Results 2: Races, Rules and Regs
The small things that matter most.
Question 10: Does manufacturer participation in the championship influence your perception of that company’s road cars?
Reasoning
This question aims to determine how fans see the various manufacturers that participate in the WEC, and whether there is a difference between a manufacturer developing a purpose-built race car (such as a Le Mans prototype) or adapting an existing road car for racing use (like those in GTE).
Participating users
519/519 [100%]
Some car manufacturers may be put off by the high cost of developing an endurance racing prototype because racing fans cannot buy a direct road-going counterpart. Even with high-end luxury models that feature as the base for GT racing, there is potential that fans who can afford the road car may decide to purchase one because they are a fan of its track-ready counterpart.
These results show that, in general, fans are influenced by race participation regardless of which class the manufacturer enters. A combined 73 percent of WEC fans say that their views of a car manufacturer are impacted by their racing programme.
Action
When talking to manufacturers, this information can be used to inform them as to how fans perceive their participation in the WEC.
Question 11: How do you rate the current Virtual Safety Car system?
Reasoning
This question aims to clarify how fans feel about the WEC accident management system that utilises a track-wide speed limit in the event of a crash, rather than deploying an actual safety car.
Participating users
516/519 [99.4%]
Teams and competitors have claimed that the VSC system is unfair and can give one team an advantage over another depending on where they are on track at the time of the accident. The system is controversial in that there have been occasions where teams have been contending for the overall victory only for a VSC to alter the course of events. Multiple competitors, such as Audi Sport Team Joest’s Andre Lotterer and Porsche’s Mark Webber have been among the system’s chief critics.
Contrary to how the teams feel about it, the fans appear to be in favour of maintaining the current VSC system and gave it an average rating of 7.7 points on a simple 1–10 scale. The system isn’t perfect, and could possibly do with some refinement, but the overall concept carries a high approval rating among fans.
Action
No further action required. Fans approve of the current VSC system.
Question 12: Are you interested in any Virtual Safety Car alternatives?
Reasoning
This question aims to provide nuance to the rating system in the previous question by supplying a list of alternatives or modifications to the VSC system that fans may feel work better than the system in its current form.
Participating users
417/519 [80.3%]*
*This question contains a low participant percentage partially due to the fact that if none of the options listed was attractive to the participant, they would have ticked none, and thus appear as a non-participant in the question.
“Bring back the safety car” received 75 out of a potential 519 votes. That represents 14 percent of the total survey participants and while it is significant, it still points to VSC (or a modified version of its current state) being the preferred accident management system.
“Slow-zone only” allows the race to progress by isolating just one section of the track and imposing a VSC system on that sector only. This only works if the drivers understand that there is a zero-tolerance policy for breaking the speed-limit in a slow-zone. Slow-zone can potentially put marshals and recovery workers at risk if cars arrive into the area at speed. Punishments for anyone caught exceeding the speed-limit in a slow-zone would need to be extreme and potentially include large time penalties, fines, and even immediate exclusion.
“Super GT-style” is when the two classes (in this case, it would be LMP and GTE) advance to the main straight and separate on the left and right sides of the track into their respective groupings. The faster class (in this case, LMP) then proceeds behind the safety car and the slower class (GTE) follows behind. This aims to avoid accidents that often occur during race restarts by eliminating the possibility of slow cars stuck between fast cars.
“VSC, but pitlane is closed” stops cars from gaining an advantage by pitting under a VSC, though potentially impedes other cars needing fuel. A poorly timed VSC could put any non-hybrid powered car out of the race.
“VSC, but cars can pit for fuel only” was a modification designed to not impede any cars currently looking to pit and maintain fuel windows, but the advantage gained is negated by forcing cars pitting under VSC to double-stint their tyres.
Is it possible to keep the efficient parts of VSC without the system playing a role in deciding the overall race winner?
Action
No further action required. No option received a majority share of votes.
Question 13: How interested would you be in variation from the standard 6-hour race distance?
Reasoning
This question aims to see how fans would respond to varied race distances in the WEC. At the moment, the WEC contains eight 6-hour races and one 24-hour race. The lone 24-hour race represents one-third of the total championship and stands alone as the only signature race on the calendar. Could variation in race distance allow races to develop their own unique selling point?
Participating users
519/519 [100%]
If we look back to the results from Question 5, we can see that 67.4 percent of survey participants declared that they watch the IMSA Weathertech Sportscar Championship. It is bested only by Formula 1 as the series — other than WEC — watched by WEC fans. The WTSCC contains a sub-championship called the Tequila Patron North American Endurance Cup, and it is made up of four races with which all WTSCC competitors enter. All four races in this series are run to different lengths. The Daytona 24 Hours, 12 Hours of Sebring, 6 Hours of the Glen, and Petit Le Mans (10 hours) each represent an individual and style and bring something different to the calendar through varied race lengths.
Could the WEC adopt a similar approach to spice up races that previously seemed somewhat unremarkable on the calendar? Could extending or shortening the time distance of one or two races add variety to the championship? Could the 8 hours of Silverstone better prepare drivers for the 24 hours of Le Mans? Could the 12 hours of Bahrain add another level of intrigue to the series finale?
Action
Consider race distance variation within the calendar in order to highlight races other than Le Mans within the championship.
Question 14: The IMSA Weathertech Sportscar Championship uses GTE-spec cars in their “GTLM” category and GT3-spec cars in their “GTD” category. How interested would you be in WEC adopting a similar approach for their “Pro” and “Am” classes?
Reasoning
The GTE Am class uses year-old GTE machinery and an amateur-based driver line-up. The variety of car available is dictated by the technology that came a year prior.
Participating users
516/519 [99.4%]
Could an influx of more cost-effective vehicles increase the appeal of this class to competitors? The amateur drivers would find the GT3 class cars easier to drive than the GTE tech thanks to an increased number of available driver aids. GTE allows traction control to help the driver, but GT3 also allows the use of anti-lock braking systems.
Would GT3 be more interesting to the fans? It’s no secret that GT3 is one of the most varied race formulas in existence. With more than 20 different manufacturers having produced a GT3 car in the last ten years, the introduction of GT3 to the WEC grid would give the “Am” class a much-needed shot in the arm. Would a wider variety of cars present on the grid help fans engage with a class on the fringe of their interest?
As we saw in Question 9, GTE Am was rated the lowest for fan interest with a meagre 5.6 out of 10. The “GT3 for amateurs” concept was rated an average of 6.4. If this class was to feature machinery not seen elsewhere in the series, would it draw more attention?
The downside to this idea is that it may draw away from the actual “Am” concept at the heart of this class. Driver ratings are already a tricky issue in the WEC, and with increased manufacturer representation on the grid, there comes the likely chance that manufacturers encourage the use of low-rated professionals as designated “gentlemen drivers” in their respective cars. This creates a climate whereby the actual amateur competitors, who usually contribute a sizable chunk of team finances, are left behind. This is an unsustainable race model as the genuine amateurs who pay to compete can no longer contend for race wins, the competitor interest to race drops away, and the grid numbers fall.
Action
If the technical regulations within GTE Am were to be reviewed, this shows one potential option that fans would be open to — if not necessarily overwhelmingly in favour of — adopting.
Question 15: How interested would you be in an Indycar-style system where the LMP1 series employs a single-spec chassis (cuts development cost) and teams build everything else around it?
Reasoning
This question aims to gauge fan interest in a potential cost-cutting measure for the WEC’s most expensive class by far, LMP1.
Participating users
516/519 [99.4%]
This idea was developed as a possible way of cost-cutting in the LMP1 class in order to attract new manufacturers to the series and allow it to be affordable for those currently competing. The idea to have a spec-chassis for LMP1 was borrowed from Indycar, where the series uses a Dallara DW12 chassis and teams and manufacturers build engines, component parts and aero-kits around that.
In this scenario, the contract would be put out to tender among current prototype chassis manufacturers and the onus would be on manufacturers to create custom bodywork and aero-packages around the selected design. This system would cross elements of the LMP2 formula, IMSA’s DPi formula and the current LMP1 regulations to form a cost-effective strategy for growth and sustainability in the WEC’s top class.
If implemented in LMP1, the cost of running a car in that class would drop considerably. The hybrid systems would remain as a stumbling block and a budget concern, but the idea of sharing a single chassis among all top-class cars might be attractive to prospective teams who might be drawn to the idea of cutting the time required to develop a car for LMP1 use.
This idea was widely panned by survey participants. More than half of all fans rated it “1” — the lowest possible score available — and the average across the 516 participants came out to a lowly 2.6 average score. It is clear that fans are drawn to the engineering and technology aspect of the WEC, and that any attempt to normalise some areas of this in the premier class was met with contempt. It is not advisable for the WEC organisers to undertake this strategy for future regulations.
It is important to note that this survey received the majority of submissions before the news about Audi Sport’s departure from endurance racing after 18 years in the sport.
Action
When discussing the upcoming 2020 LMP1 regulations, keep in mind that not all cost-cutting measures for manufacturers rate well among fans. This question shows that chassis engineering and variety is valued highly as an important part of the car development process.
Question 16: How interested would you be in organiser approval of race liveries to ensure manufacturer variation?
Question 17: How interested would you be in different liveries for each car in multi-car teams?
Reasoning
These two questions aim to address the aesthetic elements of LMP1 liveries and the homogenisation of colour palettes in this class. As the example in Question 15 points out, all three hybrid-powered teams in 2016 ran the same three-colour design on their cars.
Participating users
Question 16–513/519 [98.8%]
Question 17–516/519 [99.4%]
While Audi, Porsche and Toyota all designed cars and liveries that are striking when viewed alone, none of the manufacturers made an attempt to separate themselves visually from the other teams in their class. There is no denying that fans gravitate to cars that look good, and while aerodynamics decide the overall form and shape, colour remains a valuable tool at the disposal of those wanting to promote their participation in the championship.
The results above clearly show that fans do not want organisers getting involved with the decision-making process of how cars appear on the grid. Fans may be displeased with the similarity of liveries in LMP1, but don’t wish to see administrative action taken to correct this.
Fans do like to see teams run multiple liveries or modified liveries within their team. 238 out of 516 survey participants rated their interest in this concept as an 8 out of 10 or higher. The three different coloured Porsche 919 Hybrids at the 2015 24 hours of Le Mans were a huge hit with fans. This was an excellent example of a team retaining their brand and image, but introducing stronger colours to their aesthetic. It added variety to the top class while also aiding fans following the race by easily identifying which car is which.
Action
Understand that the visual appeal of the cars plays an important part in the attractiveness of the sport, but that it is a creative discipline that cannot be enforced. Fans would like to see more than just black/white/red at the front of the grid, but that telling one team or another to change things for the sake of variety is not advisable.
The only possible action that could help colour variation in LMP1 would be to change the colour of their number boards from red to monotone. Teams are adapting their liveries to fit with the red number boards for their class, so changing this from red background / white numerals to black background / white numerals or white background / black numerals could give teams more flexibility when designing their liveries.
Question 18: How interested would you be in additional points rewarded for race leaders at designated distances? (E.G. Bonus point at quarter markers or hour markers)
Question 19: How interested would you be in additional points rewarded for fastest race lap?
Reasoning
These two questions aim to understand if fans would like to see additional points awarded for accomplishments during the race other than finishing position.
Participating users
Question 18: 513/519 [98.8%]
Question 19: 513/519 [98.8%]
The idea of awarding championship points at distance markers — whether hourly, halfway point, etc — was an idea to inject higher stakes to parts of the race where fans may have potentially paid less attention towards.
The idea of awarding championship points to the fastest race lap was an idea to give cars all cars in all category a reason to push to their maximum at least once in the race. A car a lap or so behind the rest of the field is less likely to be of interest to the race broadcast, but if there was a reason for that car to go flat out regardless of its finishing position, it would give fans a new reason to pay attention.
Both of these concepts were disliked by survey participants. An immense quantity of fans gave both ideas the lowest possible rating.
Action
No further action required. Both concepts were disliked and should not be considered for implementation.
Question 20–28: How do you rate [RACE NAME] on the WEC calendar?
Reasoning
These questions aim to understand how fans feel about each individual round in the championship.
Participating users
Silverstone — 513/519 [98.8%]
Spa — 516/519 [99.4%]
Le Mans — 517/519 [99.6%]
Nurburgring — 509/519 [98.1%]
Mexico — 511/519 [98.4%]
Circuit of the Americas — 514/519 [99.0%]
Fuji — 513/519 [98.8%]
Shanghai — 513/519 [98.8%]
Bahrain — 510/519 [98.2%]
As expected, Le Mans is the highest rated race on the WEC calendar and it isn’t even close. With a 9.9 average score, it just narrowly misses a perfect 10, with only five total participants rating it as a 7 or lower.
The next two best races are Spa and Fuji, and it’s no surprise given that both circuits carry historical significance in motorsport. Silverstone is just marginally behind in fourth place and appears to be a well-respected opening round of the WEC.
In general, the fan ratings skew towards classic tracks, with only the U.S. round at the Circuit of the Americas bucking the trend by beating out Mexico’s rebuilt Autodromo Hermanos Rodriquez. It is important to note that we learned in Question 2 that 30.5 percent of survey participants reported as living in the U.S. and this represented the largest demographic of any country listed. This may have caused some skew in the circuit ratings that favoured the Circuit of the Americas. The same can be said of Silverstone’s rating as British survey participants were second only to U.S. fans in terms of numbers, and represented a 26.5 percent share.
Survey participants rated the two final rounds of the championship as the lowest. Shanghai and Bahrain each score much lower than the other rounds on the calendar. Both tracks were built in 2004 and represent a new era of circuits. Given the lack of heritage, it makes sense that these were rated lower.
This information could be observed in conjunction with Question 13, whereby the organisers could generate more interest in races that received a low score by modifying their race distance to achieve a unique selling point.
Action
Consider targeting low-rated races with new ideas in the hope of boosting their appeal.
Question 29: Which of the following tracks would you like to see WEC visit in the near future?
Reasoning
This question aims to generate a favourability rating for all potential circuits that could appear on the WEC calendar in future years.
Participating users
511/519 [98.4%]
The current WEC calendar contains nine races, but some of those events have not been championship rounds since the series inception in 2012. The Circuit of the Americas race replaced the Sebring 12 Hours in 2013 and has held the U.S.-based slot ever since. The 6 Hours of Sao Paulo was dropped in 2015 in favour of the 6 Hours of Nurburgring. Compared to some other championships of this calibre, the WEC has shown the ability to be flexible and dynamic with which events appear each season. Should the organising bodies consider future changes, this question provides context for what the fans would like to see in terms of potential new races.
Certain races were left off this list because they didn’t represent a viable option but were likely to receive a high number of votes. This included Sebring and Road Atlanta in the U.S. as both play key roles in the IMSA Weathertech Sportscar Championship and whose audience and importance may be compromised by hosting separate rounds of both series. Daytona was left included as a 6-hour race and a 24-hour are very different in terms of scale and pace and the WEC has already proved that both can be held at the same circuit and not affect interest with their 6 Hours of Spa event that occurs a few months before the annual 24 Hours of Spa race.
Some high-rated FIA Grade 2 circuits were included here, mainly ones that have held other high-profile races and have shown that they can sustain large grids of upper-tier race cars without issue.
This list can be combined with Question 20–28 to see which races could possibly be reshuffled in favour of ones that scored highly on this list.
Action
Consider including high-rated circuits for potential inclusion when discussing future WEC calendars.
