Am I Sad?

Watching today's Fujitsu race I was getting more interested in it. Not because of the quality of racing, but because there were guys who were taking each other out.

How sad is that?

I've been following motorsport since Brock, Moffatt, Grice, Big Rev Kev, Bond etc. were all slugging it out. I used to deride those "fans" of motorsport who only watched it for the crashes. Today I started to feel the same way - that the procession that we see at each touring car meeting is such that a decent prang injects some excitement into the racing.

Tomorrow we can expect pace cars at the drop of a hat - watching a slow procession for lap after lap. For this I'm tempted to do something other than gluing my arse to the couch - perhaps a drive to Melbourne to pick up a roll of bubble wrap for use as solar blanket for the pool, maybe.

It's my dream to have at least one last Bathurst before I croak where there are no pace cars, that pit stops are compulsory in the sense that if they're not taken then physical mechanics will dictate a DNF or a poor result. In other words, the race is won on race drivers' merit and due to reliability - not because one guy can swap brake pads quicker than the next one.

Just watch the Superbikes mate - it's far more interesting.

Unfortunately As we all know, Most sport has been ruined by the almighty dollar, and Motorsport is dragged along with it! Nowadays, it is no longer sport its a business, and one part of that business, it has to be entertaining! or so they reckon! So just like the so called V8 TAXIS which are manufactured, so is the sport itself, it too is manufactured! All glitter and glam, the smoke and mirrors.
How many times in the last few years have we seen the outcome of a race changed by a stoopid drive thru, , Or a CPS, The leader can lose a lead because of something out of his control like a jammed wheel gun in the pits, There are many instances and I am sure we could recall many?
I still look at the TAXIS on the TV, but I dont get excited about it like I used to! I havent really thought too much about Bathurst to be honest!

I often think to myself how lucky I was to grow up in an era to witness the 60's,70's,80's when we used to see actual road cars built to go racing, not race cars built to look like road cars that race!
To see the heroes of the day in the late 60's at Bathurst racing for 500 miles solo doing battle racing inferior cars (compared to todays slot cars) To hear storys of Brocky in 1972 driving the winning XU-1 for 6 odd hours and at the pit stops, just having sips of Cola so he didnt have to have to get out of the car! I'd like to see that today?

With only Pit boards, a flash of the headlights, a wave, or a flashing indicator to communicate, They had no radios, to tell the driver to breathe, or when to pit! Pitstops were for when the car needed fuel or tyres , (not between lap 4 to lap 55 because its good entertainment! )
Slipping and sliding on the standard seat, or hitting the brake pedal to find its all but gone! then have to actually race around wrecks or dodge pick up trucks all without the aid of safety cars. (Not that these issues are a good thing! It happened and they didnt know any different! All this while there was a race being run!
Each brand suited different circuits then it was up to driver talent to do the rest thats what racing was all about! Toranas often beating the GT Falcon in the 60's and 70's Moffats Mazda often beating Holden and Fords finest in the 80's
Over the years the Safety improvements have been outstanding for the sport, just the racing and rules have become all to manufactured, just like the cars! It wouild be great if we could somehow combine the past and present formulas and go racing!

Its a sad indictment on the series that realisticly only 4 cars of a field of 30 have any chance of winning the race, it's not so sad to see cars taking each other out, at least in that scenario the cars are actually racing, something that has sadly been lost to the main game.

I'm with AMoffat, watch the superbikes, way more enjoyable, plus they actually race!

How many cars were capable of winning back in "the good old days"?

How many cars were capable of winning back in "the good old days"?A lot more than today There were more makes for a start!

How many cars were capable of winning back in "the good old days"?
Its funny how people think as there is more 'professional' teams means that more cars are capable of winning......

I wouldn't be so sure about that; a trawl through history will probably show that there would only be about four to five cars that could win the race - on speed and quality preparation - each year. All the other possible contenders would have to rely on the cars in that core group to strike problems.

For example:

1972: Realistically, only Brock, Bond, and Moffat (and possibly Geoghegan) were likely to win. Gibson in the other factory GTHO would only win if Moffat or the others struck trouble. Of course, the wet weather changed everything...

1976: Moffat/Schuppan, Brock/Brock, Bond/Harvey, Morris Fitzpatrick, Grice/Gardner.

1984: Brock/Perkins, Johnson/French, Moffat/Hansford, Fury/Scott, Grice/Harrington, and that's being generous. Realistically, maybe it was only the first two combinations that were likely winners. The #25 HDT car would only have won if #05 struck trouble.


Of course, there are exceptions:

1994: Seton/Radisich, Skaife/Richards, Brock/Mezera, Johnson/Bowe, Jones/Parsons, Perkins/Hansford, Gardner/Crompton, maybe also Longhurst/O'Brien.

BUt as was pointed out - the race was won or lost on the reliability of the car, the mechanics of the car (both physical and human) and even the weather.

Dare I mention that in 1974 one car was not given a snowballs chance in hell of winning - yet it did - John Goss's Falcon.

And even 1997 - was the winner that year given a chance (but there again - that's dangerously too close to today to warrant thinking about).

I just loved the different makes, different engine sizes. The smaller cars needed less pit stops for tyres, fuel etc. One of the great moments at Bathurst was Colin Bond out braking Alan Moffat at the end of Conrod on Lap 1 in 1970. He went past so fast it looked like Moffat was standing still. I really miss that.

If that happened today, the car outbraking the other would be either pulled in for 'bad sportsmanship' or excluded after the event for having 'non-standard TEGA issued rubber coverings on their brake pedals' (but would never be tested for any illicit substances in their blood....)

How many cars were capable of winning back in "the good old days"?

"The good old days" wasn't a CONTROL category limited to 30 cars having a start. Any CONTROL category with only 4 cars able to win on outright pace isn't working as it should.

Give me the good old days thanks, 55 cars, different makes, classes, race stragegies, engineering philosophies.........

I am with you Phase 3, I cant understand why the fujitsu cars are not included, the clas tyhing was great but i dont think that can be brought back and although i accept they may spear off, that is all part of what we all remember as the real Bathurst.

The reason they 'spear off' wouldn't be because they are <choke> racing amongst themselves would it :)

Maybe the real reason they aren't allowed to play with the big boys is that some of the 'big boys' wouldn't appreciate being shown up???

Watching today's Fujitsu race I was getting more interested in it. Not because of the quality of racing, but because there were guys who were taking each other out.

How sad is that?

I've been following motorsport since Brock, Moffatt, Grice, Big Rev Kev, Bond etc. were all slugging it out. I used to deride those "fans" of motorsport who only watched it for the crashes. Today I started to feel the same way - that the procession that we see at each touring car meeting is such that a decent prang injects some excitement into the racing.

Tomorrow we can expect pace cars at the drop of a hat - watching a slow procession for lap after lap. For this I'm tempted to do something other than gluing my arse to the couch - perhaps a drive to Melbourne to pick up a roll of bubble wrap for use as solar blanket for the pool, maybe.

It's my dream to have at least one last Bathurst before I croak where there are no pace cars, that pit stops are compulsory in the sense that if they're not taken then physical mechanics will dictate a DNF or a poor result. In other words, the race is won on race drivers' merit and due to reliability - not because one guy can swap brake pads quicker than the next one.
Very well said

mtj57, hope you didnt go to melbourne yesterday, because if you did, you missed out on the best bathurst finsih ever

we have never seen a finish where there are 13 cars on the lead lap, , somehow different marques dont provide that,

with less than 12 laps to go cars that were not part of "only 4 cars able to win " were in the elead or challenging for as it as Phase 3 waffled on about it

Seriously old timers, you would really rather watch some guy win by 6 laps rather than what happened yesterday. if thats the case i pity you old people as seriusly you have nothing to live for

Seriously old timers, you would really rather watch some guy win by 6 laps rather than what happened yesterday. if thats the case i pity you old people as seriusly you have nothing to live for

But us old timers as you call us have seen both generations of racing and can compare the two, you can't so have no way to judge what you have not seen. We can judge the two eras and there is no way the present one even comes close to what we had at Bathurst in the era of variety. This era will not last due to boredom, of that you can be sure.

Casper - no he has a point - 149 laps of so-so racing is easly overcome by 12 laps created by a safety car. I mean - that is pure excitement that lasts all day!

Next year, I guess they should just forego the first 150 laps - start the race at 4pm behind the safety car (draw a lottery to see who gets to be classified as DNF or crashed) and let them go at it for 11 or 12 laps.

come on boys, you can do much better than that

name a better one and tell me why

2nd closest competitive finish ever. most cars on the lead laps ever.

Somehow when a car would win by multiple laps that was better racing was it?

and casper i've been to nearly half of them and watched another quarter live, i think im qualifired to comment

i think you meant ijn your last line "The old era did not last due to boredom,"

Serously night stalker if you think that was a 12 lap race then clearly you have no idea about endurance races

It's better than Brock winning by 6 laps in the old days. I, for one, am very glad those days are behind us

Casper - no he has a point - 149 laps of so-so racing is easly overcome by 12 laps created by a safety car. I mean - that is pure excitement that lasts all day!

Next year, I guess they should just forego the first 150 laps - start the race at 4pm behind the safety car (draw a lottery to see who gets to be classified as DNF or crashed) and let them go at it for 11 or 12 laps.

Sadly, this is what the 'Cocho V8 Staged Entertainment' era has brought !

A contrived 12 lap shoot-out at the finish of a 1000 km race... Which I must add was THE BEST SPRINT RACE OF THE SEASON, but the overall race was ho-hum.

Without wanting to sound like a broken record, a 31 (30) car field attempting to complete 161 sprint laps around one of the toughest circuits in the word is bizarre to say the least.

The "good old days" :old: of Bathurst provided a much more interesting race than what we are served up these days, races within races (remember different classes?) and some proper endurance racing, with as many as 56 entries, back as recently as 2000.

The coch'ed-up franchise system has made the once Great Race, not as great as it should be.

Some stats from Natsoft.

1994: 44 entries; 26 finishers
1995: 32 entries; 15 finishers
1996: 35 entries; 22 finishers
1997: 41 entries; 19 finishers (V8's) Two litres 1997: 26 entries, 11 finishers
1998: 46 entries; 20 finishers (V8's) Two litres 1998: 43 entries, 18 finishers
1999: 56 entries; 22 finishers
2000: 56 entries; 29 finishers
2001: 39 entries; 21 finishers
2002: 38 entries; 24 finishers


I challenge anyone who can remember races from the 80's and early 90's (ie: older than 16) to say that the entire Bathurst race these days is better, both as a sporting event, and entertainment wise.

I understand that things change with time, but not always for the better.


As I've posted here before, I'd love to see a 3 round endurance series separate from the Championship: Bathurst, Sandown & somewhere else!

Lets see VE$A open up an endurance series to all-comers, with cars and drivers from both series, hell if they were fair dinkum about making a racing spectacle they would allow Carrera Cup cars in as well:

Gee a race within a race. ;)


(hang on, the Porsche's might actually do a 1000 K race on less stops for brakes tyres & fuel, making them a chance for an outright victory, no,no,no that would never happen in the land of the Black Wiggle.....):cool:

i think i've already said it. the race these days is better without a doubt

i do agree that 31 cars is not enough,

if you want all the different marques then go to the 12 hour and live with what that provides good and bad

They will have 32 cars next year

Dont need any more than that to have a spectacle.

Almost cleared all the space cadets off the grid, but one or two slipped thru (Verdnik, Noske & Gurr spring immediately to mind) :laugh:

I challenge anyone who can remember races from the 80's and early 90's (ie: older than 16) to say that the entire Bathurst race these days is better, both as a sporting event, and entertainment wise.

I understand that things change with time, but not always for the better.


I'm 31 and would contend it is. Most of the Bathurst I remember from the 80s through 90s seemed to be cakewalks (Brock winning by more than a lap on more than one occasion). I never cared for class victories, I wasn't concerned which Corolla was leading it's class. You'd get an interesting first hour then it would fall away. At worst they've moved the best bit of the race from 10-11AM back until 4-5PM.

They will have 32 cars next year

Dont need any more than that to have a spectacle.
On a 3km circuit you may be correct - possibly a 4km track.

But on a 6.1km circuit - sorry - no way.

Do some math - on a 3km track you have 93 metres for each vehicle - easily covering the entire track with vehicles if spread out. Lap times - 1:25 to 1:35.

Mt Panorama - 193 metres of track for each vehicle (assuming all 32 running - last weekend 203 metres at the start) and lap times of 2:10.

The ONLY reason 32 cars are running at Bathurst is because no one used any foresight to build more garages (this is what they cite as the 'limiting factor')

there are 36 pit garages at bathurst.

Your maths on the gaps is good but means little because most people watch it on tv anyway

and even at the track the majority have a big screen in front of them

You miss the point though - whether they watch it on TV, at the track or on a big screen - a track of this length is noticeably vacant with so few cars on it. This was very evident on the weekend - how many times did you see a shot looking down mountain straight, across the top of the mountain or on conrod where there were no more than 2 cars in view - especially on the 'longest straight of any Australian motor circuit' (as they kept reminding us'?

The only time it looked like a field of race cars was after the last (contrived???) safety car period.

I take your word on the 36 - I understood 32 but wasn't 100% sure.

even with 50 cars it can still look like that

but i agree (as mentioned earlier) 32 cars is not enough

still the reduction of cars has meant less time under safety car, usally we are back going after two laps (sometimes only one)

There are 35 garages in the new Bathurst pits.

but they are 35 TWO-car garages. They were built with the 24hr in mind, when they were talked up a maximum of 72 starters for it.


You can't compare old 'proper' Bathurst's with modern day Bathurst 1000s.

Who is to say that 'back in the day' races would not have been as close as today if there had been safety cars to close the fields up every chance they get. And by the same token, if there were no safety cars these days, there is every chance the winners (or the first couple anyway) have the speed to lap the field.


The end of this years Bathurst was very exciting, but very contrived.

The end of Bathurst 1979 wasn't very exciting, but it was a proper race.

They will have 32 cars next year

Dont need any more than that to have a spectacle.

Almost cleared all the space cadets off the grid, but one or two slipped thru (Verdnik, Noske & Gurr spring immediately to mind) :laugh:

A well known poster and preparer of cars says that Noske is in his words ' very employable'. Are you a better judge of driver ability than he is? Mark Noske from as long as i remember has been a very good driver, most of the time in average or below average cars.

They will have 32 cars next year

Dont need any more than that to have a spectacle.

Almost cleared all the space cadets off the grid, but one or two slipped thru (Verdnik, Noske & Gurr spring immediately to mind) :laugh:

Maybe your information is 2nd or 3rd hand, but it would be a very brave person who said that Mark Noske wasn't a talented driver.

He's not as young as some, and he has been overlooked and sidelined, the exception being enduros, for a while, but if it wasn't for the Gore "Revolving Door", then he would still be in the series.

Passion, desire, hunger, but most of all ability....he has them all. The last couple of enduro seasons have been too flash, but that reflects equipment more than talent, or a perceived lack of the latter.

If Tasman didn't believe in him, then he wouldn't have been invited back!

Note: I hadn't read pete's comments. Page 2 got read first...