2010 Farewell WRC Cars and Hello S 2000.

[Mirek]

In my opinion using restrictor is the most expensive way to limit power which a man can imagine. Milions Euro are spent to make as big turbo boost as possible etc. In my opinion some strict turbo regulations and no restrictor is better way (less expensive, better sound, no extreme torque - less stress in engine parts). Without restrictor even a cheap turbo is enough to produce power far over 300 Hp as OldF said.

[Rally Power]

It’s really revolting the way FIA rules this sport!

They took almost 2 years to make a decision about what rally cars use in order to regain manufacturers interest and now that finally there’s a solution the FIA doesn’t feel urgency to implement it!

More 20 months of a suffering world series...what will happen to WRC after all this nonsense?

PS: What about the winter calendar? Wasn’t it examined at the WMSC?

[dimviii]

trying to make current wrc power/torque from an 1600 turbocharged engine even without restrictor is not cheaper.

[OldF]

trying to make current wrc power/torque from an 1600 turbocharged engine even without restrictor is not cheaper.

Not torque, just power.

[Mirek]

dimvii: You don't need to have 800 Nm if there is no restrictor (You may use much higher rpm), therefore You also don't need 4 bars of turbo boost. Pretty common 2 bars may be enough.

Edit: OldF was faster

[dimviii]

Mirek todays 1,6 lit to produce 150-175 bhp are working more than 1,5 bar.
its just impossible with 2 bars of boost to have an 1,6 engine with torque that can make ''us'' with open wide eyes in a ss.
Except that nobody must worry about power.Torque is the key of current wrc beeing so fast.And torque without extreme boost pressure even from an 1,6 lit is just impossible.

Fia maybe ''saw'' which brands have 1,6 lit engines and want to push them into the circus.

[OldF]

Mirek todays 1,6 lit to produce 150-175 bhp are working more than 1,5 bar.
its just impossible with 2 bars of boost to have an 1,6 engine with torque that can make ''us'' with open wide eyes in a ss.
Except that nobody must worry about power.Torque is the key of current wrc beeing so fast.And torque without extreme boost pressure even from an 1,6 lit is just impossible.

Fia maybe ''saw'' which brands have 1,6 lit engines and want to push them into the circus.

DIMVII, the Citroen C2 R2 MAX (1,6 l NA engine) produces 190 hp so a 1,6 l turbo engine with a 1,5 bar boost probably produces little more than 150-175 hp.

Source: http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc..._c2r2_max.html

[janvanvurpa]

Ladies! Ladies!!!!
OK we know torque is what gives cars the acceleration but do remember (isn't anybody here old school normal aspirated driver? Am I the only one here?) that as I say to customers (I build engines and gearboxes and suspension for rally cars as my sole employment) "What the engine doesn't make for torque, the gearing takes care of."

Acceleration is what? Toque from motor multiplied by the gearbox then multiplied again by the final drive x weight.

1,6 liter only makes X torque? Fine a 1,6 turbo car times the FIA turbo coefficient means it will be able to be lighter and if unrestricted or mildly restricted, will make OK "axx" then you gear it shorter in final drive.
So instead of todays what 4,1 ring and pinion maybe you gear it 4.88.

Doesn't any old timers here remember that of all the GpB motors only Audi and Ford RS200 were 2,0 or larger.
I vaguely recall the GpB 205 was 1730cc

And they went pretty damn good when I watched them.

[big_sw2000]

Ladies! Ladies!!!!
OK we know torque is what gives cars the acceleration but do remember (isn't anybody here old school normal aspirated driver? Am I the only one here?) that as I say to customers (I build engines and gearboxes and suspension for rally cars as my sole employment) "What the engine doesn't make for torque, the gearing takes care of."

Acceleration is what? Toque from motor multiplied by the gearbox then multiplied again by the final drive x weight.

1,6 liter only makes X torque? Fine a 1,6 turbo car times the FIA turbo coefficient means it will be able to be lighter and if unrestricted or mildly restricted, will make OK "axx" then you gear it shorter in final drive.
So instead of todays what 4,1 ring and pinion maybe you gear it 4.88.

Doesn't any old timers here remember that of all the GpB motors only Audi and Ford RS200 were 2,0 or larger.
I vaguely recall the GpB 205 was 1730cc

And they went pretty damn good when I watched them.

Spot on, and some F1 cars were 1.4 in the mid 80s. Bet the Turbo lag was awsome

[Sulland]

I believe in simple rules, what about these:

Course of action 1:
WRC: 1,6 Turbo, 4wd
PWRC and JWRC: S2000, 4wd
GTWRC: N-GT, 2wd

Course of action 2:
WRC: 1,6 Turbo, 4wd
PWRC, JWRC: 1,6 Turbo, detutned, 4wd
GTWRC: N-GT, 2wd

Course of action 3:
WRC: S2000
PWRC,JWRC: S2000
GTWRC: N-GT, 2wd


Keep It Simple Stupid !

Any better ?