2011 Bathurst 12 Hour

[Sheep Stations]

Originally Posted by Wood-duck

Well it looks like a lot of chest beating over nothing really.. I am aware of the class with the 997/6, the point i was trying to make was that the distance between race winner and these cars in the future will be much greater, and the outright result acquired by such cars in the future may not be as prominent. Therefore, it will be more class based... which may or may not sit well with the owners or whoever is signing the cheques.

A point has to have ahh, well you know...an actual point!

It is, always was a class race. Do you think Lago would turn up with 250 hp less, half the aero and a smaller footprint than the lead cars and be disappointed at not winning outright?

Winning class B was our target. Beating several A class cars was a bonus. If there are 10-15 B class cars entered next year, then that race within a race will be as important and exciting as the A class, particularly to the competitors and their supporters.

Do you think Lynton or Conroy aren't chuffed to have won their class. I don't think they would have head in hands bemoaning how many laps down they were on the Audi's.

I think you've totally missed the point of endurance racing.

[pplater]

Originally Posted by Sheep Stations

I think you've totally missed the point of endurance racing.

The same could be said for a lot of proddie guys. I've always considered class wins to be an important thing, eg Boylan's efforts in the M3 at B24. The majority of proddies today seem to lack that have-a-go attitude so welcomed in Aussie sport.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Woolley

I also don't get this seeding of drivers. Put the best drivers in and let them race. If you're a gentleman driver then either have a non-professional trophy or measure yourself against the pros.

The laptime gap between the pros and the ams at the weekend was significant, somewhere between 2 seconds for the better 'ams', to 8 or 9 seconds for the less experienced ones.

The Audi squad did not suffer from this in the #8 Euro car, with 3 effective 'pros', while the #7 Aussie car did have the 'am' of Mr Eddy to contend with. Still a quick-ish driver, just not on par with Messrs Lowndes and Luff, and some seconds away from their times.

The #29 VIP Porsche had a seeded 'pro' driver aboard, in Mr Baird, who was mega quick all weekend, and the 2 'ams' in the car-owning Quinns. There was a genuine disparity in outright laptimes between the 'pro' and 'ams' in this car, of a number of seconds per lap.

The same scenario existed in the #69 Superbarn Porsche, Mr Owen was the seeded 'pro' driver, quick, certainly quicker than the 'am' car owners in the Koundouris Bros.

The idea of running a seeded driver seems to point to the desire for the owner/driver scenario to play out in the B12 format. Primarily this seems to be because there aren't the 'patron' owned & run teams in AusGT as there are in other parts of the world, and certainly no manufacturer run squads. The 'am' team drivers in AusGT are almost always the car owners...

So the logical question may be to run a 'pro' car and an 'am' car. Hmm, sounds expensive... Most of the cars run in the B12 were 1 car operations, certainly 1 car of that model/specification anyway, such that there wasn't a capability for a 'pro' car and an 'am' car in one team.

If an 'am' is required for every car, then every 'am' is competing with every other 'am' in every other car, as mandated by the rules. Makes sense when you think about it...

Which is kinda what Mr Quinn was probably getting to when talking about his team having one (unpaid?) 'pro' and 2 very enthusiastic amateurs in his car's driving line up...

[pplater]

Tony’s beef was with the fact that Warren Luff was not considered a ‘seeded’ driver.
True, Luffy has not finished in V8 Supercars’ shampionship top six or won the won the Australian GT Championship, but he could be argued as ‘‘a driver whose performances and achievements, despite not being covered by one of the definitions above, may be considered as seeded by the Organisers’ at their discretion’’.

There are other full-time V8 guys who might not be considered seeded without the ‘‘discretion’’ of organisers. Jason Bargwanna might be one (has not won a championship at any level, or finished inside the V8 championsip top six). But Bargs should probably be considered a ‘seeded’ driver as he’s been a professional racer in a strong championship for more than 10 years.

Dominik Farnbacher is an international who does not fit the seeded criteria, as he has not achieved any of the milestones that define a seeded driver for B12.
And yet... he’s won the Daytona 24 hour, was first in class / second outright at N24 last year, won several races and finished as runnier-up in the ALMS GT championship and won the (one race) Asian Le Mans Series title. He races GT cars in the ALMS, LMS, Grand-Am and VLN championship and probably whould, with organiser ‘‘discretion’’ be a seeded driver.

Just as Luff should have been.

[TCR]

Originally Posted by pplater

The same could be said for a lot of proddie guys. I've always considered class wins to be an important thing, eg Boylan's efforts in the M3 at B24. The majority of proddies today seem to lack that have-a-go attitude so welcomed in Aussie sport.

Agreed. Could never really understand why so many Proddie guys suddenly lost interest when they realised they wouldn't be fighting for an outright result. I do understand that it might have been a bit more difficult to get sponsors on board but surely a class win at the B12hr is still a hell of an achievement, is it not?

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by TCR

I do understand that it might have been a bit more difficult to get sponsors on board but surely a class win at the B12hr is still a hell of an achievement, is it not?

It is a hell of an achievement, but is it worth going bankrupt for?
At production car level, no sponsor means no racing.
But then that gets down to an entirely differnt sort of class competition.

[ff s conscience]

Originally Posted by Sheep Stations

Wrong car? sorry FFC, those red cars all look the same to me... and I thought you fixed all these things.
Lago's car had a fresh gearbox (2 rounds of GT3cc) and 2 year old engine, but I fail to see the relevance. If you go under-prepared you suffer the consequences generally.

As for the lap times, I guess you're lucky it didn't rain all day. Kingsley lapped 4 seconds on average faster than Simonsen on both wet (wets) and drying track (slicks) in the morning...in a B class car.

Aren't A class cars supposed to be faster?

Yes, all 430's DO look the same, but they don't look like many other ferraris, unlike Porsche 911 series which DO look like all the others.

I do fix all these things, but I can only be in one place at a time! Maranello is not my bag.

Our car ran superbly, considering. We lost about 18 minutes with problems in 12 hours of racing... I'll take that any day of the week, with a Ferrari.

ok, sorry to crush your self image, but heres some facts for you....

lets see what a 5 year old porsche with 8500 race km, unrefreshed, could do....

the relevance is that, given the age/mileage of the Ferrari, it was actually better than anyone expected, and certainly no Porsches were there with similar start mileage and age.

and oh, sorry, But Kingers was comparing himself to Luke, Not Allan. Allan did hardly any laps on the slicks in the wet, and when he did get in after Luke, the engine had less than 400 BHP as it was in limp mode with cyber problems. If you REALLY believe that Kingers is as fast as Allan, well, there's only one way to prove it. Come and run the eastern creek NSW state round, on the same bill as when AGT are there at the end of may. Allan will be driving both the Maranello 430 in the GT races, and teds lambo in the state races... lambo will be parity free... will be worth watching.

yes, Class A cars are certainly supposed to be faster, and we were, comprehensively actually, you just did more laps with better reliability.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

It is a hell of an achievement, but is it worth going bankrupt for?
At production car level, no sponsor means no racing.

Very true Old Tony, however many of the production teams that we self funded and not dependant on sponsors also chose to bypass the event which was unfortunate.

[ff s conscience]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

The Audi squad did not suffer from this in the #8 Euro car, with 3 effective 'pros', while the #7 Aussie car did have the 'am' of Mr Eddy to contend with. Still a quick-ish driver, just not on par with Messrs Lowndes and Luff, and some seconds away from their times.

The regs are crystal clear, and I'm dying to know why nothing has happened.

Obviously, Lowndes is seeded.... but the regs also say, very very specifically, that an Aus GT champion is a seeded driver. Eddy won it in 2008... so, you can forget Luffy, CL and ME are seeds... that's already over, never mind luffy.

[Wood-duck]

[QUOTE=Sheep Stations;2828134]A point has to have ahh, well you know...an actual point!

It is, always was a class race. Do you think Lago would turn up with 250 hp less, half the aero and a smaller footprint than the lead cars and be disappointed at not winning outright?[QUOTE]

Yes, I have missed your point.

In a previous post you are banging on about beating a Class A car. Now you say that you only care about a 'class' victory. Which is it ?

And looking at the entry, winning class B didnt look that difficult...

The point i was trying to make that next year the class B cars will have less of a chance against the A class cars, if everyone up-specs to try and keep up with Audi.

If you get 10-15 Class B cars good on you. But that is a long way from the 4 that bothered to roll up this year... especially after most of them have seen just how much quicker the class A cars have the potential to be.

You could spend 3 times less money and race for a "class win" in a production car !! That is if winning class D or E is as prestigous as class B ?

[Wood-duck]

Originally Posted by TCR

Agreed. Could never really understand why so many Proddie guys suddenly lost interest when they realised they wouldn't be fighting for an outright result. I do understand that it might have been a bit more difficult to get sponsors on board but surely a class win at the B12hr is still a hell of an achievement, is it not?

Well for a start, a percentage of the "proddies" that raced in last years 12 hour were not eligible for this years as they were deemed too slow, so they couldnt race even if they wanted to.

The 'outright' production car guys are competitive. A class win just doesnt appeal to some. They want to run at the pointy end and they race to win. No seeding, no handicapping, no gentleman racing B/S. Being bombed off the road by a GT3 car every 10 laps also doesnt float everyone's boat.

Also. Most of the proddie guys do not have access to the sort of financial resources that is self-funding the majority, if not all, of the Australian GT cars. Proddie guys also rely to a degree on sponsors, who may or may not only be interested in sponsoring an 'outright' car. The balance is made up from the drivers and teams who arent in the personal wealth realm of the GT3 drivers. They spend their hard-earned, work hard to drum up sponsors just to get to the event..

[racer69]

Originally Posted by pplater

The same could be said for a lot of proddie guys. I've always considered class wins to be an important thing, eg Boylan's efforts in the M3 at B24. The majority of proddies today seem to lack that have-a-go attitude so welcomed in Aussie sport.

Because, put simply, the Proddies were the main class the last few years, and they probably felt why support a promoter who obviously had no faith in production cars?

The production cars have been happy to run as class cars before, look at the PROCAR enduro's during 2001, 2002 and 2003, and compete for outright honours.

If the reborn 12hr was a mix of GT cars and proddies right from the start back in 2007, i'm sure there'd be plenty of production cars competing today... but seeing as the current promoters pulled the rug out from under their feet, can you blame them for not competing?

[Sheep Stations]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

It is a hell of an achievement, but is it worth going bankrupt for?
At production car level, no sponsor means no racing.
But then that gets down to an entirely differnt sort of class competition.

Unfortunately OT, other peoples money has dried up in motorsport. Not fair particularly in promoting young talent, but for the time being it's just the way it is.

[Sheep Stations]

Originally Posted by ff s conscience

Yes, all 430's DO look the same, but they don't look like many other ferraris, unlike Porsche 911 series which DO look like all the others.

I do fix all these things, but I can only be in one place at a time! Maranello is not my bag.

Our car ran superbly, considering. We lost about 18 minutes with problems in 12 hours of racing... I'll take that any day of the week, with a Ferrari.

ok, sorry to crush your self image, but heres some facts for you....

lets see what a 5 year old porsche with 8500 race km, unrefreshed, could do....

the relevance is that, given the age/mileage of the Ferrari, it was actually better than anyone expected, and certainly no Porsches were there with similar start mileage and age.

and oh, sorry, But Kingers was comparing himself to Luke, Not Allan. Allan did hardly any laps on the slicks in the wet, and when he did get in after Luke, the engine had less than 400 BHP as it was in limp mode with cyber problems. If you REALLY believe that Kingers is as fast as Allan, well, there's only one way to prove it. Come and run the eastern creek NSW state round, on the same bill as when AGT are there at the end of may. Allan will be driving both the Maranello 430 in the GT races, and teds lambo in the state races... lambo will be parity free... will be worth watching.

yes, Class A cars are certainly supposed to be faster, and we were, comprehensively actually, you just did more laps with better reliability.

FFC, my self image needs no crushing!...self-deprecation is a finely honed skill I possess but just don't share it with you.

Please, ease up on the Ferrari longevity and reliability. My 996 Cup Car racked up 17,000 race kilometres in Carrera Cup, GT3CCNZ with Alex Davison and Craig Baird then 2 years of my clumsiness and over-revs before the engine was stripped. And that was more out of fear of it sawing in half unexpectedly than for any performance drop off. Gained a miserable 2 kw out of the $25k spend.

Lago's 3 year old car did Asian Carrera Cup and 2 years GT3CC prior to the 12 hour and hasn't had any engine work. Now has 6500 kms and will do this years GT3CC untouched.If your car ran suberbly, then I have no superlatives to describe Lago's 997.

And Kingers might compare himself to Searle, but my comparison on the day was with Simonsen. Wet track, on slicks (400hp sick? vs 420hp) Kingsley smoked him 4 secs a lap, caught and passed with ease. With the hero worship that revolves in your circles for Simonsen, I enjoyed that immensely.

Your idea of proving the better driver is a little flawed considering HP, but if you can promise rain at Eastern Creek, Kingsley can run my old dunger 996. But then there would have to be an intervention to keep you away from sharp objects.

[Alan52]

Even with the pit stop rules the 2010 cars finished laps in front of the nearest older car which was driven by 3 top line drivers (Wall,Mawer and Crick).The parity rule did not give the older cars a chance of winning and all it accomplished was to deter a few overseas teams from competing.Similarly if teams like Audi are going to go to the expense of competing in the race ( a budget of $1.5 mill for the weekend was mentioned)they will not hand over their cars to "gentlemen" drivers.These teams are there to win not just to compete.Maybe the top class needs to be split into 2 classes-one for the latest international models and one for cars whose age would make them eligible for Australian GT.Neither should have the seeded driver restrictions which are a hangover from the 12 Hour's formal affiliation with Australian GT.The 12 Hour has great potential but I don't think I would be saying that if the race had run without the Audi entry.

[GTRMagic]

I can see the use for the 90 second pitstop rule... why make the teams rush the pitstops, to invest in the latest el-swisho wheel changing gear, and the rest of it, when the timed piece allows the stop to happen at a good pace, and the cars are ready to go, confident that all the bits that should be attached are attached, and it is fully fuelled.

Whether there should be a mandatory 12 stops or 10 stops or whatever may be the subject for debate...

[Sheep Stations]

Was interesting to time the fuel refills with various teams. With a compulsory 32mm restrictor and maximum 100 litres, we were averaging just on a minute. Some got it done in 35 secs. We needed all the 90 secs so there wasn't any car controller holding the car back.

All rigs gravity fed, dead man handles...physics isn't my strong point so maybe someone else can explain?

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Sheep Stations

Was interesting to time the fuel refills with various teams. With a compulsory 32mm restrictor and maximum 100 litres, we were averaging just on a minute. Some got it done in 35 secs. We needed all the 90 secs so there wasn't any car controller holding the car back.

All rigs gravity fed, dead man handles...physics isn't my strong point so maybe someone else can explain?

Nitrogen bottle plugged into the back of the fuel rig?

[Sheep Stations]

You're an ideas man GTR...will put that on the debrief list for next year!

[cptkablamo]

Yeah the compulsory amount of pitstops and the gap between pitstops confused and annoyed me. I think the regulation time can stay if they want to control the stops, but if you can work out how to go 12 hours on one tank of fuel, then good luck to you...

SS - I want to see that next year, could be fun

[EfiOz]

Originally Posted by Sheep Stations

Was interesting to time the fuel refills with various teams. With a compulsory 32mm restrictor and maximum 100 litres, we were averaging just on a minute. Some got it done in 35 secs. We needed all the 90 secs so there wasn't any car controller holding the car back.

All rigs gravity fed, dead man handles...physics isn't my strong point so maybe someone else can explain?

You can get those rigs up to nearly 3 litres a second with a bit of fiddling around. It's all one percenters like the length of the fill hose, the filler neck in the car, the proximity of the restrictor to the feed nozzle, etc.

The devils in the details.

[Sheep Stations]

Originally Posted by EfiOz

You can get those rigs up to nearly 3 litres a second with a bit of fiddling around. It's all one percenters like the length of the fill hose, the filler neck in the car, the proximity of the restrictor to the feed nozzle, etc.

The devils in the details.

Thanks for that, we'll have to look at fine tuning this part for next year.

We were running 32mm hoses so the restrictor was superfluous but still there. Just seemed to me that the teams getting the fuel in super-quick were using much wider hoses. Maybe the restrictor needs to be more visible to scrutineers during the race in case it goes walkabout?

[racer69]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

I can see the use for the 90 second pitstop rule... why make the teams rush the pitstops, to invest in the latest el-swisho wheel changing gear, and the rest of it, when the timed piece allows the stop to happen at a good pace, and the cars are ready to go, confident that all the bits that should be attached are attached, and it is fully fuelled.

Does that not take one of the arts of the race out of the equation though? One of the skills in endurance racing is slick pitwork... the 90sec rule means pitstops don't mean a thing in this race.

[EfiOz]

Originally Posted by Sheep Stations

Thanks for that, we'll have to look at fine tuning this part for next year.

We were running 32mm hoses so the restrictor was superfluous but still there. Just seemed to me that the teams getting the fuel in super-quick were using much wider hoses. Maybe the restrictor needs to be more visible to scrutineers during the race in case it goes walkabout?

That'd be most of your problem. You really need 50mm ID at least. We got 100L down to 38 sec.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by racer69

Does that not take one of the arts of the race out of the equation though? One of the skills in endurance racing is slick pitwork... the 90sec rule means pitstops don't mean a thing in this race.

It brings the pitstop speed of the pro teams back in line with the amateurs.......and I thought people on this forum didn't like parity.