TORA 24 Hours of Daytona - General Discussion

Just want to apologize for my awful driving in stint 5 (Lobby B) and to the guys I hit

Just wanted to say this was an awesome event! Many thanks to the TORA staff for putting it together so well, and many thanks to the teams competing that created some damn good endurance racing. Poor TORA staff did so well that everybody is asking about Sebring already😂😂.

It turned out that the best strategy in GT class was to do 1 pit stop. In C lobby Porsche, Viper and Vette could do it. I tried it with Ferrari but it was impossible at least to me even with some serious fule saving from start. How was Ford and BMWs? Were you guys aware of that during car balance or it just popped out?

Ford and Ferrari was impossible to 1 stop and the RSR is arguably slower on a 1 stop

Many thanks to everyone who took part and helped out in the event.
A really positive start to the sportscar racing calendar at TORA in 2018.

Lots still to come!

Jan Filip S wrote:It turned out that the best strategy in GT class was to do 1 pit stop. In C lobby Porsche, Viper and Vette could do it. I tried it with Ferrari but it was impossible at least to me even with some serious fule saving from start. How was Ford and BMWs? Were you guys aware of that during car balance or it just popped out?

Speaking as a third party (as I'm no longer staff and I didn't participate in the race), I believe it was an attempt to bring some strategy into the race. Tire wear and fuel consumption are two of the biggest factors in racing at any level, so the fact that these things aren't even applicable within Forza is disheartening. The cars that couldn't one stop were the fastest over a lap (Ferrari and Ford), and as we saw in Stint 1 in Lobby A, a 2-stop car could in fact overcome the pit-stop deficit, but it wouldn't be easy to do. In theory, the Ford (arguably best on raw pace) should've still been the best car, but when you have multi-class racing, it's not like you're going to be hotlapping the whole time, which became a crucial factor. I was surprised to see that more teams didn't switch to the Viper, but I suppose that'd be because I assumed that everyone read the Driver's Briefing that called out the lack of mandatory stops, and that everyone would test cars for fuel mileage. Learning experience for those that didn't- It's the first thing I do when I test for an enduro, or in any series where the number of pit stops is up to the driver.

If there had been 2 stops mandatory, the Ford, Ferrari, and Porsche would've been the strongest choices. But again, not everyone tested the cars for fuel mileage so very few people knew about the fuel saving capabilities of the Viper and the Vette until car choice was already locked in. The Porsche could one stop but it was slower to do that compared to the Viper.

Overall, I hope the trend of "change" continues, just give me a touring car enduro and I'll be on it like white on rice

^^ this.

I can say the fuel usage was a factor for my team to stay in the Corvette when contemplating swapping to the Bimmer, as otherwise they were close on pace. Some of our drivers were quicker in the M6, others were quicker in the C7R, but some 7-8 minutes difference in a full fuel run made the decision for us, the Vette could and the BMW couldn't possibly one-stop it.

Thx Diablo you put a lot of effort. I did not thought about fule but I agree this makes racing way more exciting. Sadly my Ferrari was not as competitive with pace like Vette with fuel

Congratulations to BAM and WR feat. Murica!

Thanks to Ben and the other TORA Staff for letting me help out w/ the timing sheet and hosting 3 stints.

I haven't been that tired in a while!

Swordfish Motorsport will be back in full force for Sebring and ASCC. See you all on track!

F4H Diablo wrote:

Jan Filip S wrote:It turned out that the best strategy in GT class was to do 1 pit stop. In C lobby Porsche, Viper and Vette could do it. I tried it with Ferrari but it was impossible at least to me even with some serious fule saving from start. How was Ford and BMWs? Were you guys aware of that during car balance or it just popped out?

Speaking as a third party (as I'm no longer staff and I didn't participate in the race), I believe it was an attempt to bring some strategy into the race. Tire wear and fuel consumption are two of the biggest factors in racing at any level, so the fact that these things aren't even applicable within Forza is disheartening. The cars that couldn't one stop were the fastest over a lap (Ferrari and Ford), and as we saw in Stint 1 in Lobby A, a 2-stop car could in fact overcome the pit-stop deficit, but it wouldn't be easy to do. In theory, the Ford (arguably best on raw pace) should've still been the best car, but when you have multi-class racing, it's not like you're going to be hotlapping the whole time, which became a crucial factor. I was surprised to see that more teams didn't switch to the Viper, but I suppose that'd be because I assumed that everyone read the Driver's Briefing that called out the lack of mandatory stops, and that everyone would test cars for fuel mileage. Learning experience for those that didn't- It's the first thing I do when I test for an enduro, or in any series where the number of pit stops is up to the driver.

If there had been 2 stops mandatory, the Ford, Ferrari, and Porsche would've been the strongest choices. But again, not everyone tested the cars for fuel mileage so very few people knew about the fuel saving capabilities of the Viper and the Vette until car choice was already locked in. The Porsche could one stop but it was slower to do that compared to the Viper.

Overall, I hope the trend of "change" continues, just give me a touring car enduro and I'll be on it like white on rice

Again, this is going to sound biased coming from me since my team was in the Ford, but I honestly do not think that not having required pitstops was the best decision. You say that the Ford still was arguably the best car despite its horrible fuel consumption, but during the race that Viper seemed to be keeping up with that Ford pretty well. Now, I think most people can agree that the likes of Zermatt, Commando, RoadRunner, ForceOne,Virus, Harmonic, etc. are relatively similar in terms of pace, so that Viper couldn't have been more than 1-3 tenths slower than the Ford. Hardly enough to compensate for the roughly 30 second gap that Viper gains by not having to take an extra pitstop. This isn't trying to take away anything from WR, they obviously paid the most attention to the rules and made the smartest choice accordingly. Plus they had more than enough pace to challenge for the win regardless. So if the rule carries on to Sebring, so be it.

But where does that leave us? It leaves us with a situation where 2/3 of the GT cars are immediately rendered useless if a team wants any hopes of winning the race. Doesn't that eliminate the purpose of trying to balance all these cars in the first place? We finally have the chance to race cars like the M6 GTLM and the RSR in a league setting, and I can't be the only one who would be disappointed if the GT class for Sebring gets reduced to a Viper vs Vette class.

Regardless, the race was still a fun experience and congrats to WR for the win.

AMS McQueen wrote:

F4H Diablo wrote:

Jan Filip S wrote:It turned out that the best strategy in GT class was to do 1 pit stop. In C lobby Porsche, Viper and Vette could do it. I tried it with Ferrari but it was impossible at least to me even with some serious fule saving from start. How was Ford and BMWs? Were you guys aware of that during car balance or it just popped out?

Speaking as a third party (as I'm no longer staff and I didn't participate in the race), I believe it was an attempt to bring some strategy into the race. Tire wear and fuel consumption are two of the biggest factors in racing at any level, so the fact that these things aren't even applicable within Forza is disheartening. The cars that couldn't one stop were the fastest over a lap (Ferrari and Ford), and as we saw in Stint 1 in Lobby A, a 2-stop car could in fact overcome the pit-stop deficit, but it wouldn't be easy to do. In theory, the Ford (arguably best on raw pace) should've still been the best car, but when you have multi-class racing, it's not like you're going to be hotlapping the whole time, which became a crucial factor. I was surprised to see that more teams didn't switch to the Viper, but I suppose that'd be because I assumed that everyone read the Driver's Briefing that called out the lack of mandatory stops, and that everyone would test cars for fuel mileage. Learning experience for those that didn't- It's the first thing I do when I test for an enduro, or in any series where the number of pit stops is up to the driver.

If there had been 2 stops mandatory, the Ford, Ferrari, and Porsche would've been the strongest choices. But again, not everyone tested the cars for fuel mileage so very few people knew about the fuel saving capabilities of the Viper and the Vette until car choice was already locked in. The Porsche could one stop but it was slower to do that compared to the Viper.

Overall, I hope the trend of "change" continues, just give me a touring car enduro and I'll be on it like white on rice

Again, this is going to sound biased coming from me since my team was in the Ford, but I honestly do not think that not having required pitstops was the best decision.  You say that the Ford still was arguably the best car despite its horrible fuel consumption, but during the race that Viper seemed to be keeping up with that Ford pretty well.  Now, I think most people can agree that the likes of Zermatt, Commando, RoadRunner, ForceOne,Virus, Harmonic, etc. are relatively similar in terms of pace, so that Viper couldn't have been more than 1-3 tenths slower than the Ford.  Hardly enough to compensate for the roughly 30 second gap that Viper gains by not having to take an extra pitstop.  This isn't trying to take away anything from WR, they obviously paid the most attention to the rules and made the smartest choice accordingly.  Plus they had more than enough pace to challenge for the win regardless.  So if the rule carries on to Sebring, so be it.

But where does that leave us?  It leaves us with a situation where 2/3 of the GT cars are immediately rendered useless if a team wants any hopes of winning the race.  Doesn't that eliminate the purpose of trying to balance all these cars in the first place?  We finally have the chance to race cars like the M6 GTLM and the RSR in a league setting, and I can't be the only one who would be disappointed if the GT class for Sebring gets reduced to a Viper vs Vette class.

Regardless, the race was still a fun experience and congrats to WR for the win.

I see what you are saying, but if TORA wants to inspire strategy complexion, they have to start somewhere, and also, Harmonic explained on twitter how the Ford and Viper ended up being pretty close in overall performance (pace and fuel consumption) on twitter. Maybe the cars weren't balanced perfectly, but they were still very good and another fact in addition to this is that this is the first endurance race (in a while at least) that TORA has tried to balance the cars this way, so there is probably room for improvement. btw I don't think there is anything wrong with you speaking out your opinion I am just speaking out mine.

Also, the Ford was probably closer to the Viper than the Corvette, considering the Corvette was probably slower in potential pace to the Viper and the Viper could one stop just like the Corvette.

Porsche was an easy 1 stop at night. Went from last in lobby to 3rd in the 3 stints I tried it, would it have been quicker to 2 stop if I wasn't starting at the back? I'm not sure but the one stop worked for me.

That awkward moment when the Porsche can do a 43.5 while saving enough fuel to 1 stop during the day