Technical regulations from 2013

[Sulland]

Lets say that the S2000 that probably will come from 2010 is only a gap-filler, until they will go back to a Turbo format again, already from 2013.

If we here at the forum would be asked to give advice to FIA, what would be your perfect engine formula - that also support what is happening in the car industry - much smaller volume, and turbo.

1.6 turbo has been mentioned, Diesel has mentioned. Can we go further down in volume, maybe 1,2 or 1,3 ltr, would be an engine that will fit what the manufacturers will produce as their GTI type cars, also taking the environmentalists into account

FIAT Abarth are making their 1,4 esseesse Grande Punto and 500 models, where they are taking out 180 hp at 5750, and 270 NM at 3000. Also a Racing 500 with a 1,4 with 190 hp.

What will be the best formula long term if you could decide ?

[urabus-denoS2000]

1,6 L Turbo seems very good

[AndyRAC]

Personally speaking - Manufacturers are in it to sell road cars - right, base the Regs on Road cars. Use what you sell in the showrooms/forecourts; that means mainly small engined turbo charged cars - with no fancy electronics, etc and using H -pattern gear shift.
I feel what's allowed has gone too far - GroupN has gone ridiculous - it should be a normal road car with safety equipment and no more.
Whereas my proposed regs would be extrememly simple cars - but with engines tuned to 300BHP and uprated brakes, suspension, safety etc
I've said on another thread about the FWD, 4WD, RWD dilemma - seeing as most road cars are FWD, go that route, so, therefore ban 4WD.
Or use a silhouette formula and make them all RWD, which is no different to what we have now - I can't buy a 4WD Focus/C4 - I can no longer understand this desire for 4WD

[Sulland]

So if we were to go in the other direction, the S2500 would be one option - Both Ford and Subaru have cars with 2500 ccm engines -- is this a better direction than 1300-1600 turbo ?

[grugsticles]

So if we were to go in the other direction, the S2500 would be one option - Both Ford and Subaru have cars with 2500 ccm engines -- is this a better direction than 1300-1600 turbo ?
IMO if the choice was between a 1600cc Turbo and 2500ccc NA then the 1600Turbo would be my choice simply for the low down torque advantage.

But in all honesty, whats the point? Is changing the engine capacity from 2 litres to 1.6 actually going to make any financial differance to teams? Umm, I very much doubt it. Im pretty much sure every manufacturer has a 2 litre block accessable.

[escortrs]

I agree with a lot of what Andy RAC has already written. However I would refine it slightly -

Teams could choose from two or three third party (companies like Xtrac could bid for the business) H - gate gearboxes.

A normally aspirated engine based on something used in the manufacturers road cars - I guess a two litre - I'd like to think the teams could agree the right level of power.

Rear wheel drive. Oversteer.

An easily and cheaply modified and replaced/repaired bodyshell. At the looney cost of current cars, who can blame the teams for being risk averse. If Citroen and MSport can't afford to replace them, it's not surprising there are so few private entrants.

Moving to Fiesta/ C3 sized cars compromises safety - Focus/C4 proportions should be retained.

Brakes and suspension would be unregulated enough to allow the engineers to make a difference.

Electrics of a type beyond those found in a basic hatchback today would not be permitted.

I'm not sure that the idea of the cars needing to be closely related to the road versions applies. Most people don't understand the technicalities anyway. As Andy says 4WD Focus? C4?

Lower grip / longer lasting / less specialised tyres. Less grip. More sideways. Less focus on one particular driving style. Increased opportunities for using tactics. Cheaper.

Sideways cars, with lower levels of grip than now, will be more exciting to watch, especially on TV, slower, and therefore safer, and a HUGE amount cheaper.

Its no coincidence that "drifting" became popular as rally cars went more and more in straight lines (even understeer!!!!).

If we really have to worry that much about the environment, we can probobly wave the sport goodbye altogether. 1.2, 1.4, 2.0, 2.5, 5 litre V8 - at the end of the day the public will see a bunch of hooligans burning carbon fuels and polluting the atmosphere for fun in picturesque countryside, running over furry animals, and creating huge ruts in the roads. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

With this kind of specification, any number of private teams could compete successfully at the highest level, opening more opportunities for aspiring professional drivers, and creating a real competition again.

And restoring the fever

[f-cup]

Hey escortrs, have you noticed that FIA allready have historic rallyes? Because that's how the cars would be with your suggestions.

[PHD]

f-cup; what you say is not far from the truth! I would actually compare it more to Touring car racing, which would also be better off with rear wheel drive. I really can't believe it's that difficult/expensive to convert a competion car from FWD to RWD. Remember the Gartrac G3?

For me the 'close to road car spec' argument for top level WRC holds only as far as appearance and make of engine is concerned.

The difference between the historics and WRC is the drivers, and the level of promotion and other investment.

I'm pretty sure that technology has moved on some way since the 70s, so the engineers would still have lots of opportunities to make a difference. All the 2 litre Group 4 cars had well over 250bhp in the early 1980s. Power shouldn't be a problem with todays technology

Any accidents will happen at lower speeds, which has to be a good thing.

You could run a car from your garage (well, maybe!)

The less stable cars would look great on TV, rather than the huge and surgically precise speed of WRC cars, which is impressive if you love the sport and know what you are looking at. If the viewer is not knowledgeable, they might as well watch circuit racing - at least they might get to see a battle for position. Why is it that people clamour to see the accidents?

Apart from Off/Soft roaders, 4WD is now a sideshow in the mainstream car market - enthusiasts in Subarus/Mitsubishis, and Audis. Its really not relevent to the vast majority of motorists on the road today.

Therefore GpN should consist of Focus STs, Civic Type R, Astras etc with LSDs. I know this board will probobly explode now, but the Subarus and Mitsubishis should be removed from International rallying. They can live out their lives in the hands of club competitors with more money than they know what to do with!

These ideas make rallying affordable, giving the best possible chance to maximise manufacturer involvement, and giving more drivers the opportunity to show their ability.

The point of technology is lost, when all it does is gain a split second per mile at huge cost, until the other teams adopt it themselves, also at huge cost.

Massive cost, just to maintain the status quo!

Control the technology, and let the drivers make the difference.

By the way - I appear to be both escortrs and PHD. How did that happen!!?? (You don't need to explain - I think I know!)

[Nenukknak]

Regulations for 2013:

A car with four electric engines, one on each wheel. Being exactly restricted to the equivalent of 300bhp. The rest will pretty much stay the same.

[Sulland]

Apart from Off/Soft roaders, 4WD is now a sideshow in the mainstream car market - enthusiasts in Subarus/Mitsubishis, and Audis. Its really not relevent to the vast majority of motorists on the road today.

Therefore GpN should consist of Focus STs, Civic Type R, Astras etc with LSDs.

Fully support that !

[LeonBrooke]

Group R3, the class with the Honda Civic and the Renault Clio. The list of other possibles for this class is endless - this should be the new world championship. Faster classes - S2000 and group N4 - should be allowed to compete but not for points.

[OldF]

Group R3, the class with the Honda Civic and the Renault Clio. The list of other possibles for this class is endless - this should be the new world championship. Faster classes - S2000 and group N4 - should be allowed to compete but not for points.

No way!!!! :hmph: The group R is for privateers. WRC should be something else.

If I had the power to decide the 2013 WRC cars would,

Have a 2 l turbo engine with such a low boost that the best power would be somewhere between 5000 – 8000 rpm (= nice sound).

The centre differential would be a planetary differential with a front/rear split 40:60 (= acts more like a RWD car).

The other option for the engine could be a 1,6 l turbo or a 2,5 l NA engine. IMO with a suitable boost level both torque and power can be made equal for the both engines. Then it would be up to the manufacturer to choose which one.

[Gard]

No way!!!! :hmph: The group R is for privateers. WRC should be something else.

If I had the power to decide the 2013 WRC cars would,

Have a 2 l turbo engine with such a low boost that the best power would be somewhere between 5000 – 8000 rpm (= nice sound).

The centre differential would be a planetary differential with a front/rear split 40:60 (= acts more like a RWD car).

The other option for the engine could be a 1,6 l turbo or a 2,5 l NA engine. IMO with a suitable boost level both torque and power can be made equal for the both engines. Then it would be up to the manufacturer to choose which one.

Good points here OldF. In this financial and environmental times, it is important to have an engine/car that future cars would benefit the most from it's development. this way, WRC will be even more important to the development of environmentally sound cars used in the future.

Surely a NA gasoline engine would not be a part of that. The 2l turbo with restrictor is actually a fairly good platform for engine development. What fuels to use and maybe a limit on the amount of fuel would to use, could be important issues to discuss.

[Brother John]

How about this system in a rally car?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGdKlbW2K-U&eurl=http://www.hbvl.be/gidsen/auto-moto/algemeen/revolutionaire-airpod-rijdt-op-lucht.aspx&feature=player_embedded

[f-cup]

Group R3, the class with the Honda Civic and the Renault Clio. The list of other possibles for this class is endless - this should be the new world championship. Faster classes - S2000 and group N4 - should be allowed to compete but not for points.

My G*D! How can someone even think something like this?? Would it be nice that with wrc cars like that, allmost everyone can have faster road car, than top level rally car. Great! And what would that do for the respect of the sport?

[LeonBrooke]

My G*D! How can someone even think something like this?? Would it be nice that with wrc cars like that, allmost everyone can have faster road car, than top level rally car. Great! And what would that do for the respect of the sport?
We'd have simplicity and diversity, which is ideal for a world championship. And Group R is fast enough: http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=AU&hl=en-GB&v=k_z7eYdn-Pg imagine a field of 30 of those at each round, with plenty of full-time championship drivers backed up by lots of competitive locals.

[Nikey]

No they ain't. And FIA will never allow faster cars than their n.1 class to take part in their events.

I would copy the IRC rules as they are and we would have over 20 top class cars in every European rally. The problem is FIA wants to keep the same engine for several events for manu cars so they must do something to keep the privateers slower. If they had something like 10 rallies in calendar they could ditch the motor rule.

Ideal situation would be like in the early 90s that a new and upcoming driver could get a competitive top-level S2000 (group A in the 90s) car or try to tease them with a slightly slower (and a lot cheaper) group N car.

[Sulland]

With F1 spearheading the KERS tech, would this be something for WRC to look into ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_braking

Or is this something motorsport should forget ?

[jonkka]

With F1 spearheading the KERS tech, would this be something for WRC to look into ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_braking

Or is this something motorsport should forget ?

Given that such technology is coming to road cars, motorsports should adopt it as well (solely for environmental PR as I don't think there's any performance advantage to be gained).