How do you see the future of rally?

[Mirek]

I don't think it is possible to make the cost lower by technical rules. Manufacturers will always spend as much as they are allowed to even the simplest possible part. Look at S2000 which is in fact very simple formula. All shocks are same without ball bearings, diffs are dumb clutchpacks with none center one, all transmission is highly standardized and limited to just two manufacturers. Cars have steel bodyshells. Carbon is allowed only for covering layer, no titanium allowed etc. There are limited options of homologating new things and even those like ECU software must be homologated. And in the end it's still rather expensive car with differences between works and private one.

It's like in a lumberjack competition. You can buy an axe for 10 Euro but the competition one costs 200 Euro even though it is still an axe.

[Sulland]

But you could do as they do in for instance Karting, keep or freeze homologation periodes for 3 years.

[Mirek]

No manufacturer will ever agree with that. They need to develop their speed and not to loose for three years just because they once homologated something wrong.

[pete c]

So do you really believe that F1 was a competition this year? one team dominated and both championships were over and done early.
At least the WRC drivers championship went down to the last round.
If you dont like it no one is making you watch it.
If you think that the manufacturers want to rally production based cars at the sports top level again, you're kidding your self.
Group N came and now is going,and personally i'm not going to miss it

[OldF]

I was an entrant of Rally NZ in '94 so obviously the 920,000 spectators were there to watch me. Me and some young fella called McSomething.

In truth the numbers are nonsense. It's unlikely 20,000 people turned out to watch let alone 920,000. Sometimes we need to stop reading our own press.

I was wondering about the numbers of NZ. In Finland tickets have been sold as long as I remember. In 1994 there was already a rally pass (called vauhtipassi at that time) but if I remember correctly me and my friend didn’t buy them because you should have to visit at least five stages before it pays off.

Maybe this tells something about the numbers. Tickets sold 1994 in NORF 95 000!

[OldF]

I don't think it is possible to make the cost lower by technical rules. Manufacturers will always spend as much as they are allowed to even the simplest possible part. Look at S2000 which is in fact very simple formula. All shocks are same without ball bearings, diffs are dumb clutchpacks with none center one, all transmission is highly standardized and limited to just two manufacturers. Cars have steel bodyshells. Carbon is allowed only for covering layer, no titanium allowed etc. There are limited options of homologating new things and even those like ECU software must be homologated. And in the end it's still rather expensive car with differences between works and private one.

It's like in a lumberjack competition. You can buy an axe for 10 Euro but the competition one costs 200 Euro even though it is still an axe.

The only way IMO is to use as many standard parts as possibly. I don’t know but I think that even about 95% of the parts are racing parts in a S2000. For a R2/R3 I think it’s about 50%.

Cost control will always be difficult but lets hope this cost control will work.

“’Final user’ cost control rules are extended in that every major item on the car must be available at under a maximum cost.”

GP Week (page 20)

[Mirek]

That is not the way because for manufacturer standard parts useful for competition use are way more expensive than special competition parts. That's how it is - for manufacturer it is much cheaper to build hand-made competition car than to produce thousands of half-competition cars. Also it is much more flexible because development and production planning of stock car takes years before a new one is launched.

The maximum cost for every component is already applied in S2000/WRC rules...

I also don't agree with making all cars using same standard components. That's no longer a manufacturer competition. It can be done for some cup to make numbers of entrants but not more.

[Sulland]

No manufacturer will ever agree with that. They need to develop their speed and not to loose for three years just because they once homologated something wrong.

So make a regime where manu's can apply for a change in homologation if one thing obviously make them slower pver time.


But to me the drivers championship is pri 1, and manu championship pri 2, (but not very important) not vice versa. Here we differ in view Mirek, and that is ok!

[focus206]

But to me the drivers championship is pri 1, and manu championship pri 2, (but not very important) not vice versa. Here we differ in view Mirek, and that is ok!

For a manufacturer how can the driver championship be more important than the manufacturer championship?

[Mirek]

So make a regime where manu's can apply for a change in homologation if one thing obviously make them slower pver time.

Impossible to evaluate anyhow.

But to me the drivers championship is pri 1, and manu championship pri 2, (but not very important) not vice versa. Here we differ in view Mirek, and that is ok!

It's manufacturers who drives the motorsport and it's them who sell cars so they are the most important. We can't change it.

For me the way to make the sport cheaper is to cancel any homologations completely. Just make clear simple rules and let anyone build whatever he wants. But this is what manufacturers will never allow to happen so again just an utopia.