Stéphane Ratel and his working group continue to face the challenges posed by the GT3 platform. The grids of each championship based on this category remain in shape, and at first glance, there does not seem to be an imminent risk of diminishing participation. However, during the 24 Hours of Spa, Ratel, founder and CEO of SRO Motorsports Group, created a stir when he warned that the escalating costs threaten the long-term future of the category.
These comments were directed at manufacturers developing increasingly extreme GT3 vehicles, moving away from the street-oriented philosophy that has historically supported the category, in favor of building prototypes that then become street models.
During the GT World Challenge in Misano, Ratel was asked about the reactions he had received from manufacturers and industry insiders following his controversial statements. “Well… I haven’t burst any bubbles; it’s simply the reality of the situation,” Ratel said.
“The important thing is that the key parties involved reach an agreement and meet with the relevant governing body. We hold meetings with the GT Commission and always discuss it. Naturally, I am also involved, as I created the GT3 category; regarding the FIA championships, we share the promotion with them. While for GT2 and GT4, as SRO, we act freely, for GT3, we need the FIA by our side.”
Ratel clarified that having the FIA as a strategic partner is an additional advantage, but it is not mandatory for all sports car championships to use GT3 vehicles.
“I have laid out the points for discussion; I believe they should be taken into account and acted upon. If this is not done, GT3 will continue, but with far fewer teams involved,” he added.
“We do not want a new GTE that lasts five years and then disappears because costs become unsustainable, and manufacturers end up withdrawing. We have already seen how this happened with GT1, where vehicles were built and managed by manufacturers for major events, with grids full from the beginning, but they started having problems over time as manufacturers withdrew due to costs. It always happens this way.”
“Before this happens, my proposal is to relaunch GT3 by rethinking the category with a new platform. The most notable example comes from our friends at the ACO, who have already established the foundations for the new Hypercar category of 2030. The ACO and the FIA have acted proactively to give manufacturers time to design vehicles.”
Regarding upcoming GT3 vehicles, he added: “As far as I’m concerned, if they want to create a new GT1 alongside GT3, that’s fine. If manufacturers agree and want to do it -following technical rules that specify the construction of a certain number of vehicles based on street models, clearly defining what it means to compete in GT1 and homologating them- let them do it. But we need dedicated regulations because these are special vehicles. End of story!”
The FIA must decide what to do
Ratel emphasized that the quality of a championship and its future vision are what truly matters, especially since it is better to address problems early than to wait for them to become critical.
“I’ll say it again, I do not take pleasure in opposing this; I believe there are fantastic and suitable vehicles in the market, just as has happened in the past,” he explained.
“But we also need to look at the prices of these vehicles, like the Mercedes-AMG GT1 or the Maserati MC12. We need to know exactly what we want to achieve. The FIA must decide, together with the manufacturers, what to do, keeping in mind that we are talking about two different markets with their own objectives. There may be those who truly desire a new GT1; there are excellent cars like the Pagani or the Aston Martin Valhalla, and so on.
“As far as I’m concerned, they are perfectly free to do what they want; they would be brilliant at Spa, but the GT World Challenge will continue to showcase GT3 vehicles. Let’s not forget that GT1 and GT3 are categories regulated by FIA homologation, while GT2 and GT4 are regulated by SRO, in collaboration with the Belgian Motorsport Federation.
“Today, however, we are at risk, and a governing body must be able to make predictions and look toward the future, making decisions in advance. We cannot take the risk of going down the same path as DTM, which found itself in a dead end with Class 1.
“Governance also means saying no if necessary. And I have said this many times when we represented around 80% of the GT3 market and I was presented with projects for vehicles unsuitable for our category. Many got angry, but that’s how I secured a successful future for GT3.
“Unfortunately, today we have dropped to 50% of the market and I’m probably no longer in the same position to say no. I know some are entering, like Toyota, while others might return, like Audi. But the truth is we do not need 11 or 12 brands involved; things can work just as well with fewer manufacturers, we would simply have more vehicles from the same brand and different teams.”
Ratel also outlined his vision for the future of the grid, emphasizing that the priority is to maintain long-term stability and healthy competition, rather than pursuing inflated entry numbers driven by short-term fervor.
“For years, DTM has continued with only three manufacturers on the grid, so I believe it is better to have 7 to 8 different ones ensuring a solid presence, instead of 12, but with fewer vehicles,” he said.
He added that the sizes of the grids are ultimately determined by the strength of the championship’s whole, which includes its media exposure, spectator interest, and the professionalism level of the teams and drivers.
“If we look at WEC, there are some very promising young drivers in the Hypercar class, and manufacturers are investing in their careers,” he said. The more such situations there are, the better it will be -that’s why I say we need to rethink the foundations. When then we have figures like Valentino Rossi or Ferrari involved, it’s clear that interest grows everywhere. And that’s important for the sport.
