Page 21 of 52 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 520
  1. #201
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Africa
    Posts
    20
    Like
    0
    Liked 21 Times in 10 Posts
    Does anyone have pictures of Toyota's rear suspension for Sweden/Monte and Mexico? I ask because a 1.5cm reduction on the rear, will greatly affect chassis agility, maneuverabilty and especially high speed stability.

  2. #202
    Senior Member NickRally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    264
    Like
    523
    Liked 233 Times in 115 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sonnybobiche View Post
    Can we talk about the complex, downforce-generating wing mirrors that the Yaris debuted with, which very late in testing actually disappeared from the car altogether, and which eventually came back as the simplified single-plane ones that actually got homologated?

    I read a translated finnish interview with Makkinen where it was clear he was angry about having to deal with last-minute changes to the aero regulations. Anyone want to bet one or another team saw the wing mirrors, got super envious, and filed a 'request for clarification' with the FIA?
    It is not easy to talk about the wing mirror stays when we don’t know the specific tech rules regarding aero (remember form 400/01 WRC), which means the changes could have been provoked by having to comply with some initially grey area in the rules, which was then clarified or they could have come about as a result of evolution in the aero concept of the complete car, i.e. changes to the rear wing might have come as a package deal together with the mirror stays for example.

  3. Likes: Mirek (15th March 2017)
  4. #203
    Senior Member NickRally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    264
    Like
    523
    Liked 233 Times in 115 Posts
    Also wondering if anybody has any insight into the downforce figures the 2017 WRC cars produce (or has this already been discussed?) – I know this will be a well-guarded secret, but wondering if anybody has heard anything in conversation.
    If I was to make a very wild guess on the numbers (which could be way way off the mark), I would maybe say 200kg (+/-50kg) at 150kph in tarmac trim, which would roughly equate to the downforce produced by the special track editions of the “hyper” cars and slightly above than that of the road versions of these cars. This number will also be slightly below what a Formula 3 car produces. Then of course we can expand the question to what the downforce numbers are in gravel spec

  5. Likes: sonnybobiche (15th March 2017)
  6. #204
    Senior Member Sulland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    6,378
    Like
    2,005
    Liked 1,367 Times in 710 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mozesii View Post
    Does anyone have pictures of Toyota's rear suspension for Sweden/Monte and Mexico? I ask because a 1.5cm reduction on the rear, will greatly affect chassis agility, maneuverabilty and especially high speed stability.
    Why do they have to loose 1,5 cm travel on the rear?

  7. #205
    Senior Member KiwiWRCfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    771
    Like
    264
    Liked 661 Times in 290 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulland View Post
    Why do they have to loose 1,5 cm travel on the rear?
    At Monte Carlo it was found car did not meet regulation requirements. It was considered no competitive advantage was gained and TGR were given until Mexico to correct the error without penalty
    https://twitter.com/KiwiWRCfan adding a fans perspective to Twitter

  8. Likes: A FONDO (15th March 2017)
  9. #206
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,491
    Like
    7,821
    Liked 11,137 Times in 4,419 Posts
    In other words they let them drive only because it was the first event for the new cars. Normally it's very clear disqualification.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  10. #207
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Africa
    Posts
    20
    Like
    0
    Liked 21 Times in 10 Posts
    There is competitive advantage. Probably could explain the constant TGR mention of trying out different setups.

  11. Likes: dimviii (15th March 2017)
  12. #208
    친애하는 지도자
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    20,522
    Like
    439
    Liked 2,720 Times in 1,256 Posts
    Another indication how much of an amateur team they are in their current format.

  13. Likes: A FONDO (15th March 2017)
  14. #209
    Senior Member Sulland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    6,378
    Like
    2,005
    Liked 1,367 Times in 710 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KiwiWRCfan View Post
    At Monte Carlo it was found car did not meet regulation requirements. It was considered no competitive advantage was gained and TGR were given until Mexico to correct the error without penalty
    Is max suspesiontravel specified in the regulations? If yes, why?

  15. #210
    Senior Member Rally Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    3,004
    Like
    3,729
    Liked 2,937 Times in 1,338 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KiwiWRCfan View Post
    At Monte Carlo it was found car did not meet regulation requirements. It was considered no competitive advantage was gained and TGR were given until Mexico to correct the error without penalty
    Didn’t they solve the suspension issue before Sweden? Rallye Magazin news after MC said suspension should be fixed before Sweden and engine before Mexico. I don't remeber anyone reporting otherwise.

    http://www.motorsportforums.com/show...V)-2017/page38
    Rally addict since 1982

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •