2010 Farewell WRC Cars and Hello S 2000.

[Brother John]

Instead of introducing 2011 the new Super2000+ with turbo-kits, are in the coming year Super2000 -Cars as WRC replacement in the Rallye WRC.
FIA, manufacturers and Promoter ISC obviously agreed on the common meeting in the previous week.

http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2009/02/24/tschuess-wrc-hallo-super2000/index.html

[wwbroe]

Finally they take a decision, if it is the right one remains to be seen, but for me it certainly looks like the only possible one. According to the article it is said that Citroen has almost completed their C3 S2000 allready, and Ford is waiting only for the engine for their Fiesta S2000. Let's wait and see what potential manufacturers will turn their heads towards WRC in the coming years. ;)

[Sulland]

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=no&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2009/02/24/tschuess-wrc-hallo-super2000/index.html

It looks ok, but I do not take anything for granted, until I see it black on white from FIA !

[J.Lindstroem]

I hope this is coming already in 2010. I think it is good that the change is coming as soon as possible. It whould not be great for the sport to have another "sabbatical year" as it is this year.

Bring on S2000 without turbo for 2010!

My german is a bit bad but is the article saying that the S2000 cars will have a bigger spoiler and front bumper when they turn to Wrc-cars?

[Donney]

Hopefully is the right decision, I'm all for it, let it develop and when the formula is over, in more or less 5 to 7 years, introduce the Turbo Kit.

[J.Lindstroem]

Hopefully is the right decision, I'm all for it, let it develop and when the formula is over, in more or less 5 to 7 years, introduce the Turbo Kit.

I think the S2000's can develope very much in the following years. Can they be faster than people think? We saw stunning pace from the Proton Satria and the Fabia is also beating the less good Wrc-drivers. Maybe the S2000 is to slow for Wrc as it is now, but in a couple of years, it may be absolutley perfect!

[Sulland]

My german is a bit bad but is the article saying that the S2000 cars will have a bigger spoiler and front bumper when they turn to Wrc-cars?

That is how I read it, that the difference btw the IRC and WRC S2000 (or 2009 and 2010) is plastic that will fall of if the car is used as it should !!!

But other sources say that turbo is still in as a part. Why has not other Rally mags/sites mentioned this meeting, WRC.com for instance ??
They are also saying that 1.6 turbo might replace 2.0

But why a new thread on this issue, cant we continue with this one, to keep it simple: http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129177

[Iskald]

That is how I read it, that the difference btw the IRC and WRC S2000 (or 2009 and 2010) is plastic that will fall of if the car is used as it should !!!

But other sources say that turbo is still in as a part. Why has not other Rally mags/sites mentioned this meeting, WRC.com for instance ??
They are also saying that 1.6 turbo might replace 2.0

http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129177

Autosport has no mention of it either, and this decision is somewhat in contrast with their article some three weeks ago saying that WRC would continue in 2010 and that S2000(+) was on for 2011.

Having seen S2000 cars on a couple of occasions in Rally Norway I must say it looks rather tame on the stages compared to WRC. In my opinion S2000 without modifications (read stronger engine) is not by any means spectacular or fast enough to replace the WRC-cars as the top level of rallying.

[Buzz Lightyear]

Autosport has no mention of it either, and this decision is somewhat in contrast with their article some three weeks ago saying that WRC would continue in 2010 and that S2000(+) was on for 2011.

Having seen S2000 cars on a couple of occasions in Rally Norway I must say it looks rather tame on the stages compared to WRC. In my opinion S2000 without modifications (read stronger engine) is not by any means spectacular or fast enough to replace the WRC-cars as the top level of rallying.

It's like watcing a well driven Mk2 Escort in the forests, under powered, but you could watch it all day.

Loeb in a C3 S2000??

I'll have some of that.

[I am evil Homer]

If it's a choice...as it seems to be....or having an international rally championship or nothing, i'll take S2000 all day long. Forget "spectacular"....that argument was used when Grp A replaced Grp B and things were just fine, sure it took time to adjust but in the current climate rallying has to become affordable and relevant to road cars. If it isn't it may as well die.

[AndyRAC]

If it's a choice...as it seems to be....or having an international rally championship or nothing, i'll take S2000 all day long. Forget "spectacular"....that argument was used when Grp A replaced Grp B and things were just fine, sure it took time to adjust but in the current climate rallying has to become affordable and relevant to road cars. If it isn't it may as well die.

Quite agree!! While S2000's aren't perfect, more grip than power, and probably too heavy - there are more Manufacturers with them than WRCars. 1987 was a similar scenario, and they developed into good cars.
As for the road car relevance, personally, I think this is important (S2000's aren't), you Rally what you sell. What we have at the moment are basically Prototypes. However, I'd rather a see a lot of different cars/drivers entered with S2000's than the 2 'works teams' we have now.

[urabus-denoS2000]

If it's a choice...as it seems to be....or having an international rally championship or nothing, i'll take S2000 all day long. Forget "spectacular"....that argument was used when Grp A replaced Grp B and things were just fine, sure it took time to adjust but in the current climate rallying has to become affordable and relevant to road cars. If it isn't it may as well die.

:up:

That's what I always said

[J.Lindstroem]

Quite agree!! While S2000's aren't perfect, more grip than power, and probably too heavy - there are more Manufacturers with them than WRCars. 1987 was a similar scenario, and they developed into good cars.
As for the road car relevance, personally, I think this is important (S2000's aren't), you Rally what you sell. What we have at the moment are basically Prototypes. However, I'd rather a see a lot of different cars/drivers entered with S2000's than the 2 'works teams' we have now.

I agree!

I think the S2000's can develope to good cars as the time goes by. One should remember that these cars have not existed for so long and they can be seen as prototypes like you say. I say bring it on and lets se what it can bring in the future!

[Lousada]

If true, this is the best decision they could have made!
Hopefully they drop the stupid M1-M2 rules and do as in the IRC the best two cars of every brand. That way there will be a train of Peugeots, Citroens, Fords, Fiats, Subarus, Skodas, Mitsu's and Protons on equal ground. Can only be better than it is now. And perhaps no more Loeb :eek:

[f-cup]

I really dont see anything good in bare S2000 becoming a new WRCar. It really needs something more to be something I could watch and respect. Or is it cool that after this year, many national series will have cars that are a lot faster than worlds top level cars? WRC should have something that makes it different and more interesting from lower series, and it should not be being slower than them.
And yes, they soud great, but that just is not enough. If you tell someone, who is not so much in to rallying, that worlds top level car has 280 bhp and 165 km/h top speed, do you think that he is going to give any respect to the car or the drivers? No.

[turves]

But other sources say that turbo is still in as a part. Why has not other Rally mags/sites mentioned this meeting, WRC.com for instance ??


WRC.com will report on it as breaking news in, ooooh, about a weeks time...

[J.Lindstroem]

WRC.com will report on it as breaking news in, ooooh, about a weeks time...

Wrc.com, has they mentioned anything about the S2000 cars replacing the Wrc cars yet?

[Iskald]

I agree!

I think the S2000's can develope to good cars as the time goes by. One should remember that these cars have not existed for so long and they can be seen as prototypes like you say. I say bring it on and lets se what it can bring in the future!

What kind of development are you thinking of? The cars are already "good cars", but they lack in power. And what kind of development do you think is possible for a 2-litre normally aspirated engine? A few hp, maybe? A little bit different torque caracteristics? Nothing much more than that. Of course if you slice off 100-150 kilos in weight of the cars, it would mean a significant difference, but I can`t imagine FIA is going to do that.

There are only two alternatives that will make the cars quick enough in my opinion. A bigger or a stronger engine. That means either a 2.5-litre (or even larger) normally aspirated engine or a 1.6-litre or 2-litre turbocharged engine.

[f-cup]

There are only two alternatives that will make the cars quick enough in my opinion. A bigger or a stronger engine. That means either a 2.5-litre (or even larger) normally aspirated engine or a 1.6-litre or 2-litre turbocharged engine.

I can't agree more. A 1.6 litre turbo, with healthy sized restrictor would be nice. Then there would be the power, the rews and hopefully, the sound.

[J.Lindstroem]

What kind of development are you thinking of? The cars are already "good cars", but they lack in power. And what kind of development do you think is possible for a 2-litre normally aspirated engine? A few hp, maybe? A little bit different torque caracteristics? Nothing much more than that. Of course if you slice off 100-150 kilos in weight of the cars, it would mean a significant difference, but I can`t imagine FIA is going to do that.

There are only two alternatives that will make the cars quick enough in my opinion. A bigger or a stronger engine. That means either a 2.5-litre (or even larger) normally aspirated engine or a 1.6-litre or 2-litre turbocharged engine.

I'm not a technican and i really suck at engines and things like that, trust me. So i should not be the right person to talk about devlopement. If you say that it can't be devloped further, it maybe is so.

I was'nt following rallying back in the group A days, so i want to know how was the Group A cars developed between the debut in 1987, during the 1990's and up to the entrance of the Wrc cars in 1997? Can this in any way be compared with the devlopement of S2000 cars?

[mm1]

I have to say that the most spectacular car to watch on rally Ireland was Proton, none of the wrc cars. So my wote goes for s2k, the sound they make is just gorgeous.

[Buzz Lightyear]

I really dont see anything good in bare S2000 becoming a new WRCar. It really needs something more to be something I could watch and respect. Or is it cool that after this year, many national series will have cars that are a lot faster than worlds top level cars? WRC should have something that makes it different and more interesting from lower series, and it should not be being slower than them.
And yes, they soud great, but that just is not enough. If you tell someone, who is not so much in to rallying, that worlds top level car has 280 bhp and 165 km/h top speed, do you think that he is going to give any respect to the car or the drivers? No.

you dont have any respect for loeb driving a s2000? i would suggest to look about sitting in the co-driver seat to find out.

[urabus-denoS2000]

I really dont see anything good in bare S2000 becoming a new WRCar. It really needs something more to be something I could watch and respect. Or is it cool that after this year, many national series will have cars that are a lot faster than worlds top level cars? WRC should have something that makes it different and more interesting from lower series, and it should not be being slower than them.
And yes, they soud great, but that just is not enough. If you tell someone, who is not so much in to rallying, that worlds top level car has 280 bhp and 165 km/h top speed, do you think that he is going to give any respect to the car or the drivers? No.

Nonsense ;)

First of all they are 180-ish top speed (S1600 has 165 top speed in that setup)

And WRCs have 200 km/h......
Whats the difference?
Anyway they (almost) never reach it.... (except in NORF and Sweden,but even there it is rare)

In the current climate,if you want really attractive cars,then go to a WRC a watch 2 cars....

I would rather go to IRC Barum Rally and watch 20+ higly attractive car (I'm sorry but they are attractive) from 6 different manufacters with close fights...


And about national championships having better cars...
I'm sorry but the combination of Loeb and S2000 would demolish gentleman drivers in modern WRCs any day on any event....

The only fast driver next year in a national WRC will be a 50-year-old legend who is the only one to have the balls to drive that car (relatively) to the max....

Yes I mean Patrik Sniijers,maximum respect to him :up:

If you are a real rally fan (which I know you are,just like all of us ) then you are going to survive this very small step back...

[Mirek]

WRC should have something that makes it different and more interesting from lower series, and it should not be being slower than them.

Having special machinery is actualy what killed WRC. After FIA ban of WRC in 2004 for other championships WRC went steadily down...

Also curently there's not an economical situation which allows manufacturers to spend bilions on new cars for dead championhip. First You need to bring back quality in terms of competition and stability in rulles.

WRC has died painfuly and raising from the ashes will also be painful for some time. Let's hope better days for car makers return as well...

[urabus-denoS2000]

so i want to know how was the Group A cars developed between the debut in 1987, during the 1990's and up to the entrance of the Wrc cars in 1997? Can this in any way be compared with the devlopement of S2000 cars?

I couldn't follow because I'm simply too young ;)

1987 Lancia Delta 8v was 240 BHP car.... :o


While at the top of group A Toyota Celica and Lancia Delta had little less than 350 BHP and outpacing the Group B cars (mostly because of tyre development) ;)

[Mirek]

Urabus: Abarth has top speed 165 or 175 km/h depending on setup but almost every time uses 165 km/h. Peugeot usualy uses 175 km/h. Škoda uses 171 and 179 km/h.

[Sulland]

Just to recap the thinking behind the S2000 Rally formula; The plan was to simplify to try to get more manufacturers into the game. By using a NA 2000 ccm engine, they could combine participation in Touring Cars, F3 and Rally with one engine with small tweaks to optimize them for the type car they were to sit in.

Not a bad idea, and it has played nicely into the current finacial climate as well.

But since most people with a lot of insight says that for rally you need a turbo, the 1,6T idea is not a bad one. The car industry is making small turbo engines, so many have one that will fit the bill.

For me S2000 is good enough, and I do not find the boring, quite contrary. And the 165 km/h can be fixed with different top gearing I guess !
But FIA, pls make a decision in March, and we will live with it !

[urabus-denoS2000]

Ah,I heard that they are at blocade at 180... (but you know better ;) )

Anyway,I think it would be a lot more spectacular to see a S2000 screaming at max revs ( http://www.dailymotion.com/search/barum%2Brally/video/x6kl8n_rallye-barum-irc-2008_auto watch Travaglia at 2:50 :D ) at 175 than the no-sound Focus WRC at 190...

[Lutherg17]

First we say implement S2000 because they were more spectacular to watch (may be true), sound better (true), and they offer more manufactures to enter at world level (at this present moment). Now we say forget spectacular (realizing now that they are under power), but lets focus on the number of manufactures (true), and they sound better. The current cost of a Proton S2000 is Euro 240,000.00 in 2009 while in 2008 a Peugeot S2000 was 220,000 taking into consideration these cars were developed by privately run companies or semi works teams. When Ford and Citroen introduce their models will the current cost remain under 250,000? Will Fiat, Skoda, Proton, Subaru, Mitsubishi or any other manufacture have a development programmed similar or even close to Ford and Citroen? Will Fiat, Skoda, and Proton continue if they are not win rallies similar to the situation with Toyota in Formula 1? Will s2000 cars highlight the most talented drivers, or drives that have the talent in retain big sponsors during the financial crises? Will we have better TV coverage similar to the IRC in Monte if these cars are introduced? Let’s not forget the drivers. What would Colin McRae and Richard burns (R.I.P),loeb, Carlos Sainz, Tommi, Marcus, Vatanen, Walter Rohl or any other successful drive say about the performance of S2000? I guess they all would say comments similar to Markku Alén -"comparing the lancia delta integrally to the delta S4 is like night and day." In closing, Money will always be an issue with any sport at any time. What we need is a championship that provides value and excitement to the manufactures and the spectators. If not, s2000 will be just a quick patch to a gapping wound in WRC! Oh, where can I buy a 2L awd 207?

[A.F.F.]

]
WRC has died painfuly and raising from the ashes will also be painful for some time. Let's hope better days for car makers return as well...


Not to mention competition and the drivers as well. God for bid there are some members on this forum with common sense. :up:

I really didn't even understand how deep WRc has been until I refreshed my memory by watching 28 hrs of rallying from the year 85 to this day. Yes, year -87 was a bit different from -86, just like -10 is going to be comparing -09 but this time some manus are ready. Prototypes has been tested in national level, cars are somewhat ready and this way we may have impressive starting lists again in rallyes when potential privateers actually stand a chance, both finacially and competition level.

Yet some are whining about the change in a situation any change is better :confused:

Yes, it's going to be fun to see more manufactureres but it's going to be even more fun to see many drivers competing and not just driving for hobby.

I want to see young and crazy talents pushing maximum and surprising us all with speed or flamboyance, either way is fine for me :D

[urabus-denoS2000]

First we say implement S2000 because they were more spectacular to watch (may be true), sound better (true), and they offer more manufactures to enter at world level (at this present moment). Now we say forget spectacular (realizing now that they are under power), but lets focus on the number of manufactures (true), and they sound better. The current cost of a Proton S2000 is Euro 240,000.00 in 2009 while in 2008 a Peugeot S2000 was 220,000 taking into consideration these cars were developed by privately run companies or semi works teams. When Ford and Citroen introduce their models will the current cost remain under 250,000? Will Fiat, Skoda, Proton, Subaru, Mitsubishi or any other manufacture have a development programmed similar or even close to Ford and Citroen? Will Fiat, Skoda, and Proton continue if they are not win rallies similar to the situation with Toyota in Formula 1? Will s2000 cars highlight the most talented drivers, or drives that have the talent in retain big sponsors during the financial crises? Will we have better TV coverage similar to the IRC in Monte if these cars are introduced? Let’s not forget the drivers. What would Colin McRae and Richard burns (R.I.P),loeb, Carlos Sainz, Tommi, Marcus, Vatanen, Walter Rohl or any other successful drive say about the performance of S2000? I guess they all would say comments similar to Markku Alén -"comparing the lancia delta integrally to the delta S4 is like night and day." In closing, Money will always be an issue with any sport at any time. What we need is a championship that provides value and excitement to the manufactures and the spectators. If not, s2000 will be just a quick patch to a gapping wound in WRC! Oh, where can I buy a 2L awd 207?

Punto,207 and the Fabia are full-works projects.

They are allready around the 250-270 000 mark (MG and Proton are cheaper)

[urabus-denoS2000]

Yes, year -87 was a bit different from -86, just like -10 is going to be comparing -09 but this time some manus are ready.

I think it's going to be a small change.

86-87 was jumping from 450-500 BHP prototypes to undeveloped 240 BHP showroom cars

09-10 jump from 350 BHP prototypes to developed 280 BHP prototypes

[Iskald]

I think it's going to be a small change.

86-87 was jumping from 450-500 BHP prototypes to undeveloped 240 BHP showroom cars

09-10 jump from 350 BHP prototypes to developed 280 BHP prototypes

There is quite a significant difference. Group B had only been the top level class for two seasons when it was banned at the end of 1986. With the WRC cars we are actually used to see them many years in national rallying.

In 1987 its true we went to more showroom-like Group A-cars, but this is most important, the cars had turbo engines and that meant it was possible to develop the cars into much faster machines in quite a short time. It took no more than three years before the Group A cars (like the Celica GT4) actually did faster stage times than the Group B cars.

That is simply not possible with the S2000 cars with only normally aspirated 2-litre engines, unless they are given wings and are made to fly....

[A.F.F.]

.

[urabus-denoS2000]

There is quite a significant difference. Group B had only been the top level class for two seasons when it was banned at the end of 1986. With the WRC cars we are actually used to see them many years in national rallying.

In 1987 its true we went to more showroom-like Group A-cars, but this is most important, the cars had turbo engines and that meant it was possible to develop the cars into much faster machines in quite a short time. It took no more than three years before the Group A cars (like the Celica GT4) actually did faster stage times than the Group B cars.

That is simply not possible with the S2000 cars with only normally aspirated 2-litre engines, unless they are given wings and are made to fly....

True :up:

[BDunnell]

I was'nt following rallying back in the group A days, so i want to know how was the Group A cars developed between the debut in 1987, during the 1990's and up to the entrance of the Wrc cars in 1997? Can this in any way be compared with the devlopement of S2000 cars?

I hope they won't develop like that, otherwise the WRC will become too expensive again.

[BDunnell]

There is quite a significant difference. Group B had only been the top level class for two seasons when it was banned at the end of 1986.

I thought Group B assumed that level of prominence in 1983, making it the 'top-level class' for four seasons.

[Tom206wrc]

Looks like 2009 is the last WRC season for Sébastien Loeb who doesn't like S2000s(not enough torque to his taste) :rolleyes:

[Gard]

Only thing that keeps the cost down on s2000 cars is the lack of interest to build really fast cars. As soon as PSA or any other manu decides to make a real winning car. The cost will be the same as WRC and they will be equally "boring" to watch. Because it's just faster that way.

The cost isn't for how the car is built, but for what it takes to beat the opposition.

How anybody can say that a s2000 on max revs sounds good, is beyond me. In RN when they run on rev limiter, coffing and spitting, they was slower than the fia security car. 1'st time I ever heard a racecar gearing down to get up a hill.

PLEASE STOP THIS JOKE

[J4MIE]

I really didn't even understand how deep WRc has been until I refreshed my memory by watching 28 hrs of rallying from the year 85 to this day. Yes, year -87 was a bit different from -86, just like -10 is going to be comparing -09 but this time some manus are ready. Prototypes has been tested in national level, cars are somewhat ready and this way we may have impressive starting lists again in rallyes when potential privateers actually stand a chance, both finacially and competition level.

Yet some are whining about the change in a situation any change is better :confused:

Yes, it's going to be fun to see more manufactureres but it's going to be even more fun to see many drivers competing and not just driving for hobby.

I want to see young and crazy talents pushing maximum and surprising us all with speed or flamboyance, either way is fine for me :D

Agree completely, AFF :up: Any driver who is giving it 110% on the stages will be spectacular to watch in anything, sometimes I have even been cheering for people driving group N cars :eek: I was watching the difference between the WRCs and the Fabia in Norway and it was obvious that the S2000 was slower, but why do the cars have to be as fast as WRCs? Surely part of the problem is that these days the cars are too fast and need slowing down, this will surely make the sport even safer.

I am all for it and glad they have not opted for the turbo kit :bounce:

[Mirek]

J4MIE: Good point, many rally events have problems with too high average speed today ;)

[gloomyDAY]

Only thing that keeps the cost down on s2000 cars is the lack of interest to build really fast cars. As soon as PSA or any other manu decides to make a real winning car. The cost will be the same as WRC and they will be equally "boring" to watch. Because it's just faster that way.

The cost isn't for how the car is built, but for what it takes to beat the opposition.

How anybody can say that a s2000 on max revs sounds good, is beyond me. In RN when they run on rev limiter, coffing and spitting, they was slower than the fia security car. 1'st time I ever heard a racecar gearing down to get up a hill.

PLEASE STOP THIS JOKELOL!

Gard is right. How do we know that costs won't be astronomical in the future and then have another meritocracy in the WRC? S2000 doesn't seem to be the solution to our problem.

[A.F.F.]

S2000 doesn't seem to be the solution to YOUR problem is more accurate.

Of course there will be a manufacturer who'll put bucks on table and start developing. Then, some will follow and about dozen or more years we'll be in a similar situation, crying the PAST days would remain.

I don't know about you but I'm gonna enjoy the journey till those days come.

I actually don't know which is more boring, WRC today or listening some members whining about S2000. Bu-****ing-huu...

[BDunnell]

S2000 doesn't seem to be the solution to YOUR problem is more accurate.

Of course there will be a manufacturer who'll put bucks on table and start developing. Then, some will follow and about dozen or more years we'll be in a similar situation, crying the PAST days would remain.

I don't know about you but I'm gonna enjoy the journey till those days come.

I actually don't know which is more boring, WRC today or listening some members whining about S2000. Bu-****ing-huu...

:up:

The speed of the cars is not why I became a rallying enthusiast.

[MJW]

I just hope that something positive happens, in the short term moving to S2000 would be good. Lts face it ISC /WRC is scared of the IRC format and the effective way of dealing with IRC would be to attract Abarth (at least) Proton and any other manufacturers with S2K cars to join wrc as soon as possible. For all its faults WRC is the pinnacle of our sport, (like F1 is for racing) and thats where the top drivers and manufacturers should be. In teh medium term I like the 1600T option. If given enough time to plan, say that 3 to 5 year stability for S2K and then go 1600T.

[A.F.F.]

If given enough time to plan, say that 3 to 5 year stability for S2K and then go 1600T.


I wouldn't be surprised if that is exactly what will happen. At that time most of the manus should be at the same line and none of them is given a flying start to develop.

[Brother John]

Agree completely, AFF :up: Any driver who is giving it 110% on the stages will be spectacular to watch in anything, sometimes I have even been cheering for people driving group N cars :eek: I was watching the difference between the WRCs and the Fabia in Norway and it was obvious that the S2000 was slower, but why do the cars have to be as fast as WRCs? Surely part of the problem is that these days the cars are too fast and need slowing down, this will surely make the sport even safer.

I am all for it and glad they have not opted for the turbo kit :bounce:
But wait! The F.I.A. just will decide in March! You never know.
At last someone who dares to say that WRC Cars are too fast. :up:
I say that already since 4 years! :p :

[gloomyDAY]

S2000 doesn't seem to be the solution to YOUR problem is more accurate.

Of course there will be a manufacturer who'll put bucks on table and start developing. Then, some will follow and about dozen or more years we'll be in a similar situation, crying the PAST days would remain.

I don't know about you but I'm gonna enjoy the journey till those days come.

I actually don't know which is more boring, WRC today or listening some members whining about S2000. Bu-****ing-huu... :confused: Is this how we treat members nowadays? Sorry if you took that the wrong way. I just thought it was funny and somehow bizarre that a rally car needs to downshift in order to make it up a hill.

We want spectacle in the sport but I just don't see it happening with S2000. The IRC coverage was great, but I wasn't astounded by the drivers or cars whatsoever. I don't care about outright speed as much as I care about being entertained. I'm just casting doubt on whether the latter can be acheived.

[Mirek]

Well, someone says that S2000 needs downshifting to go uphill and people take it as fact. Next time someone says S2000 needs to go reverse to get uphill, will people believe again?

I don't say Gard is lying but the situation is probably different. Naturaly aspirated engine has close peak power ratio and using that rpm ratio is nercessary. Making mistake while shifting is much easyier and therefore sometimes driver may need to downshift because of previous wrong shift up.

Anyway that's plus in my opinion because driving such car fast requires more skills. IRC and local championships prooved that not all drivers are able to drive S2000 fast. Some of them are faster in gr. N cars which are easyier to drive.

[MJW]

I wouldn't be surprised if that is exactly what will happen.
That would also co-incide with the motor manufacturers trend for making smaller capacity engines. You can see that happening now with roadcars, even with diesels, a few years ago a 2.0l turbo diesel was the norm, now PSA diesles in C4 are 1.6 and give the same power as the old 2.0l. I also read some months ago regarding touring car racing where Max Mosely had suggested a 1600T as being the way the motor industry was going.

[RS]

I think you are all reading this news wrong again!

I believe what the article is saying is that (if the winter calendar gets the go-ahead) then the start of 2010 will be the last for WRCars and 2010-2011 winter season will be S2000s with turbo plus extra aero bits.

I also think some people on here are too much torque-fetishists. A 'normal' Grp N4 has much more torque than an S2000 but there is no question which one is better to watch and listen to.

If you stick that Rallye-Magazine article through Google translate it calls the Fiesta's coming turbo engine a "2 litre vacuum cleaner" which based on the sound of the Focus WRC is about right :D

[Mirek]

MJW: The way You suggest would make sense. Manufacturers go downsizing with low pressure turbos because of more strict emission standards and lower fuel consumpion. Motorsport should reflect marketing needs. 1.6 turbo would be definitely better choice as a promotion for new car models in next years.

[Shrike]

I hate to be the one to say this but the WRC switching to S2000 will not make closer fights like in IRC. If Loeb stays in the WRC it will be the same old show just different cars. I hate to see Loeb win all the time but he is the best driver and has the best team to build the best car, neither of those things will change.

[RS]

I hate to be the one to say this but the WRC switching to S2000 will not make closer fights like in IRC. If Loeb stays in the WRC it will be the same old show just different cars. I hate to see Loeb win all the time but he is the best driver and has the best team to build the best car, neither of those things will change.

Maybe so, but at least more people would be having a go instead of just two mediocre Finns in that hovercraft thing and a load of paydrivers.

[Sulland]

]
Anyway that's plus in my opinion because driving such car fast requires more skills. IRC and local championships prooved that not all drivers are able to drive S2000 fast. Some of them are faster in gr. N cars which are easyier to drive.

This is a extremely good point, and it should cost you to make a mistake. I think a S2000 is more of a driver car, since it is harder to drive fast consistently.

We here believe a lot of things on S2000, but have any of the top WRC drivers tried out S2000, and if so - what did they think ?

But also try to remember some of the background for why, NA 2ltr is a smart engine seen from a manufacturers point of view, and why it was proposed as the new rally engine a while back; WTCC uses it, F3 uses it and rally uses it - Then they can participate in 3 different classes with minimum tweaks to the engine. In todays economical climate that is a more valid argument than ever ! And there is no reason for that the WRC S2000 can not be lighter than the one used today. FIA has changed the weight two times to match it better to GrN, remember ! The WRC car could be 900 or 1000 kg, that is easy tuning !

Would love to see a BMW 1 series Coupe S2000 Rally in the forrest, and for VW they are or will be in all 3 forms of motorsport, with the same engine in 2010 !

The cost is a worry, and it has to be a max price, but it is of course hard to control, and the "factory cars" might get the top notch expensive parts, while customers only get the B parts !

Any ideas on how a max price could be put in place ?

[HaCo]

If you stick that Rallye-Magazine article through Google translate it calls the Fiesta's coming turbo engine a "2 litre vacuum cleaner" which based on the sound of the Focus WRC is about right :D

LOL :D :D


Version Francais:
http://www.autonews-magazine.com/blog/?p=3788

[MJW]

This is a extremely good point, and it should cost you to make a mistake. I think a S2000 is more of a driver car, since it is harder to drive fast consistently.

We here believe a lot of things on S2000, but have any of the top WRC drivers tried out S2000, and if so - what did they think ?

Kris Meeke was interviewed by Motorsport News in UK at the begining of the year, now you have to remember that Kris was on the verge of his IRC campaign at the time, and may have been 'rose tinted glasses' at the time but his comparison of S2K and WRC cars was interesting. He said that in WRC cars there is torque from about 2500rpm and if you make a mistake with gears or a corner it didnt really punish you. He also said that a man off the street given 1/2 a days tuition would put up a mediocre time in a WRC, getting the very best out of them took something special (Loeb?) However regarding the S2K car he said that they were more rewarding to drive but far more difficult to be competitive as it punished wrong gear / messed up corners etc. Also teh power band was very narrow and they just have to be kept buzzing at high reves 7500 to 9500 for anything to happen. He said gentlemen drivers would be nowhere in s2k cars, they were for drivers.

[A.F.F.]

We here believe a lot of things on S2000, but have any of the top WRC drivers tried out S2000, and if so - what did they think ?


Don't know about TOP drivers but Sebastian Lindholm has tested Peugeot 207 and he said it was a proper rally car.

[Mirek]

A.F.F.: Lindholm was testing Fabia during the development also ;)

[bluuford]

FIA has changed the weight two times to match it better to GrN, remember ! The WRC car could be 900 or 1000 kg, that is easy tuning !


Exactly my idea! don't add any turbo kit. Just remove some kg-s and that will make S2000 very spectacular in my view. There could be S2000 for national level to compete with grN cars and S2000L (light) that is meant for competing in WRC level (lets say, 150-200kg lighter).
Any idea how much the current S2000 cars are wearing ballast kg-s?
Can detuning be cheaper than adding turbo kit? Or do they have to use more expensive lighter materials?

[BDunnell]

Kris Meeke was interviewed by Motorsport News in UK at the begining of the year, now you have to remember that Kris was on the verge of his IRC campaign at the time, and may have been 'rose tinted glasses' at the time but his comparison of S2K and WRC cars was interesting. He said that in WRC cars there is torque from about 2500rpm and if you make a mistake with gears or a corner it didnt really punish you. He also said that a man off the street given 1/2 a days tuition would put up a mediocre time in a WRC, getting the very best out of them took something special (Loeb?) However regarding the S2K car he said that they were more rewarding to drive but far more difficult to be competitive as it punished wrong gear / messed up corners etc. Also teh power band was very narrow and they just have to be kept buzzing at high reves 7500 to 9500 for anything to happen. He said gentlemen drivers would be nowhere in s2k cars, they were for drivers.

I think there is much truth in this. You only have to look back to the way in which certain drivers, especially Per Eklund and Jean Ragnotti, were able to get the absolute maximum out of small, underpowered, two-wheel-drive Group A cars — enough on occasion to match their more powerful or four-wheel-drive brethren — while others in similar machinery weren't in the same league.

[flat out fred]

Once these cars are being driven on their door handles by the top drivers in the world they will be spectacular, i can,t wait to actually see who can peddle them flat out and keep them on the road.
All the driver aids and flappy gear change gone at a stroke , chris Meek is right it will really sort the men from the boys.

[sollitt]

If I remember correctly;

In the 70's I watched the world's top drivers in Grp4 cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the 80's I watched the world's top drivers in GrpB cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the 90's I watched the world's top drivers in GrpA cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the new millenium I watched the world's top drivers in WRC cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the 2010's whether they be in S2000 or S2000+ the top drivers will still be fast and spectacular but with S2000 there might just be more manufacturers involved and top drivers from outside of Europe might just have a better opportunity to get amongst the action.

For the first time in the history of the sport we might actually have a true World Championship.

It all looks good from here.

[A.F.F.]

who dares wins or rolls it

:up:

[BDunnell]

If I remember correctly;

In the 70's I watched the world's top drivers in Grp4 cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the 80's I watched the world's top drivers in GrpB cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the 90's I watched the world's top drivers in GrpA cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the new millenium I watched the world's top drivers in WRC cars. They were fast & spectacular and there were about 3 or 4 manufacturers at the pointy end of the competition.

In the 2010's whether they be in S2000 or S2000+ the top drivers will still be fast and spectacular but with S2000 there might just be more manufacturers involved and top drivers from outside of Europe might just have a better opportunity to get amongst the action.

For the first time in the history of the sport we might actually have a true World Championship.

It all looks good from here.

Excellent post. I agree completely.

[Iskald]

Exactly my idea! don't add any turbo kit. Just remove some kg-s and that will make S2000 very spectacular in my view. There could be S2000 for national level to compete with grN cars and S2000L (light) that is meant for competing in WRC level (lets say, 150-200kg lighter).
Any idea how much the current S2000 cars are wearing ballast kg-s?
Can detuning be cheaper than adding turbo kit? Or do they have to use more expensive lighter materials?

You`re talking 900 kilo pocket rockets here. They will definitely be faster, but how do you maintain safety levels in such light cars?

Did I hear carbon and kevlar, cheramics, titanium and other sophisticated and lighter materials? But hey, wasn`t that thought to be too expensive?

[Helstar]

I think the S2000's can develope very much in the following years. Can they be faster than people think? We saw stunning pace from the Proton Satria and the Fabia is also beating the less good Wrc-drivers. Maybe the S2000 is to slow for Wrc as it is now, but in a couple of years, it may be absolutley perfect!
Totally agree. Also, the more manus, the better. We are dying with C4 and Focus only here come on...


If true, this is the best decision they could have made!
Hopefully they drop the stupid M1-M2 rules and do as in the IRC the best two cars of every brand. That way there will be a train of Peugeots, Citroens, Fords, Fiats, Subarus, Skodas, Mitsu's and Protons on equal ground. Can only be better than it is now. And perhaps no more Loeb :eek:
lol poor Loeb come on, let him lose in S2000 (..... not xD)

[Mirek]

Iskald: If You hit solid obstacle (rally case), the lighter car, the better because You have to spent less kinetic energy during the impact ;)

Of course 900 kg is unreal. In current S2000 rulles 1150 kg is realistic, for some cars less but not for all.

I would prefer to use separated throttle valves and a bit more rpm than use of carbon/titanium etc. on lighter bodyshell.

[J4MIE]

It would cost huge amounts to lighten S2000 cars, what is the problem with them as they are?

[AndyRAC]

It would cost huge amounts to lighten S2000 cars, what is the problem with them as they are?

Well according to the anti-S2000 people, "They're not spectacular enough"

The only thing I would say is that they probably have more grip than power - and they have had their minimum weight increased twice. Maybe they could go back to what they originally were.

Shouldn't they really be like the old F2 cars, but with an added set of driving wheels?

Anyway, bring them on - the more Manufacturers the better - the sport can only benefit.

[BDunnell]

Shouldn't they really be like the old F2 cars, but with an added set of driving wheels?

Or maybe without an extra set of driving wheels.

[AndyRAC]

Or maybe without an extra set of driving wheels.

I actually wouldn't disagree - but those in charge are fixated with 4WD. Any reason why? It's proved it's point - forget it. Ford's latest Focus RS isn't 4WD, so why have it? Most normal road cars are FWD -aren't we supposed to be using 'Production' based cars?

[Mirek]

There is one reason... Even stock Imprezas and Lancers would be faster on gravel and snow ;)

[Sulland]

While FIA is at it, why cant they clean up the international class jungle that today look like:

GROUP A/N
Group N1 - up to 1400cc
Group N2 - over 1400cc and up to 1600cc
Group N3 - over 1600cc and up to 2000cc
Group N4 - over 2000cc
Group A5 - up to 1400cc
Group A6 - over 1400cc and up to 1600cc
Group A7 - over 1600cc and up to 2000cc
Group A8 - over 2000cc

GROUP R
R1A (up to 1400cc)
R1B (over 1400cc and up to 1600cc)
R2B (over 1400cc and up to 1600cc)
R2C (over 1600cc and up to 2000cc)
R3C over 1600cc and up to 2000cc
R3T: up to 1600cc
R3D: up to 2000cc (nominal)
R4: S2000
R5: S2000+ (?)

Do what you have started, and only allow the new R classes from 2010 !

[AndyRAC]

]There is one reason... Even stock Imprezas and Lancers would be faster on gravel and snow ;)

Fine, no problem - have a season with a proper mix of events - Gravel, Tarmac, Snow. Instead of the preference for Gravel.
The 4WD cars dominate on snow,Gravel, but get blitzed on Tarmac. It should even itself out over the course of a season. That's what would cause interest - of course it would never be allowed. But you could have BMW, Porsche, etc entering the Tarmac rounds to throw a spanner in the works, just like the old days. Forgive me, I'm dreaming..........

[Mirek]

I would allow N-GT immidiately if it was up to me ;)

[sal]

Porsche 911 GT3 and Ferrari 360s now that would address the issue of the cars not sounding sexy enough!

[Sulland]

Or will the new regs look like this: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/122255-2010-regulations-released
;)

[Torsen]

rally cars to me have to be AWD and Turbo Charged... without it to me its just weird... I like S2000 cars, I think they're fun to watch sometimes... I was cheering for the skoda in norway... but to me... they are PWRC cars... not WRC cars...

i really think if by using S2000 spec cars, throw on a turbo & a wing and if they can keep the cost low... it'll be the best solution...

regardless of the spec... the cost has to be kept low and cars spec'd so that manufacturers have cars to use...

[ShiftingGears]

I won't miss these current regulations.

[Gard]

Exactly my idea! don't add any turbo kit. Just remove some kg-s and that will make S2000 very spectacular in my view. There could be S2000 for national level to compete with grN cars and S2000L (light) that is meant for competing in WRC level (lets say, 150-200kg lighter).
Any idea how much the current S2000 cars are wearing ballast kg-s?
Can detuning be cheaper than adding turbo kit? Or do they have to use more expensive lighter materials?

the cost is the problem. It's takes hugely more resources to develop better NA engines than turbo engines. adding turbos will reduce costs and make it more even. They also need to limit what that can be done to engines more. control turbo, IC and valves. No ALS (that will sort the men from the boys) and fancy water/air injections. and perhaps manually regulated/controlled boost pressure.

Just by a control gearbox, the wrc-cars would almost be down to same cost as s2000.

also good idea to keep weight limits, so the need to use expensive materials is reduced

[Iskald]

It would cost huge amounts to lighten S2000 cars, what is the problem with them as they are?

With all the S2000-fans currently active on this forum, it would perhaps be seen as swearing in the church, but here comes. I like the WRC-cars a lot and don`t find them boring at all. But having seen S2000 on a couple of occasions lately, those cars really take away the fascination of the sport for me. Nicely built and sometimes nicely sounding, but hey, they don`t pull the skin off the porrigde!

[AlfaWRC]

With all the S2000-fans currently active on this forum, it would perhaps be seen as swearing in the church, but here comes. I like the WRC-cars a lot and don`t find them boring at all. But having seen S2000 on a couple of occasions lately, those cars really take away the fascination of the sport for me. Nicely built and sometimes nicely sounding, but hey, they don`t pull the skin off the porrigde!

That might be true.

Seeing boys like Mikko, Sebastian, Jari-Matti or Petter flying in a WRC is just fantastic.
But on the other hand in my opinion the time is absolutely ripe to make a step backwards. So there are pros and cons no question, but S2000 will not be as fascinating as WRC out there on the stages...

[urabus-denoS2000]

With all the S2000-fans currently active on this forum, it would perhaps be seen as swearing in the church, but here comes. I like the WRC-cars a lot and don`t find them boring at all. But having seen S2000 on a couple of occasions lately, those cars really take away the fascination of the sport for me. Nicely built and sometimes nicely sounding, but hey, they don`t pull the skin off the porrigde!

Don't get me wrong,I also prefer WRCs a lot and I find them more attractive,but I also find S2000 to be a very attractive formula and I just can't stand people who are so stubborn and say that S2000 is soooooooooo boring.....NO IT ISN'T AND YOU GUYS KNOW IT!!!!!!! :mad:
If that's what it takes to save our sport than bring it on.
You go to your fancy WRC rallys,I would prefer Barum Rally any day in the current climate :D


And after all look at what those expensive hicg-tech cars brought us to.

[Sulland]

]Iskald: If You hit solid obstacle (rally case), the lighter car, the better because You have to spent less kinetic energy during the impact ;)

Of course 900 kg is unreal. In current S2000 rulles 1150 kg is realistic, for some cars less but not for all.

I would prefer to use separated throttle valves and a bit more rpm than use of carbon/titanium etc. on lighter bodyshell.

What was the original weight on the S2000R , before FIA changed it ?

How far down can we get them, without a lot of fancy and expensive material being used; 1000 - 1050 kg ?

[sal]

Mikko Hirvonen is having a full Group 4 Escort built for historic rallying in the UK so perhaps we should go even further back in time...

[Mirek]

Sulland: Originaly 1100 kg for tarmac but none of S2000 cars was reasonably bellow 1150 kg in real (for example Abarths had about 1170 kg on Barum 2007).

[Iskald]

Don't get me wrong,I also prefer WRCs a lot and I find them more attractive,but I also find S2000 to be a very attractive formula and I just can't stand people who are so stubborn and say that S2000 is soooooooooo boring.....NO IT ISN'T AND YOU GUYS KNOW IT!!!!!!! :mad:


You shouldn`t be so angry, its bad for your blood pressure...
Who has actually said that S2000 is "soooooooo boring"? We haven`t said that, have we? We are just not satisfied with having S2000 as the top level in the sport. But we still can discuss sensibly and respect other peoples opinions without using all those big letters and exclamation marks.

[OldF]

There are ways to get more power from a S2000.
Take off the 64 mm restrictor[/*:m:2d8gpl8h]
Allow modifying of the cylinder head i.e. bigger intake and exhaust channels (this is allowed in WTCC).[/*:m:2d8gpl8h] This will of course add cost but don’t think so much.

Another way to have some more is to, instead of a turbo, use a compressor, which will not increase the torque as much as with a turbo but give more torque on lower revs. Also using a small turbo that gives low boost (0,5 – 1,0 bar) maybe would give the same result.

The problem is, as said on this forum many times, if two different groups of cars are built from the same base, is the torque. All the parts affected of higher torque have to cope with the higher torque and that means that the S2000 has to be built with stronger parts than necessary. The S2000 has about 250 Nm and if the torque of a S2000T would be about 350 Nm they could IMO be built on same base.

Personally I would like to see WRC cars with more power than the S2000 but if they decide that it is S2000 that’s OK for me. They are nice cars.

[COD]

I can't agree more. A 1.6 litre turbo, with healthy sized restrictor would be nice. Then there would be the power, the rews and hopefully, the sound.

There will be no sound on turbo car. Turbo is what mostly kills the sound, as todays WRC cars demonstrate. That and the fact that turbo engines work on torque rather than rpm.

And to those who say S2000 is not fast enough for WRC, just one random example:

Norway 2009, Sandell's time on SS Finnskogen was 12,57,4. On that same stage 2007, Galli made exactly same time (9th overall). More significant though is that Loeb's time was 12,42,3 so a S2000 car is only marginally slower than WRC's in 2007 when they had better tyres!!!!

All in all, I hope this proves to right and S2000 without turbo will replace WRC's in 2010!

[DonJippo]

Norway 2009, Sandell's time on SS Finnskogen was 12,57,4. On that same stage 2007, Galli made exactly same time (9th overall). More significant though is that Loeb's time was 12,42,3 so a S2000 car is only marginally slower than WRC's in 2007 when they had better tyres!!!!

And in 2009 on the same stage best time was 11:55.4, which is over minute faster than Sandell's time. Wonder what the difference would have been with better tyres?

[Gard]

There will be no sound on turbo car. Turbo is what mostly kills the sound, as todays WRC cars demonstrate. That and the fact that turbo engines work on torque rather than rpm.

And to those who say S2000 is not fast enough for WRC, just one random example:

Norway 2009, Sandell's time on SS Finnskogen was 12,57,4. On that same stage 2007, Galli made exactly same time (9th overall). More significant though is that Loeb's time was 12,42,3 so a S2000 car is only marginally slower than WRC's in 2007 when they had better tyres!!!!

All in all, I hope this proves to right and S2000 without turbo will replace WRC's in 2010!

Turbo is not the problem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEK7POxpVeE

[Brother John]

Mikko Hirvonen is having a full Group 4 Escort built for historic rallying in the UK so perhaps we should go even further back in time...

Group 4 was the best time in Rally sport, look in how many countries Historic rallying draw more people than the WRC at the moment.

The group 4 cars were my favorites and then came the group B with the beginning of the end, the start of the current problems thanks to Audi and Lancia.
Do not understand me wrong, I saw them come and i saw them disappearing and they were fantastic to see in the forests but also dangerously.
For this reason I say it once again " Back to the Roots" and S2000 cars be very near at the present time how rally would have be.

[Mirek]

There will be no sound on turbo car. Turbo is what mostly kills the sound, as todays WRC cars demonstrate. That and the fact that turbo engines work on torque rather than rpm.

Not in any case. If You don't use restrictor and use limited turbo boost isntead, You can still use high rpm.

[big_sw2000]

Group 4 was the best time in Rally sport, look in how many countries Historic rallying draw more people than the WRC at the moment.

The group 4 cars were my favorites and then came the group B with the beginning of the end, the start of the current problems thanks to Audi and Lancia.
Do not understand me wrong, I saw them come and i saw them disappearing and they were fantastic to see in the forests but also dangerously.
For this reason I say it once again " Back to the Roots" and S2000 cars be very near at the present time how rally would have be.
Great from the money side off things, but theses cars have got to be intresting to spectators. I just dont think they are poweful enough, too much like group N. But saying that the Monty was excellent to watch on TV.
And with the likes of the current WRC drivers in them they could be fun. I HOPE.
It dose say in Motorsport news that the WRC version of the S2000, introduced in 2010, will be slightly modified, and look a little diffrent, too current S2000.
And will be limited to 8500rpm, not the current 8000rpm.
There is also talk that by 2013, they may even bring in a 1600cc turbo engine. Could be intresting.
Even though i love WRC cars, the sound thy make etc. I think they have run there course.

[Brother John]

Turbo is not the problem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEK7POxpVeE

Audi Sport Quattro = the car that has destroyed rally. :rolleyes:
The beginning of the end like i told before.
Nobody can pay the current WRC Cars because that is also too expensive such as Group B.
Why don't we give the current S2000 a chance?
Do we not all have to think about environmental issues and economics? Yes also in motor sport!

[urabus-denoS2000]

You shouldn`t be so angry, its bad for your blood pressure...
Who has actually said that S2000 is "soooooooo boring"? We haven`t said that, have we? We are just not satisfied with having S2000 as the top level in the sport. But we still can discuss sensibly and respect other peoples opinions without using all those big letters and exclamation marks.

No,no Iskald,I'm not angry at you don't get me wrong ;)

At least you say you prefer WRC with some decency :D


I just can't stand comments like "Oh no they can't go uphill on hairpins","They have to shift down just to go uphill","I'll stop watching rallys because of those cars!!!!!"

[BDunnell]

Turbo is not the problem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEK7POxpVeE

And what happened with those cars? They became completely unsustainable.

[Mirek]

It dose say in Motorsport news that the WRC version of the S2000, introduced in 2010, will be slightly modified, and look a little diffrent, too current S2000.
And will be limited to 8500rpm, not the current 8000rpm.

The limit actualy is 8500 rpm and newer was different for S2000-R.

[big_sw2000]

]The limit actualy is 8500 rpm and newer was different for S2000-R.
Sorry looks like Motorsport news has got it wrong, but i did think current S2000 were limited to 8000rpm

[f-cup]

There will be no sound on turbo car. Turbo is what mostly kills the sound, as todays WRC cars demonstrate. That and the fact that turbo engines work on torque rather than rpm.
!
Well obviously you have not been with the sport wery long. Or maybe you prefer different kind of sound, but the best year in rallying (soundwise), was 1994. Those sounds of Toyotas and Subarus were just amazing. In '95 came the restrictor that is used still, and it is the sole reason for the low rpm's. And when came the restrictor, the cars lost allmost 100 bhp of power.

I dont say that S2000 is totally bull, but is it the best solution just because it is allready here? Or is it possible that with little thinking there could be something better? In my opinion, the biggest problem of rallying are not the cars that are used, but the fact that the sport is too much relying on car manufacturers and their interest of being around.

[big_sw2000]

]The limit actualy is 8500 rpm and newer was different for S2000-R.
Sorry i read the article wrong. Current S2000 are limited to 8500rpm.
But will be reduced to 8000rpm in 2010. When S2000WRC will run 8500rpm, and slightly modified areo package.

[big_sw2000]

[quote="COD"]There will be no sound on turbo car. Turbo is what mostly kills the sound, as todays WRC cars demonstrate. That and the fact that turbo engines work on torque rather than rpm.quote]

Turbo kills Sound. Yeah Always rember Group B cars being very quiet.
What you got to rember now, is noisey rally cars will never be any more, not with all the noise restrictions around.
S2000 cars will have there noise levels lowed some how

[Mirek]

Sorry i read the article wrong. Current S2000 are limited to 8500rpm.
But will be reduced to 8000rpm in 2010. When S2000WRC will run 8500rpm, and slightly modified areo package.

Very bad news if true :(

[Gard]

Audi Sport Quattro = the car that has destroyed rally. :rolleyes:
The beginning of the end like i told before.
Nobody can pay the current WRC Cars because that is also too expensive such as Group B.
Why don't we give the current S2000 a chance?
Do we not all have to think about environmental issues and economics? Yes also in motor sport!

The environmental issues and economics are some of the main reasons to go for turbos(and/or compressors). NA engines has very limited future

[Iskald]

And to those who say S2000 is not fast enough for WRC, just one random example:

Norway 2009, Sandell's time on SS Finnskogen was 12,57,4. On that same stage 2007, Galli made exactly same time (9th overall). More significant though is that Loeb's time was 12,42,3 so a S2000 car is only marginally slower than WRC's in 2007 when they had better tyres!!!!

All in all, I hope this proves to right and S2000 without turbo will replace WRC's in 2010!

I must comment on this even if DonJippo already have proven that COD`s example is more than "random". Best time on the stage in 2009 was 11.55, more than a minute faster than Sandell, as reported by DonJippo.

In 2007 no S2000 cars competed in RN, but still COD compares two different years to prove his point. In 2007 the Finnskogen stage was run in opposite direction of 2009. The road conditions were also totally different with lots of new and loose snow on the stages, making the stage overall much slower than in 2009. If Sandell had competed in a S2000 car in 2007 his time would probably have been above the 14 minute mark.

So you have proven absolutely nothing COD, except that conditions were different. Statistics is not always what they seem to be...

[big_sw2000]

I must comment on this even if DonJippo already have proven that COD`s example is more than "random". Best time on the stage in 2009 was 11.55, more than a minute faster than Sandell, as reported by DonJippo.

In 2007 no S2000 cars competed in RN, but still COD compares two different years to prove his point. In 2007 the Finnskogen stage was run in opposite direction of 2009. The road conditions were also totally different with lots of new and loose snow on the stages, making the stage overall much slower than in 2009. If Sandell had competed in a S2000 car in 2007 his time would probably have been above the 14 minute mark.

So you have proven absolutely nothing COD, except that conditions were different. Statistics is not always what they seem to be...
Quite simple S2000 is not as quick as WRC.
Its in the same catogry as the Ptoduction Cup.
How can a S2000 car non turbo a lot less torque, 240ish bhp.
Be as quick as a 300bhp WRC car.

[Iskald]

Quite simple S2000 is not as quick as WRC.
Its in the same catogry as the Ptoduction Cup.
How can a S2000 car non turbo a lot less torque, 240ish bhp.
Be as quick as a 300bhp WRC car.

Of course, I have never been in doubt about that. But COD tried to prove different, by comparing stage times from different years. It failed...

[Mirek]

Quite simple S2000 is not as quick as WRC.
Its in the same catogry as the Ptoduction Cup.
How can a S2000 car non turbo a lot less torque, 240ish bhp.
Be as quick as a 300bhp WRC car.

S2000 has around 280 Hp, WRC over 350 (the real difference is bigger as WRC's have much larger power bend) ;)

[ste898]

Can anyone tell me if the S2000 cars will have all the stupid gizmo's in like the split times etc I hope not and then we might see some proper competition and not just driving to times!!!!

[urabus-denoS2000]

Can anyone tell me if the S2000 cars will have all the stupid gizmo's in like the split times etc I hope not and then we might see some proper competition and not just driving to times!!!!

Hmmmm I think bad news for you....


Sandell's team reported to him on stage when Mikkelsen didn't show up on split.....

[Mirek]

It doesn't depend on car but championship rulles.

[ste898]

Hmmmm I think bad news for you....


Sandell's team reported to him on stage when Mikkelsen didn't show up on split.....

AHH well nothing will change.....new cars same old thing!!!!!!!!

[big_sw2000]

]S2000 has around 280 Hp, WRC over 350 (the real difference is bigger as WRC's have much larger power bend) ;)
I wont quote you on S2000, im still learning, but WRC are limited to a maxium 300bhp, and have been since the old group A days.

[big_sw2000]

Can anyone tell me if the S2000 cars will have all the stupid gizmo's in like the split times etc I hope not and then we might see some proper competition and not just driving to times!!!!
Team orders and stopping on stage to gain advantge happend in Group B days aswell. Its not a new thing.

[urabus-denoS2000]

I wont quote you on S2000, im still learning, but WRC are limited to a maxium 300bhp, and have been since the old group A days.

Trust me,they aren't..... :cool:


They are 350+

[big_sw2000]

Trust me,they aren't..... :cool:


They are 350+
Trust me they are limmited to 300bhp @ 6500rpm.
http://www.rallysportmag.com.au/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1672&Itemid=2

[Mirek]

No, they are not. They have only intake restrictor of 34 mm diameter. Real output is definitely over 350 Hp for WRC cars. Also the peak power rpm is much lower than 6500. 300 Hp with this restrictor was reality in days it was first used, that was in 1994, I think. You can't stop development...

[urabus-denoS2000]

You can't trust everything you see...... :D

[Sulland]

Just to take a turbo discussion;

If we could compare a 1600 turbo, 1800 turbo and a 2000 turbo for a second.
They have the same spec when talking restrictor, max rpm and other tech issues.
How much will the max output and max torque be on them ?

If we were to use a compressor instead of turbo, would the answer be the same ?

[Mirek]

That's not possible :) If You have same restrictor, same turbo boost, and different engine capacity, You'll have also different peak power rpm.

Compressor is not same as turbo. First it takes energy compared to turbo which uses only exhaust energy (which would be otherwise wasted) and the second thing is that it has different characteristics than turbo.

[TKM]

So they want to turn the WRC into the PWRC. Oh well, at least Subaru might make a come back using their Grp N car.

[grugsticles]

OK, so if the FIA want to move to a S2000 based series that all well and good in my opinion. Put simply, It works.

It does open the door for Subaru and Mitsubishi to return to the WRC if they made adjustments to the current Group N regulations to give a little more power (to bring them up to the same speed as current S2000 cars).
Subaru seem to be turning thier rallying efforts to a Group N format through the IRC, and Mitsubishi are already represented.

At the end of the day I dont really see the argument against this.

The IRC is a pretty interesting competition. Its not that expensive for works or private teams to enter, sponsorship seems relativly easy to find, there are many cars already built, its open to many different brands of car products (ie. tyres) which generates development in said technology, it has great media support and, most of all, its competative.

So, IMO, the FIA has finally seen the light and has actually realised that there isnt the money out there to support thier idea of WRCars anymore.

Having said all that, it can only be a matter of time before F1 suffers... dramatically.

[Brother John]

Sorry i read the article wrong. Current S2000 are limited to 8500rpm.
But will be reduced to 8000rpm in 2010. When S2000WRC will run 8500rpm, and slightly modified areo package.

This is ridiculous, is that a way to keep WRC at place 1?
Looks like the F.I.A., Citroën and Ford want assassinate IRC with new rules.
Deeply sad decision and again the proof that it concerns only money and not the sport. :confused:

[big_sw2000]

This is ridiculous, is that a way to keep WRC at place 1?
Looks like the F.I.A., Citroën and Ford want assassinate IRC with new rules.
Deeply sad decision and again the proof that it concerns only money and not the sport. :confused:
For everyone who can not tread the article, i will see if i can scan it, and post a link on the forum.
What the IRC has got at the momement is an amazing championship. I give it that.
But what is wrong in modifying the cars slightly IE, diffrent areokit
More power etc, to separate it from the IRC.
At the end of the day its the WRC that should be the no1 championship.
But like i said the IRC is running a much better set of regulations, than the WRC. Flexi Service, tyre choice etc.

[AndyRAC]

For everyone who can not tread the article, i will see if i can scan it, and post a link on the forum.
What the IRC has got at the momement is an amazing championship. I give it that.
But what is wrong in modifying the cars slightly IE, diffrent areokit
More power etc, to separate it from the IRC.
At the end of the day its the WRC that should be the no1 championship.
But like i said the IRC is running a much better set of regulations, than the WRC. Flexi Service, tyre choice etc.

Which is the main reason why the WRC/IRC can't join together. The IRC regs are far better than the restrictive regs of the WRC.
The WRC is still the 'Blue Riband' of Rallying, however, it's sat on its laurels for far too long - but the fastest cars should be in the WRC!!

I still think that Rallycars need to resemble road cars - they've gone too far away from this thinking.

[COD]

I must comment on this even if DonJippo already have proven that COD`s example is more than "random". Best time on the stage in 2009 was 11.55, more than a minute faster than Sandell, as reported by DonJippo.

In 2007 no S2000 cars competed in RN, but still COD compares two different years to prove his point. In 2007 the Finnskogen stage was run in opposite direction of 2009. The road conditions were also totally different with lots of new and loose snow on the stages, making the stage overall much slower than in 2009. If Sandell had competed in a S2000 car in 2007 his time would probably have been above the 14 minute mark.

So you have proven absolutely nothing COD, except that conditions were different. Statistics is not always what they seem to be...


It was of course just a random example, didn't have much time to any thorough research. Can you give me a comparison on a stage that was exactly the same?

The point there being though, that if there are no WRC-cars to compare to, who in the forests can tell that the car is say 1,5 secs/km slower? Than equals to 0,3 secs/200m, which I think is some kind of average distance a spectator can see the cars in the forests.... The only thing that from spectators view changes is that he/she can hear the cars for miles...

[Sulland]

Which is the main reason why the WRC/IRC can't join together. The IRC regs are far better than the restrictive regs of the WRC.
The WRC is still the 'Blue Riband' of Rallying, however, it's sat on its laurels for far too long - but the fastest cars should be in the WRC!!

I still think that Rallycars need to resemble road cars - they've gone too far away from this thinking.

That is fine, but we need to end up with 1 S2000 car, if that is the route FIA chooses for WRC.

It would be completely stupid to have 1 car for IRC, and 1 for WRC - where the only difference is som bits of plastic here and there.

If you are a driver owning a S2000 car normally used in a national series, you should be able to decide if you would like to save up for a IRC or WRC round of your choice - and be able to fight on equal terms.

If we now end up with two different S2000's I will loose the little rest of faith I have in FIA, and start work for a system where the top part is elected via a democratic way from the membernations - and get rid of the mafia family tendences that is in place today !

[big_sw2000]

Which is the main reason why the WRC/IRC can't join together. The IRC regs are far better than the restrictive regs of the WRC.
The WRC is still the 'Blue Riband' of Rallying, however, it's sat on its laurels for far too long - but the fastest cars should be in the WRC!!

I still think that Rallycars need to resemble road cars - they've gone too far away from this thinking.
Totaly agree

[big_sw2000]

That is fine, but we need to end up with 1 S2000 car, if that is the route FIA chooses for WRC.

It would be completely stupid to have 1 car for IRC, and 1 for WRC - where the only difference is som bits of plastic here and there.

If you are a driver owning a S2000 car normally used in a national series, you should be able to decide if you would like to save up for a IRC or WRC round of your choice - and be able to fight on equal terms.

If we now end up with two different S2000's I will loose the little rest of faith I have in FIA, and start work for a system where the top part is elected via a democratic way from the membernations - and get rid of the mafia family tendences that is in place today !
What will happen is IRC will die, and there will be only 1 championship

[J.Lindstroem]

That is fine, but we need to end up with 1 S2000 car, if that is the route FIA chooses for WRC.

It would be completely stupid to have 1 car for IRC, and 1 for WRC - where the only difference is som bits of plastic here and there.

If you are a driver owning a S2000 car normally used in a national series, you should be able to decide if you would like to save up for a IRC or WRC round of your choice - and be able to fight on equal terms.

If we now end up with two different S2000's I will loose the little rest of faith I have in FIA, and start work for a system where the top part is elected via a democratic way from the membernations - and get rid of the mafia family tendences that is in place today !

Do we actually know if IRC is going to exist in the future, or if the irc and the wrc are going to be the same championship? just a thought.

[big_sw2000]

It was of course just a random example, didn't have much time to any thorough research. Can you give me a comparison on a stage that was exactly the same?

The point there being though, that if there are no WRC-cars to compare to, who in the forests can tell that the car is say 1,5 secs/km slower? Than equals to 0,3 secs/200m, which I think is some kind of average distance a spectator can see the cars in the forests.... The only thing that from spectators view changes is that he/she can hear the cars for miles...
Well on Wales Rally GB i spectated on Sweetlamb, and there were a few S2000 cars in the field. Ok not driven by top drivers, but compared to a WRC car the were slow and boring, and i dont think sound that great any way.
You will never have a car that you can here miles away, because of sound regulations. Im not sure what it is but a rally car must be under a certain noise limit.

[Sulland]

Do we actually know if IRC is going to exist in the future, or if the irc and the wrc are going to be the same championship? just a thought.

According to the management level of Eurosport, they do not see the need to combine them ! :D

[WRC1]

What will happen is IRC will die, and there will be only 1 championship


this means also that we will loose a few top rallyes like ypres, barum and san remo...

[big_sw2000]

this means also that we will loose a few top rallyes like ypres, barum and san remo...
They will probley drop back down to European championship again.

[f-cup]

It was of course just a random example, didn't have much time to any thorough research. Can you give me a comparison on a stage that was exactly the same?

The point there being though, that if there are no WRC-cars to compare to, who in the forests can tell that the car is say 1,5 secs/km slower? Than equals to 0,3 secs/200m, which I think is some kind of average distance a spectator can see the cars in the forests.... The only thing that from spectators view changes is that he/she can hear the cars for miles...

Well, find somewhere the results of NORF 2007. There were A.Alen with Punto. And you REALLY can tell, if someone is 1.5 sec/ km slower, if you have ever seen a faster car/ driver. Not nessesary even in the same rally. Sound is nothing, if the going doesn't match.

And for those who fancy so mutch of the IRC: It is completely made for Eurosport, so when they loose interest to it, then it's no more IRC.

I must wonder that have anyone who think that S2000 is the best solution, seen them live? Because if so, you are quite easily sadisfied.

[WRC1]

They will probley drop back down to European championship again.

sure, but this rallyes deserves more than "just" european championship...

[big_sw2000]

sure, but this rallyes deserves more than "just" european championship...
The same as the manx rally.
Rallies like Ypes are great events, but not big enough to be World Championship.

[big_sw2000]

Its strange how all the Europeans on this forum are up for S2000.
And us brits are all WRC fans.

[A.F.F.]

Well, find somewhere the results of NORF 2007. There were A.Alen with Punto. And you REALLY can tell, if someone is 1.5 sec/ km slower, if you have ever seen a faster car/ driver. Not nessesary even in the same rally. Sound is nothing, if the going doesn't match.



That was two years ago. I'm not sure what I'm trying to point out with that but surely it means something :D

Yes you can tell if someone is 1,5 sec slower. It happens all the time in modern rallying. When guys like Loeb and Hirvonen passes by, everybody else looks like snails, especially in NORF.

I think the point however is how you drive the car. If it's pushed to maximum like Loeb and Hirvonen drives, 1,5 sec counts nothing in spectatorwise, especially it's driven with weaker car AND YOU KNOW IT.

When the starting list is full of S2000s and there hopefully won't be anyone who only drives "terveisiä", the gap is even smaller and the competition is going to be great. Anyways, there won't be WRCs anymore to compare.

[sal]

I'm a Brit and I'm well up for S2000. To get the best out of em they need to be driven hard and so the top guys will be able to get the best out of them. Rich amateurs may struggle though as WRCcars tend to flatter their abilities. However I've seen many a badly driven WRC on British and European events so think that arguement is redundant.

[AndyRAC]

Its strange how all the Europeans on this forum are up for S2000.
And us brits are all WRC fans.

Not sure about that - the WRC could, and should be a fantastic series, but has been ruined by inept rulers/rules/regulations. Whereas, the IRC, while not perfect, is doing more things right than wrong.

While you should always look forward, there is also going back to go forward. What was wrong with WRC up until the late 90's?

[big_sw2000]

I'm a Brit and I'm well up for S2000. To get the best out of em they need to be driven hard and so the top guys will be able to get the best out of them. Rich amateurs may struggle though as WRCcars tend to flatter their abilities. However I've seen many a badly driven WRC on British and European events so think that arguement is redundant.
I think WRC is near the end, it is too expensive and we need a change.
But are current S2000 cars spectacular enough to do it. They may be fine on tarmac events. But do they have enough grunt on gravel to be spectacular.

What you got to rember, people said the same thing when Group B was banned, Group A cars will be boring and slow.
Look where we are with development, the cars got quicker and more spectacular. Then we got WRC, which was great, in its early years.
I think we should give S2000 a chance, with the tweaks they will do to them in the world Championship, and a few years develpment + top drivers driving them. Then you never know. Lets hope.

[big_sw2000]

Not sure about that - the WRC could, and should be a fantastic series, but has been ruined by inept rulers/rules/regulations. Whereas, the IRC, while not perfect, is doing more things right than wrong.

While you should always look forward, there is also going back to go forward. What was wrong with WRC up until the late 90's?
Sorry i did not mean the championships, i meant the cars.
I love the way the IRC is currently being run

[sal]

My favourite period for rallying after Group 4 and Group B obviously was the A7 two litre kit car era of the late 90s. Possibly an acquired taste for some spectators especially on gravel however they had the noise and looks and in the hands of someone like Laukkenen or Delecour were always good value. IMO S2000 comes close in spirit to those cars whilst adding the 4wd aspect which is necessary if the cars are to compete with 4wd Group N cars.

If we are talking pure spectacle on any surface a return to rwd is the only answer but I'm sure the engineers would soon find a wayto make that look boring...

[big_sw2000]

My favourite period for rallying after Group 4 and Group B obviously was the A7 two litre kit car era of the late 90s. Possibly an acquired taste for some spectators especially on gravel however they had the noise and looks and in the hands of someone like Laukkenen or Delecour were always good value. IMO S2000 comes close in spirit to those cars whilst adding the 4wd aspect which is necessary if the cars are to compete with 4wd Group N cars.

If we are talking pure spectacle on any surface a return to rwd is the only answer but I'm sure the engineers would soon find a wayto make that look boring...
I will always rember Mark Higgins coming through Sweetlamb in the F2 2L astra kit car. Amazing

[AndyRAC]

I will always rember Mark Higgins coming through Sweetlamb in the F2 2L astra kit car. Amazing

Oh yeah, year 2000, first run through there was frost on the stages. Great stuff!!
Anybody who says the F2 cars were boring wants their eyes tested. When driven properly - and in the BRC - they were, absolutely awesome stuff!! They looked right, sounded right......

[big_sw2000]

Oh yeah, year 2000, first run through there was frost on the stages. Great stuff!!
Anybody who says the F2 cars were boring wants their eyes tested. When driven properly - and in the BRC - they were, absolutely awesome stuff!! They looked right, sounded right......
Stood down at the hairpin before the water splash. They had 2 course cars which were Astra's, both went straight on on the ice.
Mark Higgins and i think Neil Weadon in the other Astra, no problem.

[big_sw2000]

Oh yeah, year 2000, first run through there was frost on the stages. Great stuff!!
Anybody who says the F2 cars were boring wants their eyes tested. When driven properly - and in the BRC - they were, absolutely awesome stuff!! They looked right, sounded right......
Stood down at the hairpin before the water splash. They had 2 course cars which were Astra's, both went straight on on the ice.
Mark Higgins and i think Neil Weadon in the other Astra, no problem.

[AndyRAC]

My favourite period for rallying after Group 4 and Group B obviously was the A7 two litre kit car era of the late 90s. Possibly an acquired taste for some spectators especially on gravel however they had the noise and looks and in the hands of someone like Laukkenen or Delecour were always good value. IMO S2000 comes close in spirit to those cars whilst adding the 4wd aspect which is necessary if the cars are to compete with 4wd Group N cars.

If we are talking pure spectacle on any surface a return to rwd is the only answer but I'm sure the engineers would soon find a wayto make that look boring...

Unless you ban 4WD!! No, not likely. The idea of RWD is okay, but it's only Luxury/Prestige cars which have it - and they're unlikely to be interested in WRC. I really do think the link between Road car/Rally car has to be close - not at it is now.

[AndyRAC]

Stood down at the hairpin before the water splash. They had 2 course cars which were Astra's, both went straight on on the ice.
Mark Higgins and i think Neil Weadon in the other Astra, no problem.

You're quite correct. Though I think 1999(2 Astras, 2 Meganes, 2 Golfs, 2/3 Ibizas, a 106 Maxi, plus the GroupN lot) was a better Championship. Still great action though.

[sal]

Unless you ban 4WD!! No, not likely. The idea of RWD is okay, but it's only Luxury/Prestige cars which have it - and they're unlikely to be interested in WRC. I really do think the link between Road car/Rally car has to be close - not at it is now.

How many of the general public would know that a car was rwd if it resembled something like the fwd model sitting on thier drive? Silhouette formulas have been the norm in racing for years and other than enthusiats I guess the majority of people would be none the wiser. After all the manufacturers have been celebrating WRC victories in the press that were achieved with cars that have no 4wd version in the range and no one has had them up under the Trades Descriptions act.

[big_sw2000]

How many of the general public would know that a car was rwd if it resembled something like the fwd model sitting on thier drive? Silhouette formulas have been the norm in racing for years and other than enthusiats I guess the majority of people would be none the wiser. After all the manufacturers have been celebrating WRC victories in the press that were achieved with cars that have no 4wd version in the range and no one has had them up under the Trades Descriptions act.
Good point, how many Citroen C4 2l turbo 4 wheel drive cars are on the road.

[MJW]

Couple of thoughs on this subject:-
1. The state of the current WRC with, 36 entries in Ireland, 43 in Norway and 34 in Cyprus, and IRC snapping at the heels of WRC something had to be done, and I'm glad that FIA have (finally) acted. S2000 seems to be the logical quick fix.
2. According to Autosport magazine today it seemed to suggest that this S2K will become exclusive from autumn 2010, suggesting a winter calendar. Now what happens in the 2010 calendar where current WRC cars are allowed, does this mean Citroen and Ford works and Junior or Stobart teams get to run current spec, whilst everyone else runs effectively PCWRC cars? - Surely this will be unacceptable to everyone running S2000(kit) as its possible that prfofessional drivers, will be handicapped by S2000's whilst gentlemen drivers still could buy their results in superior cars.

[urabus-denoS2000]

And for those who fancy so mutch of the IRC: It is completely made for Eurosport, so when they loose interest to it, then it's no more IRC.

I must wonder that have anyone who think that S2000 is the best solution, seen them live? Because if so, you are quite easily sadisfied.

I'm sorry,but isn't that what makes the IRC great?

I think we would be the happiest men in the world if the WRC was made for Eurosport,we would have 4 h live coverage every rally!

If you prefer this WRC TV-format,which is basically 30 minutes report at midnight (after some second-class fighting or whatever :confused: )


And yes I have seen S2000 in action,seeing that you come from Finland I could say that I have probably seen more S2000 than you have (not the most popular formula from your environment ;) ) ,and I find them extremely attractive...

Possibly our conflict comes from the fact that I watch them on tarmac and you on snow and gravel... ;)

[AndyRAC]

Interesting article in yesterday's MN by Jerry Williams - about the FIA changing the rules/bringing new rules out every few months. What are the odds on them changing their minds in another week or 2? It might be S2000+ yet, or S1600+, etc It seems as if they don't know what they are talking about.

[sal]

Interesting article in yesterday's MN by Jerry Williams - about the FIA changing the rules/bringing new rules out every few months. What are the odds on them changing their minds in another week or 2? It might be S2000+ yet, or S1600+, etc It seems as if they don't know what they are talking about.


Whilst MM is FIA top man and his buddy Bernie's nest egg is suffering the WRC will always be in a state of flux...

[AndyRAC]

Whilst MM is FIA top man and his buddy Bernie's nest egg is suffering the WRC will always be in a state of flux...

Which is another subject altogether!!

[f-cup]

I'm sorry,but isn't that what makes the IRC great?

I think we would be the happiest men in the world if the WRC was made for Eurosport,we would have 4 h live coverage every rally!

If you prefer this WRC TV-format,which is basically 30 minutes report at midnight (after some second-class fighting or whatever :confused: )


And yes I have seen S2000 in action,seeing that you come from Finland I could say that I have probably seen more S2000 than you have (not the most popular formula from your environment ;) ) ,and I find them extremely attractive...

Possibly our conflict comes from the fact that I watch them on tarmac and you on snow and gravel... ;)

Well, I prefer seeing cars live, not so much from tv. I don't watch Eurosport coverage very much, and quite little WRC tv too. And you are right, I have not seen too many S2000 cars live, we have only 2 or 3 in our national series, most cars are GrN.

So Im not against any tv format, just thinkin that the cars are bit lame.

[mjh]

I think we would be the happiest men in the world if the WRC was made for Eurosport,we would have 4 h live coverage every rally!


Every rally?....don't you mean a handful of selected rallies. 4 out of 12 for the full live show a la Monte?

Whilst the WRC has things to learn from the Monte coverage, I doubt they are quaking in their boots about being overhauled by the IRC....

[urabus-denoS2000]

I think WRC should have the same coverage for every rally because the top entries should be basically the same for all rallys.

[urabus-denoS2000]

Well, I prefer seeing cars live


I think that's a statement for all of us ;)

I go to rallys in Croatia,Slovenia,Italy,Austria,Hungary and hopefully Czech Republic which are all 2-4 hours from Zagreb so I have seen some S2000s

[BDunnell]

Anybody who says the F2 cars were boring wants their eyes tested. When driven properly - and in the BRC - they were, absolutely awesome stuff!! They looked right, sounded right......

And for anyone who thinks two-wheel-drive and a small engine is automatically boring, I suggest finding a video of Stig Blomqvist in the 1600cc Skoda Felicia. That ought to dispel any such views.

[urabus-denoS2000]

Or Jarin Orsak in a Trabant ;)

[BDunnell]

Or Jarin Orsak in a Trabant ;)

Is there footage on YouTube?

[urabus-denoS2000]

Yep ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjl5ej2gECA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-1g14WwYyc&feature=related

[A.F.F.]

I'm not so sure if that's exactly what BDunnell meant by his example... :p :

[Mirek]

Hey, that action was big fun. The car was stock Trabant with some 25 Hp on wrong tyres but even though we have onboards on http://www.mediasport.cz as from any other rally :D

[big_sw2000]

]Hey, that action was big fun. The car was stock Trabant with some 25 Hp on wrong tyres but even though we have onboards on www.mediasport.cz (http://www.mediasport.cz) as from any other rally :D
Thats the way forward for the WRC ;) .
Trabants Imps Skodas Ladas etc. Budget cap of £500

[COD]

That was two years ago. I'm not sure what I'm trying to point out with that but surely it means something :D

Yes you can tell if someone is 1,5 sec slower. It happens all the time in modern rallying. When guys like Loeb and Hirvonen passes by, everybody else looks like snails, especially in NORF.

I think the point however is how you drive the car. If it's pushed to maximum like Loeb and Hirvonen drives, 1,5 sec counts nothing in spectatorwise, especially it's driven with weaker car AND YOU KNOW IT.

When the starting list is full of S2000s and there hopefully won't be anyone who only drives "terveisiä", the gap is even smaller and the competition is going to be great. Anyways, there won't be WRCs anymore to compare.

Finally some who understood what I was trying to say and who has common sense. Concratulations AFF: :D

[Tuscany gravel]

For spectactors, the problem of WRC isn't the cars but rallys.

RAC with mickey mouse, night of Turinì, Sanremo with mixed sourface.
With these type of rally, s2000 or turbo car are both spectacular.

[AndyRAC]

For spectactors, the problem of WRC isn't the cars but rallys.

RAC with mickey mouse, night of Turinì, Sanremo with mixed sourface.
With these type of rally, s2000 or turbo car are both spectacular.

Yes, proper Rallying and what are the chances of these returning?

None, the teams wouldn't put up with it - costs too much.

[Tuscany gravel]

IRC this year is "dangerous" for WRC.

Montecarlo 2009 have demostrated that organizers can do an "old style" rally with modern standard of security and distance.

The new "low cost" WRC must be follow by rally with a format like middle 90's rally. Many WRC events now haven't an identity..
This is what i think..

[Iskald]

IRC this year is "dangerous" for WRC.

Montecarlo 2009 have demostrated that organizers can do an "old style" rally with modern standard of security and distance.

The new "low cost" WRC must be follow by rally with a format like middle 90's rally. Many WRC events now haven't an identity..
This is what i think..

I don`t understand this. What actually did the organisers of Monte Carlo do to make it such an "excellent" event? I know they put a bundle of money in producing live TV. Fine, but didn`t they do this first and foremost to show the FIA that they could go one step further and actually be "better" than the WRC-events? Any rally organiser today can provide live TV from almost all stages if they are willing to pay for it. I don`t think Monte Carlo can keep on spending hundred of thousands of Euros each year just to show the world how "good" they are. They will probably soon be bankrupt if they continue with that.

What else was special about Monte Carlo. The format or the stages? Was that very different from previous years? It`s well known in WRC circles that the Automobile Club de Monte Carlo has been an arrogant bunch of people, doing things their own way and very seldom willing to listen to others. It has never scored well in FIA observers reports and in my opinion it`s a stoneage event. It has the tradition and history, but can just as well keep up with that in the IRC.

Television broadcasts were OK, though...

[big_sw2000]

IRC this year is "dangerous" for WRC.

Montecarlo 2009 have demostrated that organizers can do an "old style" rally with modern standard of security and distance.

The new "low cost" WRC must be follow by rally with a format like middle 90's rally. Many WRC events now haven't an identity..
This is what i think..
The only thing that was diffren, was a few night stages. And then there wer no stages in the first half of the day.
It was pritty much a normall 3 day rally, just finnishing in the middle of the night.
Ok it was good to see the live TV, and the Col run in the dark, maybe WRC could do something like that.

[Nenukknak]

It has never scored well in FIA observers reports ...

Any rally that doesn't do exactly what the FIA wants, is a rally that's worth keeping imo. :D

[Tuscany gravel]

The only thing that was diffren, was a few night stages. And then there wer no stages in the first half of the day.
It was pritty much a normall 3 day rally, just finnishing in the middle of the night.
Ok it was good to see the live TV, and the Col run in the dark, maybe WRC could do something like that.

I don't refer to TV. For me, the hearth of rallys will rest always the special stages.

In the last 10 years Montecarlo like more other rallys were too compact and too busy for much spectators.
With two or three assistance (no big motorhome, big hospitality) many wrc events can reach many special stage that were lost..

So i prefer view a s2000 like now in Kielder forest, dark of Turinì ecc. to a WRC or else in rally so compact.


This is only my point of view.. Turbo or not, car must be not so expensive like now for have more manifactures and little back step in format rally..

Sorry for my "school english".. i'm trying to do my best! :D

[big_sw2000]

I don't refer to TV. For me, the hearth of rallys will rest always the special stages.

In the last 10 years Montecarlo like more other rallys were too compact and too busy for much spectators.
With two or three assistance (no big motorhome, big hospitality) many wrc events can reach many special stage that were lost..

So i prefer view a s2000 like now in Kielder forest, dark of Turinì ecc. to a WRC or else in rally so compact.


This is only my point of view.. Turbo or not, car must be not so expensive like now for have more manifactures and little back step in format rally..

Sorry for my "school english".. i'm trying to do my best! :D
Your English is probley better than mine :s mokin:
But really was the Mote Carlo less compact than prevous years, with the WRC. Both events run over 3 days, ok you had more night stages in the IRC.
And that brought a bit more magic to the event.
I seem to rember the WRC using remote servicing on the Monte. So they could use more stages. (Feel free to correct me)
And again i agree with you having to make the cars cheaper.
But when are the IRC using Kielder Forest

[swordsman]

I think the most important thing about this years Monte was the new televising standard it set. That standard is worth keeping, that's for sure. Totally awesome.

The event also brought some other adjustments to the better, but those weren't major. In fact I agree with Iskald, everybody knows that Monte have always seen their place in the calendar as self-given, because of their position as the most traditional and mythic event. It has annoyed the hell out of many people, one simple example is their weird logistics around the stages with bad parking control and bad safety, making stages get cancelled.

So myself, I don't think Monte is any kind of pattern everyone should follow, but the live coverage should be brought into the WRC almost no matter the price. TV pays the WRC and I'm sure money invested there will pay back. Anyone investing can just call TNS and ask what they did get, in terms of euros - they know exactly... :)

[Tuscany gravel]

I didn't tell that all wrc events must follow montecarlo.

But FIA could be more free for the route of WRC.

Neste Oil Rally Finland don't have problem. It's fantastic rally now like in the past.
But Sanremo for example? Sanremo was died when became an all tarmac event because it became busy an too more compact. It was born like a mixed surface rally. So there are many rally that must have the possibility of more expansive route for continue to be spectacular.

But i don't want continue. I'm going off discussion..

[Iskald]

So myself, I don't think Monte is any kind of pattern everyone should follow, but the live coverage should be brought into the WRC almost no matter the price. TV pays the WRC and I'm sure money invested there will pay back. Anyone investing can just call TNS and ask what they did get, in terms of euros - they know exactly... :)

You`re in principle absolutely right - and wrong. It`s impossible to base TV-coverage of rallying on "no matter the price"-principle. Monte Carlo did that in january, but I doubt very much they can continue with it. With the current economical climate - and the fact that many rally organisers has struggled already before the "crisis" - we are far away from live TV-coverage becoming the norm. Rallying is not Formula 1, and never will be. In 2008 54 billion people watched (saw) Formula 1 on TV in one or another form. The equivalent number for WRC was 800 million. It could of course become higher with better coverage, but this is first and foremost a question of market value. Rallying simply doesn`t have enough value for the investments needed.

[Brother John]

THE FIA want to slow down current S2000. Simply ridiculous. :dozey:
Because of the broader fenders, and bigtail spoilers on the new WRCS2000
It would be slower by the aerodynamic disadvantages than the the current Super2000.
The F.I.A. want to reduce the RPM to make the current S2000cars slower to have them at the same level.
Again disorder under the teams foresees. They say,It would be better to be moveable the new Super2000 to 9,000 rpm.
source: http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2009/03/03/fia-will-aktuelle-s2000-ausbremsen/index.html

[big_sw2000]

THE FIA want to slow down current S2000. Simply ridiculous. :dozey:
Because of the broader fenders, and bigtail spoilers on the new WRCS2000
It would be slower by the aerodynamic disadvantages than the the current Super2000.
The F.I.A. want to reduce the RPM to make the current S2000cars slower to have them at the same level.
Again disorder under the teams foresees. They say,It would be better to be moveable the new Super2000 to 9,000 rpm.
source: http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2009/03/03/fia-will-aktuelle-s2000-ausbremsen/index.html
I think this is to make sure that the WRC is running quicker cars than the IRC. So making it the blue ribbion championship.
So i make it WRCS2000 will be 8500rpm
And IRC S2000 will be 8000RPM.
Otherwise i could see teams compeating in both championships, a bit like the old days. Not a bad thing from my point of view.

[Abarth]

I think this is to make sure that the WRC is running quicker cars than the IRC. So making it the blue ribbion championship.
So i make it WRCS2000 will be 8500rpm
And IRC S2000 will be 8000RPM.
Otherwise i could see teams compeating in both championships, a bit like the old days. Not a bad thing from my point of view.


If FIA decide to do this split they loose the little credibility they have left !

This is plain stupid, and is the reason that the factory teams are afraid of the competition of the IRC teams !

[Mirek]

THE FIA want to slow down current S2000. Simply ridiculous. :dozey:
Because of the broader fenders, and bigtail spoilers on the new WRCS2000
It would be slower by the aerodynamic disadvantages than the the current Super2000.
The F.I.A. want to reduce the RPM to make the current S2000cars slower to have them at the same level.
Again disorder under the teams foresees. They say,It would be better to be moveable the new Super2000 to 9,000 rpm.
source: http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2009/03/03/fia-will-aktuelle-s2000-ausbremsen/index.html

Is there any other source? That would be incredibly stupid not only because of lowering power but also insane lowering of top speed (just imagine 155 km/h as new top speed of Abarth with current most used gearbox)...

[Sulland]

If FIA decide to do this split they loose the little credibility they have left !

This is plain stupid, and is the reason that the factory teams are afraid of the competition of the IRC teams !

Agree, they can not be this stupid if they want to get a healthy series again !

Pls go for a normal S2000, and not something with a bit more plastic, and in the process also destroys a growing class worldwide !

[big_sw2000]

Agree, they can not be this stupid if they want to get a healthy series again !

Pls go for a normal S2000, and not something with a bit more plastic, and in the process also destroys a growing class worldwide !
Can not see this being a problem. Current S2000 car are 8500RPM. The only diffrance will be a slight diffrent Aero package, for WRC level in 2010. Easy for teams to changes.

[Sulland]

I do not think they will be allowed to buy, unless you are registred to do a full WRC season...... !! :p

[big_sw2000]

I think that the IRC will die 2010, and hope that the teams like Fiat Peugeot Skoda, all move to the WRC. Along side Ford Citroen.
Can not rember where but i think Ford are developing a S2000 car on the new Fiesta.
Will Citroen develop a S2000 car if Peugeot already got one.

[ToughMac]

Is there any reason why the S2000 cars should be restricted to 8000rpm in the IRC? After all this is pretty much an independent championship. Manufacturers might be more keen to stick with the IRC as it is getting better PR by the round and has a large fan base for what is a young championship. FIA are more or less jumping on the band wagon or hijacking the S2000 Formula because they can see that it can work.

[big_sw2000]

Is there any reason why the S2000 cars should be restricted to 8000rpm in the IRC? After all this is pretty much an independent championship. Manufacturers might be more keen to stick with the IRC as it is getting better PR by the round and has a large fan base for what is a young championship. FIA are more or less jumping on the band wagon or hijacking the S2000 Formula because they can see that it can work.
The IRC is a FIA approved championship. It seem a waste of money to have too world championships, (IRC and WRC) using the same cars.
For obvious reasons then the WRC has tobe number 1. But it dose seem a pitty to loose the IRC, i enjoyed the Monty, and we will find out how good Brazil will be this week end.

[ToughMac]

Will Eurosport get any say in the IRC's future?

[big_sw2000]

Will Eurosport get any say in the IRC's future?
I would like to think so

[DonJippo]

Will Eurosport get any say in the IRC's future?

IRC lives and dies with Eurosport but as said it's running under FIA's approval with FIA homogolated cars.

[Iskald]

i enjoyed the Monty, and we will find out how good Brazil will be this week end.

Pardon me, but are you joking?

[big_sw2000]

Pardon me, but are you joking?
I never once said i did not enjoy the Monte, it was a great event.
Just apart from some night stages run to a similar format to the WRC.
The IRC looks good on paper, im still not sure how great S2000 on gravel will be, but b Saturaday dinner time we will know.

[bf1_IRL]

Don't know why there is whinging over the different rev limit...
It can easily be changed to suit the regs you need to run to..

Just plug in the Laptop and change the rev limit..

WRC is the higher level championship and should have the faster spec of car not that the extra 500rpm is going to make a massive amount of difference..

They just want to differenciate the World Championship from the other series but still make it accessible to others who have S2000 cars

Chillax :)

[Torsen]

Don't know why there is whinging over the different rev limit...
It can easily be changed to suit the regs you need to run to..

Just plug in the Laptop and change the rev limit..

WRC is the higher level championship and should have the faster spec of car not that the extra 500rpm is going to make a massive amount of difference..

They just want to differenciate the World Championship from the other series but still make it accessible to others who have S2000 cars

Chillax :)

+ 1

[Mirek]

bf1_IRL: The problem is that after making current S2000 sllower, their existence lost sense. They are three times more expensive then gr.N and if they are equal on speed or slower noone buys them. Without selling standard S2000, there will be no S2000+ either and the only result would be that all manufacturers will be hung up for wasting money on useless development.

The other problem is that S2000 uses standard gearbox and loosing 500 rpm means loosing cca 10 km/h of top speed. Do You like top national level rally car with top speed of 155 km/h (Abarth on sixth gear @ 8000 rpm)?

[big_sw2000]

]bf1_IRL: The problem is that after making current S2000 sllower, their existence lost sense. They are three times more expensive then gr.N and if they are equal on speed or slower noone buys them. Without selling standard S2000, there will be no S2000+ either and the only result would be that all manufacturers will be hung up for wasting money on useless development.

The other problem is that S2000 uses standard gearbox and loosing 500 rpm means loosing cca 10 km/h of top speed. Do You like top national level rally car with top speed of 155 km/h (Abarth on sixth gear @ 8000 rpm)?
Thats the point, no on will run the IRC, and hopefully everyone will run WRC spec S2000. Which if im not mistaken, is the same spec as they use now in the IRC, with a new aero kit.
Why do we need a development series.
The idea is that Manufactures, like Fiat Peugeot Skoda so on, will join the WRC.

[big_sw2000]

Don't know why there is whinging over the different rev limit...
It can easily be changed to suit the regs you need to run to..

Just plug in the Laptop and change the rev limit..

WRC is the higher level championship and should have the faster spec of car not that the extra 500rpm is going to make a massive amount of difference..

They just want to differenciate the World Championship from the other series but still make it accessible to others who have S2000 cars

Chillax :)
Brilliant

[racer69]

Rallying needs to go back to its roots, get rid of the 'elitists only' tag it has had lately in the WRC era.....

S2000 is a good start.... they need to open the series back up to as many entrants as possible. S2000/GrpN is what is used in most national series theses days. It will give them more incentive to have a go.

.....playing with the rules to create a WRC-S2000 and an IRC-S2000 ain't a good sign though.....

[Iskald]

Rallying needs to go back to its roots, get rid of the 'elitists only' tag it has had lately in the WRC era.....

S2000 is a good start.... they need to open the series back up to as many entrants as possible. S2000/GrpN is what is used in most national series theses days. It will give them more incentive to have a go.

.....playing with the rules to create a WRC-S2000 and an IRC-S2000 ain't a good sign though.....

Yeah, and lets run Formula Renault cars in the F1 World Championship. That surely gets rid of the "elitists only" tag....

[big_sw2000]

OK i would rather S2000 be faster more powerful. But they do work on icey Tarmac as the Monty proved.
But what do you expect of S2000 cars on gravel. Are they going to have enough grunt.

[A.F.F.]

Yeah, and lets run Formula Renault cars in the F1 World Championship. That surely gets rid of the "elitists only" tag....

???

[Gard]

Yeah, and lets run Formula Renault cars in the F1 World Championship. That surely gets rid of the "elitists only" tag....

Good point! We cannot turn our top rally class into veteran or slowmo-cup

[Mirek]

Thats the point, no on will run the IRC, and hopefully everyone will run WRC spec S2000. Which if im not mistaken, is the same spec as they use now in the IRC, with a new aero kit.
Why do we need a development series.
The idea is that Manufactures, like Fiat Peugeot Skoda so on, will join the WRC.

You missed the point. Car makers developped S2000 to sell them to as much users as possible and not to make 2 cars for WRC. S2000 in the current state is good bussines with dozens of cars sold every year (for example Peugeot sold cca 60 cars so far which is about 16 milion Euro return for cars only, no pats, no service etc.). Making them slower by additional handicaps will make nothing good at all.

The reason why manufacturers started development of S2000 is not to go WRC but to sell them to many national teams and that's why there is quite a lot of various S2000 on the Earth.

Once You create priceless S2000, You get to the same unavailing situation which is in WRC in these days. Why should manufacturer spent bilions without a possibility to sell the product? The situation would return to current state very fast.

The fact is that WRC goes steadily down since FIA banned WRC for national championships, Europeand championships and cups in 2004. Current WRC state is clear proof that elitism doesn't bring anything good in rallying. Bring back good old times and forget some F1-like rubish ideas for WRC.

[DonJippo]

]The reason why manufacturers started development of S2000 is not to go WRC but to sell them to many national teams and that's why there is quite a lot of various S2000 on the Earth.

And why would they not do the same with -500RPM S2000?

[big_sw2000]

]You missed the point. Car makers developped S2000 to sell them to as much users as possible and not to make 2 cars for WRC. S2000 in the current state is good bussines with dozens of cars sold every year (for example Peugeot sold cca 60 cars so far which is about 16 milion Euro return for cars only, no pats, no service etc.). Making them slower by additional handicaps will make nothing good at all.

The reason why manufacturers started development of S2000 is not to go WRC but to sell them to many national teams and that's why there is quite a lot of various S2000 on the Earth.

Once You create priceless S2000, You get to the same unavailing situation which is in WRC in these days. Why should manufacturer spent bilions without a possibility to sell the product? The situation would return to current state very fast.

The fact is that WRC goes steadily down since FIA banned WRC for national championships, Europeand championships and cups in 2004. Current WRC state is clear proof that elitism doesn't bring anything good in rallying. Bring back good old times and forget some F1-like rubish ideas for WRC.
I now see what you are saying. WRCS2000 cars will not be allowed to run outside the WRC. Lets say national level. Or even IRC if it survives.
So 2 cars would have to be developed.
WRCS2000 = 8500RPM, modded aero kit
IRC and other rallying S2000 = 8000RPM standerd aero kit.

So what is the FIA's reason in slowing S2000 cars, and introducing a new WRCS2000 car.

[big_sw2000]

And why would they not do the same with -500RPM S2000?
You still need to build a WRCS2000 spec car as well

[racer69]

Yeah, and lets run Formula Renault cars in the F1 World Championship. That surely gets rid of the "elitists only" tag....

Rallies cannot survive on 30 or so entries. And rallying is also not Formula 1.

We need a set of rules and classes that can get events attracting the entry numbers they used to.

Why are the rulemakers hell bent on having cars for use in the WRC only??

[DonJippo]

You still need to build a WRCS2000 spec car as well

If you read the part I quoted from Mirek's post and think about it, why would those manufactures that build S2000 and were not planning to enter WRC not to continue it with -500rpm S2000? What difference does lower rpm make on that?

[Mirek]

And why would they not do the same with -500RPM S2000?

Already answered before. S2000 -500 rpm +50 kg (since 1st January 2009) would hardly be faster than gr.N on most of the stages and also with current standard gearbox also with very low top speed (155 km/h for Abarth). Such S2000 is priceless.

[big_sw2000]

But as already said, surly 500RPM diffrance is pluging in a computer and changing the Engine managment.
Weight 50kg can easily be removed added.
New aero kit is only bolt on.
So why need to build 2 types of S2000

[DonJippo]

]Already answered before. S2000 -500 rpm +50 kg (since 1st January 2009) would hardly be faster than gr.N on most of the stages and also with current standard gearbox also with very low top speed (155 km/h for Abarth). Such S2000 is priceless.

So S2000 would be equal with gr.N as it was meant to be. What's wrong with that? More competition for the class as Mitsu and Subaru would be able to fight for the win as well.

[Mirek]

But as already said, surly 500RPM diffrance is pluging in a computer and changing the Engine managment.
Weight 50kg can easily be removed added.
New aero kit is only bolt on.
So why need to build 2 types of S2000

You forget that top speed of N/A engined car is on rpm limiter. The lower rpm, the lower top speed. 155 km/h (96 MPH) is uselles for every rally. S2000 are developed for some gearbox and with lower rpm You have to use longer gearbox which lowers down the acceleration. That's twice minus for perfomance.

Minus 500 rpm => lower power, smaller power bend => lower acceleration
Longer gearbox for at least 165 km/h => lower acceleration
More weight => lower acceleration

S2000 are largely sold because they are better than gr.N but after that they are hardly still better but much more expensive.

[big_sw2000]

]You forget that top speed of N/A engined car is on rpm limiter. The lower rpm, the lower top speed. 155 km/h (96 MPH) is uselles for every rally. S2000 are developed for some gearbox and with lower rpm You have to use longer gearbox which lowers down the acceleration. That's twice minus for perfomance.

Minus 500 rpm => lower power, smaller power bend => lower acceleration
Longer gearbox for at least 165 km/h => lower acceleration
More weight => lower acceleration

S2000 are largely sold because they are better than gr.N but after that they are hardly still better but much more expensive.
Yeah see what your saying toatly agree :)

[Mirek]

So S2000 would be equal with gr.N as it was meant to be. What's wrong with that? More competition for the class as Mitsu and Subaru would be able to fight for the win as well.

Heh, would You buy equal car for three times more? I definitely no. As S1600 died after gr.N became faster even on tarmac by changed rulles, S2000 would die as well once they are not faster. The reason why there are many S2000 is that it is good bussines. Since they are not faster than gr.N it's not good bussines anymore. Different class is much more sensible.

[big_sw2000]

So S2000 would be equal with gr.N as it was meant to be. What's wrong with that? More competition for the class as Mitsu and Subaru would be able to fight for the win as well.
Group N is boring

[DonJippo]

Group N is boring

And S2000 is not?

[big_sw2000]

And S2000 is not?
I do kind off agree with you there as well.
Got to be honest they worke on the Monty on the tatmac and the ice.
But even now at 8500RPM, i dont think they are poweful enough to be spectacular on gravel. We will find out tomorrow with the rally in Brazil.
Why dont they just turbocharge S2000 cars.

[DonJippo]

]Heh, would You buy equal car for three times more? I definitely no. As S1600 died after gr.N became faster even on tarmac by changed rulles, S2000 would die as well once they are not faster. The reason why there are many S2000 is that it is good bussines. Since they are not faster than gr.N it's not good bussines anymore. Different class is much more sensible.

You think it has been good business for Mitsu and Subaru? As they are meant to be equal then I believe rules should be changed so that they are equal not like now.

About the costs, I remember reading that grN running costs are higher but don't know for sure nor how much higher those would be. So it's not only how much it costs to buy one but also how much it costs to use one that I would consider when making my decision...

[Brother John]

So S2000 would be equal with gr.N as it was meant to be. What's wrong with that? More competition for the class as Mitsu and Subaru would be able to fight for the win as well.

Mitsu and Subaru have to build their own S2000.
The S2000 belongs not in group N.
Why they want to have 2 unequal S 2000 cars?
To make it difficult?
To save money?
C´on, for me this is a big joke and the F.I.A. only think about their self and doesn't think about a real open championship for everyone.
Explain once why WRC need a different Car? To look only at 4 top drivers?
Are they frightened that an outsider would win a WRC rally?
I can go still even further with questions as you want. ;)

[DonJippo]

C´on, for me this is a big joke and the F.I.A. only think about their self and doesn't think about a real open championship for everyone. Explain once why WRC need a different Car? To look only at 4 top drivers? Are they frightened that an outsider would win a WRC rally?
I can go still even further with questions as you want.

Why do F1 use F1 cars and not Formula Fords? I don't see any problem in having a WRC spec car for rallying's top class as that is what WRC should be.

[Mirek]

Why do F1 use F1 cars and not Formula Fords? I don't see any problem in having a WRC spec car for rallying's top class as that is what WRC should be.

Why do You still compare with F1? What good brought elitism to WRC after 2004 when it was settled by FIA WRC ban for other championships?

Clearly nothing, just slow and painful death.

[Gard]

]Why do You still compare with F1? What good brought elitism to WRC after 2004 when it was settled by FIA WRC ban for other championships?

Clearly nothing, just slow and painful death.
What exactly do you mean Mirek? What championship is banned by FIA?

[Mirek]

What exactly do you mean Mirek? What championship is banned by FIA?

No championship but cars. in 2004 FIA banned WRC for all FIA championship and cups except WRC. Since then the number of WRC cars in WRC and especialy the quality of competitive field got worse and worse every year as the private WRC cars become obsolete. Much less teams were running new WRC after that because they had no use for them.

You are from Norway where there WRC cars weren't banned as in most of the countries so that Your point of view is probably different...

[big_sw2000]

What exactly do you mean Mirek? What championship is banned by FIA?
Natianal championships like the British Championship European Championship French Championship. Have banned WRC cars. IE they are not allowed.
WRCS2000, will be for the WRC only. Natinal championships will have to use the lower spec S2000 car, that format will not work.
When WRC cars were banned from Natinal championships, the WRC started to die. See my point. I agree with what Mirek saiz

[DonJippo]

]Why do You still compare with F1? What good brought elitism to WRC after 2004 when it was settled by FIA WRC ban for other championships?

Clearly nothing, just slow and painful death.

I believe WRC's current status is a result of way different issues than banning WRCs in FIA's other championships.

[DonJippo]

Natianal championships like the British Championship European Championship French Championship. Have banned WRC cars. IE they are not allowed.
WRCS2000, will be for the WRC only. Natinal championships will have to use the lower spec S2000 car, that format will not work.
When WRC cars were banned from Natinal championships, the WRC started to die. See my point. I agree with what Mirek saiz

FIA can't ban using WRCs in national series it's an issue of national ASN to decide not FIA.

[Gard]

FIA can't ban using WRCs in national series it's an issue of national ASN to decide not FIA.
That was my point. FIA cannot ban wrc-cars in national championships.

[Gard]

]No championship but cars. in 2004 FIA banned WRC for all FIA championship and cups except WRC. Since then the number of WRC cars in WRC and especialy the quality of competitive field got worse and worse every year as the private WRC cars become obsolete. Much less teams were running new WRC after that because they had no use for them.

You are from Norway where there WRC cars weren't banned as in most of the countries so that Your point of view is probably different...

Thats right. If WRC had been banned in Norway. RN would probably never had happen and Mikkelsen, Grøndal and Østberg would always stayed in GroupN or playing golf or something.

[big_sw2000]

FIA can't ban using WRCs in national series it's an issue of national ASN to decide not FIA.
I can not comment on other series, but the British Championship, is run to international regulation controlled by the FIA. It goes back to cost, WRC cars were banned, (i can not rember which year but it was quite early), because of how expensive they were to run.
The old 2l cars Formula 2, front wheel drive 2L, and group N cars were the only cars that counted towards champonship points. The series then lost a lot of spectators, due to the cars being a lot less spectacular. Now the series runs Production Cup cars (group N), and S2000. The first round i think is this week end, look at the entry list http://www.bulldog-rally.co.uk/
Not very exciting.
Im sorry to babbel on, but i feel the WRC has to change, but i also feel S2000 is not spectacular enough. So maybe WRCS2000 will be. But for that to be sucsefull, it needs to be run in other championships. Or there will be no point in manufactors developing WRCS2000. And we will go the same way as the WRC is now. Its alot to do with money, but not everything to do with money.

[DonJippo]

I can not comment on other series, but the British Championship, is run to international regulation controlled by the FIA.

Still it is the national ASN to decide which cars are allowed in their own championship not FIA.

[Mirek]

Yes, it is ASN but many national championships are held under FIA rulles from practical reasons as they have many rallys in FIA championships and cups and two different rulles in one rally causes problems.

The fact is that after this FIA decission in 2004 the number of competitive private WRC cars went very much down.

[OldF]

I would suggest that:

S2000 as it is in IRC, 64 mm restrictor and 8500 rpm
S2000WRC, aero kit, no restrictor and 9000 rpm.

For more money you should get more performance so a S2000 should be faster than a N4.

Somehow the S2000 used in WRC should be more powerful otherwise the team drivers could be beaten in NORF by the drivers driving N4 cars in the Finnish championship.

[big_sw2000]

May its me being Welsh, but what is ASN.

[Mirek]

ASN is national authority or national motorsport federation.

[AndyRAC]

May its me being Welsh, but what is ASN.

It's the MSA at Colnbrook.

[AndyRAC]

I would suggest that:

S2000 as it is in IRC, 64 mm restrictor and 8500 rpm
S2000WRC, aero kit, no restrictor and 9000 rpm.

For more money you should get more performance so a S2000 should be faster than a N4.

Somehow the S2000 used in WRC should be more powerful otherwise the team drivers could be beaten in NORF by the drivers driving N4 cars in the Finnish championship.

And there you have one of the problems - why are S2000's in the same class as Production cars? Madness, S2000's are proper competition cars, designed purely for Motorsport. Production cars aren't - and in some ways are no longer what I would call proper 'Production cars' - they should really be a normal road car, with the safety equipment fitted, and that's it, nothing else.
I'm against them adding weight to the S2000 cars, so they are level with GpN cars - they are completely different cars.
You could always solve this problem by banning 4WD, but I can't see it happening - but it's proved it's point, move on. Isn't it 90% of road cars are 2WD/FWD - Whats wrong with that?

[big_sw2000]

And there you have one of the problems - why are S2000's in the same class as Production cars? Madness, S2000's are proper competition cars, designed purely for Motorsport. Production cars aren't - and in some ways are no longer what I would call proper 'Production cars' - they should really be a normal road car, with the safety equipment fitted, and that's it, nothing else.
I'm against them adding weight to the S2000 cars, so they are level with GpN cars - they are completely different cars.
You could always solve this problem by banning 4WD, but I can't see it happening - but it's proved it's point, move on. Isn't it 90% of road cars are 2WD/FWD - Whats wrong with that?
Can FWD cars really be exciting at WRC level
99% of road cars drive on tarmac roads, so may be the WRC should all be tarmac. I hope not

[big_sw2000]

]ASN is national authority or national motorsport federation.
Thanks MSA in Bratain Motorsport Assotiation :)

[AndyRAC]

Can FWD cars really be exciting at WRC level
99% of road cars drive on tarmac roads, so may be the WRC should all be tarmac. I hope not

Well the F2 cars were fantastic - on Gravel and Tarmac - put the top drivers in them and they would be spectacular - I've no doubt about that.
How many of the current WRCars are really exciting? A handful at most.

[big_sw2000]

Well the F2 cars were fantastic - on Gravel and Tarmac - put the top drivers in them and they would be spectacular - I've no doubt about that.
How many of the current WRCars are really exciting? A handful at most.
The F2 cars had as much power as the WRC cars, and yes they were good. But they are not WRC quilaty. Look what happend in the British championship.
It fell apart after WRC cars were banned. I went to rally Wales at Sweetlamb, when WRC car were part of the champonship, and it was packed.
Went the next year, when it was F2 and Group N, and there was hardle any spectators. The championship has never really recoverd.

[JFL]

The F2 cars had as much power as the WRC cars, and yes they were good. But they are not WRC quilaty. Look what happend in the British championship.
It fell apart after WRC cars were banned. I went to rally Wales at Sweetlamb, when WRC car were part of the champonship, and it was packed.
Went the next year, when it was F2 and Group N, and there was hardle any spectators. The championship has never really recoverd.

I think Sweden had the same experience... Correct me if I'm wrong.!

[Gard]

I would suggest that:

S2000 as it is in IRC, 64 mm restrictor and 8500 rpm
S2000WRC, aero kit, no restrictor and 9000 rpm.

For more money you should get more performance so a S2000 should be faster than a N4.

Somehow the S2000 used in WRC should be more powerful otherwise the team drivers could be beaten in NORF by the drivers driving N4 cars in the Finnish championship.

No restrictor and 9000rpm? interesting combo for a NA engine. Anyone has hp/torque curves for s2000 with and without the 64mm restrictor?

[big_sw2000]

There are a few of these S2000 about now
http://www.s2000rally.com/s2000-cars.php
Quite like the Lada

[Brother John]

Why do F1 use F1 cars and not Formula Fords? I don't see any problem in having a WRC spec car for rallying's top class as that is what WRC should be.

I understand what you want to say here Don. But I have a another view on the future. And not only what concerns rally. ;)
To promote the WRC you need more factories.
They can do that with easier rules and certainly with simple cars, according to me.
Turn it around then and let the IRC and national championships also use the WRCS2000 .
The main point is, to see more cars and drivers everywhere with a payable car. :s mokin:

[big_sw2000]

I understand what you want to say here Don. But I have a another view on the future. And not only what concerns rally. ;)
To promote the WRC you need more factories.
They can do that with easier rules and certainly with simple cars, according to me.
Turn it around then and let the IRC and national championships also use the WRCS2000 .
The main point is, to see more cars and drivers everywhere with a payable car. :s mokin:
That would work, even if they only use the WRC aero kit in the WRC, to make it that bit diffrent

[Sladden]

I cannot get exited with this S 2000 formula. Okey, maybe the competition will get tighter and attracting new manufacturers ect. But what about the spectacle? What about the jaw dropping sensation of seeing the ultimate rallycar, the best rallycar in the world going sideways? I dont see that happening with S 2000. My feeling is they are basicly less advanced racing type cars that will go on rails even more than WRC cars because of less power to grip ratio.

I would have loved to see someting more brutal, something like a late 90s WRC car, or early 90s GrA car with less electronics, h pattern gearbox, noise. The old time soft settting, high center of gravity rallycar, less built according to racing standards anyway. The Impreza P2000 was described as a "racing car with a sump" I think, in the Rallying Imprezas book. For me this S 2000 feels like it is going in the same direction, with less power.

Im I being to negative? Maybe!
But at the moment I find it difficult to get exited.