Bring Back Group A

[ShiftingGears]

Just watching 1995 season highlights.

Man the cars are great to watch.

Whoever proposed regulations allowing more grip and less stages is an idiot.

[Donney]

I didn't really like Group A at that time but compared to what we have now I absolutely adore them, please bring them back!!!!

I was sooo wrong.

[RAS007]

Just watching 1995 season highlights.

Man the cars are great to watch.

Whoever proposed regulations allowing more grip and less stages is an idiot.

+1

Could not agree more. I was also recently watching season reviews from the 90's; multiple manufacturers, several possible winners going into each event...... Man, it just makes you realise what a joke the current WRC is.

[HaCo]

You have my vote! Make them 2WD as well please!

[Juha_Koo]

No thanks...

WRC cars are true racing machines due to their amazing engines and even more amazing suspensions. I just love those close shots of modern WRC suspension in action. Modern Gr. N. cars could easily beat Gr. A cars. If I want to see rather normal road-going cars that for example take jumps (landings) very poorly, I can go to watch normal traffic at some speedbump. :D

[cali]

No thanks...

WRC cars are true racing machines due to their amazing engines and even more amazing suspensions. I just love those close shots of modern WRC suspension in action. Modern Gr. N. cars could easily beat Gr. A cars. If I want to see rather normal road-going cars that for example take jumps (landings) very poorly, I can go to watch normal traffic at some speedbump. :D

Yes, incredible technical wonders, but somehow boring to watch (problably 2-3 drivers of today can excite me these days) and expensive as well. Not the right formula to me. I just recently watched Richard Burns onboard from 2002 GB Rally and it looks waaaay better than the cars today. WRC 2009 is just like watching train on tracks...

[Macd]

Just watching 1995 season highlights.

Man the cars are great to watch.

Whoever proposed regulations allowing more grip and less stages is an idiot.


+1000000 The noise of the 555 subaru and the sight of colin McRae and Sainz wrestling the car around beats any WRC car and i dont care if they are slower.

[serial jeff]

+1000000 The noise of the 555 subaru and the sight of colin McRae and Sainz wrestling the car around beats any WRC car and i dont care if they are slower.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs-jAImScms
Here you go.

[N.O.T]

90s cars were far too sophisticated....the 30s was the golden era of rallying....real rally cars and real men now everything are too civilised....i mean they even use internal combustion engines and more than 2 gears....Steam powered ones are the way too go RAW STEAM POWER !!!!!!

[Langdale Forest]

Are you having a joke about the 1930's!?

[BDunnell]

Just watching 1995 season highlights.

Man the cars are great to watch.

I'd say the same for 1987, personally, even if the cars aren't as rapid as they became by the mid-90s. Progress isn't always a good thing.

[AndyRAC]

With all the doom and gloom with Manufacturers pulling out of F1 - I know it's not really ideal, but maybe the proposed regs need to be thought about.
I'm not convinced by S2000/S1600T, but maybe something really less expensive needs to be brought in. Make the cars as simple and basic as possible - then when Global financial matters improve, have a rethink.

[Macd]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs-jAImScms
Here you go.

There is a difference between a Uber talented rally driver wrestling a 350BHP Subaru on rallies covering whole countries and Ken Block pissing about on an airstrip. :mad:

[Langdale Forest]

I'd say the same for 1987, personally, even if the cars aren't as rapid as they became by the mid-90s. Progress isn't always a good thing.

The cars in 1987 were varied and IMO, that is what makes things interesting. :)

[janvanvurpa]

There is a difference between a Uber talented rally driver wrestling a 350BHP Subaru on rallies covering whole countries and Ken Block pissing about on an airstrip. :mad:


You you you! Pessimist!!!! I read his Press Release For Immediate Release
and it said right there that his deal to buy/lease some Fords for himself and some Ozzy stockbroker was "one of the most significant deals in WRC History"

Kenny is the Futre! (and that ain't misspelt)

[janvanvurpa]

No thanks...

WRC cars are true racing machines due to their amazing engines and even more amazing suspensions. I just love those close shots of modern WRC suspension in action. Modern Gr. N. cars could easily beat Gr. A cars. If I want to see rather normal road-going cars that for example take jumps (landings) very poorly, I can go to watch normal traffic at some speedbump. :D


Juha Who, as somebody who wants to DRIVE rally again, and as something for the particiaption levels of the sport, the GpA rules prior to '93 requiring 5000 cars for homologation was the right idea.

I, me have 4x4 Cosworth in my Sierra rally car because they made total 37,000 or so of all models so a average guy can afford a first class powerplant and a shell that is fairly common.

The World rally Car rules sub-set allowing these marvelous but 100% hand built things is the death of the highest levels of the sport, the reason for the infestation of talentlss millionaires filling the top spots.

And Sorry I don't think todays 32mm restricted GpN cars could be as fast or last anywhere near as long as mid 90s GpA cars.

They certainly aren't DRIVEN anywhere near as fast, don't LOOK anywhere near as fast...

I'm curious, how long have you been watching rally?
That might explain something.

[Juha_Koo]

And Sorry I don't think todays 32mm restricted GpN cars could be as fast or last anywhere near as long as mid 90s GpA cars.

This is not solely my view, IIRC I've heard Miikka Anttila, Juho Hänninen and Mikko Markkula plus few others talking about this and they all have said the same. I'm not sure if Pykälistö also wrote something about this in his "Juuso tests" series in Finnish motorsport magazine. It's easy to see from old videos too, compare e.g Gr. A Evo 3 and modern Gr. N Evo 10.

Someone also talked about Gr. N cars being faster than Gr. B cars, I guess that was Ketomaa.



I'm curious, how long have you been watching rally?
That might explain something.

I guess one can call me a junior. :D

I believe first time I watched rally from TV was in 1992 (meaning that I spesifically watched TV because there was rally). And first time I saw rally live was Thousand Lakes 1993 in Himos special stage (but my first live motorsport experience was an autocross event in 1992). Obviously I don't have such clear images from then, being only three years old. :)

But luckily my father had a nice VHS collection, something from late 80s and more from 90s, I loved to watch them during late 90s when growing up. Don't get me wrong, I really admire the driving during those times. It was spectacular, no doubt about that. The thing that I really miss is the good old rally template: more remote services and single stages, less stages driven two times.

Luckily there's always some exeptions to this days idiotic "WRC template" three stages in the morning and the same again in the afternoon. (Ireland, Finland, Australia, etc.) The normal template is just utterly boring.

I see that as the technology goes on, it is rally's duty to develop new, better systems. Is it a good or bad thing, I don't know. Modern WRC's are the fastest rallycars ever. I really admire modern suspensions, they're just unbelievable. I guess I'm a bit "younger generation" sort of guy. :) But that doesn't mean that I wouldn't support some historic elements to be brought back to rallying! I nearly demand the endurance factor to be given a bigger role, SupeRally to be removed and a bit longer, more varied events added to the calendar plus some other stuff.

I guess I'll be beaten up if I say that "the rallycar" for me is WRC Focus '08. Especially in the blanco test colours... Just something so beautiful. And those gravel rims. Grr. :kiss: (That is the answer because I haven't lived to see 037s, Mini's, MK II Escorts, etc. in the top level. I believe that "the" -things have to be something you've seen live.)

[Miika]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sNwOkjxMAGI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sNwOkjxMAGI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Period.

[karo]

Just watching 1995 season highlights.

Man the cars are great to watch.

Whoever proposed regulations allowing more grip and less stages is an idiot.

+1

[ZequeArgentina]

I made the comparson at mid 90´s with stages of Rally of Argentina which were not altered, and considered best time of group B era (85 and 86) and bests times of the 90´s, and it was true.
mid 90´s group A vcars were faster than group B.

And even not having made the comparisson, I am quite sure that in most stages modern group N cars would beat them both.

Traction has improved impressively, tyres also, a group N car is wider, have etter weight balance, and suspenssion wise, probably better than early group A cars (meaning late 80´s mid 90´s)

[Buzz Lightyear]

No thanks...

WRC cars are true racing machines due to their amazing engines and even more amazing suspensions. I just love those close shots of modern WRC suspension in action. Modern Gr. N. cars could easily beat Gr. A cars. If I want to see rather normal road-going cars that for example take jumps (landings) very poorly, I can go to watch normal traffic at some speedbump. :D

why cant some of you guys understand, that its the drivers not the cars that make it exciting.It dont car if Loeb is driving a 360bhp WRC car, or a Mk2 Escort of wheather he was 34s slower over a particular stage... who cares?!

Are you saying L555 BAT was boring to watch, and you would rather look at close up's of modern day WRC suspension movement?? Rallying is no long for development of road cars, its purely promotion. F1 can be the cutting edge of technology with KERS etc, Cut the wide track, turbos, and bring back H-pattern boxs.

[Donney]

So basically it is cars, because they have to be driven in a certain way to extract the best of them. Modern WRC cars work better if driven smotth and straight, whereas group A cars or the mentioned MKII Escort....

[N.O.T]

the human race never seazes to amase me with its stupidity....during the 90s rallying dinosaurs like alen said that the cars had no power and all the fans said the 80 was the golden era....now its the 90s that was a great era....and in 10 years time the 00s will be the one and the cars and champions of the future will be nothing compared to the citroen C4 the focus Rs and Loeb and Gronholm....

Maybe all this critisism to nuclear weapons is wrong after all...

[Sladden]

the human race never seazes to amase me with its stupidity....during the 90s rallying dinosaurs like alen said that the cars had no power and all the fans said the 80 was the golden era....now its the 90s that was a great era....and in 10 years time the 00s will be the one and the cars and champions of the future will be nothing compared to the citroen C4 the focus Rs and Loeb and Gronholm....

Maybe all this critisism to nuclear weapons is wrong after all...

Ahh comon! The difference is the show was still good.. group A was even more sideways than group B! Competition also tight. WRC era is characterized by PSA domination and reductions in the competietive km. Maybe this era will be remembered as an example of what not to do with motorsports instead!?

[N.O.T]

i prefer rallying than sideways shows...but we cannot all be the same.

[Langdale Forest]

You perfer steam powerd cars!

[macksrallye]

It's not that the cars aren't sideways but the whole thing lacks spectacle.

The sound just doesn't match that of the group A & B cars, you could tell what car was coming by it's sound from miles away & that would start to get you excited. As they got closer you got more & more excited, when they finally got into view the flame bealching monsters would get thrown into the corner with 100% commitment & you knew it just by looking at it. Once it was all over you left with a real respect for the men behind the wheels of these beasts.

The problem now is they sound so simular, look like their on rails & are so efficient they don't even have to try that hard around corners meaning that you don't walk away in awe like you did just over 10 years ago. And to be honest 99% of modern day WRC drivers wouldn't know what 100% commitment is. Let's face it Mikko only worked it out on the last day of Rally GB & Loeb hasn't been under any serious pressure for a few seasons now.

The cars are incredible but the spectacle is gone, & I personally miss it.

[N.O.T]

hmmm somehow i believe that if we had 4 manufacturers running in the WRC your opinion about the cars and the drivers would be different.....

[ShiftingGears]

I'd say the same for 1987, personally, even if the cars aren't as rapid as they became by the mid-90s. Progress isn't always a good thing.

Of course, however I was watching highlights from the 1987 Monte and preferred the 1995 event, to be honest.


F2 was pretty excellent as well...

[macksrallye]

hmmm somehow i believe that if we had 4 manufacturers running in the WRC your opinion about the cars and the drivers would be different.....

Maybe...

Although having said that, my opinion was no different last year & we had 4 manufacturers. More manufacturers would help but the cars they produced would have to be competative enough (with competative drivers of course) to challenge the status quo of Loeb. Without that there is no reason for anyone to push any harder therefore the spectacle is largly the same.

[ST205GT4]

Group A was great if for nothing else than giving the public access to cars like the STis/WRXs, Evos, GT4s, Integrales, Cosworths etc.

[AndyRAC]

Group A was great if for nothing else than giving the public access to cars like the STis/WRXs, Evos, GT4s, Integrales, Cosworths etc.

True, and is unlikely to happen again, as 5000 'Specials' had to be built. Not cost effective. Unless they drafted the rules so they were 'Production-based' and had to make, for example 100-200 'Special versions'. But this won't happen.

[Donney]

(...)

Maybe all this critisism to nuclear weapons is wrong after all...


You can always commit suicide and leave us alone with our stupidity.

[ST205GT4]

True, and is unlikely to happen again, as 5000 'Specials' had to be built. Not cost effective. Unless they drafted the rules so they were 'Production-based' and had to make, for example 100-200 'Special versions'. But this won't happen.

I know. Real shame though because instead of drawing a tenuous link between a manufacturer's products and WRCars, the Group A rules really forced them to produce the technology for their road cars. Up to a point obviously. What worries me is that at some point Subaru and Mitsubishi will decide that they've proven enough at a Group N level and give up on the Impreza and the Lancer. Where's our next generation of cheap road rockets going to come from?

I've watched WRCars and the Group A cars and I much preferred the Group A cars. I liked the sideways and the noise more.

Haven't been lucky enough to see a Group B car in action live.

[PuddleJumper]

Please can we keep the discussion civilised and on topic. There is no need for personal insults against people whose opinion differs to your own.

Thank you.

[Tuscany gravel]

Last Group A cars were exciting to view.

But i think the best were the first WRC cars (1997 - 1998 - 1999). Sideways like Group A and more techincal evolutions.

The bad things of WRCcars were rally rules (from 1997 no mixed surface, only one service park...)

[OldF]

I just watched a VHS from the 1998 season. There were four manufacturers, Ford with group A Escort (Juha Kankkunen and Bruno Thierry), group A Mitsubishi Lancer (Tommi Mäkinen and Richard Burns), Toyota Corolla WRC (Carlos Sainz and Didier Auriol) and Subaru WRC (Colin McRae and Piero Liatti). Two group A cars and two WRC cars. I must say that I couldn’t see any difference in spectacularly between the group A cars and the WRC cars.

Why WRC cars are so boring to watch nowadays isn’t because they’re WRC cars but because of the general technical development. IMO the WRC concept is the best ever made. Without that I don’t think Peugeot had returned to WRC and we wouldn’t have seen smaller manufacturers like Skoda.

It shouldn’t been forgotten that WRC cars are based on group A regulations. WRC rules have some more liberties compared to group A but IMO those doesn’t affect the performance.

1998 Juha Kankkunen and Carlos Sainz had few very tight fights and keeping in mind that the Escort had its last season, the performances of the two ”different” cars were quite equal.

As a general observation they had a lot more retirements because of technical problems and all of the WRC drivers made much more mistakes compared to the robot drivers like Seb and Mikko.

All the group A cars had an active centre differential by the end of 1995 and they also had sequential gearboxes. By that I don’t think that these technical innovations are those that killed the spectacularly of rally cars.

So I would say that bring back rules that would give us spectacular cars (only mechanical differentials) and the possibility for as many as possible manufactures to build a WRC car at a reasonably cost.

[FAL]

Bring back Group 2.

[cali]

I just watched a VHS from the 1998 season. There were four manufacturers, Ford with group A Escort (Juha Kankkunen and Bruno Thierry), group A Mitsubishi Lancer (Tommi Mäkinen and Richard Burns), Toyota Corolla WRC (Carlos Sainz and Didier Auriol) and Subaru WRC (Colin McRae and Piero Liatti). Two group A cars and two WRC cars. I must say that I couldn’t see any difference in spectacularly between the group A cars and the WRC cars.

Why WRC cars are so boring to watch nowadays isn’t because they’re WRC cars but because of the general technical development. IMO the WRC concept is the best ever made. Without that I don’t think Peugeot had returned to WRC and we wouldn’t have seen smaller manufacturers like Skoda.

It shouldn’t been forgotten that WRC cars are based on group A regulations. WRC rules have some more liberties compared to group A but IMO those doesn’t affect the performance.

1998 Juha Kankkunen and Carlos Sainz had few very tight fights and keeping in mind that the Escort had its last season, the performances of the two ”different” cars were quite equal.

As a general observation they had a lot more retirements because of technical problems and all of the WRC drivers made much more mistakes compared to the robot drivers like Seb and Mikko.

All the group A cars had an active centre differential by the end of 1995 and they also had sequential gearboxes. By that I don’t think that these technical innovations are those that killed the spectacularly of rally cars.

So I would say that bring back rules that would give us spectacular cars (only mechanical differentials) and the possibility for as many as possible manufactures to build a WRC car at a reasonably cost.

Very sensible and i couldn't agree more with You!!

[grugsticles]

I just watched a VHS from the 1998 season. There were four manufacturers, Ford with group A Escort (Juha Kankkunen and Bruno Thierry), group A Mitsubishi Lancer (Tommi Mäkinen and Richard Burns), Toyota Corolla WRC (Carlos Sainz and Didier Auriol) and Subaru WRC (Colin McRae and Piero Liatti). Two group A cars and two WRC cars. I must say that I couldn’t see any difference in spectacularly between the group A cars and the WRC cars.

Why WRC cars are so boring to watch nowadays isn’t because they’re WRC cars but because of the general technical development. IMO the WRC concept is the best ever made. Without that I don’t think Peugeot had returned to WRC and we wouldn’t have seen smaller manufacturers like Skoda.

It shouldn’t been forgotten that WRC cars are based on group A regulations. WRC rules have some more liberties compared to group A but IMO those doesn’t affect the performance.

1998 Juha Kankkunen and Carlos Sainz had few very tight fights and keeping in mind that the Escort had its last season, the performances of the two ”different” cars were quite equal.

As a general observation they had a lot more retirements because of technical problems and all of the WRC drivers made much more mistakes compared to the robot drivers like Seb and Mikko.

All the group A cars had an active centre differential by the end of 1995 and they also had sequential gearboxes. By that I don’t think that these technical innovations are those that killed the spectacularly of rally cars.

So I would say that bring back rules that would give us spectacular cars (only mechanical differentials) and the possibility for as many as possible manufactures to build a WRC car at a reasonably cost.
I have that season on DVD... somewhere:P

What I dont understand is why its so hard to come up with a set of regulations that work and then STICK TO THEM.
It seems that every year the rules and regulations are altered so greatly that over a period of a few years the original idea of the regulations is lost.
Look at Nascar, same designs year after year and its going great guns (although... it is Nascar :dozey :) .
The average rally fan doesn't really care if the car that goes past them at 150+ km/h through the forests is of the absolute latest in technology or not, as long as it looks good doing so. That is a main point overlooked by the sports officials.

Id like to see the cars built to use off the shelf parts. For example, base the idea around a Group N shell, throw in some adjustable dampers, a regulation turbocharger (with ~ 35mm restrictor), mechanical front and rear differentials with provisions for either active or mechanical centre diff., minimal downforce from an areo package (or make it none unless there is a road car with the same areo package), and make H pattern gearboxes using the same casings but with uprated internals (I have a Subaru background where this is a feasible option and is done on many street and performance cars, but I wouldn't know about other manufacturers).
Engines must maintain original block, but allow closed decking/sleeving, forged internals, etc. in similar stead to that of a street car.
A control ECU should be used. Something like a Motec or Autronic of some description (2 companies that dont see much rallying advertising).

I think even I could build a car to such specifications for under AUD $100,000.

[JFL]

Why not just look at the regulations of ERC cars, just with a couple of extra gears(Most ERC cars have 4 gears, some 5 and 6) and a smaller restrictor? Mechanical all over.. A new built fresh car can't cost over 250.000,-€ ??
http://rallycross.com/sales_db/viewoffer.php?id=2733&lang_id=0
http://rallycross.com/sales_db/viewoffer.php?id=2210&lang_id=0

[Lousada]

Why not just look at the regulations of ERC cars, just with a couple of extra gears(Most ERC cars have 4 gears, some 5 and 6) and a smaller restrictor? Mechanical all over.. A new built fresh car can't cost over 250.000,-€ ??
http://rallycross.com/sales_db/viewoffer.php?id=2733&lang_id=0
http://rallycross.com/sales_db/viewoffer.php?id=2210&lang_id=0

Rallycross cars are crazy expensive for the amount of km's they drive. One race weekend consists of less than 35km! A full 10 round ERC is the same distance as one WRC rally. If you count running costs per km, I don't think a rallycross car is that much cheaper than a WRC car.

[JFL]

Rallycross cars are crazy expensive for the amount of km's they drive. One race weekend consists of less than 35km! A full 10 round ERC is the same distance as one WRC rally. If you count running costs per km, I don't think a rallycross car is that much cheaper than a WRC car.

a lot of the reason for that is the amount of HP in the engines... the cars are a lot cheaper.. even with a wrc engine..

[Mirek]

None of rallycross cars is able to finish a long rally. It's too much kilometers for them. They are not build for that and would broke after few stages. Some rallycross cars are used here in smaller rallys and even with lower power hardly reaches finish (those rallys are usualy 60-100 km long). And to tell the truth without that monstrous power they are not spectacular at all.

[JFL]

That's probably true, but I doubt they have the large services that the WRC teams have.. I guess a lot would'nt finnish a wrc with no service or changing parts either.. ? ?
I mean.. If you use the same mechanical gearboxes, and none of all that electronic science, the wrc cars would be a lot cheaper..
A lot of private teams using wrc cars in national events don't finnish short rallies either... Due to lack of service before the rally and during..(budget)

[Saabaru]

Group N+; no restrictors, bigger brakes and some form of paddle shift transmission. They would be great to watch, wouldn't be any faster and could be built for around 200K.

[Mirek]

Paddle shifting is uselles. It's very expensive since it requires hydraulics for gearbox and as a result has only negative effect on spectacle as drivers can still hold the steering wheel by both hands.

The biggest problem of gr.N cars is that they are simply way too heavy.

[Francis44]

I've said this for a long time and i say this again....The future could be still be WRC cars but they could spend some money on research for new materials and cut the cost of a wrc car, s2000 are way too slow, those cars cant climb a road with a good speed seriously it's embarassing.

[Sulland]

]Paddle shifting is uselles. It's very expensive since it requires hydraulics for gearbox and as a result has only negative effect on spectacle as drivers can still hold the steering wheel by both hands.

The biggest problem of gr.N cars is that they are simply way too heavy.

Totally correct ! :D

[Saabaru]

]Paddle shifting is uselles. It's very expensive since it requires hydraulics for gearbox and as a result has only negative effect on spectacle as drivers can still hold the steering wheel by both hands.

The biggest problem of gr.N cars is that they are simply way too heavy.


Wrong; transmissions like the S2000’s use can be had for around 25K. All that would have to be done is add the paddle shifters and some servos on the transmission, would be quite easy to do.


Rally fans contradict everything they say. If you don’t want the cars to look like they are on rails without increasing speed this would be a great way to do it and it would bring down the cost of rallying instrumentally. Addressing two of the largest issues in rallying today, but maybe they should just require using snow tires on all rallies. That would bring down speed and make it safer as the way the FIA thinks, plus the cars would be sliding around like they are in a drift show… awesome! (Not!)

[racer69]

Group N+; no restrictors, bigger brakes and some form of paddle shift transmission. They would be great to watch, wouldn't be any faster and could be built for around 200K.

All good except for the paddles, give them a clutch and a gear stick, make it a challenge for them when they have to heal & toe and cross the gate while approaching a sharp corner..... better than just bashing some paddles.