concept of a base car but with different “kits” being made available to adapt the car for either a cost-effective privateer class or a fully fledged factory-based category. The two proposed classes are being known as “GT” and “GT+” internally"

Umm... I don't know, that doesn't really sound convincing.

Looks like the makes are still half split between wanting a class based purely on BoP / regs. Audi particularly looks to be in favour of the balancing lotteries

In any case, seems as I have to keep dayreaming about the re-introduction GT1/GT2 esque structure for another ~10 years

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

If they keep the idea of one class, rather than mandate a minimum weight for the whole class, I think it would make sense to employ a version of the GT1 restrictor/weight table, i.e. 1100 kg means an x mm restrictor, while 1250 kg means y mm. The size of your engine would determine the weight you run at. (Not like when Corvette use to make the cars heavier at Le Mans in order to get bigger restrictors for those long straights.) Engine capacity would be 8 litres for N/A, 4 litres for turbos.

For turbos, apply a "turbo factor" of maybe 1.75 to the engine size (instead of the 1.5 from Group A that allowed the R32 GT-R to be so powerful) and restrict the boost depending on the number of turbos and size of the engine.

The 911 would be lightest, followed by the Munich abomination, then the 458 and Vantage, the Corvette and finally the Viper. You would have cars with different strengths and weaknesses depending on the racetrack.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Cormac, that is way too sensible and straightforward. There would be less "wiggle room" for special interests to lobby for waivers and BoP breaks. :-}

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Sorry for repeating myself AGAIN... as well as for lazy grammar

AUDI: "There are some parties that are more focused on technical regulations, but if it's focused on that, the costs will go up. -- So if you really go into the details and rules, you are allowed to modify this or that in that way. Because in GT, the concepts of the cars are so different, it's almost impossible to find technical rules to combine cars that are following different concepts. All of these concepts are competitive. I think it's impossible."

1) Audi is a participant of a full BoP category so they cannot possibly have the fairest opinion on this
2) Again, WHAT IS SAID ABOVE WAS PERFECTLY POSSIBLE SOME FIVE YEARS AGO IN GT1 and GT2. There was some BoP (or success ballast particularly in FIA GT) yes but it was limited and not intended to act as a general helping hand. I already showed you what the regs said few years ago so you've got the picture.

It's very simple: more variety, more BoP comes to play (in the current way of thinking). And the way to fix that, as opposed to BoP lotteries is a multi class GT formula based on capacity and other figures. IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE DIFFERENT CARS AND PHILOSOPHIES ON TRACK WITHOUT RESORTING TO WWE GIMMICKS. It has always been a part of GT racing, you only hurt yourself if you throw everything into one basket. And that's exactly what has happened in the last few years. Different makes make different models for different purposes, making it extremely difficult to have all cars under one ruleset. You would have never justified a Lotus Evora or BMW M3 badged touring car competing for a GT1 victories when all the other cars were more or less exotic models.

This new base car & kit thing sounds like an attempt to have some rules, but at the same times not - which sounds pretty familiar to me. And once again every single car manufacturer has to obey to one set of rules (or none at all if that half of the manufacturers that want to follow the BoP only route get their wish granted) which makes the life very difficult.

Also this GT/GT+ thing further goes into the ever so popular PRO/AM aspect of the game which I never really agreed with, but that is another discussion.

btw Cormac, by 2016 (the new deadline set by the parties involved) none of models you listed should be around anymore in their current form.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

I agree that lumping everything into one class doesn't make sense. I based my musings on the fact that apparently there will only be one class and was using today's machines as a reference.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Oh okay.

Your idea wasn't too bad btw (for one class concept that is)

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Again I am sorry, I truly am for being so negative and repetative all the time but I'm seriously losing the patience with GT racing right now. And this base car & kit thing doesn't really sound any better than what was promised last fall, actually it feels even more complicated. How on earth are they going to figure this out... the LMP1 regs and aspects for 2014 sound like a holy grail in comparison

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Has anyone stopped to consider how the competitors in GT3 feel about the balance of power? I am reading a lot of whinging and whining about how the GT regulations are unjust and unclear, as well as how the BoP is a horrible blasphemy to the world of racing... but participation in a category should be a clear indicator.

From my perspective GT3 is growing and has been growing for several years. It affords great racing, great entertainment and provides a playing field for numerous manufacturers and a wide variety of models. If the rich guys who purchase and field these cars and the manufacturers who build them were upset about the BoP do you really think they would be spending so much money to buy and race GT3 cars? Creating more classes, more rules or more "interpretations" will only serve to fragment racing even more than it is already. Ideally, a team should be able to buy a platform and race it in many different events across the globe without having to convert the car, or find themselves outside the regulations, from one sanctioning body to the next.

Racing is entertainment. I do not know why anyone is fighting this notion. Anything for which you purchase a ticket, or set aside time to watch on TV or listen to on the internet or via PodCast is entertainment. Racing is also marketing. Look at the elaborate hospitality facilities that race teams are almost required to operate if they want to land the massive sponsorship dollars (or rich guy's wallets) required to operate a race team. If said sponsor or rich guy was not entertained by the notion of going racing they would not spend their money on it. The sponsorship has so little to do with "eyeballs" and so much more to do with "what the marketing director / rich guy thinks is cool".

Over the years I have watched so many great sportscar racing series flourish and then falter because someone decided to make it "international" or because someone insisted that Le Mans were an all-important goal. The original DTM, while expensive, seemed to die an awful death after being FIA sanctioned as the ITC. Group C seemed to die after the FIA decided to include F1 motors. The BPR series was growing and had some cool cars until the FIA turned it into an internationally sanctioned series, rather than a place for rich guys to check off "race a cool car" from their bucket list.

Right now GT3 offers: variety, entertainment, technology and a place for people to race one car in many events. Someone else suggested that having GT3 available from the National to International level would allow a team to grow from one class to the next. I agree with this notion. Why do we need regulations and set rules instead of a BoP? Why does it matter? If we are entertained and get to see great racing, why are we complaining? The last thing I want to see is even more fragmentation in motorsport.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Sorry, I am not entertained by GT3 racing as I do not see it as REAL. It doesn't have any relevance with the road cars or technology. You can't even have a tyre war as those figures are BoPped too. I am not here to watch "cool cars" that have nothing to do with anything. Why would I watch something that I know is manufactured at the point that WWE is not so far a way? Even NASCAR gimmicks pale in comparison.

And GT3 teams and drivers moan about the BoP. ALL. THE. TIME. Which is strange I admit considering that they knew what they signed for.

GT3 is popular for the manufacturers as it provides an easy platform where you can build whatever you want (supercar or B-class sedan) and just relax while the organizing body makes sure that you are able to comfortably have success in the series. Same with (gentleman) drivers, these cars are so easy to handle with all the driver aids and stuff that it's become like an entry level class for many. It is an easy place for teams.

BoP-only series provides great grids but I DO NOT CARE about big grids if it means racing that is more or less scripted in advance. Now you throw in the usual "but BoP is everywhere in motorsport anyway" -line, but that's not really true and I've made numerous counter arguments to that on my previous post already so I'm not going to repeat myself again.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

While BoP can become political, it does have a huge benefit for the gentleman driver. If you are a manufacturer racing as a factory team, it makes sense that your success should be based on your ability to produce a superior car. However, for the wealthy businessman who is going to go out and buy a car to race, it's a bit hard to get him to commit massive amounts of money when he could find he bought the "wrong" car and doesn't stand a chance of getting a good result because his Porsche is inferior to the Ferraris. For that class of driver, knowing that the cars will start out even and that your success will be based on how well you use the equipment is a huge selling point.

Sure, it means the battle between the makes is useless. It doesn't mean the battle between the teams is meaningless.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Okay this is no GT3 or GTE but SCCA WC's GTS class

You see even people that are contesting in BoP-dominated series moan and protest, as seen here not behind the curtains only.

Re: New unified GT class for 2015

Given the various proposals & ideas I've read, I really like Cormac O'Connell's idea. It's clear, gives clearly defined parity in the regulations and it's easy to understand not only for the enthusiasts on this forum, but also for the casual viewer. There is also absolutely no reason why current GT3 / GTE class cars couldn't be included with either additional ballast or engine restrictor's. The only suggestion I'd throw in would be to perhaps do away with the restrictors, but return to the old Group 'C' idead of so many miles per liter of fuel or so many liter's per hour of racing. Then leave it to the manufacturers to engineer the best possible car from their production models. I think the only substantial ammendment I'd make would be to include regs regarding the track / wheelbase of the race car in comparison to the GT (i.e. no stretching or widening the platform from the production model). I would also hate to see the class become a space frame silhouette class, I'd rather know the chassis racing were using at least the same chassis architecture as the road car it's based on, likewise drivetrain, transmission and suspension geometry should also be closely related to the production car (no strapping 4WD onto a 2WD model, but likewise if the road car has 4WD, then the GT should have it also).

This would seemingly be an all inclusive formula, the relationship and relevance to the road car is maintained for the manufacturer / viewer, and the open, easily understandable rules should encourage all kinds of cars to enter to maintain both grid numbers whilst keeping the racing fair and understandable.



Re: New unified GT class for 2015

The danger with 4WD (as I hinted at above) is that you could end up with a car like the R32 Skyline GT-R.

D | forum