WRC 1.6T or IRC S2000 [Archive]

MJW

9th May 2009, 20:09

Now that it looks likely that the re-launched WRC championship wont be a 'winter series' i.e Finalnd in August 2010, but a January 2011 start with the cars being powered by a 1.6T rather than the simple S2K that Max spoke about. What do you think will happen in 2010 and beyond? 2010 looks like another Citroen versus Ford year with Loeb staying. In simple terms that means most of the current drivers without a factory drive, Petter, Meeke, Hnninen,Chris A, Gigi, PG etc. etc etc, wont all get drives next year, also will those teams, Peugeot, Skoda, Fiat, Proton etc currently competing in IRC decide to build a 1.6T (remembering that Max and FIA said that costs of developing a S2K+ (turbo) would be too much whilst the car manufactureres were in melt down. Now all of a sudden we have a WRC platform that will suit Citroen and Ford (i.e the ones without a S2000) whilst forcing those manufactureres currently in IRC to have a new engine if they want to play in WRC. Whats your thoughts and opinions, will the current IRC manufacturers say, lets stick with IRC and let that become the top level or will they want to join the WRC and build a new engined car, or do Citroen and Ford want to keep WRC as their exclusive club?

Bazza2541

9th May 2009, 20:25

Wouldn't a supercharger be a better option? It can be added to the NA engines with very little work and is much easier to police?

chris16valve

9th May 2009, 20:29

stay s2ooo,they sound fabulous and are great to watch,

PLuto

9th May 2009, 21:07

I have seen 1,6T car here on Acores. I must say, also S1600 are more interesting for watching...

MJW

9th May 2009, 21:16

What I am trying to gauge is will those IRC teams make the switch to WRC if they have to build a new engine? Personally I am a big fan of the normally aspirated 2 WD Super 1600 class, Renault Clio, Citroen C2, and Suzuki Swift, far more entertaining than a group N cornering on rails and sounding flat. But thats not what I am asking - will the delay to 2011 finally kill off WRC if these teams say f**k it and start giving paid drives to quick drivers whilst WRC continues to be a gentleman driver and Seb formula?

Mirek

9th May 2009, 21:22

I have seen 1,6T car here on Acores. I must say, also S1600 are more interesting for watching...

Pluto, what You saw is a car for some 25 tousand Euro with stock engine (only electronics changed) and 28 mm restrictor. The car was 1/10 of S2000 in price...

J4MIE

9th May 2009, 21:38

I thought the decision to base it on S2000 had already been made? :confused:

MJW

9th May 2009, 21:47

I thought the decision to base it on S2000 had already been made? :confused:
Yes - that was correct, smart money (informed gossip) is that in the June World Council meeting it will be ratified that the engine initailly talked about for 2013, (the 1.6T) will be brought in in 2011 - I understand that Ford and Citroen wanted this. Therby meaning that status quo (WRC)remains to 2011 and then the new WRC car becomes a 1.6Litre Turbo engine - all the S2000 transmission and less technology stays, just a brand new engine. If true this means ALL the current IRC teams will need a new car to play in the WRC, wheras Citroen and Ford will have their new car based on the future rules.

atsiotras79

9th May 2009, 21:57

I am also in favour of the S2000 pattern!

I was wondering if anybody remembers what the great Colin McRae said about how the top class in WRC should be. I think he said 2.5lt, no turbo, 4WD!

I just cannot imagine how such beasts would sound and look! S2500!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

alleskids

9th May 2009, 23:00

I wonder if the IRC will go with the 1.6T rule or stick to the 2.0 atmo. Manufacterers with excisting plans (Proton, MG, Peugeot, Peugeot, Fiat, Skoda) do not want to devellop a second rallycar and want value for ther investment and have a platform to show their potential.
Ford and Citroen will be on the 1.6T route and maybe new team with only paper plans (Suzuki?) can follow them.

sollitt

10th May 2009, 00:32

I too favour the S2000 model. It seems to me that moving to a 1600 turbo charged engine is another development programme that the sport doesn't need.
If any performance gains are desired over S2000 I would have thought allowing the engine out to 2.3 or thereabouts would have done the job without complication.

From what I've seen S2000 looks pretty good.

J4MIE

10th May 2009, 00:41

Seems to me this is just leading to a lot more confusion :(

Rally Power

10th May 2009, 02:05

The FIA incapacity to decide WRC future it’s outrageous!!!

First decision to replace WRC for S2000 based cars was taken at the WMSC of June 2007, and almost 2 years after the new WRC regulations are still drawn in discussion and uncertainty…

MJW is totally right: this delays, which have allowed WRC cars to compete one more year, and the now proposed 1.6T engines*, can only benefit Citroën and Ford but will certainly raise many doubts to a large number of manufactures that were left to believe that S2000 was the way to go!

I just hope that the organizers of IRC will maximize the WRC disorientation, and consider rescaling their competition to a maximum of 8/9 rallies, in order to attract not only factory teams but also top privateers, and turn the series into the leading formula of international rallying.

*someone has pointed that 1.6T engines are now common, but aren’t 2.0 atmo engines much more widespread ?!?

f-cup

10th May 2009, 08:36

Well, I think that it is good decision to move straight to 1.6T engines rather than doing one or two years with s2000. That would have meant developing two different engines in a short period of time for some tems. And small tbo engines is the way where all car manu's are moving in these days. N/a engines are old tech in small/medium size cars.

chris16valve

10th May 2009, 08:49

bluuford

10th May 2009, 19:12

I think that it is quite pointless to run one more year with WRCar as the top class. Currently both, Citroen and Ford are developing S2000 cars (those cars are meant for national championships as well, that means there is still point to develop those cars).

So. The best solution is to run S2000 in 2010 and if someone is ready then 1600t is also allowed (for testing purposes) but at the same time eligible for manu and driver points. Most probably there wont be very big difference between well developed S2000 and 1600t on development phase. That means, those who have S2000 cars well developed can participate and at the same time those who are developing 1600t cars are able to test their cars in competition mode. And manu points must be calculated not according to those who are factory drivers but the best positioned cars (But manufacturer have to be registered). I think that the current situation is bad enough to introduce something so freaking difficult :-)
Well, It is really hard to express my ideas in words at the moment.. difficult weekend.. most probably :-)

f-cup

11th May 2009, 06:02

Most probably there wont be very big difference between well developed S2000 and 1600t on development phase.

As a spectator I certainly hope that there is a big difference between those two engines. And these should be, if 1.6T has a reasonable restrictor in it. S2000 just is too slow and not what is expected in rallying's top level. And yes, yes, S2000 has a good sound, but It is pointless because the speed does not match the sound even close.

Iskald

11th May 2009, 08:51

As a spectator I certainly hope that there is a big difference between those two engines. And these should be, if 1.6T has a reasonable restrictor in it. S2000 just is too slow and not what is expected in rallying's top level. And yes, yes, S2000 has a good sound, but It is pointless because the speed does not match the sound even close.

I second that. If they allow a decent sized restrictor in the 1.6T the transition to a smaller and somewhat more restricted engine will not be so dramatic. I really applaud if FIA brings this rule forward, instead of running two interim seasons (2011 and 2012) to S2000 engine rule, which from the onset seemed meaningless.

Many of you like the sound of S2000 n/a engine. Is that why you follow rallying - to listen to the cars? As long as the cars sound nice you don`t mind them performing like shopping trolleys? Not my cup of tea, I regret to inform...

11th May 2009, 11:39

I too agree that 1.6T is the right way to go for road car relation and easy high torque, and that it would be stupid to change to 2.0N/A engines and then change again two years down the line again...

But..

I will remain sceptical until we see them for real. It will be useless if they end up as boring to watch, as boring to listen to and as expensive as now. I can just imagine the teams will start whingeing 6 months down the line saying we need this and that to make the cars safe, or make the parts last or whatever and we will be back at square one.

But if they are literally an S2000 car with a 1.6T engine, then they should be pretty good :up:

MJW

11th May 2009, 12:02

I too think that a 1.6T would be better than the N/A S2000, (knowledege of the rebuild costs on a S1600 n/a are enough) and it does fit the roadcar trend, and will give better torque. Also agree (to a point) with Iskald that its good that we dont have an interim 2 years. What does worry me is that for 2010 we will have the same two manufacturer teams, that means there are not the opportunities for drivers, and that Seb, Sordo, Mikko, JML is all we have, as the others will need to pay huge sums of money to drive 'de-tuned' customer cars, and if IRC have openings for professional drivers will these go there for the money, and the competition the extra year 2010 will damage WRC further, and as yet no new manufacturer has commited to join, let alone build a 1.6T. Fact is there are Citroen and Ford (4 seats) compared to a fleet of Peugeots, FIATs, and Proton commited to entering IRC events.
I believe WRC should be the pinnacle, I just want more manufactureres and drivers in that and I fear that this could drive these manufacturers to IRC permanently.

urabus-denoS2000

11th May 2009, 12:04

1,6 turbo sounds OK but only if it's kept under simple rules,like the old Group A!!!

Sulland

11th May 2009, 15:14

I second that. If they allow a decent sized restrictor in the 1.6T the transition to a smaller and somewhat more restricted engine will not be so dramatic. I really applaud if FIA brings this rule forward, instead of running two interim seasons (2011 and 2012) to S2000 engine rule, which from the onset seemed meaningless.

Many of you like the sound of S2000 n/a engine. Is that why you follow rallying - to listen to the cars? As long as the cars sound nice you don`t mind them performing like shopping trolleys? Not my cup of tea, I regret to inform...

This can of course be discussed from here to eternety, and never agree.

But for me; Yes sounf is part of the experience as a spectator. And a S2000 sounds more like a competiton car than especially GrN and also to a certain extent WRC, due to the low revs.

For group N, they have now alloved almost every part of the car to be modified, so why not give themm a decent exhaust as well. This is also a security issue, since hearing a Gr N car coming can be hard, and with a lot of spectators wandering the SS's thiat could get ugly !

I think is is apauling to see the power Ford and Citroen has with both FIA and ISC, since almost everything they say is being followed. It must be a bit frustrating for the now 10-11 manufacturers that buildt a S2000 to be part of the new WRC, that in tha last possible minute the 1,6 T comes in from the right, and suddenlywill be the thing to have, and not only from 2013, but maybe already from 2011, and that you can compete with the current WRCar until 1,6T takes over - that is a lot of wasted money !

I do not really care if the end result is 2000 NA or 1600T, as long as it meets the requirements, and is so simple and cheap that more manufacturers and privat teams can afford to compete.

If I had done so bad staff work in my job, as FIA has done here, I would have been kicked out and been asked to do damage somewhere else. Planning is everything, it has been said - and the long term planning in this case has not even been there. This has to be improved for FIA as such, it is not only Rally that has a challenge, F1 is not much better off !

urabus-denoS2000

11th May 2009, 20:02

This is also a security issue, since hearing a Gr N car coming can be hard, and with a lot of spectators wandering the SS's thiat could get ugly

Oh come on,can you seriously say that Group N cars can't be heard?!?

In Slovenia I heard them coming 20 secs before it came,in a normal environment!

Am I seriously the only one who sees Group N as a attractive class???

It's maybe because I grew up in a part of Europe where it's a top class and all the top drivers drive it.

Mirek

11th May 2009, 20:15

When it's windy or when the gr.N car doesn't use ALS, it's almost impossible to hear it.

urabus-denoS2000

11th May 2009, 20:22

When it's windy it's hard to hear anything.I had a really windy rally in which I couldn't hear a Clio S1600 50 meters before

J4MIE

11th May 2009, 20:38

Oh come on,can you seriously say that Group N cars can't be heard?!?

In Slovenia I heard them coming 20 secs before it came,in a normal environment!

A few years back I am ashamed to say that I did once find myself face down and spread out across the road, with the ground rumbling and I remember that I was wondering what the hell was happening before I looked up......

They are too quiet, it is definitely a safety issue. Especially with some diesel and lpg etc type cars which there have been a few competing in the UK over recent years - and they are a lot quieter still!

You can say what you like about people not meant to be on the stages when there is a stage running, but people will always wander about, there will be accidents, and more noise means greater safety. I've been saying this for years.

urabus-denoS2000

11th May 2009, 20:54

You can say what you like about people not meant to be on the stages when there is a stage running, but people will always wander about, there will be accidents, and more noise means greater safety. I've been saying this for years.

That is a fact,the thing that upsets me the most is that people realize the danger only after it happens to someone else.

But I still think Group N is OK.It doesn't have a great sound,far from it,but it isn't that boring.

Daniel

11th May 2009, 22:19

J4mie's right. Remember Finland 2007 when Pino said there were no more cars coming?

BDunnell

11th May 2009, 22:45

If Group N is the answer to anything, that question should never have been asked. It holds no appeal to me whatsoever.

C64WDU

11th May 2009, 23:28

Prefer s2000 to the 1.6t. S2000 sound fantastic & if they are slower who cares you see the cars for longer.

TKM Jnr

12th May 2009, 01:13

12th May 2009, 05:51

Half the people on this forum complain that Grp.N is boring....1.6T won't be any better. Grp.N WRX/Evos are already 2L turbo, how exciting will WRC be with 1.6T. Exciting to think that Grp.N cars will possibly be faster then World rally cars....dumb idea.

That would not happen because S2000 cars are already faster than Grp N and have less torque and possibly less power than the 1.6Ts would.

People here should stop thinking just about the power/torque. The current WRCars have bucketloads and they're still terrible to watch, I think the transmissions/chassis are just as important in this respect.

AndyRAC

12th May 2009, 08:36

If Group N is the answer to anything, that question should never have been asked. It holds no appeal to me whatsoever.

That's another thing as well. When will GroupN return to a proper 'showroom class'? How on earth are S2000 in the same class as them, completely mystifies me. Stop adding weight to the S2000's, please.

Mirek

12th May 2009, 10:29

Half the people on this forum complain that Grp.N is boring....1.6T won't be any better. Grp.N WRX/Evos are already 2L turbo, how exciting will WRC be with 1.6T. Exciting to think that Grp.N cars will possibly be faster then World rally cars....dumb idea.

I personally enjoy the Grp.N cars, well driven they are more exciting then WRC cars and S2000 cars.

Go back to the days of Grp.A.....

Delta S4 was only 1.7 turbo... New WRC may easyly be 1.6 turbo and much faster than gr.N and much more spectacular. And they needn't to be very expensive. It's just a question of rulles.

Sulland

12th May 2009, 19:12

It will always depend on the restrictor, and what else will get limitations I guess, but I expect FIA to decide a couple of hours before the first rally to give the manufacturers more than enough time........

When you have at least 10 manufacturers in S2000, I would have given that a chance in 2010, to get them into the circus - and if S2000 shows not to be good enough, change to 1600T for 2013. That would give them 2 years to construct a new one. But then the 1600T tech rules need to be ready mid 2010 !

OldF

12th May 2009, 19:28

1,6 turbo sounds OK but only if it's kept under simple rules,like the old Group A!!!

This means that we would go back to the time before 1997 where the manufacturer had to build 2500 4WD turbocharged cars. Wasn’t WRC rules developed so as car manufacturers who didn’t have a 4WD turbocharged car in their program could compete in rally world championship. Today there are only two manufacturers that could compete in group A, Mitsubishi and Subaru.

BTW, WRC cars are based on group A cars.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/2589A7BA2955E0A2C12574FF0051D9F4/$FILE/255%20(2009)-15112008.pdf (http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/2589A7BA2955E0A2C12574FF0051D9F4/$FILE/255%20%282009%29-15112008.pdf)

A ”Word Rally Car” (WR) is a variant of a fixed model of car, previously homologated in group A and must therefore be assembled as a group A vehicle.

If you look at “APPENDIX J TO THE INTERNATIONAL SPORTING CODE” (http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulations/Pages/InternationalSportingCodeA.aspx
There are no specific regulations for WRC. WRC use the same regulations as group A.

And another btw. Mitsubishi Evo 9 is not valid in group A.

OldF

12th May 2009, 19:40

It will always depend on the restrictor

Yes it depends on the restrictor. It’s not the turbo that kills the sound, it’s the dam restrictor. It would be far better with limited boost instead of a restrictor. The old group B cars didn’t have so high boost (as the example Mirek gave) but they had the highest torque around 5000 rpm and best power around 8000 rpm so they where driven with high revs. Even group N cars would sound better with limited boost instead of a restrictor.

I would be pleased to see two alive championships, WRC with 1,6T limited boost / high rev engines and IRC with S2000 cars (that are already high rev nice sounded engines).

urabus-denoS2000

12th May 2009, 19:49

Wow ;)

young walsh

12th May 2009, 21:52

Mirek

12th May 2009, 21:58

The best sounding engine would be flat 6 cylinder N/A engine but that's pretty unrealistic :D

AndyRAC

13th May 2009, 07:34

]The best sounding engine would be flat 6 cylinder N/A engine but that's pretty unrealistic :D

Remember any new rules must suit Ford and Citroen.....

Iskald

13th May 2009, 08:52

Rally Power

13th May 2009, 13:10

It will indeed be interesting to see what FIA does. But if they bring the 1.6T rule forward to 2011 (which is good IMO) it must be because they are unhappy about the possible competition from IRC. With two interim years (2011 and 2012) running with S2000 cars the WRC will be in direct competition with IRC. I can`t imagine FIA would like that, to have two international (global) championships running to the same rules, and possibly even risk the WRC to lose out in this competition by drawing more manufacturers and especially top independent teams into IRC as this series is less expensive. With Eurosport closely involved in the IRC, and more live TV forthcoming from the IRC-events, this is also a battle that could easily be lost re. the sponsorship market.

With quicker and more spectacular 1.6T cars WRC will keep the position as the major championship, and that must be the goal of the FIA.

You’re right, this issue has more to do with politics than sport!!!

From the Monte 2009 media impact, it’s impossible to deny the existence of WRC/IRC rivalry, but FIA could have avoided it with the selection of Eurosport Events for the WRC promotion.

Comparing ISC and EE work of the last years, it’s hard to understand the criterion used by FIA on the WRC promoter choice, especially when EE assured a joined WRC/IRC promotion that surely would benefit rally sport.

Perhaps a strong and competitive WRC it’s not in the interest of FIA and its F1 partners…

13th May 2009, 14:02

OldF

13th May 2009, 18:24

The video at the bottom of this page:

http://www.ir7.at/fotostest120509.html

...is quite a compelling argument for S2000.. Ok, we all know it's slower than a World Rally Car but that is a damn site better to watch and listen to than any sodding Focus I have ever seen.

Yes, they have great sound and the slowness I think is only noticeable by the clock.

I calculated from the results of Argentina the average speed of the winner (Loeb) and the best group N (Al-Attiyah). Loeb’s average speed was 83,76 km/h and Al-Attiyah’s average speed was 76,31 km/h. The difference is only 7,45 km/h.

With a speed of 83,76 km/h on a 100 m view, it take 4,3 sec to pass and with a speed of 76,31 km/h it takes 4,72 sec. The difference is only 0,42 sec, which IMO is not noticeable with the eyes. With higher speed a difference of 7,45 km/h is even less.

Km/h____sec / 100 m_____Difference, sec (Row – fastest)
180_________2,00
170_________2,12_____________0,12
160_________2,25_____________0,25
150_________2,40_____________0,40
140_________2,57_____________0,57
130_________2,77_____________0,77
120_________3,00_____________1,00
110_________3,27_____________1,27
100_________3,60_____________1,60
90__________4,00_____________2,00
80__________4,50_____________2,50

dimviii

13th May 2009, 20:04

Yes, they have great sound and the slowness I think is only noticeable by the clock.

I calculated from the results of Argentina the average speed of the winner (Loeb) and the best group N (Al-Attiyah). Loeb’s average speed was 83,76 km/h and Al-Attiyah’s average speed was 76,31 km/h. The difference is only 7,45 km/h.

With a speed of 83,76 km/h on a 100 m view, it take 4,3 sec to pass and with a speed of 76,31 km/h it takes 4,72 sec. The difference is only 0,42 sec, which IMO is not noticeable with the eyes. With higher speed a difference of 7,45 km/h is even less.

Km/h____sec / 100 m_____Difference, sec (Row – fastest)
180_________2,00
170_________2,12_____________0,12
160_________2,25_____________0,25
150_________2,40_____________0,40
140_________2,57_____________0,57
130_________2,77_____________0,77
120_________3,00_____________1,00
110_________3,27_____________1,27
100_________3,60_____________1,60
90__________4,00_____________2,00
80__________4,50_____________2,50

Yoy mean that when you are in a ss you can t see the difference in speed between wrc and N4 car? :dozey:

13th May 2009, 20:38

Yoy mean that when you are in a ss you can t see the difference in speed between wrc and N4 car? :dozey:

I agree with OldF, over that distance you probably can't see the difference in actual speed (probably even less on tv). It's all about how agile the car looks, how attacking the driver looks and how the car sounds. That's why it's so important they get the rules right, and if we go the turbo route they must sound like they are actually pushing and not driving to Tesco.

dimviii

13th May 2009, 20:51

I agree with OldF, over that distance you probably can't see the difference in actual speed (probably even less on tv). It's all about how agile the car looks, how attacking the driver looks and how the car sounds. That's why it's so important they get the rules right, and if we go the turbo route they must sound like they are actually pushing and not driving to Tesco.
Τοttaly disagree!!
it is obvious that a wrc car passes faster than a pwrc car whatever you are in a u-turn or in a 5th gear corner.I am talking about the speed can understant the human eye.

Or i am a hawk? :p :

Iskald

14th May 2009, 09:08

Τοttaly disagree!!
it is obvious that a wrc car passes faster than a pwrc car whatever you are in a u-turn or in a 5th gear corner.I am talking about the speed can understant the human eye.

Or i am a hawk? :p :

You`re not a hawk, dimviii. You`re just like me and many others, who actually like WRC-cars and think they are a damn bit faster and more spectacular than both Gr. N and S2000. There has been a trend on this forum to argue that S2000 is more spectacular and fun to watch than WRC. Now someone tries to convince us that there isn`t actually a visual difference between WRC and Gr. N. Honestly I can`t understand that at all, unless my own eyes deceives me totally.

But then again, I`m an old geezer and need glasses for reading newspapers...

Torsen

14th May 2009, 12:15

i cringe when i see an s2000 hit a hairpin on dry tarmac...

dimviii

14th May 2009, 15:28

You`re not a hawk, dimviii. You`re just like me and many others, who actually like WRC-cars and think they are a damn bit faster and more spectacular than both Gr. N and S2000. There has been a trend on this forum to argue that S2000 is more spectacular and fun to watch than WRC. Now someone tries to convince us that there isn`t actually a visual difference between WRC and Gr. N. Honestly I can`t understand that at all, unless my own eyes deceives me totally.

But then again, I`m an old geezer and need glasses for reading newspapers...
There are two points for me.
Number one is if a wrc car is more spectacular than a s2k - n4 car.For me there is no question whatever corner,tarmac,gravel,uphill,downhill,mud etc.
Number two is about the competition in these championships.For me again there is no question .IRC is much better,fresh,new rallys,and the best reason for me is that you don t have a clue about who is going to win every rally.

if i had to choose,i d choose IRC with no doubt.
If i had to choose just a car yes it had to be a wrc.
But the best car with no competition is zero.IMO.

OldF

14th May 2009, 16:51

Yoy mean that when you are in a ss you can t see the difference in speed between wrc and N4 car? :dozey:

I think it’s more about feeling. You now a N4 is slower so it also looks slower. My point was to show that on a 100 view (which is quite long in some rallies) the time difference is not big. 83,76 km/h is about 10% higher than 76,31 km/h and 4,72 sec is about 10% longer than 4,3 sec.

At least for me the sound of a rally car is essential and S2000 has good sound and WRC cars once had good sound. The other thing is more sliding and I’m convinced it will be more spectacular if the active centre diff is banned. More nice 4-wheel sliding true the corners.

playmo

14th May 2009, 17:58

WRc may be a lot faster than S2000, but the sound seems quite oposite, i might go with s2000 too.
But the thing that turns me off is the TV editing and sequence that eurosport do with IRC, always puts me to sleep! no matter the hotter (as in great action) the rally is, the tv production just don't seem interested on reflecting that through the screen... If wrc's production of the tv shows is not all that good, compared to IRC's is FAR BETTER; remember i0m just talking of days highlights or event highlights, not live stages.

14th May 2009, 20:45

The other thing is more sliding and I’m convinced it will be more spectacular if the active centre diff is banned. More nice 4-wheel sliding true the corners.

Me too. That Fabia in the video I liked to earlier is handling like a proper rally car (sliding, opposite locking, even some scandinavian flicking).. and not like a hovercraft (Focus)

As I said before, I believe that they way the car handles and sounds is at least as important as the outright speed. I'd even go as far as to say, that if you put the Focus through that very same stage as the Fabia, 9 out of 10 "normal" people (ie. not rally forum freaks) watching on tv will think the Fabia is at least as fast.

14th May 2009, 20:49

But the thing that turns me off is the TV editing and sequence that eurosport do with IRC, always puts me to sleep! no matter the hotter (as in great action) the rally is, the tv production just don't seem interested on reflecting that through the screen... If wrc's production of the tv shows is not all that good, compared to IRC's is FAR BETTER; remember i0m just talking of days highlights or event highlights, not live stages.

Although I'm a big fan of what IRC is doing, I'm inclined to agree with you to an extent there. I wasn't too impressed with the day reports on Eurosport last weekend (the 30 minutes edited highlights programme shown this week was better) The WRC programming is certainly slicker, although I still prefer the IRCs matter-of-fact commentary to the silly bugger pretend live WRC commentary.

Iskald

15th May 2009, 08:46

[quote="OldF"]I think it’s more about feeling. You now a N4 is slower so it also looks slower. My point was to show that on a 100 view (which is quite long in some rallies) the time difference is not big. 83,76 km/h is about 10% higher than 76,31 km/h and 4,72 sec is about 10% longer than 4,3 sec.

At least for me the sound of a rally car is essential and S2000 has good sound and WRC cars once had good sound. QUOTE]

I think you need glasses, you too, OldF, if you really can`t see the visual difference.

At least you don`t need a hearing aid ;-)

lcd

15th May 2009, 09:42

...IRC is much better,fresh,new rallys,and the best reason for me is that you don t have a clue about who is going to win every rally....IMO.

I just feel exactly the same! Many people have found In IRC things that gradually started fading In WRC...
It's It is no coincidence, that IRC has grabbed so much reputation,
which Is growing day after day.

OldF

15th May 2009, 15:19

I think you need glasses, you too, OldF, if you really can`t see the visual difference.

At least you don`t need a hearing aid ;-)

Excuse me, I didn’t hear what you’re saying. I already have glasses. Maybe I should by binoculars or even a telescope. :eek:

OK, the difference is noticeable but as I said my point was to show how small the time difference is.

“but the hand is quicker than the eye
only a stranger knows why”

Rainbow / Magic

306 Cosworth

18th May 2009, 14:05

What about a N/A 2.9 Cosworth V6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znEhv2IRnV4&fmt=18

Sounds fecking awesome and has plenty of power :D

AndyRAC

18th May 2009, 14:31

What about a N/A 2.9 Cosworth V6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znEhv2IRnV4&fmt=18

Sounds fecking awesome and has plenty of power :D

Oh yeah, was out watching the Plains on Saturday and you could hear it miles away. Awesome, that is how a Rally car should sound. Pity it retired.

Darren Jones

19th May 2009, 09:54

bluuford

19th May 2009, 11:22

A wrc car driven by Loeb or Mikko may be better than a group n car driven by say Nassar but Sandell in a S2000 is better to watch tha Wilson or Compac in a WRC

in other words id prefer to see 10-15 good drivers in s2000 cars than 5-6 good drivers in WRC cars followed by a few scarletrixs cars that sometimes struggle to beat the pwrc guys
You got the point. WRC cars are not allowed in most of Estonian rallies and Group N is the highest level. So, I must admit that first 5-10 drivers are more spectacular than 90% of WRCars I have seen on the same rallies on the same roads. The point is that when you have drivers who drive on absolute limit then it is not so important is it Group N, WRC on S2000. They are almost always very spectacular. And you need good competition to put the drivers on absolute limit. I saw it in last Estonian rally (Tallinn rally)
and you can see from the results: http://autosport.ee/rallyreg/?page=33&race_id=21&race_ss_id=53&
That the difference between 1 and 11th driver is only 43 sek. And it was really nice to watch all the time how big effort they all made too keep or gain a position!

OldF

19th May 2009, 19:50

That the difference between 1 and 11th driver is only 43 sek. And it was really nice to watch all the time how big effort they all made too keep or gain a position!

Let’s hope we can sometimes see the same in WRC.

Helstar

20th May 2009, 02:34

i cringe when i see an s2000 hit a hairpin on dry tarmac...
Take a look at the end of this video (at 9'50" more or less) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqPuPVyOOJc&fmt=18

You were saying ?

20th May 2009, 11:47

Take a look at the end of this video (at 9'50" more or less) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqPuPVyOOJc&fmt=18

You were saying ?

Good point Helstar.

I think the people who think WRCars are still good to watch on dry asphalt are living in the past, because the fact of the matter is that a current World Rally Car probably slides less on dry asphalt than an S2000.

Let's hope the people making the new rules for WRC aren't of the same opinion, otherwise they will be sleepwalking into disaster.

MJW

3rd June 2009, 22:13

grugsticles

4th June 2009, 05:48

Maybe not even remotely associated, but you never know........British Touring Car Championship bring in new rules for 2011.
The 'Next Generation Touring Car' regulations will incorporate a switch to a front-wheel drive only, and 2-litre turbocharged petrol engine formula that rules out cars like the SEAT Leon TDI and the BMW 320si.S2000 and BTC versions of these cars will still be allowed to compete with equalised performance levels until 2013.
Spec six-speed sequential gearboxes, ECUs, turbo wastegates, brakes, hubs, fuel tanks and steering racks will be sourced and price-capped by TOCA to ensure a reduction in spending, while a TOCA-branded powerplant will also be available for £25,000 per year for teams not wishing to conduct their own engine development programmes.

A move to 18" wheels, coupled with a predicted 300bhp output from the turbo engines, is expected to increase speeds, as is a move to slightly larger cars than currently.

It is estimated that a full car, complete with engine, will be available for around £100,000 new, around 50 per cent of the cost of an S2000 machine.

Would be one h@ll of a shock if WRC commission makes rallycars 2 wd again, (Max himself said that he favoured 2wd for rallycars some 15months ago) If not the eqivalency factor could conceivably be used in WRC to allow the IRC manufacturers a chance to run with existing world rally cars to 2013 when a 1.6T could come in.
While I dont follow the British Touring car championship at all, I think thats kinda of a a brave, but good move moving to those regulations.
As a general rule touring cars dont have the need to be sideways as a rally car so the 25,000 grand standard engine (pretty cheap really for a motorsport engine) along with FWD should work quite well.

If Max even gets a little bit excited about going to 2WD for top level rallying, hes a dead man! What would be the point of having an AWD road car (WRX, EVO etc.) being quicker over a stage than a 2WD rally car if the conditions went suited to the rally car?

I do especially like the idea of the price cap of equiptment expences. Ive had the same idea for quite a while and as far as I can figure, the best way to keep the costs down and the competivnes up is to allow a certain budget, arrange a certain selection of components with fixed prices and teams can mix and match from those components to build their cars as long as the budget isnt breached.
The end result is that your car may be strong in some areas (ie. more powerful engine) but suffers in others (ie. suspension setup).

Audimadgeoff

4th June 2009, 09:47

A Group N car only looks slower when its competing against WRC cars. The BRC has banned WRCars and with Gr N being the top level the top 6 or 8 cars always appear to be 'on it'! however sound restirictions in the UK mean they are very quiet compared to European events!

As only the top few drivers in any championship are really going to be exploring the limits of their cars I personally would rather see a couple of mediocre driven S2000 cars than a couple of average WRCars - in this instance the aural benefits outweigh the technology!

OldF

4th June 2009, 16:47

I do especially like the idea of the price cap of equiptment expences. Ive had the same idea for quite a while and as far as I can figure, the best way to keep the costs down and the competivnes up is to allow a certain budget, arrange a certain selection of components with fixed prices and teams can mix and match from those components to build their cars as long as the budget isnt breached.
The end result is that your car may be strong in some areas (ie. more powerful engine) but suffers in others (ie. suspension setup).

I also think this is the only way to control and cut costs. The manufacturer of springs, dampers, turbos, gearboxes, ecus etc. would homologate the parts and the parts would have a max price. Also if the cars would have a max track instead of a max width, even the drive shafts could be standardized. Nowadays the WRC teams also put a lot of effort (=money) taking off few hundred of grams from here and there from the engine parts and instead puts ballasts to the rear to get a better weight balance of the car. This could be prevented by setting a fixed front/rear weight distribution, for example 53%/47%. This way a privateer or a private team could acquire parts for a competitive car.

Sulland

17th June 2009, 16:29

Are there any rumors on what will be presented on the June FIA meeitng as the new WRC format ?

DonJippo

17th June 2009, 17:52

Are there any rumors on what will be presented on the June FIA meeitng as the new WRC format ?

1.6T based on S2000 regulations.

morganmilan

17th June 2009, 18:00

1.6T based on S2000 regulations.
But for 2010 and so on, or two years with s2000, and then 1600T? And, by other hand, could today wrc cars compete at FIA championships next year? With an extra weight perhaps? :confused:

DonJippo

17th June 2009, 18:22

But for 2010 and so on, or two years with s2000, and then 1600T? And, by other hand, could today wrc cars compete at FIA championships next year? With an extra weight perhaps? :confused:

Forget that S2000 for WRC won't happen, it will be 1.6T from 2011 onwards, next year with current WRC.

OldF

17th June 2009, 19:32

The rally commission will present the 1.6T proposal, which six manufacturers supports, to FIA in the 24th of June meeting. ISC will give their proposal for 2010, which includes 13 rallies and no rotation.

http://translate.google.com/translat...story_sta te0 (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=fi&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nesteoilrallyfinland.fi%2Fsisap iirinews%2F2009%2Fsisapiirinuutiskirje509%2Fjarmos corner509%2Fdefault.html&sl=fi&tl=en&history_state0)

MJW

3rd August 2009, 18:47

http://mag.gpweek.com/
page 16/17 - I am well and truly confused by now!!!!! - does this mean 2000 N/A again, and S1.6T in 2013 -

AndyRAC

3rd August 2009, 18:52

http://mag.gpweek.com/
page 16/17 - I am well and truly confused by now!!!!! - does this mean 2000 N/A again, and S1.6T in 2013 -

So was I, but obviously what it says will happen - S2000 until 2013, then S1.6T. Personally, i'd allow a choice between both plus a TDI, but that ain't going to happen.

noel157

3rd August 2009, 19:32

What about this scenario:

Ford and Citroen agreed to 1.6T on condition that at least another manufacturer commits to the championship. In the absence of another manufacturer the 2 teams would revert to the original plan to go 2.0 na. The manufacturer that everybody thought would join with a 1.6T was VW and now that won't happen the 2.0 na plan is back on the table until 2013 (as mentioned) with 1.6T thereafter, but of course 2013 is a long way off and things do and can and most likely will change.
Does that make sense?

3rd August 2009, 19:48

Lol, this is really getting beyond a joke now.

seb_sh

3rd August 2009, 20:11

Lol, this is really getting beyond a joke now.

Indeed, FIA incompetence is infinite.

MJW

3rd August 2009, 20:27

I dont know if its is FIA incompetence on this issue as Morrie Chandler (WRC Rallies commission) said that those 2 manufacturers dont know their own minds they keep changing what they want from the rules every week. My personal opinion is that the parent companies, (Ford & Citroen) have siad there is no money to develop a new 1.6T competition engine in time for 2011. Hopefully the car markets pick up and in future we can have an 1.6T as this is definately the way road cars are going (smaller engines). Also (cynically I guess) they see 2 manufactureres in WRC when Proton as a new manufacturer has just joined IRC. If IRC can boast Pugeot, Skoda, FIAT, Proton, Opel whilst wrc manage 2 it makes car buyers think where is the best competition. WRC needs to poach at least one of these manufacturers from IRC, and Abarth has said if its S2000 N/A they would join.

macksrallye

4th August 2009, 02:10

For a first post this may be a bit brave but why does there have to be one engine type. One of the great things about group B was the oppotunity to use different engines.

Just pulling this out of the air but, use the chassis/transmission of the S2000 concept. Allow N/A engines of a capacity up to 3L, turbo cars up to 2L & if you want to go completly mad supercharged & turbochaged/twin turbo cars up to 1.6L. I know that the engine regs would have to be written very carefully but it would certainly be interesting. BMW might join in with one of their I6 engines, suzuki could use their S1600 engine & strap a couple of turbo's on & mitsubishi/subaru can just develop their evo/sti engines. It means all manufacturer's can use an engine from their own stables & that has to be a plus for marketing.

Sulland

4th August 2009, 17:32

Is the Ford + Citroen plan to push FIA back and fourth so much that in the end they have to keep todays WRCar ?

I thought they were the ones pushing FIA from S2000 to 1600T for 2011 instead of 2013 - or was it a compromize; you can have 1600T, but then from 2011 ?

AndyRAC

4th August 2009, 22:19

I wonder who runs the WRC - it sounds like it's run for the benefit of Ford & Citroen.

seb_sh

4th August 2009, 22:24

It's true the manufacturers are fickle when it comes to things like this but IMO the whole situation of having WRC down to 2 manufacturers with uncertain future rules is down to the FIA.

Going S2000 at least for a few years might not be bad because even if another manufacturer doesn't officially join there would be a lot more competitive cars available to private teams for a much smaller price so in theory more drivers would have a chance to drive and competition would increase.

Rally Power

5th August 2009, 00:16

The delays of the new WRC regulation proved Mosley incompetence and indifference about the rally world.

It’s now obvious that this issue will be decided by the new president to be elected at October and because all 3 candidates, Vatanen, Todt and Boeri, have large rally groundwork, everyone can only expect from them a suitable solution and a truly commitment to the sport.

PS: GPWeek reports Fiesta S2000 homologation at the beginning of 2011, but Wilson’s words indicate that it should be release to Gr. N customers from earlier 2010. Can anyone clarify it?

Buzz Lightyear

5th August 2009, 00:42

I wonder who runs the WRC - it sounds like it's run for the benefit of Ford & Citroen.

why not? if they pull out, you dont have a WRC.

macksrallye

5th August 2009, 00:44

And there lies the problem ^^

jonkka

5th August 2009, 15:04

For a first post this may be a bit brave but why does there have to be one engine type. One of the great things about group B was the oppotunity to use different engines.

That is possible even at this moment. All WRC engines are 2.0T because without turbo car is not competitive and with turbo modifier (1.7x) even smaller engine's displacement skyrockets. In theory, as it was with Group B rules, car with smaller engine could run with lower minimum weight - counterbalancing the effect of having less power.

HaCo

5th August 2009, 16:32

PS: GPWeek reports Fiesta S2000 homologation at the beginning of 2011, but Wilson’s words indicate that it should be release to Gr. N customers from earlier 2010. Can anyone clarify it?

Could it be that the WRC would need more development? It's a pitty they use different cars on different levels. Look at IRC how well they do everytime they visit a rally-popular country...

Audimadgeoff

7th August 2009, 08:58

AndyRAC

7th August 2009, 10:01

How many 1.6t road car engines are actually in production at the moment? A quick scan through a recent car mag indicates that there are just as many n/a 2lt engines in production so I don't see how manufacturers are 'leaning' towards 1.6t!

The concept of allowing different spec engines in, such as in the Group B days, is a novel idea, but one which I like - it would allow manufacturers the opportunity to be individualistic again! Audi now has a 5cyl turbo in their TT - imagine the sound of that out on the stages again mmmmmmmmmm

You could level the playing field with weight - a 2.5 n/a would way less than a 2.3 turbo, but both would be heavier than an S2000 or 1.6t.

I'd agree, but I'd go further regarding transmissions/weight - 4WD increase the weight, but lose the weight for RWD/FWD. Then organise the season with a fair spread of Gravel, Tarmac, Mixed events so a 2L FWD lightweight flyer can compete over a season against a big heavy FWD car - impossible??
Imagine a lightweight Renault screamer v Ford 4WD Turbo....

Francis44

12th August 2009, 12:32

Despite some recent contradictory statements, particularly by managers of teams, for the rules of the WRC from 2011, which as we know are being prepared behind the scenes, a source not identified, allegedly placed well within the sphere of the WRC revealed to autosport.com that the engines will be the same turbo 1.600cc: "It has to stop speculation, the rules must be stable and it was what did the FIA. We must not continue to discuss and 'undermine' the question. Believe in what we say, the engines of the WRC in 2011 are 1.600cc turbo, "he said.

WRC: 1600 cc Turbo engine is in front --

Both the Citroen and the Ford are interested in running with the rules of the current Super 2000 for engines in 2011 to avoid costs of developing a turbo engine 1600, but already know that if necessary, even build a new engine 1.6 turbo for 2011.

Apparently, the Skoda is keen to return to the WRC event were similar to the current regulations for engines, because so little need to change your Skoda Fabia S2000, but for President of the Commission of the FIA rally, Morrie Chandler, the matter is clear: "Nothing I know of Skoda! Of course we want more manufacturers, but we must realize that we look at a major, and only if the marks are no longer seduce the rules are well planned, clear and concise, leading to regulations predictable. This is the case! "said Chandler.
Original link (in portuguese)...

http://autosport.aeiou.pt/gen.pl?p=stories&op=view&fokey=as.stories/75258

COD

12th August 2009, 14:26

Original link (in portuguese)...

http://autosport.aeiou.pt/gen.pl?p=stories&op=view&fokey=as.stories/75258

I just don't get what the FIA is thinking. With all the manufacturers that allready have a s2000 car + Ford developing one for 2010 (as revealed in wrc.com) why the he*l do the wan't a 1,6t that nobody has or is willing to produce as yet?

It seems again, that they had an idea and they won't change their mind, no matter if there are very few or no manufacturers in WRC. Bloody idiots of FIA again.

MJW

12th August 2009, 14:34

Especially as Skoda had dropped a big hint they would stick with IRC in 2010 and join WRC with the S2000 car in 2011, also Abarth. Maybe FIA dont want a resolution to WRC

noel157

12th August 2009, 15:09

All is still as clear as mud now. As I said earlier and is mentioned in the Autosport link

"The last World Motor Sport Council meeting confirmed that the WRC would run with turbocharged 1.6-litre engines from 2011 onwards. Since then, however, there has been talk of 2011 running to straight Super 2000 regulations, with the 1.6 turbo engine coming in from 2012. But AUTOSPORT has learned that this will not be the case.

"This on-going debate about what format of technical regulations we're running to has to stop," a WRC insider told AUTOSPORT. "It's not helping the championship at all right now. We need stability in the regulations and that's what the FIA has given to us, we're not going to have anything undermine that right now. Believe me, World Rally cars, 2011 onwards, will run with 1.6-litre turbocharged engines."

Both current WRC manufacturers Citroen and Ford had been interested in running Super 2000 engines in 2011 to delay the cost of developing and producing a new engine. Both firms insist, however, that they will build the new engine if and when a new manufacturer signs up to 1.6 turbo WRC regulations for 2011"

So, if I'm reading this correctly FIA say 1.6T from 2011 onwards but the manufacturers say 2,000cc N/A from 2011 onwards unless a new manufacturer enters the series? Is that stability? So, the future of the WRC is based on speculation and hope?

Mirek

12th August 2009, 15:09

Škoda never said they will join WRC again. There is no official statement about that. Mr. Hrabánek only said that in the moment they don't consider WRC intereting enough to join.

Of course that doesn't mean that they won't join. I only wanted to point out that they never said they would.

MJW

12th August 2009, 15:33

]Škoda never said they will join WRC again. There is no official statement about that. Mr. Hrabánek only said that in the moment they don't consider WRC intereting enough to join.

Of course that doesn't mean that they won't join. I only wanted to point out that they never said they would.

Autosport ran a story last week following NORF that "a high ranking but declined to be named Skoda representative suggested IRC in 2010 and WRC in 2011 if the S2K format was adopted".
I was getting a bit excited after Finland when Ford & Citroen re-affirmed their commitment and NORF signed a 5 year deal, I thought WRC is staring its come back to glory days. Now I dont know if IRC retain their manufactureres maybe thats where the 'drives' will be. I for one will be disappointed with that as I prefer WRC to IRC but 5 manufactureres running professional drivers over pay as you go rich kids will make me change my mind.

MJW

12th August 2009, 17:47

This does not look promising to me. At present we have Citroen and Ford commtted to WRC for 2 years, I think partly based on the assumption they could use N/A 2 litre engines in 2011. According to Autosport last week they had a tip off from a high ranking Skoda person who dropped a big hint that Skoda would come back to WRC in 2011 with the Fabia S2000, making 3 manufactureres able to offer works drives, (maybe Abarth would also join, as I think Kimi & Anton's NORF rally performance will have been suject to some post rally meetings in Turin.) At this moment in time - some 16 months away from the start of the 2011 WRC season there is NO manufacturer with a suitable engine. Utter madness, how in these difficult economic times can you persuade the accountants running the manufacturers to commit? To me this strenghtens IRC's position to the detriment of WRC. Ego's & greed are killing our sport.

DonJippo

12th August 2009, 18:31

This does not look promising to me. At present we have Citroen and Ford commtted to WRC for 2 years, I think partly based on the assumption they could use N/A 2 litre engines in 2011.

No, both confirmed to WRC knowing what the engine rule is, confirmation came after FIA's decision to go to 1.6T 2011.

OldF

12th August 2009, 19:47

IMO the engine could be a 1.4T right away. I think there’re more 1.4T engines on the market than 1.6T engines.

About having different weight for different engine displacement is OK but for bigger engines there should be a power restrictor because the bigger engine cars would be superior compared to the smaller displacement engines. For example if a 1.6 NA engine has 200 hp and a weight of 1000 kg, the weight/power ratio is 5kg/hp. A 2L engine would produce 250 hp (2 / 1,6 = 1,25 * 200 = 250). To have equal weight/power ratio the weight of a 2L engine car should be 1250 kg. This is a quite reasonable weight but what if the engine is 3L. Calculated by same formula a 3L engine produce 375 hp and weight, with an equal weight/power ratio, should be 1875 kg which is a lead monster.

I like the idea of different engine displacement but even with an air restrictor an engine with bigger displacement would have higher torque and therefore more power on lower revs (both NA and turbo engines).

Another problem with different weight limits is that a car can’t be made as light as necessary (if the bigger displacement engine cars aren’t lead monsters) because even small cars body shells are quite heavy nowadays because of safety reasons.

modri dirkac

13th August 2009, 09:02

I'm also no optimistic about World Rally Championship. Ford and Citroen will have WRC cars (1.6T), all the others will have instead S2000 cars? Some teams will compete in S2000 Cup for S2000, but I think we will see there only small numbers of cars ...
I think that IRC will become even stronger (if Eurosport will go on with the support). Your opinion?

Tomi

13th August 2009, 10:26

I think that IRC will become even stronger (if Eurosport will go on with the support). Your opinion?

I dont think so, among drivers it will always be the 3:rd option, after works car or privateer in WRC, atleast here.

Finni

13th August 2009, 13:43

Iskald

13th August 2009, 14:09

That ing nightmare still going on.. With S2000 cars we would have seen entry list of 20 drivers and now they obviously want 1600 cars with two manufacturers. I think major manufacturers should move to IRC to stop this stupidity for the sake of the sport.

Isn`t it a bit naive to think that "major manufacturers" would like to fight for the Intercontinental Rally Challenge instead of the World Rally Championship?

I find this decision from FIA to be tactical rather than stupid. With a S2000 engine rule the WRC would compete directly with the IRC, as the cars in both series would be identical fast. The World Rally Championship is supposed to be fought out by the best drivers in the fastest cars. With a 1.6Turbo engine rule WRC will maintain its position as the series with the fastest cars, and therefore also attract the best drivers (and the major manufacturers).

I do agree that two manufacturers alone in the championship is a bit weak, but it`s still better than IRC. And who knows, maybe in 2012 or onwards it will be four, five or even more manufacturers contesting the WRC. And the reason for being so optimistic? It`s the World championship we are talking about, not a "Challenge" with dubious status among media, sponsors and spectators.

AndyRAC

13th August 2009, 15:06

Isn`t it a bit naive to think that "major manufacturers" would like to fight for the Intercontinental Rally Challenge instead of the World Rally Championship?

I find this decision from FIA to be tactical rather than stupid. With a S2000 engine rule the WRC would compete directly with the IRC, as the cars in both series would be identical fast. The World Rally Championship is supposed to be fought out by the best drivers in the fastest cars. With a 1.6Turbo engine rule WRC will maintain its position as the series with the fastest cars, and therefore also attract the best drivers (and the major manufacturers).

I do agree that two manufacturers alone in the championship is a bit weak, but it`s still better than IRC. And who knows, maybe in 2012 or onwards it will be four, five or even more manufacturers contesting the WRC. And the reason for being so optimistic? It`s the World championship we are talking about, not a "Challenge" with dubious status among media, sponsors and spectators.

It could be said that the WRC is just living on it's name at the moment - it has the name, history and the top 3-4 drivers. It has been resting on it's laurels. The longer it only has 2 Manufacturers, the less it becomes - at the moment it is suffering from credibility problems - very few people take it seriously - that cannot go on much longer. Personally, I'd have gone for S2000 for a few years, then bring in S1.6T.

RAS007

13th August 2009, 15:08

Isn`t it a bit naive to think that "major manufacturers" would like to fight for the Intercontinental Rally Challenge instead of the World Rally Championship?

I find this decision from FIA to be tactical rather than stupid. With a S2000 engine rule the WRC would compete directly with the IRC, as the cars in both series would be identical fast. The World Rally Championship is supposed to be fought out by the best drivers in the fastest cars. With a 1.6Turbo engine rule WRC will maintain its position as the series with the fastest cars, and therefore also attract the best drivers (and the major manufacturers).

I do agree that two manufacturers alone in the championship is a bit weak, but it`s still better than IRC. And who knows, maybe in 2012 or onwards it will be four, five or even more manufacturers contesting the WRC. And the reason for being so optimistic? It`s the World championship we are talking about, not a "Challenge" with dubious status among media, sponsors and spectators.

If the FIA hadn't f*cked it all up in the first place, there wouldn't even be an IRC. It is exactly because of the mismanagement of the WRC by the FIA that there was enough interest in the first place to start a break away series. Frankly, and this pains me to say it as a follower since the early 80's, I don't really care if the WRC disappears altogether now, because it has become a laughable parody of its former self. In its current form, it is actually worse than no series at all.

Mirek

13th August 2009, 15:10

FIA monopoly on using name "championship" doesn't make these series better itself. Good names are fine but still are only names. There should be something more not like in European championship for example...

Tomi

13th August 2009, 15:28

If the FIA hadn't f*cked it all up in the first place, there wouldn't even be an IRC.

Maybe Eurosport loosing their rights to send, F1, MotoGP, has quite much to do with it that there is an irc today, but its ok there is, Eurosport is still loosing huge amounts of money every year, better not forget that.
Agree also with Iskald on his points completely.
Also I belive that its checked with other manufacturers what the interest is before they made the 1600 desition.

OldF

13th August 2009, 17:33

Also I belive that its checked with other manufacturers what the interest is before they made the 1600 desition.

By the “Jarmo’s corner” six manufacturers agreed that it should be 1.6T.

http://www.nesteoilrallyfinland.fi/sisapiirinews/2009/sisapiirinuutiskirje509/jarmoscorner509/default.html

Tomi

13th August 2009, 19:07

By the “Jarmo’s corner” six manufacturers agreed that it should be 1.6T.

http://www.nesteoilrallyfinland.fi/sisapiirinews/2009/sisapiirinuutiskirje509/jarmoscorner509/default.html

Yes true, the "Stakeholder Board" is a good thing else too, less politics, better desitions hopefully.

OldF

13th August 2009, 19:36

Let’s hope that those manufacturers also will attend WRC in the near future. Would also be nice to know which these manufactures were.

Maybe the second attempt by FIA to have similar engines for WRC and WTCC gives a better result than the first one (S2000). The S2000 engines in rallying and track racing are not exactly the same and therefore it’s not possible to use the same engine in both rallying and track racing but if the 1.6T engine would be exactly the same in both rallying and track racing then maybe (big maybe) there could be some manufacturer that would attend the both championships.

Finni

13th August 2009, 22:17

OK, if so many potential manufacturer has agreed on s1600 then it's not too bad decision.

But I have been wondering some time why they are not doing three cars per manufacturer rule? If there was Petter and Atkinson driving during 2009 the championship would be worthy. In that case we could safely say that there would be four best drovers in the world (Loeb, Hirvonen, Petter and Atkinson).

Francis44

14th August 2009, 07:57

Thank God they are moving to a turbo engine...

Wrc cars had turbo since.... since i remember.

And the s2000's are not bad but may i say that they are slow as hell... I watched IRC in Madeira few weeks ago and man were they slow...

The top sport has always to have the top car and get more people into the sport, s2000 cars aren't capable of that because they are not that fun to watch!!!!

modri dirkac

14th August 2009, 08:13

seb_sh

14th August 2009, 21:00

If the FIA hadn't f*cked it all up in the first place, there wouldn't even be an IRC. It is exactly because of the mismanagement of the WRC by the FIA that there was enough interest in the first place to start a break away series. Frankly, and this pains me to say it as a follower since the early 80's, I don't really care if the WRC disappears altogether now, because it has become a laughable parody of its former self. In its current form, it is actually worse than no series at all.

Agree about FIA but not necessarily about WRC dying.

By the “Jarmo’s corner” six manufacturers agreed that it should be 1.6T.

http://www.nesteoilrallyfinland.fi/s...9/default.html

Good news, let's see: Ford, Citroen, Skoda, Proton, Fiat(Abarth) and... Suzuki?

Brother John

15th August 2009, 07:47

It could be said that the WRC is just living on it's name at the moment - it has the name, history and the top 3-4 drivers. It has been resting on it's laurels. The longer it only has 2 Manufacturers, the less it becomes - at the moment it is suffering from credibility problems - very few people take it seriously - that cannot go on much longer. Personally, I'd have gone for S2000 for a few years, then bring in S1.6T.

I agree entirely with your post here. :up:
Nevertheless someone who is realistic and sees the truth.

15th August 2009, 12:21

]FIA monopoly on using name "championship" doesn't make these series better itself. Good names are fine but still are only names. There should be something more not like in European championship for example...

Didn't the WRC have to have some special dispensation to be called a 'championship' this year anyway as it only has 2 manufacturers? Maybe they got round this with the pretend "teams" such as Munchis and Stobart..

seb_sh

15th August 2009, 22:32

Didn't the WRC have to have some special dispensation to be called a 'championship' this year anyway as it only has 2 manufacturers? Maybe they got round this with the pretend "teams" such as Munchis and Stobart..

Yea they fudged it with the "manufacturer teams" as AFAIK in order to have a FIA Manufacturers Championship there need to be more than 2 manufacturers...

Helstar

16th August 2009, 04:03

I do agree that two manufacturers alone in the championship is a bit weak, but it`s still better than IRC.
Still better with only 2 manufacturers ? And 2/3 drivers allowed to win ? FAIL !

And who knows, maybe in 2012 or onwards it will be four, five or even more manufacturers contesting the WRC.
Yes, that's what we used to say also in 2006 ... let's keep on dreaming.

But I have been wondering some time why they are not doing three cars per manufacturer rule? If there was Petter and Atkinson driving during 2009 the championship would be worthy. In that case we could safely say that there would be four best drovers in the world (Loeb, Hirvonen, Petter and Atkinson).
First time ever that a Finni's post makes not much sense xD "three cars ! having Petter and Atkinson again !", you mean one in Ford and one in Citroen ? Apart that it would be impossible (they would take other paying people - oh wait, Ford has already Al Qassimi in the third official car ! Didn't you know ?)...what would be the difference compared to last poor year ^^ ?

Saabaru

16th August 2009, 09:11

Isn`t it a bit naive to think that "major manufacturers" would like to fight for the Intercontinental Rally Challenge instead of the World Rally Championship?

I find this decision from FIA to be tactical rather than stupid. With a S2000 engine rule the WRC would compete directly with the IRC, as the cars in both series would be identical fast. The World Rally Championship is supposed to be fought out by the best drivers in the fastest cars. With a 1.6Turbo engine rule WRC will maintain its position as the series with the fastest cars, and therefore also attract the best drivers (and the major manufacturers).

I do agree that two manufacturers alone in the championship is a bit weak, but it`s still better than IRC. And who knows, maybe in 2012 or onwards it will be four, five or even more manufacturers contesting the WRC. And the reason for being so optimistic? It`s the World championship we are talking about, not a "Challenge" with dubious status among media, sponsors and spectators.

First of all you are way too optimistic about the WRC and the F1A. They dug the hole that started a spinoff series (IRC), so what makes you think they can dig their way out of it by making the same stupid mistakes all over again? If they want to call themselves the “World” Rally Championship they need to be more open to more worldly cars and engine platforms. Another thing you need to take into account is that most all organizations whose names begin with the word “world” are usually corrupt and maybe the WRC isn’t any different.

MikeD

16th August 2009, 11:13

Let’s hope that those manufacturers also will attend WRC in the near future. Would also be nice to know which these manufactures were.

The 6 manufactures are Citroën and Ford from WRC and BMW, SEAT, Chevrolet and LADA from WTCC. FIA's idea was that it would be easier for those brands to let cars race in both series.

Of course the big question marks is, will it work.

Tomi

16th August 2009, 11:41

The 6 manufactures are Citroën and Ford from WRC and BMW, SEAT, Chevrolet and LADA from WTCC. FIA's idea was that it would be easier for those brands to let cars race in both series.

Of course the big question marks is, will it work.

and the sourse is?

MikeD

16th August 2009, 12:43

and the sourse is?

I think it was written both on Crash.net, TouringCar Times, Autosport and Rally-Info. It was also discussed on Eurosport during the last WTCC event at Donnington.

AndyRAC

16th August 2009, 13:14

Well I can't imagine BMW or Seat would do the WRC, so that's 2 less possible Manufacturers.

Tomi

16th August 2009, 13:29

Same here, i guess its differnt issue from the Mahonen thing, OldF is talking about.

Helstar

16th August 2009, 16:49

and BMW, SEAT, Chevrolet and LADA from WTCC.
If they are competing in WTCC, they WON'T do WRC ... trust me.
It's the same as saying Ford and Citroen doing WTCC in the future ! Impossible (at least not while they're doing WRC).

16th August 2009, 18:45

IRC may not been around for ever but I'm going to enjoy it whilst it lasts. Have you guys seen the entry list for Barum this weekend? 5 different makes of S2000 (25 in total) and maybe 10 potential winners. Surely this is the kind of variety we want to see in WRC?

Contrast this to Rally Australia, next up on the WRC calendar where we already know one of two drivers is going to win it bar problems for Loeb or Mikko.

Perhaps that is why the Barum Rally thread on the IRC board has 258 posts and 19,464 views already and Australia has, errrrm, 3 posts and 481 views.

We desperately need more teams and drivers in WRC, maybe the new technical regs are the thing to do it, although I think WRCs problems lie deeper than that alone.

And one more thing, I don't think you can really say that the 4 works WRC drivers are definitely "the best in the world" when they have NO COMPETITION! Is Matthew Wilson the 7th best rally driver in the world because he is 7th in the championship? I don't think so.

alleskids

16th August 2009, 18:58

The secret of rally for many years was the change to drive the same car in the same specifications as the championship regular stars. In IRC, the client Peugeot's beat the factory Peugeot because they have the exact same equipement. WRC now demands a miljion euro investment plan and even the you get a half compettive car. Make rallycars available for everyone for a descent price like IRC does. Now they force everyone to build a hightigh F1 Space Shutle look a like thing. Rally was a thing for normal people with some kind of normal street cars. IRC is the best alternative for such an idiolistic world

A.F.F.

16th August 2009, 21:29

Iskald

17th August 2009, 13:51

If they want to call themselves the “World” Rally Championship they need to be more open to more worldly cars and engine platforms. Another thing you need to take into account is that most all organizations whose names begin with the word “world” are usually corrupt and maybe the WRC isn’t any different.

Exactly what do you mean by worldly car and engine platforms? From an american standpoint the WRC should then preferably be fought out with 1,6 ton rearwheeldrive cars, and engine platform should be cast iron V8`s with or without restrictor plates depending on the nature (speed) of the different rallies. Isn`t that a "worldly" car and engine platform for an american?

Honestly, I haven`t made up my mind if 1.6T is the right way to go or not. I just suspect that proper WRC rally cars needs a turbo and the engine torque that comes with it to remain spectacular and fast enough. In my eyes S2000 is just way to slow to maintain interest as the spearhead of international rallying.

Saabaru

17th August 2009, 15:23

Exactly what do you mean by worldly car and engine platforms? From an american standpoint the WRC should then preferably be fought out with 1,6 ton rearwheeldrive cars, and engine platform should be cast iron V8`s with or without restrictor plates depending on the nature (speed) of the different rallies. Isn`t that a "worldly" car and engine platform for an american?

Honestly, I haven`t made up my mind if 1.6T is the right way to go or not. I just suspect that proper WRC rally cars needs a turbo and the engine torque that comes with it to remain spectacular and fast enough. In my eyes S2000 is just way to slow to maintain interest as the spearhead of international rallying.

I don't know about all of America but in the U.S. a street car that you could use for rally would be: Ford Focus 2.0L, Volvo C30 or S40 2.5L, Subaru STI 2.5L, Mitsubishi EVO 2.0L, Mazda 3 not sure, Saab 2.0L, Chevrolet Cobalt SS 2.0L,Honda Civic Si 2.0L, Honda Fit 1.5L, Nissan Sentra SE-R 2.5, Scion TC 2.3L, Scion XD 2.3L, VW GTI Jetta Rabbit Beetle come with Petrol and TDI engines, Lexus IS 2.5L, Audi A3 2.0L, Audi TT 2.0L, Toyota Matrix 2.3L, Dodge Neon 2.0L. I'm sure there are many I am forgetting but as you can see not all cars here in the U.S. are big V8's. Even so it would be interesting to see a G8 or CTS-V on a tarmac rally!

Motorsportfun

17th August 2009, 17:11

Well I can't imagine BMW or Seat would do the WRC, so that's 2 less possible Manufacturers.

Why neither Seat's?

Has been in the WRC some years ago... :D

Motorsportfun

17th August 2009, 17:18

If the FIA hadn't f*cked it all up in the first place, there wouldn't even be an IRC. It is exactly because of the mismanagement of the WRC by the FIA that there was enough interest in the first place to start a break away series.

Why you all are talking about the past?

Look at future, Dave Richards is not being rally's Bernie Ecclestone (and all the crazy proposed to a "VIP" series).

Is coming back soon to spectators. Look at the proposal of last WMSC, then we can talk! ;)

25th August 2009, 12:50

i cringe when i see an s2000 hit a hairpin on dry tarmac...

Try from 5:55 :)

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

J.Lindstroem

8th September 2009, 12:23

Mirek

8th September 2009, 12:40

I heard Mini is thinking about joining WRC.

J.Lindstroem

8th September 2009, 12:46

Volkswagen has expressed their interest as we know, but i hav'nt heard anything about them recently.. Fiat? Renault?

noel157

8th September 2009, 13:01

If we assume that the new cars are going to be 1.6T. What manufactures are in? Has someone made a list of potential newcommers to the Wrc? It is a bit strange that i've not heard anyone else than Citroen and Ford...

I think that's been the problem since Ford and Citroen will only go 1.6T if at least one other manufacturer commits to the series, otherwise it's 2.0 N/A. Perhaps things have moved on since that was the case and for all we know there may well be somebody waiting to sign up. As far as I can see it won't be just the FIA that decides. The WRC is Ford and Citroen and they will get exactly what they want.

I'm not sure what value we can place on various manufacturers "expressing an interest" in the WRC. Really means nothing.

A.F.F.

8th September 2009, 13:50

Opel?

Proton?

MJW

8th September 2009, 14:49

gpweek.com has a bit from Quensel stating that Citroen have stopped development work on their S2000 car but still say the new wrc car will be the DS3. Interesting bit from Quensel was that there were 30 unsold 207's along with the cars from Skoda, and FIAT looking for purchasers. Quensel gave a confusing message about the economy not supporting Citroen embarking on an S2K car. In another bit in gpweek it said that WRC cars will come from class N4, thereby allowing Group N cars (from Subaru and Mitsu) S2000 N/A and teh new 1.6T cars to compete.

8th September 2009, 14:55

gpweek.com has a bit from Quensel stating that Citroen have stopped development work on their S2000 car but still say the new wrc car will be the DS3. Interesting bit from Quensel was that there were 30 unsold 207's along with the cars from Skoda, and FIAT looking for purchasers.

Surplus 207s surprises me, Skoda have quite a waiting list for Fabias at the moment.

The other thing awaiting confirmation is whether the 1.6T engines will be based on road car units or will be bespoke designs. Latter IMO does not stick to the spirit of rallying and would surely be more expensive?

Buzz Lightyear

8th September 2009, 15:57

Sulland

8th September 2009, 16:06

As far as I have understood the DS3 chassis will be based on S2000 regs. They just do not want to use resourses to make one S2000 and one 1600T engine version.

The other aspect is the World Engine. Will be very interessting to see what happens tomorrow. If they now allows N4 based cars again, then I give up !

HaCo

8th September 2009, 16:42

If they now allows N4 based cars again, then I give up !
What's wrong with that? One big class with S2000, S1600T and N4. They will never have as many manufactures as now... PWRC could be changed to an R1 class, which mean true (and affordable) production class.

Sulland

8th September 2009, 18:27

Because this has been ruled out from the start of the process, until right before the final meeting.

OldF

8th September 2009, 22:26

Questions aroused based on the article in gpweek (page 16).

“As from January 2010 Super 2000 cars will be allowed to be wider, and from January 2011 new Super 2000 cars will only be homologated if they are fitted with a 1.6 turbocharged engines”.

What will happen to IRC? No more new manufacturers in IRC after 2011? Why is Ford developing a S2000 car?

“The World championship rules say that as from the start of 2011, WRC cars shall come from Class N4.”

If the new engine format is 1.6T, how can the cars come from class N4 (2-litre turbo engines)? Does the “from class N4” mean that from the beginning of 2011 the class N4 cars have a 1.6T engine?

“As things stand, manufacturers can run cars in one of three different formats: current Super 2000 (2-litre normally aspirated) form, 2011 Super 2000 rules (1.6 litre turbocharged) or orthodox turbocharged Group N cars.”

If from January 2011 the Super 2000 cars must be fitted with a 1.6T engine to get homologation, does it mean that the “2-litre NA format” cars are cars homologated before 2011? Does it mean that the performance of the 1.6T cars are at same level as current S2000 and N4?

Sulland

8th September 2009, 23:25

I just hope FIA for once make a set of rules that are simple, simple, simple so everyone can follow and understand.

I am not very optimistic, since they normally are being pushed by the factories.

If they can get a standard ECU into the rules, then more teams can win, also privat teams. If not standard ECU, still only a few possible winners = boring and predictable rallies.

Look at how much IRC have managed to do in a few years with a simpe set of rules, and cars you can buy to start a team that with the right driver can win.

FIA; surprise me tomorrow !!

bt52b

9th September 2009, 01:44

The new WRC 2011 is still probably S2000 + kit (aero bits + more boost)

Super Production will probably comprise N4 and S2000. Not sure how you equalise N4 2.0l turbos, S2000 1.6l turbos and S2000 2.0l....

jonkka

9th September 2009, 06:07

Not sure how you equalise N4 2.0l turbos, S2000 1.6l turbos and S2000 2.0l....

With restrictor and minimum weight limits.

9th September 2009, 07:17

With restrictor and minimum weight limits.

It's not really that simple though is it since different engines and chassis specs will still perform differently in different situations.

This whole thing seems messier than ever reading the last few posts :(

f-cup

9th September 2009, 09:22

If the new engine format is 1.6T, how can the cars come from class N4 (2-litre turbo engines)? Does the “from class N4” mean that from the beginning of 2011 the class N4 cars have a 1.6T engine?

The 1.6t is allready N4, becuse N4 is class for over 2000cc engines, which 1.6t is.

grugsticles

9th September 2009, 09:33

The 1.6t is allready N4, becuse N4 is class for over 2000cc engines, which 1.6t is.
Err, I think you mean to say that N4 is for engines greater than 1600cc and up to 2000cc?

But your right, N4 regulations wont need to change to suit the new 1.6T WRC.

f-cup

9th September 2009, 09:44

Err, I think you mean to say that N4 is for engines greater than 1600cc and up to 2000cc?

But your right, N4 regulations wont need to change to suit the new 1.6T WRC.
Well.. no. If I remember right, there is a multicipation factor for turbo engines, which is 1.7 or something. So 1.6t is 2720cc as 2.0t is 3400cc. You dont need to have turbo with N4, just over 2000cc with or without turbo.
Or am I totally out there...

noel157

9th September 2009, 10:08

Well.. no. If I remember right, there is a multicipation factor for turbo engines, which is 1.7 or something. So 1.6t is 2720cc as 2.0t is 3400cc. You dont need to have turbo with N4, just over 2000cc with or without turbo.
Or am I totally out there...

Think the m/factor is 1.4 which would make N/A 2,200 cc. Used to be that when Renault had the turbo in F1 with Arnoux etc.

grugsticles

9th September 2009, 10:20

I stand corrected. :)

noel157

9th September 2009, 11:00

I stand corrected. :)

I'm only guessing Grug, I'm sure it's hidden away somewhere on the FIA site.

Daniel

9th September 2009, 11:01

Think the m/factor is 1.4 which would make N/A 2,200 cc. Used to be that when Renault had the turbo in F1 with Arnoux etc.
I'm pretty sure it's 1.7 :)

Mirek

9th September 2009, 11:10

You're right. 1,4 was more than twenty years a go.

noel157

9th September 2009, 12:39

Yes, totally behind the times, it's now 1.7. Sorry Grug, you were indeed correct.

Sulland

9th September 2009, 15:03

Whenn can we expect a press release from todays meeting ?

OldF

9th September 2009, 16:26

The 1.6t is allready N4, becuse N4 is class for over 2000cc engines, which 1.6t is.

Noup,

The multiplier is 1.7

Link to the site (article 251):
http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulations/Pages/InternationalSportingCodeA.aspx

Direct link to the document, 3.1 Supercharging on page 2:
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/7FBA987096BA1544C12575DF00535DC1/$FILE/252%20_09-10_.pdf

N4 is over 2000cc, page 14

Link to the site:
http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulations/Pages/FIARallyChampionships.aspx

Direct link to the document:
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/BAD76F6EC4DC053DC125758600530CCE/$FILE/2009%20WRC%20Sporting%20Regulations.pdf

bt52b

10th September 2009, 00:36

Noup,

The multiplier is 1.7

Wonder will that change, as it never took direct injection into account.

Whenn can we expect a press release from todays meeting ?

Doubt there will be anything official till WMSC on Oct 23rd/ish, but something will probably appear on motorsport sites in the next week if there is agreement...

OldF

13th September 2009, 14:06

Doubt there will be anything official till WMSC on Oct 23rd/ish, but something will probably appear on motorsport sites in the next week if there is agreement...

There’s also a WRC commission meeting next Wednesday, 16th of September, but maybe they decides only the calendar for 2010.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/78488

Rally Power

14th September 2009, 13:32

October 23 will be FIA election day, maybe this time it justifies a new delay in WRC regulations so that the elected board members could express their opinion.

Maybe none of the candidates agree with the world 1.6T motor concept launched by Mr. Mosley!

Even considering some advantages on a smaller turbocharged engine, I still believe that 2011 WRC cars should be entirely based on actual S2000 in order to avoid larger developments costs and immediately attract IRC manufacturers.

Barreis

14th September 2009, 13:49

I totally agree.. :)

bt52b

14th September 2009, 14:08

MJW

14th September 2009, 14:42

Martin Holmes is reporting that the production and custom 1.6l turbos may be allowed, but also mentions that it would make sense to delay the introduction of these engines till 2012 or 2013. No sign of any new rules yet.

In the article by Martin Holmes in gpweek.com, it's Christian Loriaux who says it makes sense to delay the 1.6T until 2012 or 13, he says every time there is a meeting the costs go up with each new proposal, he also says that all those manufacturers who either joined recently with S2000's did so with the enticement of a simple set of rules and N/A engines. If no decision is taken on engines until end of October it leaves 14 months to start of "new dawn wrc" for manufacturers to evaluate the rules, decide on whether they want to play, get the funding, design, build and test. Maybe when Max goes something quick and simple can be brought in. Also getting hints that whilst Ford may be happy to use a 2000 N/A Citroen say that Peugot have that engine and Citroen wont build a direct competitor to its PSA sister. Again heared last week that DTM rules stay the same until 2012 and that Citroen still considering..............

Barreis

14th September 2009, 15:12

They can go to DTM if they want to..

Sulland

14th September 2009, 17:02

A lot of good points in this piece on page 17 in GPWeek issue 63. http://www.gpweek.com/

- It is too little time left until 2011 for this to become a success. Use S2000 until 2012 or 13.
Lorioux of Ford says; Every time a rule is implemented too quicly it ends up being too expensive.

- A lot of manufacurers have made S2000, since it is simple. Simple is good.
No new manufacturer or any of the current S2000 factories have said out load that they will go 1600T, only Ford and Citroen.

- FIA was too quick to give indications to VW to allow 1820mm with, since that suited them, in eagerto get a new big manufacturer. Keep 1800, if not this move could destabilize the whole S2000 group we have now, by allowing 1820 and making them obsolete.

I agree in much of this, bottom line; Wait with 1600T to 2013, and get it right the first time. The rallysport can NOT afford to miss this one !!!

17th September 2009, 10:57

I did originally think that it would be stupid to make the manufacturers develop a 2litre NA engine, only to have to develop a 1.6T only a couple of years down the line. But given that another 6 months has passed and they have still not decided the rules, and that there are no new teams yet forthcoming, maybe Loriaux is right...

alleskids

17th September 2009, 17:43

I read on a Belgium forum that it is confirmed that Mikko Hirvone wil drive a Ford Fiesta S2000 as 0-car in the Monte Carlo Rallye?

17th September 2009, 17:48

I read on a Belgium forum that it is confirmed that Mikko Hirvone wil drive a Ford Fiesta S2000 as 0-car in the Monte Carlo Rallye?

Don't know about Monte, but it is rumoured for IRC Scotland. Matthew Wilson will shakedown the car soon.

OldF

17th September 2009, 20:39

At the moment there isn’t any new manufacturers at all. If the engine would be a 2-litre NA engine there are three potential new manufacturers with S2000 cars: Fiat, Peugeot and Skoda. If the engine will be a 2-litre NA engine I think we will loose one manufacturer, Citroen.

If I could decide the manufacturers could choose a turbo engine between 1,4 – 2,0 litre. These different size engines can have equal torque and power with different boost levels.

I had a look in the IRC forum at the “Skoda begin testing Fabia S2000” thread and the first post was in February 2008. By this I assume that proper testing of a new car takes about one year and maybe another year or a half for designing and building the prototype, so about 1,5 - 2 years from “blank paper” to “ready to race”. For a manufacturer with no motor sport activities at all it will take even longer because they have to start with hiring staff and acquire facilities etc. Of course this could be done more quickly by signing an agreement with a team like Prodrive.

Helstar

18th September 2009, 03:56

(warning: this post contains sarcasm ^^)

Come on FIA ... don't decide so quickly ! Wait another 3-4 years, who cares ... WRC is WRC, would be da best rally championship even without any manufacturers, you figure with the INCREDIBLE number of 2 ! Woho !

Ps. FIA = FAIL (not sarcasm).

Rally Power

18th September 2009, 20:33

Portuguese Autosport news site has published Martin Holmes report of last WRC commission meeting, suggesting that from 2011 it will be allowed manufacturers to enter Gr. N, S2000 or WRC 1.6T cars!
Each category will have an extra aerodynamic package but WRC 1.6T technical definition is still under discussion.

http://autosport.aeiou.pt/gen.pl?p=stories&op=view&fokey=as.stories/76550 (http://autosport.aeiou.pt/gen.pl?p=stories&op=view&fokey=as.stories/76550)

After all the delays, this is clearly a B plan showing that FIA is finally convinced that 1.6T WRC’s wont be ready for 2011!
Will FIA be able to equalise 1.6TWRC to S2000 and Gr. N cars? If so, this amplified technical layout could be very interesting…

Helstar

19th September 2009, 05:24

Bring in S2000 and that's it ... for Colin's sake ! ¬_¬

1.6T in next years if they really really really want to be 'superior' to IRC (at least in machinery ^^).

Wim_Impreza

19th September 2009, 09:47

I read on a Belgium forum that it is confirmed that Mikko Hirvone wil drive a Ford Fiesta S2000 as 0-car in the Monte Carlo Rallye?

It isn't confirmed. Still a few months to go to Monte-Carlo.

19th September 2009, 21:28

Will FIA be able to equalise 1.6TWRC to S2000 and Gr. N cars? If so, this amplified technical layout could be very interesting…

Be nice if they grew a spine and chose one formula instead of ticking "all of the above"

AndyRAC

19th September 2009, 22:01

It would be nice if they made Group N a proper Showroom class. Not the silly regs they have now - trying to make it equal with S2000 cars.

OldF

20th September 2009, 04:50

Will FIA be able to equalise 1.6TWRC to S2000 and Gr. N cars? If so, this amplified technical layout could be very interesting…

If they’re equalised it means that the future WRC cars won’t be so powerful. IMO a WRC car should have more power than a S2000 or N4 car have. Otherwise the formula could be interesting with the different option of bases.

That I don’t understand if one of the option is a 1,6why it could be, as I’ve said earlier, an option between 1,4– 2,0.

OldF

20th September 2009, 05:24

It would be nice if they made Group N a proper Showroom class.

We have a class called V1600, which is almost a showroom class. Only modifications allowed except the safety and reinforcement are “one way adjustable” dampers, brake pads, break pipes. The ECU is free as long it’s interchangeable with the original one. The cars don’t have to homologated as long they are commercial available in the EU countries. That’s why here are cars not so common in rallies, for example a Alfa-Romeo 147.

BTW it would be interesting to know what national “homologation” there are different countries?

HaCo

20th September 2009, 07:50

It would be nice if they made Group N a proper Showroom class. Not the silly regs they have now - trying to make it equal with S2000 cars.

It's silly we're still talking about N class, which is something of the last century. N4 is just R4, just like the S2K and the 1.6T will be...

Proper ProductionWRC should be with R1 (which do not exist right now, I know): this would make a cheap and slow car championship for young and or gentleman drivers drivers to learn and for the adventure of rallying.

A true Junior championship could be made with R2/R3 cars, the last stage for young drivers before coming to WRC for example.

Are these rules, I mean R1/R2/R3/R4 classes already approved and when will they become implemented?

HaCo

20th September 2009, 07:55

We have a class called V1600, which is almost a showroom class. Only modifications allowed except the safety and reinforcement are “one way adjustable” dampers, brake pads, break pipes. The ECU is free as long it’s interchangeable with the original one. The cars don’t have to homologated as long they are commercial available in the EU countries. That’s why here are cars not so common in rallies, for example a Alfa-Romeo 147.
This sounds like a nice class to me, already found the website: http://www.v1600.com/

Even Loeb was there in his young year :p
http://www.v1600.com/files/v1600.julkaisee.fi/.album/1250501977330_1_large.jpg