"Best" for promotion and image I guess, but you can define how you like.


My opinion:

F1 - They look silly when multi-billion dollar corporations are unable to beat garagiste teams in preparing these silly-looking little prototype cars that consist of little more than a few bits of carbon fibre glued together. The "hit" to the image is more, as the marques can build whatever they want and are supposedly trying to show their technical excellence... as the money involved is so great, to get beat by a fizzy drink seller and some other privateer teams is not good for the image and the full media and image benefits of participation don't come unless the manufacturer is reguarly winning and in contention for the championship.

Le Mans/Sportcar - Not bad, a good showcase but the profile isn't very high.

GT (Production) - Not bad. Requires a premium sports car in the production vehicle range of course - the cars are the stars, rather than the usually gentlemen racers. Somewhat political with the power/weight formulas, and the profile of this type of racing is pretty low too.

Touring cars - Especially the old super touring style - good exciting bash and crash racing, all volume selling marques welcome. It's not so bad for the image if winning is not acheived. After all, the fans understand that the latest Mondeo has been designed for sufficient rear headroom and not optimal airflow to the rear wing.... Simply participating and being out there is good for the brand, and the involvement definatley promotes a positive image without the "win at all costs" F1 ethos that makes teams look silly when a big car maker can hardly get in the points in a grand prix.

My pick - Touring cars. With a tweaked formula for the world and national championships (WTCC, BTCC, STCC, and bring back the NATCC and Australian 2L series): more exciting and therefore higher profile cars (NGTC with low-cost 350 hp homologated turbo motors, and the classic 19" wheels?), cheap for manufacturers to enter (performance and developments closely controlled - simple, cheap cars), sufficient profile that privateers are able to gather real commericial sponsorship that is sufficient to prepare winning capable cars, it could be the "best" place for of the volume car makers to direct their attention.



If you think manufacturers can promote their wares better in other forms of motorsport apart from circuit racing please select that option (e.g., rallying, drag racing, drifting, solar cars etc....).

Touring Cars are the most fun to watch, while not as good as it were back in the heyday of 1990s, it's still quite enjoyable. But the 1990s were the gold standard, absolutely bloody brilliant.

when you think about it, it really is quite laughable that the likes of toyota can get beaten by a fizzy drinks company....

In terms of which are best for selling cars I would agree touring cars as people can relate to them more.

The 90s were excellant but yesterdays final race wasn't to bad .

Surely the higher the exposure the better and F1 beats them all hands down worldwide. There's probably a better cost/success ratio nearly anywhere else but thats the way it is.

Formula 1 is only sport to make it to the newspapers here (the Netherlands) with exception of 24h of Le Mans perhaps but that's it.

Audi has got more exposure from Le Mans than any other brands in F1 bar Ferrari.

Le mans i think is very good for manufactures because when you think of who won the 24 hours you instantly think Peugeot or Audi, not Raikkonen or Alonso or whoever as you do with F1. It's also been a great advertisment for diesel technology in recent years. Really the big problem with le mans is the lack of interest on anything outside of the 24 hours itself. The le mans series hardly covers the back pages on Monday morning. So from that point of view it can be an expensive way of going racing.

when BMW starts to lose to Lada in touring cars then its really time to get out of F1 and concentrate on what they have historically done best.
and i still do not understand why are makers of safe family cars like Toyota or Renault in F1.

Considering the number of Repsol/Telefonica/Gauloises/Relentless (once! Bruce Anstey ftw) liveries I've seen on the roads, it has to be MotoGP. Motorcyclists tend to be scarily brand-loyal, and a lot of that loyalty seems to stem from the track.

That's a good point. A scarily fast motorcycle not too different in layout at least to the WSBK race version, can be had for 1/20th the cost of a Ferrari... And the gap from WSBK to MotoGP is not so large.

WRC used to be a pretty good bet.

You get what you pay/spend for!

No other series has the clout and visibility and the global coverage like F1. If you are a manufacturer with supercar models in the lineup and global sales, F1 is the best way to market. LeMans is a once an year event and it is column news in the west, where are other events are just for enthusiasts.

world superbikes.

It's really dependant on the aim of the manufacturer.

It would seem the more appropriate choice of series to participate in is hinged on the domestic market/demographics.

eg. Nascar for USA, v8s for Australia, SuperGT for Japan, DTM for Germany etc.

What I find really intriguing is the brand awareness of Porsche through motorsports. Currently the highest profile race they take part in is Le Mans, and they aren't in the top category either (ie. nothing front/back page). It seems that they have taken the approach that their cars are fundamentally good road cars, chuck them in various categories and watch them become competitive. It's probably their implied view that there is a direct road car benefit for going motor racing, which can't be said for most other series.