RRC vs S2000 NA

[Sulland]

Ye ye, naming convention on the 1,6T 30mm we have been thru this before, and my opinion is clear, call that type RRC, that up till now is the best name

Anyway, Corsica will be the first real test btw S2000 and RRCars with top drivers handeling them in a top series I think. Will be very interesting to see the result. If the RRC shows that it is way faster, more of them will maybe come. And since the S2000 is a beast easier to mess up in, due to the NA and narrow powerband, the RRC might be easier for the 2nd tier drivers to do a good result in.

Lets see !!

What are your predictions: what is the faster car?

[PLuto]

Last year, with top driver (on comparation test) atmospheric S2000 was in average 0,4 sec faster than S2000 1,6T (on tarmac).

[Mirek]

Ye ye, naming convention on the 1,6T 30mm we have been thru this before, and my opinion is clear, call that type RRC, that up till now is the best name

Anyway, Corsica will be the first real test btw S2000 and RRCars with top drivers handeling them in a top series I think. Will be very interesting to see the result. If the RRC shows that it is way faster, more of them will maybe come. And since the S2000 is a beast easier to mess up in, due to the NA and narrow powerband, the RRC might be easier for the 2nd tier drivers to do a good result in.

Lets see !!

What are your predictions: what is the faster car?

No doubts about that. S2000 2.0NA are faster cars. S2000 1.6T lacks average 20-40 Hp and better torque chart can't change that handicap into benefit. Suspension is basically same. Difference on gravel or snow is smaller than on asphalt because the 2.0NA engine characteristics are worse in terms of traction. Top speed of 1.6T S2000 is a bit higher but due to worse acceleration they need a lot of time to reach it

[dimviii]

No doubts about that. S2000 2.0NA are faster cars. S2000 1.6T lacks average 20-40 Hp and better torque chart can't change that handicap into benefit. Suspension is basically same. Difference on gravel or snow is smaller than on asphalt because the 2.0NA engine characteristics are worse in terms of traction. Top speed of 1.6T S2000 is a bit higher but due to worse acceleration they need a lot of time to reach it
+1
top speed for Mini 1,6t s2000 is 206km/h.

[Mirek]

+1
top speed for Mini 1,6t s2000 is 206km/h.

That must take ages to reach 200+ km/h. I watched onboard of Pech from one superfast stage of Valašská rally. On a place where Kopecký was for a long time in rpm limiter with Fabia (181 km/h) Pech with mini reached maximum 184 km/h according to tripmaster.

[RS]

I find it a bit strange that a car with twice the torque and the same chassis rules can't at least be on the same speed, even with 30bhp less? On a race circuit ok, but in rally I thought torque was king? Especially as the Mini's torque should be available across the whole rev range compared to a peaky S2000. Explain more Mirek!

[A FONDO]

Your milestone for the car's performance is Pech????????????

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Go find another sport kiddo!

[Mirek]

Basically You don't need to know torque chart if You know power chart. It's all in with the benefit that power unlike torque doesn't change through gear ratios (not counting mechanical looses for simplification). What You need is that the area below power curve is as large as possible in rpm range You use. Than You don't need to think about torque chart.

I made a very quick estimation how the situation could look here. Blue area is power available in S2000 2.0NA in usually used rpm range. Orange area is power available in S2000 1.6T in usually used rpm range. You can see that the higher torque of 1.6T virtually brings You benefit over the high-rewing 2.0NA only in so low rpm which are used in the 2.0NA S2000 for only a fraction of time. Mostly in first gear corners.

http://www.ulozobrazek.cz/images/400Comparison.jpg

[dimviii]

That must take ages to reach 200+ km/h. I watched onboard of Pech from one superfast stage of Valašská rally. On a place where Kopecký was for a long time in rpm limiter with Fabia (181 km/h) Pech with mini reached maximum 184 km/h according to tripmaster.

Sorry Mirek the right is 202km/h at limiter 8500rpm.This is claimed about Roches Mini.

[RS]

Thanks Mirek, I understand better now :)

[Mirek]

Sorry Mirek the right is 202km/h at limiter 8500rpm.This is claimed about Roches Mini.

Doesn't mater if 202 or 206 :) But I can hardly see a stage where a car with 30 mm restrictor could get to 8500 rpm on 6th gear when peak power is around 6000-6500. With 30 mm restrictor it must be pretty dead at 8500.

[dimviii]

Doesn't mater if 202 or 206 :) But I can hardly see a stage where a car with 30 mm restrictor could get to 8500 rpm on 6th gear when peak power is around 6000-6500. With 30 mm restrictor it must be pretty dead at 8500.

yes thats right,is going to be a long travel to reach limiter.

[OldF]

I find it a bit strange that a car with twice the torque and the same chassis rules can't at least be on the same speed, even with 30bhp less? On a race circuit ok, but in rally I thought torque was king? Especially as the Mini's torque should be available across the whole rev range compared to a peaky S2000. Explain more Mirek!

A RRC car (as M-Sport calls it, which is imo a good name for it to compare it with a WRC car, or SPR, super production car as Prodrive calls it) it’s official called “S2000-Rally: 1.6T engine with a 30mm restrictor” don’t have twice more torque compared to a S2000 NA car which have about 250 Nm torque.

This is my estimation by the AFAIK what gearbox Ford and Mini are using http://www.xtrac.com/pdfs/633%20RALLY%20GEARBOX.pdf (also by searching (ctrl+F = WRC) in the latest news section is said that this is the case). It’s specified for a max engine torque of 450 Nm. I don’t know what the safety margin is but I don’t think the torque can be much higher. I don’t know either if the teams are allowed to replace the gear set for stronger ones due to the control gearbox but as I believe there can be three different final drives as in group R.

EDIT: OK, I forgot as usual a thing to mention is a RRC with a 30 mm restrictor means about 83% of the airflow compared to a 33 mm restrictor which means about 372 Nm torque for a RRC car.

On the M-Sport site it’s said that the RRC car have 360 Nm of torque so it’s quite close.

[OldF]

Basically You don't need to know torque chart if You know power chart. It's all in with the benefit that power unlike torque doesn't change through gear ratios (not counting mechanical looses for simplification). What You need is that the area below power curve is as large as possible in rpm range You use. Than You don't need to think about torque chart.

I made a very quick estimation how the situation could look here. Blue area is power available in S2000 2.0NA in usually used rpm range. Orange area is power available in S2000 1.6T in usually used rpm range. You can see that the higher torque of 1.6T virtually brings You benefit over the high-rewing 2.0NA only in so low rpm which are used in the 2.0NA S2000 for only a fraction of time. Mostly in first gear corners.

http://www.ulozobrazek.cz/images/400Comparison.jpg

It looks like at least that the S2000 curve is realistic because it’s not as “smooth” as the 1.6T curve is. Maybe you have some inside information? ;)

[A FONDO]

Just 'coz it's hand-drawn on Paint :p : Didn't you notice the spray job :D

[OldF]

Just 'coz it's hand-drawn on Paint :p : Didn't you notice the spray job :D

Just compare the S2000 curve to the S2000 1.6T curve and maybe you also learn something.

[Mirek]

Yes, I saw a power and torque chart of an S2000 car. But it was quite a long time a go so not very recent. This is just an estimation but I think it must be quite close to reality ;)

[RS]

it’s official called “S2000-Rally: 1.6T engine with a 30mm restrictor”

Snappy.

Another question; if the Mini is struggling to hit it's "on paper" top speed, why not run a shorter gearbox and improve accelleration instead?

[Mirek]

It's not an issue of gearbox. What we spoke about is caused by the nature of restricted turbo engine. The rules say that the rpm limit is 8500. But that is useful only for variant with 33 mm restrictor. With 30 mm restrictor and same engine and turbo such high rpm are rather useless. With 30 mm restrictor the power peak is around 6000-6500 rpm and than the power start do decrease. If dimviii said the theoretical top speed 202 km/h at 8500 rpm it means 166 km/h at 7000 rpm and that sure isn't too long gearbox ;)

[RS]

Ok!

Interesting thread. For me this formula is a mess. Too expensive compared to S2000 and slower (I know only by rules)

Roll on R4T!

[Sulland]

A RRC car (as M-Sport calls it, which is imo a good name for it to compare it with a WRC car, or SPR, super production car as Prodrive calls it) it’s official called “S2000-Rally: 1.6T engine with a 30mm restrictor”.

Ok, have not seen that, do you have a link?

What do FIA call a S2000-Rally car running in a WRC rally with a 33mm in class 1 ?


I for one will continue to call the 30mm car for a RRC!

Looking at the BRC Sunseeker coverage I will miss the high reving NA sound when turbo engines takes over more and more. I prefer the sound picture of the R3 Clio compared with the DS3 R3T.

Will the R2 class also get a turbo engine in the future, A 1,2 or 1,3 maybe?

[Mirek]

Will the R2 class also get a turbo engine in the future, A 1,2 or 1,3 maybe?

In my opinion that will sure happen. I guess 1.2T.

[Sulland]

In my opinion that will sure happen. I guess 1.2T.

Then the circle is almost closed for me. My facination for rally started with John Haugland in the Skoda 130 RS, and I build a 110 LS into an amateur rally car. These had 1300 and 1150 ccm engines. Now we are back to small engines again.

Phuu I am getting old !! ;)

[RS]

Looking at the BRC Sunseeker coverage I will miss the high reving NA sound when turbo engines takes over more and more. I prefer the sound picture of the R3 Clio compared with the DS3 R3T.


I agree. I find watching old videos of an N1 Favorit Skoda Trophy car more exciting than R3T. Not only the sound but because of the low down torque they don't seem to require an agressive driving style either. Petrol turbos are definitely the current trend for road cars but boring for rally cars IMO, at least in the "low" classes. Really hope R4T is a lot better than R3T!

[leighton323]

It's not an issue of gearbox. What we spoke about is caused by the nature of restricted turbo engine. The rules say that the rpm limit is 8500. But that is useful only for variant with 33 mm restrictor. With 30 mm restrictor and same engine and turbo such high rpm are rather useless. With 30 mm restrictor the power peak is around 6000-6500 rpm and than the power start do decrease. If dimviii said the theoretical top speed 202 km/h at 8500 rpm it means 166 km/h at 7000 rpm and that sure isn't too long gearbox ;)

Sorry young one here trying to learn, when running on 30mm can they not drop the revs? Is it exactly the same engine bar the larger 33mm restrictor

[Mirek]

Yes, the engine is same but with small restrictor it has not enough air to be effective in high rpm.

In WRC I believe they shift around 8000-8500 rpm. In 1.6T S2000 30mm restrictor they shift around 6500 rpm. In DS3 R3T with 29mm restrictor they shift even only around 5000 rpm.

[Tom206wrc]

Don't forget this coming week-end Rally Mille Miglia with Basso in Fiesta RRC vs all the other S2000s ;)

[RS]

Don't forget this coming week-end Rally Mille Miglia with Basso in Fiesta RRC vs all the other S2000s ;)

Will be interesting. If he can't match Andreucci and Hanninen then I guess he will take the S2000 to Corsica.

[RS]

Times from Mille Miglia here, Basso won SS2: Rally FICr (http://rally.ficr.it/tab_schedule.asp?p_Anno=2012&p_Codice=29&p_Manifestazione=43)

[mousti]

He's going very well at the moment!

[Sulland]

What kind of roads are there in Mille, a lot of start and stop or sleak with nice bends?

[RS]

Looking at Basso's times on Mille Miglia, Sordo should be able to be competitive on Corsica.

[Mirek]

What kind of roads are there in Mille, a lot of start and stop or sleak with nice bends?

Very twisty roads. Most oft he time they are on 3rd-4th gear. A lot of hairpins as well. But what plays the major role now is that it's raining. Basso is on Pirelli plus the 1.6T has better traction. If it gets dry and warmer he will sure start to loose. Let's see...

[A FONDO]

What kind of roads are there in Mille, a lot of start and stop or sleak with nice bends?
Both of them. Some narrow tricky mountain paths like in Monaco/Corsica good for turbo engine, and some flatout roads like in northern Europe valleys good for high rev atmosferic engine. Here if no tyre mistakes, it all depends on the driver. Basso is one idea better than the other italians. Hanninen is way better than him but is there for first time.

[RS]

Hanninen is way better than him

Not on these types of roads.

Roads might be new to Juho but car is new to Basso.

[stepunk]

Very twisty roads. Most oft he time they are on 3rd-4th gear. A lot of hairpins as well. But what plays the major role now is that it's raining. Basso is on Pirelli plus the 1.6T has better traction. If it gets dry and warmer he will sure start to loose. Let's see...

Not completely right about weather: for most of the first loop of stages there was no rain. Anyway roads are mostly damp and wet but changing from corner to corner.
Let's see what will happen, interesting race 'til now!

[Mirek]

Not completely right about weather: for most of the first loop of stages there was no rain. Anyway roads are mostly damp and wet but changing from corner to corner.
Let's see what will happen, interesting race 'til now!

Grazie! Still a "Pirelli" weather :)

[stepunk]

Grazie! Still a "Pirelli" weather :)

Yes, 100% Pirelli weather! :)

[RS]

But even then Basso is ahead of Andreucci...

[dimviii]

Yes, 100% Pirelli weather! :)

why pirelli weather? what type of tyre they use?

[stepunk]

why pirelli weather? what type of tyre they use?

Basso and Andreucci are on Pirelli, Hanninen and Scandola use Michelin.
Pirelli weather because Pirellis do their best on damp, wet and cold roads (they're maybe even better than Michelins in this type of conditions, IMO)

[RS]

Watching the video links posted on the Mille Miglia thread it seems the fast way to drive the RRCs is very clean. S2000 are much more spectacular to watch. I hope R4T doesn't end up sounding and looking like RRC on the stages :(

[dimviii]

Basso and Andreucci are on Pirelli, Hanninen and Scandola use Michelin.
Pirelli weather because Pirellis do their best on damp, wet and cold roads (they're maybe even better than Michelins in this type of conditions, IMO)

i mean that they are not using the wet or intermediate type,they are using the rx type which is for dry asphalt.
that pirelli is better on these conditions is not something to be absolute,same in dry roads too imho

[Mirek]

i mean that they are not using the wet or intermediate type,they are using the rx type which is for dry asphalt.
that pirelli is better on these conditions is not something to be absolute,same in dry roads too imho

In the past Pirelli were always better in these conditions on Italian asphalt. Even if it was just dump and they run on soft slicks. They always started to loose with growing temperature of asphalt.

[dimviii]

know that Mirek,just i d like to say that at Greek asphalt(at least) there are types of asphalts that Pirellis are better,and some types that Michelins are better.Really cant say that this tyre, is definetely better than the other.And i am not talking about damp-wet conditions,but at complete dry and high temperatures we have in Greece.

[RS]

So after Basso's near domination of Mille Miglia can we draw any conclusions to the question in this thread?

Now I'm curious to see which car he will chose for Corsica. I prefer to watch (and hear) S2000 cars but it would be kind of interesting to see Basso in Fiesta RRC vs. Sordo in Mini RRC.

[Mirek]

According to Czech magazine "Rally" the latest evolution of Fiesta RRC has new cylinder head and engine mapping resulting in a growth of power which is now around 275 Hp. They wrote the car also had new gear ratios. They wrote it was first used by Al Rahji in Portugal.

I didn't know about that.

[OldF]

But now we all do :) . Was there anything about the torque?

I also remember that Gerard Quinn tweeted that the Fiesta RRC has 260 ps when it was introduced. If it know has 275 ps, it would be an improvement of 5,8% which could be realistic. MINI got a 3% increase in the power by redesigning the induction system etc. (prodrive (http://www.prodrive.com/p_archive.html?id=333&pagenum=1))

I had a recollection that I had read about that somewhere and after a deep search in memory I recalled it was in gpweek, issue 119 (9th of May 2011) GP Week : Issue 115, Page 1 (http://mag.gpweek.com/?iid=48118#folio=45)

The changes (homologations) by that time was only for reinforcement of the cylinder head but Loriaux said that they’ve done a lot of simulations concerning the shape of combustion chambers etc.

Probably it’s the result of those simulations and tests M-Sport (Ford) have homologated in the beginning of this year (Homologations (http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/Pages/Homologations.aspx)).


The next ones are off topic but I couldn’t resist the temptation to put them here.

I see it little confusing when Citroen says the DS3 have 350 Nm torque (with 98 SP commercial fuel) with a 29 mm restrictor (http://boutique.citroenracing.com/cms/web/upload/documentation/122/4e3be96b59bc3.pdf)
and M-Sport says the Fiesta RRC (Ford Fiesta RRC (http://www.m-sport.co.uk/index.php/motorsport/the-rally-cars/ford-fiesta-rrc)) has “only” 360 Nm with a 30 mm restrictor. OK, these are the “official” figures but still.

IMO another inconsistency on M-Sport’s site is when they say that the RRC has it peak torque @ 4750 rpm and the WRC car has it peak torque @ 4000 rpm with a bigger restrictor.

[OldF]

Ok, have not seen that, do you have a link?

If you mean the Mini, the link is http://www.motoringfile.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Mini-rally-car-sales-package.pdf

[Sulland]

Impressed by how evenly matched the RRCs and the S2000 cars are in Korsika. Not a bad job by those who calculated the restrictor size for the RRCs !

[RS]

Impressed by how evenly matched the RRCs and the S2000 cars are in Korsika. Not a bad job by those who calculated the restrictor size for the RRCs !

I kind of agree but I still think we need to see more. Basso on the coming events will be the perfect benchmark.

[Barreis]

Can't wait for San Remo roads.

[JAM]

I kind of agree but I still think we need to see more. Basso on the coming events will be the perfect benchmark.

We need to see a gravel rally.

On tarmac we saw almost everything, and i said "almost" because we need a event with fast stages.

[RS]

I guess Basso will do San Marino which should help, although I don't think he's as good on gravel as on asphalt.

Shouldn't the 1.6Ts be at an advantage on gravel due to better traction?

[mousti]

We need to see a gravel rally.

On tarmac we saw almost everything, and i said "almost" because we need a event with fast stages.
A rally like Ypres should have helped very different tarmac stages then Corse or San Remo. Barum and such would be also good.

[RS]

Looking at Eurosport simulcam, the Mini only seemed to have an advantage over the Skoda under braking. The Skoda was faster round and out of the corners. But this could be anything, tyre compound, driver, setup... But it's interesting because I thought it would be on twistier sections that the Mini should have the advantage.

IRC CORSICA SS5 SIMULCAM SORDO vs KOPECKY - Video Gallery - IRC Intercontinental Rally Challenge - Eurosport (http://t.co/1oJ0jaEJ)

[Gard]

Looking at Eurosport simulcam, the Mini only seemed to have an advantage over the Skoda under braking. The Skoda was faster round and out of the corners. But this could be anything, tyre compound, driver, setup... But it's interesting because I thought it would be on twistier sections that the Mini should have the advantage.

IRC CORSICA SS5 SIMULCAM SORDO vs KOPECKY - Video Gallery - IRC Intercontinental Rally Challenge - Eurosport (http://t.co/1oJ0jaEJ)

Sordo is probably used to a bit more torque, so he brakes to late in the RRC. With less torque you´ll probably have to brake bit earlier and carry a bit more speed through the corners.

[Coach 2]

Just a question, not an assertion, but will braking LATER give you more speed through or out of a turn?
Otherwise, I agree that Sordo will / should not spend much time trying to adjust to a "not so new car."

[A FONDO]

I think he means that if you break earlier, then you begin accelerating earlier (before the apex) too, using the "middle throttle". If you have bigger torque you dont care about that (exit of the corner with big momentum) and brake late 'til the apex. Later braking doesnt mean longer.

[JAM]

IRC CORSICA SS5 SIMULCAM SORDO vs KOPECKY - Video Gallery - IRC Intercontinental Rally Challenge - Eurosport (http://t.co/1oJ0jaEJ)

Interesting that in a fast corner (the left corner at the beggining) Sordo lost a lot to the Skoda. It was nothing to do with lack of power, and by the way he brakes, it won't seem a problem of handling.

The way the Mini brakes is powerfull. Driver or car? The mini brakes strong and late, but won't seem to lose to Skoda on the last left corner.

[Mirek]

On a rally like Corsica I can imagine they can drive very different way to achieve similar times. It's a lot about the efficiency of using brakes and tyres not in one or two corners we can see but in thousand of corners in several stages. It's difficult to judge anything but sure it's very different from them.

[JAM]

It's difficult to judge anything but sure it's very different from them.

This time you can judge and have a good ideia.
Why? Because the difference between them at the end of the video, os basically the same that they had at the beggining.

[Mirek]

That doesn't change anything on my thinking. It's not possible to base any conclusion from two or three corners. Or to say it better - You can make a conclusion but it is very likely wrong.

[M5]

If a team is to buy a Fiesta.
What are the good an bad sides of
- S2000
- RRC
- R5

[semsem]

Check out the interview in this week's MotorsportMonday.com (edition 60) with Ken Skidmore of Autotek, who compares the various types of car -from personal experience!

[Mirek]

Very nice interview. Sums it up nicely. Thanks!

[br21]

Very nice article. In general I agree with everything. Only my opinion is you also need many people working on R5 car during service, as maybe it's more simple to work on, but you need to change a lot more parts in that car comparing to WRC/RRC/S2k, so you need people to do that... Also I liked S2000 very much, as it was pure rally car! Way more hardcore than R5...

[Mirek]

By the way I was told some time a go by a guy from JM Racing that working on Fabia S2000 was much easier for mechanics than with Fiesta S2000. He said that everything was done more in a way to be replaceable easily and fast in Fabia.

[br21]

Yes, that's true in my opinion also. Approach to design of Fiesta was different, but I'm not sure if it was worse. Very similar solutions were used in Fiesta WRC later as S2k was some kind of test car for their future Fiesta WRC. Most "difficult" things were for example brake discs bolted directly to wheel hubs, without use of bells (and all 4 wheels rotating when you turn only one, so changing all 4 discs same time was some kind of challenge - one false move and finger broken:). Also driveshafts without any bolts, joints with splines etc. Open joints on both sides, with grease all over the place and many, many circlips, seger clips, etc.

[Sulland]

Check out the interview in this week's MotorsportMonday.com (edition 60) with Ken Skidmore of Autotek, who compares the various types of car -from personal experience!

Very good interview, and descriptive to everyone.
Is this the new GP Week, or has the rally Grand Old Man Journalist gone over to this one?

[Mirek]

Yes, that's true in my opinion also. Approach to design of Fiesta was different, but I'm not sure if it was worse. Very similar solutions were used in Fiesta WRC later as S2k was some kind of test car for their future Fiesta WRC. Most "difficult" things were for example brake discs bolted directly to wheel hubs, without use of bells (and all 4 wheels rotating when you turn only one, so changing all 4 discs same time was some kind of challenge - one false move and finger broken:). Also driveshafts without any bolts, joints with splines etc. Open joints on both sides, with grease all over the place and many, many circlips, seger clips, etc.

Thanks, interesting!

[PLuto]

Very good interview, and descriptive to everyone.
Is this the new GP Week, or has the rally Grand Old Man Journalist gone over to this one?

Martin Holmes left GP Week and moved to Motorsport Monday a year ago...

[Mirek]

Sorry to revive such an old and dust-covered thread but I do not want to start new one just for this little but interesting thing...

Tomasz Czopik in an advertisement on rallycarsforsale.net posted a dyno chart of his Fabia S2000. It is very low resolution but it's possible to see that the engine power is roughly 215 kW, i.e. 292,5 Hp @ 8000 rpm and the torque is roughly 270 Nm @ 6800 rpm. There are two torque peaks, one @ 5000 and one @ 6800 rpm. That correponds with an old graph from 2010 I saw years a go (without numbers). Particularly interesting is also the fact the engine is tuned by Jaroslav Vančík, Czech motoring engineer who prepared engines for example for Fabias S2000 of Kresta Racing (Kresta, Tarabus etc.).

http://rallycarsforsale.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/968098-500x250.jpg

Link to the advertisement: http://rallycarsforsale.net/ads/skoda-s2000-sell-or-exchange/

Now somebody may come and say that Proton was claiming in 2011 they had over 300 Hp. On the other hand Škoda kept claiming 270 Hp in their official tables. I call BS both. For me this graph looks somewhat believable considering S2000 performance (actually it's nearly same with a graph I sketched for myself in excel in 2013; my mistake is 2,5 Hp and 2 Nm, lol).