'How Valid is the Concept of Multi-Discipline Competition cars?'

[Jack95griffiths]

Hi guys

I'm a 3rd Motorsport Engineering Student currently researching into the topic 'How Valid is the Concept of Multi-Discipline Competition cars?'.

Just doing a quick questionnaire to gather the public's opinions on this matter.

If you've got a couple of minutes to carry it out I'd be very appreciative for your time and/or comments

Here is the link: https://jack241.typeform.com/to/mzMrOl

Thanks, Jack

Sorry if this is not allowed

[Rollo]

Valid... but uncompetitive.
Even cars like the Group A Ford Sierra and BMW M3 which although worked in both touring car racing and rally work, still had separate parts bins for both disciplines.

You could build a Multi-Discipline Competition car but why?

If the object is to win, then designing something which has to fulfill functions not currently being exploited, will be less efficient at doing their job than a specific car built for a specific discipline. Even cars competing in single disciplines are tuned for the individual track they're on; in some cases micro-tuned for differing conditions on that same track and/or even for difference parts of that same track.

[Jack95griffiths]

The reason is encouraged mainly by costs, 1 car is cheaper than 2. Very few example at a professional level exist due to the reason you stated, but why not have a base car that you can then just adapt to one discipline with your necessary parts bin. Then when your done with it, you can 'bolt on' a different package and enter the same car in another discipline. You can then have some technology cross overs that might actually have a benefit.

Alternatively anyone wanting to buy your car off you won't be restricted to that discipline.

Then using this approach maybe take it a step further - if you know what's required to turn a DS3 rally car into a DS3 Rally Cross car, why not take on the challenge to make the necessary modifications back and forth as your entering it across the disciplines. You can still fine tune the said car for each track/stage as well for optimised performance.

While I agree with you, however each car can still be open for competition and optimised for each track. Regulations hold a big restriction here with crossing over disciplines but if things like roll cages and safety equipment can be generalised then why not!

[Rollo]

While I agree with you, however each car can still be open for competition and optimised for each track. Regulations hold a big restriction here with crossing over disciplines but if things like roll cages and safety equipment can be generalised then why not!

The rule book for Group A, which was used in Touring Car racing and the WRC, was the same rulebook. In theory, cars could have been used between disciplines. Did they though? No. Regulations held zero restrictions here with crossing over disciplines and things like roll cages and safety equipment could have been generalised but they weren't.

In theory, you could have 'bolted on' a different package and enter the same car in another discipline but in practice nobody did because nobody who actually wants to win, is going to run a compromised car from the outset.

Front line race car teams don't build cars with a view to reselling them. They build cars to win. If a car isn't junk by the time it's served its purpose, then there is a proven cost overrun.

[Jack95griffiths]

Yes, complications do come in when trying to conform to differing regulations - it is possible to cross over with exceptions though and teams can exploit that.

In theory the bare bones of a modified touring car for Rallying shouldn't be any different to road car modified for rallying. There shouldn't be any disadvantage here and it bring a whole new level of interest to the sport in regards to the fans.

Yes, teams want to win but equally they want to make money. In today's day and age, Motorsport needs to consider things like cost, reliability and sustainability (environmentally), it creates a very bad image if not. If a car can go over and beyond then surely that promotes a healthy image to the team and thus the car that carries the manufacturers badge.

[Rollo]

In theory the bare bones of a modified touring car for Rallying shouldn't be any different to road car modified for rallying.

Those bare bones are only likely to be the unibody, roll cage, the safety gear etc.
Things like springs, shocks, tyres, are going to be totally different. Never mind the fact that the torque curves required for track racing are different to that on loose surfaces.

At some point, you're talking about something akin to The Ship of Theseus.

[Jack95griffiths]

Those bare bones are only likely to be the unibody, roll cage, the safety gear etc.
Things like springs, shocks, tyres, are going to be totally different. Never mind the fact that the torque curves required for track racing are different to that on loose surfaces.

At some point, you're talking about something akin to The Ship of Theseus.

Oh, I think we've been on the wrong page then - in essence that's the only way this will work. When I say multi-purpose competition cars, the physical car and whatever is still useful remains the same. To the untrained eye they'll be different cars.

Ken Block basically did this, used the same car (chassis) for Gymkhana, Rally Cross and Rally's and had to essentially rebuild the car each time changing components like suspension, brakes, maps for each discipline, but this worked out better than campaigning 3 different cars for him.