Pwrc 2009

[lcd]

I guess Patrik won't see any drop of rain or no trace of mud In Sardegna...
A lot of dust and extreme high tempreratures Is what he'll get! :D

[Micke_VOC]

Sandell Set to Show Speed in America

Patrik Sandell and Emil Axelsson will partner with NCRALLY and North Coast Subaru on June 5th and 6th for a title run in the highly competitive Susquehannock Trail Pro Rally (STPR) in Wellsboro, Pennsylvania,

Read more on:
http://www.ncrally.com/

[HaCo]

What car?

[DonJippo]

What car?

If they are partnering with NC Subaru then my wild ques is that they will use Subaru...

[Micke_VOC]

If they are partnering with NC Subaru then my wild ques is that they will use Subaru...

Subaru Impreza 2007 .. Entrylist: http://www.stpr.org/stpr09/entrylist.html

[L5->R5/CR]

Subaru Impreza 2007 .. Entrylist: http://www.stpr.org/stpr09/entrylist.html

The NCRally Subaru is pretty high specification relative to what is run in the US.


It will be interesting to see how Patrick's speed translates to running in the US. I think he has plenty of speed but without a full 2 pass recce I am not sure how quickly he will be able to adapt to our roads or our note system. I think the regular US competitors in similar or slightly higher specification cars will initially be faster, but that Patrick will start matching or setting the pace by the end of the event...

McShea had a commanding win last year at the New England Forest Rally but it was far from dominant through the course of the whole rally. On pace some of the other top cars were right there with him for most of the event until the other challengers started breaking their cars... http://www.rally-america.com/Archives/2008/NEFR/day/day_index.html

[JAM]

There is no recce in US? They use notes similar to the standard ones used in rally-raid?

[Sarac330d]

As I understanded, this is gravel rally and Patrik is specialist for gravel, so i don`t have any doubt that difference between him and all others will be measured in minutes.

[L5->R5/CR]

There is no recce in US? They use notes similar to the standard ones used in rally-raid?

Recce is not standard.

Many of the events in the Rally America National Championship have organizer generated notes utilizing the JEMBA system and then allow for a single pass recce to adjust the organizer notes.

Part of the issue is the dreaded combination of difficult road permissions (roads realistically need to be closed for recce), a lack of volunteers (our events are 100% volunteer staffed, most volunteers can't take the extra days off of work), and the cost to the competitors (to run the RA championship you will tow 27,000-45,000 miles, add in extra nights in hotels, extra meals, and so on and recce adds a real tangible cost).

There are some 2 pass recce events, there are event a couple of unlimited recce events, but 2 pass in not a standard nor is it fully adopted in the national championships.

This makes it difficult for drivers who are not used to the JEMBA notes and are used to recce as it can take some time to learn how to utilize the notes. Many teams with previous event experience can add in memory or can utilize modified notes from previous years to more refine their notes and know how to trust them to get maximum pace.

McShea had actually seen the New England Forest roads in 2007 when he was brought in to help be a recce coach for Subaru Rally Team USA so he was familiar with the note style and roads before he entered the event.

[Sulland]

For Acropolis the PWRC battle was the most exiting to follow, since few were left in WRC.

Impressive result for the Greek Skoda Driver, hopefully we will see more of him. Sandells chances of the title is lost, so lets see what he does.

[RS]

There's something very odd about pWRC. Only half the year is gone but there are only two rounds left and the main title protagonists won't rally again till Rally GB in November. Sandell won two rounds, took one second place and retired only once but is out of the title race!

[JAM]

The Nasser's car was sealed after Akropolis to be open by FIA...

[N.O.T]

AL Attiayahs subaru was found illegal (300g lighter and alternated crankshaft) and it did not went through inspection after the acropolis rally....FIA officials will meet at the rally finland to discuss for the penalty most likely they will exclude him from the results of the acropolis rally....

[ProRally]

AL Attiayahs subaru was found illegal (300g lighter and alternated crankshaft) and it did not went through inspection after the acropolis rally....FIA officials will meet at the rally finland to discuss for the penalty most likely they will exclude him from the results of the acropolis rally....

Wooaaw that is strange so late, where did you get the info ?

[N.O.T]

it was posted in a greek forum by people who are reliable enough.

[JAM]

Well, i asked after the Acropolis Rally if someone knew something about the fact that the Subaru went into verification at Prodrive headquarters.

[FabiaFan]

Well, i asked after the Acropolis Rally if someone knew something about the fact that the Subaru went into verification at Prodrive headquarters.
In case... that would mean Sandell is in the race for the title again?!?

[Mirek]

Yes, but only teoreticaly. It would look realy good for Armindo Araújo.

[alleskids]

New? standings
Araujo 37 (+2) one round to go
Al Attiyah 31 (-8) wrc.com states two rounds to go, but I beleive he only has one round to go
Sandell 28 (0) one round to go

[garais22]

LMT rally team, Neiksans brothers, saturday made a tests
Video:
http://esports.lv/motosports/video/28072009-gatis_liepins_1248806175
Photo:
http://esports.lv/motosports/galerijas/gatis_liepins/4366?show_thumbs&all_comments=1&picture=1

[JAM]

There is one thing that is a litle bit strange.

Nasser's car went into scrutining after the rally. There is no info from the organizers neither from FIA about that. Can you imagine Raikkonen's Ferrari be sent to scrutining after the Hungarianm Grand Prix? Can you imagine FIA doing that secretly?

If a car went into scrutining, the standings wait later decision, wich is not the case. The standings went as official.

There are some misterious actions here, wich is not a good sign. When a process like this is secret, things can't be ok.

Now the info that the car was ilegal... and no official decision or comunication.

Everything is so secret. :rolleyes:

[ProRally]

There is one thing that is a litle bit strange.

Nasser's car went into scrutining after the rally. There is no info from the organizers neither from FIA about that. Can you imagine Raikkonen's Ferrari be sent to scrutining after the Hungarianm Grand Prix? Can you imagine FIA doing that secretly?

If a car went into scrutining, the standings wait later decision, wich is not the case. The standings went as official.

There are some misterious actions here, wich is not a good sign. When a process like this is secret, things can't be ok.

Now the info that the car was ilegal... and no official decision or comunication.

Everything is so secret. :rolleyes:

That is normal, most results are 'pending tech. check', for example the fuel samples are analyzed in a labo so also those 'we' have to wait for. When FIA decides to do engine check teams can opt to seal the engine with FIA seal and get the scrutineer to come to the workshop where all the tools and clean area is available. For sure the latter happend...
Now we have to wait and see the result of the stewards meeting in Finland.
If correct (the news above) very sad for Nasser who sees the championship going out the window

[feresc13]

Egoi Eder Valdés has signed a new contract with the Enrique Ojeda's Subaru Rally Team Spain, to take part in Catalunya-Costa Daurada and Wales with a new Impreza N14 prepared by KRS and three events from the spanish tarmac rally championship

http://www.srts.es/noticias2009/018/018.html


http://www.SiteVacuum.com/publisher/GoogleSearchIconShadow.gifhttp://www.SiteVacuum.com/publisher/SuperSearchIconShadow.gif

[JAM]

That is normal, most results are 'pending tech. check', for example the fuel samples are analyzed in a labo so also those 'we' have to wait for. When FIA decides to do engine check teams can opt to seal the engine with FIA seal and get the scrutineer to come to the workshop where all the tools and clean area is available. For sure the latter happend...
Now we have to wait and see the result of the stewards meeting in Finland.
If correct (the news above) very sad for Nasser who sees the championship going out the window

Normal is to announce that the car X is sealed after the rally to be scrutined latter. To seal cars to be scrutined is not usual. When it happens it is announced.

The release of the organizers was not available nowhere, but that realease was published in paper after the rally. The strange of the situation is that the leader of a world championship had the car sealed and nothing was informed.

Besides all this, when FIA has the initiative of seal a car that's because they have serious doubts about something.

Let's see what happens tomorrow morning after the meating.

[ProRally]

Normal is to announce that the car X is sealed after the rally to be scrutined latter. To seal cars to be scrutined is not usual. When it happens it is announced.

The release of the organizers was not available nowhere, but that realease was published in paper after the rally. The strange of the situation is that the leader of a world championship had the car sealed and nothing was informed.

Besides all this, when FIA has the initiative of seal a car that's because they have serious doubts about something.

Let's see what happens tomorrow morning after the meating.

True and not true... I have witnessed many post event scruteneering at wrc events, before the event the stewards decide to check which cars (for example 1 and 3 in pwrc or jwrc and which items special attention, besides normal check). Then off course if they suspect something they have good reason, remember the nightly check in park ferme in Australia with the Top Run cars :D

But again to seal a engine post event and then check later is also quite normal.

Like you mention, lets see what the stewards decide later today...

[pavlos_a]

Nasser excluded. Lost his 8 points from Acropolis Rally. They appealed the decision.

[dimviii]

Nasser exclude,shows that Athanasoulas was minutes ahead from pwrc competition in Acropolis.

I am wondering what Pavlos is cooking for 2010 Acropolis :p

[Mirek]

... and despite that he was running on three cylinders for more than one stage ;)

[ProRally]

I guess we will see Nasser in a Skoda S2000 next year .....

[Mirek]

He wanted even for season but there was no free car for him.

[ProRally]

]He wanted even for season but there was no free car for him.

I think you meant this season, yes he was told the first new car would be available Oct or Nov ....

Lets see what will happen next year. Specially with the S2000 World Cup

[White Sauron]

Didn't know where to post it, but as Patrik is a PWRC driver, I think this thread is an appropriate place. So, after victory on this weekend's rally "The South Urals" Patrik Flodin won the Russian Rally CHampionship with 2 rounds still to go!

[Wim_Impreza]

Is there a link to the results? If possible in English. If not, can you please post the final top 10 results of this rally in English?

[Sulland]

Think if Brynildsen had had better equipment, that could have lasted and been competitive from 1st rally. He and the Fabia have clicked well !!

How is it tn the race for 2nd in PWRC after today ?

[dimviii]

Think if Brynildsen had had better equipment, that could have lasted and been competitive from 1st rally. He and the Fabia have clicked well !!

How is it tn the race for 2nd in PWRC after today ?
Good driver but not something special.When he was with evo 9 nothing special from him.Now it is not so difficult against subi-evos with s2000 machinery.I d like to see him with equal cars against some other drivers.

[Sulland]

Good driver but not something special.When he was with evo 9 nothing special from him.Now it is not so difficult against subi-evos with s2000 machinery.I d like to see him with equal cars against some other drivers.

But the NZ provided cars never held a whole rally, not very good equipment for him, but it would be interessting to se him in the fabia in IRC to measure the driver !

[dimviii]

But the NZ provided cars never held a whole rally, not very good equipment for him, but it would be interessting to se him in the fabia in IRC to measure the driver !
exactly! ;)

[RS]

But the NZ provided cars never held a whole rally, not very good equipment for him, but it would be interessting to se him in the fabia in IRC to measure the driver !

Yes, Brynildsen is doing well. Seems generally faster than Sandell but I don't think the level of S2000 drivers in pWRC is particularly high. They generally seem not that much faster than "normal" N4s, but see what happened when Hanninen drove the Fabia in Finland...

[Sulland]

If Brynildsen wins in GP, can he get 2nd in PWRC ?

How has the others have to finish for that to happen ?

[JHvP]

Prokop must be 7th and Al-Attiyah 9th.

[Sulland]

And it looks like Brynildsen will get 4th in PWRC, equal with Al-Attayah, but he takes 3rd with two victories in the championship. Is it not like this if the current standings in GP stays ?

[Sulland]

Did Al- Attiyah go off on 15 ?

[SubaruNorway]

Did Al- Attiyah go off on 15 ?


Yeah, rolled so Eyvind on third in the championship then.

[Sulland]

Yes congrats Eyvind and Denis.

First victory on tarmac in Spain, and then victory in GP in real mud is impressive, and show potential.

The killing time he took on SS3 was very good, and then the competitors all made small mistakes but he was in the top 3, and controlled the field. For the Bronze in the PWRC he was a bit lucky when Nasser went out, but that is part of the game !! Splendid rally Eivind !

Good luck for sponsorhunting for 2010 !

[SubaruNorway]

When the group N cars go up 1mm to 33m restrictor and some other bushings next year, will that go for national championships too?

[Mirek]

Yes

[JFL]

Shame on Skoda... :(
http://www.rallygb.org/documents/Stewards_Decision_No.5.PDF

[Langdale Forest]

As some other people have mentioned in other threads, the PWRC is just another championship and PWRC champions do not go on to be WRC champions.

[VFTS]

Brynildsen excluded from the event because of a mistake from the producer. Loeb got only 1min penalty in Australia because of a mistake from a producer(citroën)....

FIA.........France.......I will not mention anymore!!!!

[urabus-denoS2000]

Not saying anything bad but lot of critical mistakes by RGRS...

Valousek didnt get his car,Brydnilssen excluded...

[VFTS]

Not saying anything bad but lot of critical mistakes by RGRS...

Valousek didnt get his car,Brydnilssen excluded...

Its not RGRS mistake, its the producer of the brakecalipper. The number on the package and on the calipper was correct, but the measurement on the calipper was not correct.

[Carlo]

Its not RGRS mistake, its the producer of the brakecalipper. The number on the package and on the calipper was correct, but the measurement on the calipper was not correct.


Have you ever thought that sometimes people manufacture parts that will give one an advantage but attempt to disguise it by the use of "correct part numbers" in the hope that the Technical inspection team accept the part number and do not check the actual specifications of the component.

Thats just one of the many things that people can do when they build a cheater

[VFTS]

Have you ever thought that sometimes people manufacture parts that will give one an advantage but attempt to disguise it by the use of "correct part numbers" in the hope that the Technical inspection team accept the part number and do not check the actual specifications of the component.

Thats just one of the many things that people can do when they build a cheater


Everyone knows that!
Can you then tell me why Loeb and Citroën only got 1minute penalty.....while Brynildsen got excluded?

[Honza H.]

Can you then tell me why Loeb and Citroën only got 1minute penalty.....while Brynildsen got excluded?

....or why Prokop was excluded this year in Argentina while currently being fourth? Technical mistake of his team also didn´t bring him any advantage, on the contrary. (You can easily count what these 5 potential points would mean for the overall PCWRC standings.)

Don´t get me wrong - under regural circumstances I wouldn´t object anything against exclusions of the likes of Prokop or Brynildsen, rules are rules...but when you see a 1 minute penalty only for Loeb in Australia......

Just fabulating:
Had everyone got such a minor penalty like Loeb, Prokop would probably be a PCWRC champion.
.......or........
Had everyone got excluded including Loeb, Hirvonen would be a WRC champion.

This or that way, the key moments of this season haven´t happened on the track.

[GTA]

Its not RGRS mistake, its the producer of the brakecalipper. The number on the package and on the calipper was correct, but the measurement on the calipper was not correct.

The Mistake is made by SKODA MOTORSPORT, thats where the parts are ordered and they supply the parts to private teams.... it has nothing to do with RGRS.

What happened is a desaster to the Team and the driver....and somebody is going to pay for it but not RGRS !..

This story is not yet Finished.!

[urabus-denoS2000]

The Mistake is made by SKODA MOTORSPORT, thats where the parts are ordered and they supply the parts to private teams.... it has nothing to do with RGRS.

What happened is a desaster to the Team and the driver....and somebody is going to pay for it but not RGRS !..

This story is not yet Finished.!

You know I didn't mean anything bad GTA,you know I have massive respect for you and your team for being active on the forums and communicating with "ordinary" rally fans ;)

[Wasted Talent]

The Mistake is made by SKODA MOTORSPORT, thats where the parts are ordered and they supply the parts to private teams.... it has nothing to do with RGRS.

What happened is a desaster to the Team and the driver....and somebody is going to pay for it but not RGRS !..

This story is not yet Finished.!

Really sorry to hear about the problems with the brake parts - as you say, this is a disaster.

What will happen about the €60000 + VAT hire charge that Brynildsen must have paid - I would not be happy if I were him.......

WT

[Sulland]

The Mistake is made by SKODA MOTORSPORT, thats where the parts are ordered and they supply the parts to private teams.... it has nothing to do with RGRS.

What happened is a desaster to the Team and the driver....and somebody is going to pay for it but not RGRS !..

This story is not yet Finished.!

Why did the team choose not to appeal the stewards decision Imperatore ?

[JFL]

I guess an appeal cost a lot of €,-?

[bluuford]

Why did the team choose not to appeal the stewards decision Imperatore ?

What would you appeal when you prove that You used the part with correct serial number directly acquired from manufacturer and still get excluded? What else can you prove as a team? So, I hope that Škoda boys deliver free car and pay full service costs for RGRS for at least two rallies for next year S2000 cup for Brynildsen and the hardest thing would be the apologies fro RGRS and Brynildsen and Explanation for FIA.

[Sulland]

What would you appeal when you prove that You used the part with correct serial number directly acquired from manufacturer and still get excluded?

I would appeal the decision to exclude him. And there are enough evidence from other cases where the verdict from the stewards is less harsh - the stewards are punishing an innocent man - that has to be wrong !

[HaCo]

Wonder what brake callipers are on the other Skoda's? Are they all wrong?

[Mirek]

For sure not. The car was examined many times (at least after each victory). It was probably different calliper attached by wrong serial number in Brembo. I found suitable calliper (to measured dimmensions by stewards) in their online catalogue which could be the one used in Walles.

[ProRally]

The Mistake is made by SKODA MOTORSPORT, thats where the parts are ordered and they supply the parts to private teams.... it has nothing to do with RGRS.

What happened is a desaster to the Team and the driver....and somebody is going to pay for it but not RGRS !..

This story is not yet Finished.!

I too feel sorry for the RGRS team, BUT did you check the calipers BEFORE you used them ?
IF you would have checked it, you would have know ?

I know, why check it came as it comes from Skoda and is correct part, but it does not harm to double check and here it could prevent a exclusion.

[alterdaxter]

I too feel sorry for the RGRS team, BUT did you check the calipers BEFORE you used them ?
IF you would have checked it, you would have know ?

I know, why check it came as it comes from Skoda and is correct part, but it does not harm to double check and here it could prevent a exclusion.

Do you realise what it takes to measure/weigh/... every part and check it with the homologation fiche?

When you buy a factory car, it must be conform! When you buy pieces from a company like Skoda Motorsport, they must be correct too!

This is a huge mistake by Skoda Motorsport and/or Brembo and they have to take full responsability for that.


k.

[Tomi]

The Mistake is made by SKODA MOTORSPORT, thats where the parts are ordered and they supply the parts to private teams.... it has nothing to do with RGRS.

What happened is a desaster to the Team and the driver....and somebody is going to pay for it but not RGRS !..

This story is not yet Finished.!

quite a mess, huh

[ProRally]

Do you realise what it takes to measure/weigh/... every part and check it with the homologation fiche?

When you buy a factory car, it must be conform! When you buy pieces from a company like Skoda Motorsport, they must be correct too!

This is a huge mistake by Skoda Motorsport and/or Brembo and they have to take full responsability for that.


k.

True, but MSport learned their lesson with the 'thin' windows, Citroën Sport checks each and every part coming from supplier just to avoid things like this.
Ok I agree, it IS huge mistake by Skoda/Brembo, but maybe now in future others with double or triple check...

Maybe they need a good quality control a Skoda :D

[GTA]

Do you realise what it takes to measure/weigh/... every part and check it with the homologation fiche?

When you buy a factory car, it must be conform! When you buy pieces from a company like Skoda Motorsport, they must be correct too!

This is a huge mistake by Skoda Motorsport and/or Brembo and they have to take full responsability for that.


k.

I FULLY AGREE..!! its impossible to check the complete car, what happened is a big desaster for a small team and a young driver that won the rally in a great way... they should punnish the manufacturer and not the Driver / team....!..

[GTA]

after a few days and more clear thinking i feel its an absolute joke what the FIA did to Brynildsen..

Why give Citroen only a 1 minute penalty for a breach of technical regulation and not exclude them from Australia..?...

Why exclude Brynildsen from the Rally GB..?.. is the same thing, breach of technical regulation..!

Can anybody follow it any more how the FIA is working..?.. or is Brynildsen used to make a statement ( or correction of a mistake )..

maybe we should have apealed against the decission, but when you look black and white the FIA is right, so we decide no to do it....but then the FIA should do the same for everybody.. manufacturer or Private team..

[Sulland]

This does not make sense. 4 fun I had a look at he stewards saying, ( http://www.rallygb.org/documents/Stewards_Decision_No.5.PDF )

And the FIA Specific Regulations for S2000 Rally
http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1623371895__AppJ_Art_254A.pdf
The FIA documents says more about brakes than the stewards chose to put into their ruling, but not sure if it is important here (Page 8 and 9)

The stewards say that even if they were sure this was not done deliberately to cheat, and the difference in this case gives the driver a disadvantage - they still choose to disqualify the driver - that is totally innocent in all of this !

If the team has done nothing wrong, the driver has done nothing, and there is no gain to be had at all from the change to smaller pistons - it makes even less sense. Understand it whoever can - even as a steward you are supposed to use a bit of common sense !!

But how could the calipers have ended up there in the first place ? Since they have to had been produced for that car and that purpose. But are there more than one set of calipers approved for that car. (gravel and tarmac)
It is normal to have bigger brakes for tarmac, and if you have bigger discs it makes sense to have bigger pistons to push the bigger brakepads.

Is it two sets of brakes homologated for the Fabia, and were the brakes on this one the correct gravel brakes, but that the document the stewards took their measurements from, was referring to the bigger tarmac brakes ?

Just a thought, are there two sets of brakes for the Fabia, or is it just a plain and simple mistake by Brembo ?

In any case, Brynildsen is hardly to blame, and should not get the result and the Bronze medal erased by something like this !

[RS]

after a few days and more clear thinking i feel its an absolute joke what the FIA did to Brynildsen..

Why give Citroen only a 1 minute penalty for a breach of technical regulation and not exclude them from Australia..?...

Why exclude Brynildsen from the Rally GB..?.. is the same thing, breach of technical regulation..!

Can anybody follow it any more how the FIA is working..?.. or is Brynildsen used to make a statement ( or correction of a mistake )..

maybe we should have apealed against the decission, but when you look black and white the FIA is right, so we decide no to do it....but then the FIA should do the same for everybody.. manufacturer or Private team..

This is the real shame of the matter. I thought they were going to have some permanent steward at WRC events to make things more consistent, or was that only F1?

Reading the the stewards decision it seems that Brembo must have incorrecetly labelled a whole batch of parts, but I agree Skoda Motorsport should have checked them before supplying them to a customer. I guess they will learn their lesson.

But at the end of the day there was no performance advantage I assume (as it was smaller pistons)? Brynildsen still gained a whole events experience and still had the opportunity to impress everyone too. Did he or the team lose any prize money for this or is there no such thing anymore?

I just hope it doesn't affect his chances of continuing with the Fabia and RGRS next year as they seemed to be gelling very well.

[Tomi]

I just hope it doesn't affect his chances of continuing with the Fabia and RGRS next year as they seemed to be gelling very well.

Why should it? Its hardly his fault, Hänninen had the same amateurish incident in Sweden a few years back (the fuelpump), and he is still driving.
Those who followed the rally, know what did happen, and those who dont does not care.

[SubaruNorway]

Is there a fee you need to pay if you apeal?

[Mirek]

Well, notly Citroën but also Nasser finaly wasn't excluded even though in his case the infrigement was clearly performance enhancing (lighter crankshaft)...

[Carlo]

If a car is over braking at the rear and there is insufficent adjustment in the brake balance system to compensate then the fix is either fit a larger bore master cylinder for the rear brakes or fit calipers with smaller pistons to the rear. this will then bring things back into a suitable range that can be tuned to suit by the adjustable balance system.
Now if this was the problem, which was the most likely to slip past the technical inspectors, a changed master cylinder is too obvious so enlarge the bore of that cylinder, I would not reccomend it because if you enlarged to bore of the OE cylinder it would probably fail in service because the thinner wall thickness or, would you just machine the bores of the calipers to a smaller size and trust that no one would notice.

OR, perhaps it was a genuine error of manufacture

As for the penalty being applied tp the driver, well thats the way the world is. How could you aspply the penalty to the parts manufacturer or supplier, they have not entered the event so what regulations could you penalise them on and how would you enforce it

[dimviii]

Μirek in that case beside Nasser,were Subaru japan,prodrive,autotek and helped him .Just read the stewarts papers.
Surely it is not fair but......

[Mirek]

Yes, I know but still it was another technical infrigement which didn't result into exclusion from the event. That's my point.

[GTA]

[quote="RS"]

Reading the the stewards decision it seems that Brembo must have incorrecetly labelled a whole batch of parts

quote]

This is correct, all the right numbers were on the Calipers ( part numbers, FIA Number for homologation, etc, and even the spare ones were the same.

Brembo made a mistake somewhere and Skoda did not check them when the car was assembled, so they end up at RGRS incl the spare ones. RGRS only believe that they buy a factory car that has full homologation, as private team you can not go and check every single part that is in the homologation document, but a Manufacturer should do better with their quality and FIA Homologation control of parts and spare parts.!!.. its a mistake that only happens ones in a ..... and RGRS + Brynildsen were the unlucky ones...

[ProRally]

GTA, for sure Brynildsen knows it was not RGRS mistake, ok it is hard for both of you.
But show next year with him in S2000 cup what RGRS can do

[Tomi]

Has anyone involved in the Brynildsen case taken the responsibility of what did happen already?

[Halvis]

Has anyone involved in the Brynildsen case taken the responsibility of what did happen already?

Is there always up to the stewards of every rally to decide the penalty? As said before in this thread, the difference in penalties for Loeb and Brynildsen is just ... I haven't words to describe it.

A common commitee that follows every rally and impose penalties with the same rules must be the way to go - this is simply ridiculous!

[Tomi]

Is there always up to the stewards of every rally to decide the penalty? As said before in this thread, the difference in penalties for Loeb and Brynildsen is just ... I haven't words to describe it.

A common commitee that follows every rally and impose penalties with the same rules must be the way to go - this is simply ridiculous!

I would go for a simple way, exclusion every time when someone uses illegal parts, thats the only way to avoid the politics in the penalty desitions.

[sollitt]

Regardless of whose error this was, it is the responsibility of the entrant to ensure that their car complies with the regulations. That's it. End of story.

You could see in the steward's report that they too had sympathy but their decision was the only one they could have made and was, in fact the correct one.

This car, which was non compliant, was competing against cars that presumably were compliant and that is untenable. Exclusion can be the only outcome.

It has been stated that it is not possible to check all components on a competing car. Well, I'm sorry, this is the big game and, in respect of the event, it is solely the entrant's responsibility to ensure compliance.

If the car was leased or purchased with the clear intent of entering this event there may be some legal redress against it's suppliers under the relevant commercial laws but that is a matter between entrant and supplier, not the event or the sport's adminstrators.

Comparisons with the Loeb/Aussie happening, whether right or wrong, do not alter the correctness of this decision.

[Mirek]

You could see in the steward's report that they too had sympathy but their decision was the only one they could have made and was, in fact the correct one.

I agree with You however we were proven several times things doesn't happen always this way. And that's unacceptable. Just exclude strictly everyone or noone. But when one is disqualiffied and other not while both use cars which don't comply with homologation, it's just a terrible joke.

Let's follow 2009 PWRC...

Tango team, Argentina - fibreglass mudguards instead of alumium (fibreglass ones heavier than homologated) - exclusion (by the way this terrible thing is allowed by new rulles in next season)

Prokop, Argentina - rear brake discs of outdated homologation (2006 which is not valid in 2009, were thinner than new ones) - exclusion

Brynildsen, Walles - rear brake calipers with smaller pistons - exclusion

Al-Attyiah, Acropolis - lightened crankshaft - time penalty - how the hell is that possible? The car didn't comply with homologation as the others didn't and moreover this was clearly performance enhancing infrigement. What's the difference? Is it that there is Prodrive involved while the others are privateers?

It realy looks to me like rulles are strict only until they cross the way of some big factory team. Than they have to be bent not to stay in the way...

[sollitt]

I absolutely agree that there must be consistency.

If I read your list of incidents correctly, the sole inconsistent matter is that of the lightened crankshaft at Acropolis.

Yet in this instance the Stewards did exclude the competitor and the FIA supported that decision strongly at the ICA appeal hearing.

It is those presiding Judges, and not the Stewards nor the FIA who have lessened the penalty in what I would consider a quite extraordinary decision.

[Mirek]

Your right that it wasn't steward's decision but isn't ICA a part of FIA structure? I can hardly believe it could work absolutely independent.

[Wasted Talent]

Whole thing just goes to show how stupid and petty current homologation rules are....

Fine, have engine at 16v 2000cc for S2000, rev limit, standard transmission (sealed?) form 2-3 firms, have same size maximum wheels/tyres allowed, minimum weight, basic bodyshell of roadcar, standard type of suspension.......makes it much simpler and no problems with wrong parts

WT

[bowler]

]I agree with You however we were proven several times things doesn't happen always this way. And that's unacceptable. Just exclude strictly everyone or noone. But when one is disqualiffied and other not while both use cars which don't comply with homologation, it's just a terrible joke.

Let's follow 2009 PWRC...

Tango team, Argentina - fibreglass mudguards instead of alumium (fibreglass ones heavier than homologated) - exclusion (by the way this terrible thing is allowed by new rulles in next season)

Prokop, Argentina - rear brake discs of outdated homologation (2006 which is not valid in 2009, were thinner than new ones) - exclusion

Brynildsen, Walles - rear brake calipers with smaller pistons - exclusion

Al-Attyiah, Acropolis - lightened crankshaft - time penalty - how the hell is that possible? The car didn't comply with homologation as the others didn't and moreover this was clearly performance enhancing infrigement. What's the difference? Is it that there is Prodrive involved while the others are privateers?

It realy looks to me like rulles are strict only until they cross the way of some big factory team. Than they have to be bent not to stay in the way...

The last decision was a Court of Appeal decision. That avenue is still open to Brynildsen if they choose.

The other factor which needs to be accounted for is that the Stewards Panel have access to information that we do not, and they base their decision on the completeness of that information. No case is ever the same. Anyone who has been part of those hearings knows that every competitor comes to the table protesting their innocence, and it is up to the stewards to determine whether their innocence is genuine or "misguided". It is impossible to say that because a decision was made in one hearing then the same decision must be applied to every other. That makes a mockery of any semblance of a fair hearing, but I suspect that some would be prepared to waive a fair hearing just so they could claim consistency.

The Stewards are all Motorsport people, competitors mostly, who have a lot of experience. To lump all of them together and say that they have to make the same decision in every case irrespective of circumstances shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how the process works.

Equally the appointment of the same people for every event fails to allow for differences in events and countries.

I do recall when the FIA had appointed a permanent steward that people were loud in their criticism of the decisions that came from that system.

All that I can assume is that you will criticise the decision in any event which ever way it goes.

[sollitt]

]Your right that it wasn't steward's decision but isn't ICA a part of FIA structure? I can hardly believe it could work absolutely independent.
It may be a part of the structure and possibly even administered by the FIA but it must, and surely does, work independently.