VW & Fiat in WRC [Archive] - Motorsport Forums

GigiGalliNo1

17th August 2009, 08:01

What the hell?

Plus a quick Quote:

However, if the arrival of Fiat and Volkswagen eventuates, the two companies can be expected to give the series a massive boost thanks to their resources and huge global supporter base.

“I’ve got one or two (manufacturers) who I think will come in. I don’t want more than four (manufacturers competing in total) because any more than that and they can’t win,” he said to the Financial Times.

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/39802/wrc-fiat-and-volkswagen-to-join-series-in-2010/#comment-29067

I think it's BS regarding no more manu's into the championship to leave it at 3.. Ford, Citroen and/or VW/Fiat?!?!?

Tomi

17th August 2009, 08:08

What the hell?

Plus a quick Quote:

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/39802/wrc-fiat-and-volkswagen-to-join-series-in-2010/#comment-29067

I think it's BS regarding no more manu's into the championship to leave it at 3.. Ford, Citroen and/or VW/Fiat?!?!?

The VW and Fiat is correct, the rest of the story bullsh.

AndyRAC

17th August 2009, 09:25

He (Duncanson) is missing the point - yes it is cheaper than F1, but the returns are abysmal - so it's better to finish last in F1 than to finish 1st in WRC. That needs to change.

Helstar

17th August 2009, 11:49

He doesn't want more than 4 manus ? Who are you ? Why do you want to put a limit ? Total bull.... !

In F1 there 10 manus, nobody is complaining, why can't we have at least 5 in WRC ?

Apart that I don't see FIAT and VW doing a WRC car for next year, if they enter they join the S2000 cup with their Punto and Polo. So the WRC titles and the most attentions are still reserved to Citroen and Ford, that is.

J4MIE

17th August 2009, 13:10

Until there is some official news I won't believe it.

Would be nice though ;)

alleskids

17th August 2009, 15:54

VW is concentrating on Dakar 2010 and only after that they could start their 2 year build up plan for WRC, either a S200o(plus) or a 1.6T concept. VW will not be in WRC before 2012.

MikeD

17th August 2009, 16:03

In F1 there 10 manus....

Once again Mr. KnowNothing. There are 5 manufacturers in F1. They are..

Ferrari
Mercedes (via McLaren)
BMW (gone by the end of the year)
Renault
Toyota

Red Bull is using Renault engines
Toro Rosso are using Ferrari engines
Brawn and Force India are using Mercedes engines
Williams are using Toyota engines

so next year there will only be 4 manufactuers in F1, so your argument is useless (like always)

Helstar

17th August 2009, 16:21

Your argument is pointless. The teams are 10 and there are 2 drivers for each team and that's what I meant (and that's what we all want in WRC - more factory cars and more top drivers).

I don't know why you always try to flame with me but for sure you have some serious problems.... you'll be ignored from now on Mr.Flamerwithoutareason !

Motorsportfun

17th August 2009, 16:58

For 2010 in Formula 1 there will be FOUR manufacturers, so there could be no difference if VW and FIAT will come.

Anyway...

He (Duncanson) is missing the point - yes it is cheaper than F1, but the returns are abysmal - so it's better to finish last in F1 than to finish 1st in WRC. That needs to change.

...there is no return because there are no manufacturers and top-drivers battling at the top.

The FIA has totally changed his point of view about the series. The times where rallies-Ecclestone Dave Richards tried to give a F1-atmosphere (luxurious and for just VIP and famous people) is dead after the new decisions from WMSC.

Needs also to change opinions... :rolleyes:

With the new formula based on 1600cc-turbo engines and S2000-chassis, and with VW and Abarth (maybe with Raikkonen, as Ferrari wont want him anymore, although they says the exact opposite...) into the sport, together new rules (no more SupeRally, longer Stages km, more "free" format for organisers from 2 to 4 days, etc...) I think rallying in 2 years time will come back as a truly popular sport!

Don't forget that with a "lower-cost series", more private drivers will come into the sports for full programmes.

Look at World Superbikes... it's going to be as popular as MotoGP, but with a 10-times smallest budget (a MotoGP season costs for a works team about 110 millions euros, SBK is just 1)!

Helstar

17th August 2009, 17:16

Look at World Superbikes... it's going to be as popular as MotoGP, but with a 10-times smallest budget (a MotoGP season costs for a works team about 110 millions euros, SBK is just 1)!
ONE ? ^^;

Motorsportfun

17th August 2009, 17:27

ONE ? ^^;

I've read on Motosprint weekly something like this, so yes. :D

f-cup

17th August 2009, 18:35

The teams are 10 and there are 2 drivers for each team and that's what I meant (and that's what we all want in WRC - more factory cars and more top drivers).

I think that the point was that there really are only 5 manu teams in F1. The rest are just the same as Munchi's, Stobart etc. in WRC.

But anyway, there is a certain point in having only limited number of teams in WRC. You have all seen what happens to tems that are not competive. They quit. If we could have four manu teams, and they all have their junior teams as Ford and Citroen have now, it would be well enough.

alleskids

17th August 2009, 18:56

They should not limiting the numbers of manufactueres, they must limite the rules and keep them steady for many years and keep the costs low for the drivers and teams Make the cars availalble (including all the engineer stuff) and pricealble for everyone. Nobody wants to spend millions on a limited engineerd WRCar or be manipulated by the only 2 real teambosses.

Mercedes is providing/selling the engines to Brawn , but does not tell them to stay behind their 2 own drivers. So why should Ford keep their paying drivers on a leash? F1 has client teams beating factory teams.

Helstar

17th August 2009, 18:57

I think that the point was that there really are only 5 manu teams in F1. The rest are just the same as Munchi's, Stobart etc. in WRC.

But anyway, there is a certain point in having only limited number of teams in WRC. You have all seen what happens to tems that are not competive. They quit. If we could have four manu teams, and they all have their junior teams as Ford and Citroen have now, it would be well enough.

The more teams the more possibility to have competitive cars ... in 2008 we had 4 work teams but 2 failed to be competitive and retired, and we are stuck in 2 teams only now. If we'd have (example) 7 teams, and 3 are not competitive, we would have 4 in the next year :p !

I've read on Motosprint weekly something like this, so yes. :D
So it's not 10-times smallest budget, but 110-times :) !

Motorsportfun

17th August 2009, 20:01

So it's not 10-times smallest budget, but 110-times :) !

lol, sorry :D

seb_sh

17th August 2009, 21:47

The comparison to Formula 1 is not entirely correct. Indeed there are only 5 (next year 4) street car maker teams in Formula 1. Next year there will still be 5 engine suppliers as Cosworth is returning as supplier to the new teams.

However there are (usually) 10 or more independent manufacturers in Formula 1 regardless of engine suppliers (except for Red Bull/Torro Rosso atm). Brawn GP is not like Stobart even if they get engines from Mercedes. They get engines, that's it, they have to design, build, improve their own car, Mercedes has no say in what drivers Brawn hires or cannot tell them to move over in races just because they supply engines and the same goes for all the other teams (Williams with Toyota, Red Bull with Renault etc).

The difference is that F1 teams such as Williams or Force India do not need to sell cars, they exist in order to race in F1 so except for cases where they go bankrupt or whatever they won't leave even if they are last because there is nowhere to go for them.

Back to WRC now, it has for a long time been dependent on official or semi-official Manufacturer (ie road car maker) involvement. I think you need at least 4 manufacturers not at most as that article says. Not only because there is more variety and possibly more competition but also if you loose one you don't loose 25% of your top competitors.

As for Superbike thats a very good example of something done right. There are currently 7 bike makers involved (although only 3 are consistently fighting at the top with Aprillia recently getting into the scrap) and there is talks of KTM joining as well. Also, not only are they running works teams they some also give bikes to customer teams. They can do this because the cost is very low and the bikes are modified street bikes so when you think about cost/return it is very good even if you don't win.

MJW

17th August 2009, 23:43

macksrallye

18th August 2009, 02:16

Also, not only are they running works teams they some also give bikes to customer teams. They can do this because the cost is very low and the bikes are modified street bikes so when you think about cost/return it is very good even if you don't win.

And that ^ is why Group A was so successful, they were modified versions of cars that the company's produced day-in, day-out. WRCars on the other hand are much more like F1, the cars are designed with one purpose in mind, racing, so they (Citroensport & M-Sport) design the cars from the ground up just as an F1 team would.

I'm not saying go back to Group A but if we want a cost effective & competative championship the FIA needs to look that direction, if they don't care about the costs & want out & out excitment the WRCar is what they should be looking at (although the current cars reward point & shoot driving to much, we need some noise & sideways style back in the sport).

AndyRAC

18th August 2009, 08:23

Could this be the rumoured Scirocco? - I think VW are keen on Turbo engines, but the 1.4 litre is the main one for VAG group now as that is what is in the Audi A3. Talking of Audi there was some crazy whispers about Petter and Audi A3 last week. I didnt beleive it then and I still dont, - cant see Audi coming back somehow.

I can't either, VW Group has specific sports for each marque;

Audi - Sportscars
VW - Dakar
Seat - Touring Cars
Skoda - Rallying

However, VW expressed an interest in WRC with a TDI Scirocco, but the car was too wide, and wouldn't be given a dispensation. When the VAGroup come knocking, you don't knock them back. Big mistake I think.

Gard

18th August 2009, 10:46

I can't either, VW Group has specific sports for each marque;

Audi - Sportscars
VW - Dakar
Seat - Touring Cars
Skoda - Rallying

However, VW expressed an interest in WRC with a TDI Scirocco, but the car was too wide, and wouldn't be given a dispensation. When the VAGroup come knocking, you don't knock them back. Big mistake I think.

They run VW Scirocco in Swedish Touring Cars

mjh

18th August 2009, 11:14

However, VW expressed an interest in WRC with a TDI Scirocco, but the car was too wide, and wouldn't be given a dispensation. When the VAGroup come knocking, you don't knock them back. Big mistake I think.

My understanding is that the FIA increased the maximum dimension from 1800mm to 1820mm (Autosport magazine 04/09/2008), against the Sciroccos 1810mm width. I believe that the Ford Fiesta S2000 is greater than 1800mm too so I guess that is correct (couldn't find the actual regulation on the FIA website).

MikeD

18th August 2009, 12:44

However there are (usually) 10 or more independent manufacturers in Formula 1

The 10 teams in F1 are not "manufacturers", but "constructors". There is a huge difference, because a constructor builds prototypes, and that's why the comparison with rally is irrelevant. Other than that I agree with your post.

Apart from that I think there is a psykological point in saying that 4 manufacturers are enough for WRC, because it could pressure potential manufacturers to think they want to be one of the four. Hopefully it will speed up their interest in WRC.

Brother John

18th August 2009, 15:04

Check out his thread dear John: http://www.rallyforum.com/forums//sh...d.php?t=134633 (http://www.rallyforum.com/forums//showthread.php?t=134633)

That happened if they started a new thread for each fart. http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/innocent/innocent0009.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net/freesmiley.php?smiley=innocent/innocent0009.gif) :D ;)

Tomi

18th August 2009, 17:25

seb_sh

18th August 2009, 18:28

The 10 teams in F1 are not "manufacturers", but "constructors". There is a huge difference, because a constructor builds prototypes, and that's why the comparison with rally is irrelevant.

Thanks for the correction, constructor is the correct word.

As for the 4 manufacturers limit, it might be a game to make it seem like a privilege to be in but imo it was the FIA in the first place who turned the manufacturers away, interest in WRC will probably be higher again if the conditions are right esp after the world financial state improves.

AndyRAC

18th August 2009, 19:27

I can understand his reasoning a bit - if you have 6-7 Manufacturers, they can't all win - and if the same 2-3 are winning and the same 2-3 are always finishing in the low top 10, there isn't much good news for the Board members. However, if it was a level playing field and there were 5-7 Manufacturers, there could be the possibility to have a mixture of result - depending on the surface, etc
If there were only 4 Manufacturers, you would hope that Privateers could get hold of equal machinery and challenge - not like now, were the Privateers are several steps behind. As ever, self interest will win, I fear.

18th August 2009, 19:54

I can understand his reasoning a bit - if you have 6-7 Manufacturers, they can't all win.

They can if they are good enough and there are more than 6-7 events per season!

Their argument isn't very valid IMO, surely the competing manufacturers would like someone to be able to beat. It can't ring great in the Citroen boardroom either when they come back with the news of their world title and the other board members say "great, who did we beat" and Quesnel replies "Ford, a shipping company and an Argentinian icecream manufacturer"

MikeD

18th August 2009, 21:10

It can't ring great in the Citroen boardroom either when they come back with the news of their world title and the other board members say "great, who did we beat" and Quesnel replies "Ford, a shipping company and an Argentinian icecream manufacturer"

That's not how the PSA board room will react. They will ask Quesnel (responsable for both Peugeot Sport and Citröen Racing) "How did we do on our 4 targets this year?" He will say...

target 1 was to win Le Mans - Peugeot did that

target 2 is to win the Le Mans series (LMS) - That doesn't look like Peugeot will win that

target 3 is to win the WRC Manufactures' title in WRC with Citroën - That looks quite possible

target 4 is to win the Drivers' title with Loeb - That looks possible

If he can say they achived 2 out 4 targets they will be happy and worth the budget that helps build up the Image for the 2 PSA brands.

jens

18th August 2009, 21:39

No more than 4 manufacturers? This is just plain ridiculous and with such attitude it's not surprising WRC is in such death as it currently is.

The last properly competitive WRC season was IMO 2005, when we had 5 very competitive manufacturers, who were all capable of achieving podiums. And based on McRae's Oz drive, one could say that sixth manufacturer could have been competitive as well. :D

seb_sh

18th August 2009, 22:25

One of the 4 manufacturers may be slower/less experienced and not win anyway and because of the cap a stronger manufacturer might not be able to join. The cap is so wrong on so many levels I have to hope they aren't realistically considering it.

And like I said earlier if costs are low manufacturers might not have too much of a problem with not winning for a while. In 2002 there were 7 manufacturers each running 3 cars at some rallies and no one complained ;) (even if costs were not as low as they could be)

WRCS14

19th August 2009, 21:48

Hmm, I would have to agree but I think 4 is probably the correct amount. For quite a long time we had Ford, Mitsubishi, Subaru, Toyota. This worked well as all teams had a good base car with a chance of winning.

Then upon the change to World Rally Cars Seat were one of the first "new" manufacturers to come in, enjoyed little success and were gone again by 2000, one of the biggest years for car sales ever seen at that point in most countries. No success equals no point in competing, this is a hard fact.

We should not all forget there was a very very big gap in new manufactures coming into the WRC untill Suzuki in 2007.

Fiat seem to be in a strong position of late in Europe and are definite candidates. VAG, different story, lot of turbulence at the moment including the Porsche saga. VAG have much some very expensive motorsport participation at present, I am not so sure where their future is in the WRC.

Motorsportfun

19th August 2009, 22:55

Fiat seem to be in a strong position of late in Europe and are definite candidates. VAG, different story, lot of turbulence at the moment including the Porsche saga. VAG have much some very expensive motorsport participation at present, I am not so sure where their future is in the WRC.

Think also about the Dakar. With the withdrawal of Mitsubishi, he left the unique works team in rally raids, as BMW is a privateer. Don't think they want to be alone there. They also reduced by at least a year their programmes during the other rally-raids...

Barreis

19th August 2009, 23:50

I would like to see VW brand in WRC.. :)

GigiGalliNo1

20th August 2009, 05:24

I would like to see VW brand in WRC.. :)

Prefer Skoda to be back in. But they're in IRC.

Motorsportfun

20th August 2009, 14:42

Prefer Skoda to be back in. But they're in IRC.

This is not a problem, 'cause the programme is financed by the sells of Fabias S2000 (as Mirek said some days ago). Just like Peugeot does with 207. ;)

GigiGalliNo1

21st August 2009, 14:08

More official BS from WRC.com

Q&A with Neil Duncanson

"What’s the next step?

When the economy starts to come back, we will already be ahead of the game in quite a big way. I would like another couple of manufacturers in the WRC, there’s no questions about that - but I don’t want any more than four. When we came in as a television partner in 2000, there were seven manufacturers and I don’t think that was effective at all. Beyond the fourth manufacturer, the other three didn’t stand a chance of winning a rally - or even coming close to a podium and I don’t think that was particularly healthy for those manufacturers. So, I think four and a lot of customer teams to keep the championship competitive is ideal."

Having more cars in the championship brings out more drivers and sponsors + money don't you think? Isn't that a positive? People will still follow the guys down the leader board as they do now... well I think some of us still do. Still good to see the guys fighting for 5th, 6th, 7th and so on in positions!

If the company who broadcast the coverage of each round would keep it fair instead of it being a Loeb show as he was always leading and show only 5 seconds of the guys down the leader board ie Henning with Expert and the other privateers, then THAT is not fair. Pathetic. So work something out I say.. or loose the fun, exciting sport the WRC use to be...

Ok, I understand and understood that back in the 90's yes, it was only Ford, Subaru, Mitsubishi and.... there was one more but it was more exciting back then, and the sport hasn't grown to what it is now, or was in 2000-2003 then I guess the sport started to die out, money, cars, drivers, not able to get anything (someone correct me if the years are wrong).

Take me back to then and i'd love it!