The most controversial rule was arguably that which limited stint lengths as a balance of performance measure, with two of the Pro class Mercedes-AMG entries issued drive-through penalties after falling afoul of the 33-lap cap (32 until the rain came) in the latter hours.
Teams also had to abide by an 85-second minimum pit lane transit time for refuelling stops, which dramatically reduced the scope for gaining the upper hand on rivals through fuel-saving.
Drivers asked for their thoughts by Speedcafe all expressed a similar view on the 2024 rules.
“From a driver’s perspective, being really brutally honest, I think the rules for this year have been pretty disappointing in terms of the entertainment factor,” said Melbourne Performance Centre Audi driver Kelvin van der Linde, who finished third.
“I think that Bathurst was always a race we looked forward to which had, you know, a bit of strategy in there, a bit of fuel-saving, that really challenged the teams and the drivers to do things out of the box.
“It felt at times in the race, we were just driving in a train and waiting, and I was basically just looking on the dash and counting the minutes down to the pit stop, which is, at times, quite frustrating for us.
“So, hopefully we can do better, and just give a better entertainment for the crowd next year. I think that’s what we’ve got to work on.”
Race-winning Manthey EMA Porsche driver Matt Campbell added, “All I’ll say is, I sort of missed the more strategy input from the team, and also that requires more effort from the driver as well, with fuel management and everything like that.
“So, I really like that style of racing, I think that’s proper endurance.
“Obviously, in this day and age, the cars can last 12, 24 hours no problem, so bringing this aspect back, I really enjoy, and it’s sort of closer to the style of IMSA racing, let’s say, with a little bit going on behind the scenes.
“So yeah, I really enjoy this factor.”
SunEnergy1 Mercedes-AMG owner/driver Kenny Habul, who finished second today after winning for the past two years, acknowledged the entertainment motive behind the 2024 rule changes but called for a more balanced approach.
“I think I would agree with Kelvin,” he said.
“I don’t think it was the right thing to do, I think it just sort of leveled the field out, it didn’t matter what car you had or if you are normally a 20th place car.
“Like, they took all the advantage away from everybody to keep everybody at the end on the last lap to give it a show.
“To be honest, the theory of that is fine, but I think there’s a way to find something in the middle where you can have a pit stop control time, but not as long as this one, or you can have other things where you have some control and you help other teams that would normally finish eighth, 10th, 12th, 14th, to give them a chance.
“But this just took all the strategy away, it took everything away, and it just really mattered in the end if you were there or not.
“So, to me, it was a little too far, too radical, and it really sort of set up like an Am race, and that was difficult, you know?
“But, I think there’s a balance; I see what they’re trying to do and you want everybody there at the end for a fight.
“It was pretty good – there were still, you know, six, seven cars at the end; it was exciting – but it took a lot of normal racing strategy and technique and the dynamic of racing away from today.
“So, I think there’s somewhere in the middle they could find.”
Discussion about this post