WRC future

[mknight]

https://yle.fi/urheilu/3-11665104

Jarmo Mahonen said in an interview that two big manufacturers are interested in joining WRC. He also says the current teams haven't yet signed the paper on committing to the rules, but it has been agreed verbally.

Google translate says "Two large manufacturers have been interested, but it is not yet more concrete in terms of their brands."

"Interested" is quite loose term. Anyway from this definition I would guess:

- PSA (Stellantis), hard to judge the interest level

- VAG (with other brands than VW, Skoda or Seat), they did recently announce that VW wont do motorsport, but how does it apply to "semi-green" hybrid cars and other brands than VW?

- There was some talk about Subaru, but that doesn't fit with this definition of "large manufacturers" that need to pick brand

In short, nothing new, not holding my breath.

[AnttiL]

https://dirtfish.com/motorsport/dakar/dakar-rally-2021-route-and-entry-finalized/

Dakar is planning to start using hydrogen as fuel from 2026 onwards

[AnttiL]

I listened to the Mahonen podcast out of which yesterday's news article was derived from. He talked about them planning the 2017 WRC rules and it was the first time they had the manufacturers at the table, and they also tried to create what the fans wanted to see.

He also mentions that they also considered going to R5 at the time, but it would have meant losing manufacturers, because they were more interested in a high-tech solution(remember that we're talking mid 2010's here, R5 wasn't as popular as it is now)

He also said that according to Jost Capito VW's yearly budget was 70 million, and Capito said that they could have done two years in secret without anyone noticing, such big are the turnovers of big car manufacturer that a hundred million is just a decimal.

[mknight]

It's much more about the optics than the money itself. Following the dieselgate it's not like VW suddenly ran out of money, even with the massive compensations. But withdrawing as a sinner regretting the cheating surely looked good to the steering board.

Similarly when PSA is kicking people and closing factories it doesn't want to be seen "throwing" money at WRC. Again doesn't matter if they have it or not.

[AnttiL]

It's much more about the optics than the money itself. Following the dieselgate it's not like VW suddenly ran out of money, even with the massive compensations. But withdrawing as a sinner regretting the cheating surely looked good to the steering board.

Yes, definitely. That quote was just representing what kind of investment rallying is for car manufacturers in general, not VW particularly.

[AnttiL]

I'm translating direct quotes from Mahonen about creating the 2017 rules because this stuff is golden

"When I came to FIA, they had no strategy, no plans five years ahead"

"The first point on our strategy was to take the position of the fans, what they want to see. It was a big shock to the manufacturers when we had a meeting and I said we need to make new cars. It was dead silent and they asked 'what kind of cars?'. I said 'let's start with 600 bhp, spectacular cars'. Again dead silent. They said I was crazy and it cannot be implemented. But it was the first time we sat down with the manufacturers and offered to plan it together"

"We have to accept that when car manufacturers are involved, it's extremely difficult to control costs"

About going to R5

"We considered going to R5 but we would lose 150 million Euros coming to the sport"

"It was a clear message in my times [that the manufacturers want to show their high-tech competence and they are not able to do that through simpler and more limited R5 cars]. They wanted this new car that would be spectacular and could be used in marketing"

"It's not cheap either to put up a team and drive 12-14 WRC events on an R5"

about Citroen leaving

"We could see it two years before that they are leaving from their weird statements, and Ogier jumping ship was their final excuse to pull the plug. They weren't successful and although they talked about green values, in reality they were out of money on the department"

[AnttiL]

https://yle.fi/urheilu/3-11665104

Jarmo Mahonen said in an interview that two big manufacturers are interested in joining WRC. He also says the current teams haven't yet signed the paper on committing to the rules, but it has been agreed verbally.

I have to also clarify this. What he actually says is that two manufacturers were interested in joining the 2017 WRC rules, but it has been quiet from them now. The news article was misleading.

[Francis44]

With Audi leaving FE and investing heavily again in motorsport with combustion engines (albeit in a slightly different way in Dakar) could we see another VAG brand joining the party in rallying?!

[Sulland]

I'm translating direct quotes from Mahonen about creating the 2017 rules because this stuff is golden

"We have to accept that when car manufacturers are involved, it's extremely difficult to control costs"

About going to R5
"We considered going to R5 but we would lose 150 million Euros coming to the sport"



It is hard to control cost if you keep changing the regulations, and use political reasons to do so.
In large parts of the world ICE will be 99% of the market for years to come.
Fully electric is currently nor possible in rally
Hybrid is a Parentises in the car history, no use going there for rally.

So manufacturers pay 150 mill to FIA to participate.

Still I think looking at the current corona situation, and that car manus struggle with sales, FIA should keep it simple and run with R5/Rally2 as top dog for a few years. Give FIA and the manufacturers more time to agree on rules for lets say 2024. Corona will be a challenge for at leat one more year from date, if not longer.

That will give all some time to breathe and find the way ahead.

[AnttiL]

How about we won't start this debate once again. However, I want to correct one of your statements


So manufacturers pay 150 mill to FIA to participate.

This is obviously the yearly budget of two manufacturers. If they chose not to participate in the sport, that money would go elsewhere than rallying. Like Mahonen said "the money would not come to the sport". The drivers, mechanics, events, organizations etc. would not get the money, other sports would get it.

[Mirek]

It is hard to control cost if you keep changing the regulations, and use political reasons to do so.

Change of regulations is the basic tool to keep the championship atractive by giving newcommers and unsuccessful ones a chance of restart. Like it or not without this restart the sport is down to two manufacturers after five years or so and the public interest falters in boredom. That was proved over and over again in the past when the period between the changes was kept too long. Yes, it costs money but it brings much more benefits.

[Sulland]

Change of regulations is the basic tool to keep the championship atractive by giving newcommers and unsuccessful ones a chance of restart. Like it or not without this restart the sport is down to two manufacturers after five years or so and the public interest falters in boredom. That was proved over and over again in the past when the period between the changes was kept too long. Yes, it costs money but it brings much more benefits.

In normal circumstanses i agree, but now we do not have normal economical circumstances for car manufacturers, since they have red number on the bottom line. Hard to convince the board, that now is the time to develop a complete new beast.

[Rally Power]

Change of regulations is the basic tool to keep the championship atractive by giving newcommers and unsuccessful ones a chance of restart. Like it or not without this restart the sport is down to two manufacturers after five years or so and the public interest falters in boredom. That was proved over and over again in the past when the period between the changes was kept too long. Yes, it costs money but it brings much more benefits.

Sulland is right on the political motivation for the rules changes and we all know they’re not made to attract new manus but mainly to keep the current ones, making hard to believe the WRC interest will raise because of '22 rules. Besides, apart Gr.B, WRC+ era is about to become the shortest in the series history.

Probably a R5 based solution (on an upgraded mild hybrid form) would allow a larger top field, but once the new rules were finished a year ago and the teams are already working on them, despite the Covid, it seems there’s little point to keep disputing them.

[AnttiL]

Besides, apart Gr.B, WRC+ era is about to become the shortest in the WRC history.

The original 1.6 rules lasted for six years (2011-2016), only one year longer than the current era.

[Rally Power]

The original 1.6 rules lasted for six years (2011-2016), only one year longer than the current era.

That doesn't change what I've write: WRC+ is about to become the shortest WRC era, apart Gr.B (actually if we consider '82 as the beginning of Gr.B era, WRC+ will actually become the shortest one, alongside Gr.B). Besides, '17 rules were mostly an evolution of previous WRC1.6T, quite different from a fundamental change as '22 rules are.

[Mirek]

Sulland is right on the political motivation for the rules changes and we all know they’re not made to attract new manus but mainly to keep the current ones, making hard to believe the WRC interest will raise because of '22 rules.

The manufacturers themselves are part of the political motivation. It's them calling for hybridization and electrification for years. The point is that without the change even the current manus would likely loose reason to stay and the new ones would definitely not come (nobody jumps on the running train which moreover doesn't carry what you want). Also the restart gives everyone a free sheet of paper which is especially important for Ford/M-Sport which at this moment is just adding numbers.

Also the use of tubular spaceframe is much easier for whatever manufacturers to jump in than the current cars. Such cars have good potential to attract big private teams, just like in Dakar or various circuit series if the homologation process will allow that (if not it's a huge mistake from FIA).

[AnttiL]

And remember that the manufacturers are deciding the rules together with FIA, it's not just FIA telling the teams what to do.

I'm sure that if all the manufacturers would have wanted R5 to be the main class in 2022, FIA would have agreed.

[Rally Power]

The manufacturers themselves are part of the political motivation. It's them calling for hybridization and electrification for years. The point is that without the change even the current manus would likely loose reason to stay and the new ones would definitely not come (nobody jumps on the running train which moreover doesn't carry what you want).


That’s exactly what I’ve said; these rules aren’t made to attract more manus but to keep the current ones. That seems a recipe to disaster, especially when a R5+ Mild Hybrid solution was pretty easy to adopt.

Btw, for sure spaceframe chassis are used in many motorsport series, actually since almost ever, but the only time the WRC use them it was a heck of a mess.

[Mirek]

That’s exactly what I’ve said; these rules aren’t made to attract more manus but to keep the current ones. That seems a recipe to disaster, especially when a R5+ Mild Hybrid solution was pretty easy to adopt.

No, the R5+hybrid is a solution for current manufacturers (and not for the new ones) and something manufacturers clearly don't want. R5 rules have been great but they are not rules for the future because they are absolutely bound to the stock production which in the future will continue distancing itself from anything useful for racing activities.


tw, for sure spaceframe chassis are used in many motorsport series, actually since almost ever, but the only time the WRC use them it was a heck of a mess.

For reasons completely unrelated to the spaceframe.

[Rally Power]

I'm sure that if all the manufacturers would have wanted R5 to be the main class in 2022, FIA would have agreed.

How can you be sure of that? From what it was known, these rules making was full of ups and downs and it’s pretty clear that they’re a compromise, not what each manu would really wanted (apparently, Toyota asked for a hi-tech in-house developed Hydrib system, MSport was interested on a R5 based solution and Hyundai almost jumped off for the cars costs). Btw, besides the current 3, do you know if the FIA consulted any other manu, especially those with previous WRC experience?

We should look on WEC new rules; initially, the FIA and the series promoter only managed to attract 2 top manus into the new and expensive Hypercar class, condemning the series to another tedious era. Fortunately, other manus and events organizers pushed for being allowed another top category, the affordable LMDh protos, which will fight for the overall wins thanks to a BoP system. Who knows, maybe on a near future the FIA will consent a BoP leveled R5+ category alongside Rally1 cars, enlarging WRC top field. Fingers crossed!

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Wasnt it the spaceframe chassis that made the super-specialised, mid-engined, Gr.B cars possible ? Plus create their inherent danger with lighweight panels stuck on ?

[Mirek]

Wasnt it the spaceframe chassis that made the super-specialised, mid-engined, Gr.B cars possible ? Plus create their inherent danger with lighweight panels stuck on ?

No. The reason why they were crazy and dangerous was that there were basically no limits in the rules. Spaceframe itself is safer than bodyshell and much easier to design to be safe.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

So the current cars based on a bodyshell are dangerous but the rules make them safer ?

[Mirek]

So the current cars based on a bodyshell are dangerous but the rules make them safer ?

The current cars are not dangerous but spaceframe cars can be easier made safer because unlike in production-based bodyshells everything can be designed and optimized for its role from the get-go. In the current scenario a lot is given by the stock production and most of that is not very useful for race department and what is worst a lot of that can not be changed.

[Sulland]

Next generation top class rally car should get a safety cell ala F1. We saw last weekend what passive security measures does, and it saves people's life.

[Sulland]

And remember that the manufacturers are deciding the rules together with FIA, it's not just FIA telling the teams what to do.

I'm sure that if all the manufacturers would have wanted R5 to be the main class in 2022, FIA would have agreed.

And there is where the cat is barried, some things manufacturers should not be a part of deciding.
At some big crossroads FIA need to cut though the noice and decide, to make series bigger in numbers, and by that more exiting for us, who indirectly pay the bills.
It is only a few in the crowd that will notice if in 2021 R5 became top-dog.

[denkimi]

Wasnt it the spaceframe chassis that made the super-specialised, mid-engined, Gr.B cars possible ? Plus create their inherent danger with lighweight panels stuck on ?
Group b was dangerous because they were allowed to put an aluminium fuel tank under the drivers seat and next to a glowing hot turbo.

[AnttiL]

And there is where the cat is barried, some things manufacturers should not be a part of deciding.
At some big crossroads FIA need to cut though the noice and decide, to make series bigger in numbers, and by that more exiting for us, who indirectly pay the bills.
It is only a few in the crowd that will notice if in 2021 R5 became top-dog.

In the end rallying is marketing for the car manufacturers. They pay the big bills. It's only fair that the get to be in the deciding process.

Like you said, for most in the crowd it doesn't matter what is the top class. It matters more for the manufacturers.

[mknight]

Problem is the manus already in the series (and doing well) usualy want as few changes as possible, both to keep their advantage and to avoid extra costs. This in turn makes it harder for new ones to join.

[AnttiL]

Another stakeholder in the equation is WRC Promoter. I know that they've been pushing for shorter stages and ways to make the sport more directly followable (like the fake podium at the end of the power stage although most of the cars haven't yet even run through the last stage and the end scrutineerings are yet to be done).

Now, imagine the situation that we have 50 top class cars on the start line of the first forest stage, anyone of which could score the stage win. With 2-3 minute start intervals it would take roughly two hours until all the top cars are through and we can declare the stage winner.

Right now with 10 top cars, we can do it in 30 minutes. In most cases we have all the top cars through the stage until the next stage begins and you don't have to follow two stages at the same time (except for lower classes).

And of course, we could only see the first 15 cars on television because of physical and economical limitations.

I believe the WRC Promoter is happier with 10 top cars rather than 50 top cars. Or then they will have to start creating artificial leagues or similar cars like WRC2/3 this year.

[Eli]

With Audi leaving FE and investing heavily again in motorsport with combustion engines (albeit in a slightly different way in Dakar) could we see another VAG brand joining the party in rallying?!

Funny you mentioned it this morning when this: .https://dirtfish.com/rallycross/vw-to-stop-building-polo-gti-r5s-as-it-leaves-motorsport/ happened just an hour ago...

[Francis44]

Funny you mentioned it this morning when this: .https://dirtfish.com/rallycross/vw-to-stop-building-polo-gti-r5s-as-it-leaves-motorsport/ happened just an hour ago...

So VW is definitely out of the picture then. What about Cupra or Skoda?! That could be a possibility surely.

[Mirek]

And there is where the cat is barried, some things manufacturers should not be a part of deciding.
At some big crossroads FIA need to cut though the noice and decide, to make series bigger in numbers, and by that more exiting for us, who indirectly pay the bills.

That makes no sense whatsoever. How can you attract the manufacturers when you decide to go against their will? How would it help to go against the general trends in the automotive branch? How would that help anything and anyone?

[the sniper]

So VW is definitely out of the picture then. What about Cupra or Skoda?! That could be a possibility surely.

It'd make a lot of sense, if it weren't for Cupra not having the Ibiza in its range. Otherwise it'd be a no brainer. Cupra as a brand doesn't really seem to be well executed though, not having the Ibiza as an entry model doesn't seem (to me) to help. I don't see many Cupra's here in the GB, whereas SEAT Sport models of old are still a common sight and normal SEATs still seem to be selling well. Though I appreciate Cupra's are supposed to be more expensive/exclusive. How well are Cupra doing on mainland Europe?

[Rally Power]

Another stakeholder in the equation is WRC Promoter. I know that they've been pushing for shorter stages and ways to make the sport more directly followable (like the fake podium at the end of the power stage although most of the cars haven't yet even run through the last stage and the end scrutineerings are yet to be done).

Now, imagine the situation that we have 50 top class cars on the start line of the first forest stage, anyone of which could score the stage win. With 2-3 minute start intervals it would take roughly two hours until all the top cars are through and we can declare the stage winner.

Right now with 10 top cars, we can do it in 30 minutes. In most cases we have all the top cars through the stage until the next stage begins and you don't have to follow two stages at the same time (except for lower classes).

And of course, we could only see the first 15 cars on television because of physical and economical limitations.

I believe the WRC Promoter is happier with 10 top cars rather than 50 top cars. Or then they will have to start creating artificial leagues or similar cars like WRC2/3 this year.

That sounds bizarre. Every motorsport series is eager to get as many manus as possible but you’re somehow suggesting it shouldn’t be WRC case because it’s hard to broadcast more than 15 cars…

For a start, even on a R5+ scenario it’d be hard getting more than 5/6 manus, meaning we would never be close to the absurd figure of 50 top cars, even considering that a few top privateers would be able to get a R5+ car and fight for the wins (in the case R5+ wouldn’t be limited to manus teams).

Secondly, besides manus entry fees allowing to develop the WRC, the interest on having as manus as possible comes from manus ability to promote any motorsport series through their powerful marketing machines, directly or indirectly once they’re also one of the strongest media advertising costumers.

Finally, if the FIA and the WRC promoter feels that having 3 manus is enough and there’s little purpose on looking for more, they would be risking the series future (unfortunately, it seems to be the case) as it’s impossible to know when a manu decide to pull out. If having just 2 manus in the 00’s was already quite agonizing, nowadays that would probably mean the WRC end as a top motorsport series.

[Mirek]

That sounds bizarre. Every motorsport series is eager to get as many manus as possible but you’re somehow suggesting it shouldn’t be WRC case because it’s hard to broadcast more than 15 cars…

Not bizzare at all. How can you avoid a scenario where a private car wins the stage overall while starting an hour after the end of broadcast? That would definitely happen because that happens even now but very rarely. The closer the top cars are to the privateer ones the more often this will happen. The closer in performance the cars are the more often they will appear in top ten (also take into account lesser reliability of R5 in the rough events) and especially first day will be very messy and difficult to follow when results broadcasted on TV will be different than real results.


For a start, even on a R5+ scenario it’d be hard getting more than 5/6 manus, meaning we would never be close to the absurd figure of 50 top cars, even considering that a few top privateers would be able to get a R5+ car and fight for the wins (in the case R5+ wouldn’t be limited to manus teams).

Some imaginary R5+ won't be much faster than the real R5 (that is simply impossible) which means that even normal R5 would mix much more in the results than now, i.e. a chaos in results is very real thing to be expected. Those private cars will also mix in the start lists of the second and third day and take away the TV time from the manufacturers. For sure we can say they won't like that.


Secondly, besides manus entry fees allowing to develop the WRC, the interest on having as manus as possible comes from manus ability to promote any motorsport series through their powerful marketing machines, directly or indirectly once they’re also one of the strongest media advertising costumers.

And why do you think they shall use for their marketing something they don't want?


Finally, if the FIA and the WRC promoter feels that having 3 manus is enough and there’s little purpose on looking for more, they would be risking the series future (unfortunately, it seems to be the case) as it’s impossible to know when a manu decide to pull out. If having just 2 manus in the 00’s was already quite agonizing, nowadays that would probably mean the WRC end as a top motorsport series.

How did you come to a conclusion that the proposed rules are not a way to seek for new entries? In every meaningful aspect they are designed for that far better than your R5+ which manufacturers neither want nor need.

[Rally Power]

Not bizzare at all. How can you avoid a scenario where a private car wins the stage overall while starting an hour after the end of broadcast? That would definitely happen because that happens even now but very rarely. The closer the top cars are to the privateer ones the more often this will happen. The closer in performance the cars are the more often they will appear in top ten (also take into account lesser reliability of R5 in the rough events) and especially first day will be very messy and difficult to follow when results broadcasted on TV will be different than real results.

Some imaginary R5+ won't be much faster than the real R5 (that is simply impossible) which means that even normal R5 would mix much more in the results than now, i.e. a chaos in results is very real thing to be expected. Those private cars will also mix in the start lists of the second and third day and take away the TV time from the manufacturers. For sure we can say they won't like that.

And why do you think they shall use for their marketing something they don't want?

How did you come to a conclusion that the proposed rules are not a way to seek for new entries? In every meaningful aspect they are designed for that far better than your R5+ which manufacturers neither want nor need.

Look again. The point here is on the absurdity of believing that the WRC should be fine on having a small number of manus in the series.

That sounds as a recipe to disaster and I believe you weren’t able to refute it with a single valid argument.

Strangely, it seems that Matton’s reckless otpimism on the series future is becoming contagious…

[TheFlyingTuga]

Look again. The point here is on the absurdity of believing that the WRC should be fine on having a small number of manus in the series.

That sounds as a recipe to disaster and I believe you weren’t able to refute it with a single valid argument.

Strangely, it seems that Matton’s reckless otpimism on the series future is becoming contagious…

Mirek is kind of right. I remembered those end of the day reports in the early '00s, sometimes some manus like Skoda, Seat, or Hyundai didn't even appear in them and if they did it was only briefly. That will not get well with manu's.

And BTW, you talk about R5+ like they are an easy thing to do. Do you know why DTM ended up getting only the normal GT3 and not GT3+? Because when they explained the idea to the manufacturers they call Berger crazy. An R5 is completely developed for what it is. Maybe you can put a bigger wing on the back, but that's it. More power will have significant costs in the development of the cars.

[AnttiL]

That sounds bizarre. Every motorsport series is eager to get as many manus as possible but you’re somehow suggesting it shouldn’t be WRC case because it’s hard to broadcast more than 15 cars…

Circuit motorsport series are not comparable because the cars run on the circuit simultaneously. I'm not saying WRC Promoter does not want more manufacturers, but I'm saying they would have problem when the number of cars capable of winning exceeds 20. And I'm sure that would lead into a similar solution as WRC2/WRC3, you would have to pay a big entry fee to register for WRC, to be able to actually win the stages or rallies and get points, and we could see a silly situation where the car with the smallest overall time doesn't win the rally. And we don't want that.

But this thought was based on the idea of normal R5 being the main class, what Colin Clark et al on twitter tout about having the local guys being able to challenge the factory drivers in their home event. If we have an R5+ thing, it would solve nicely the problem by having again a more expensive top class with more performance...and out of reach of the local guys.

[AnttiL]

And BTW, you talk about R5+ like they are an easy thing to do. Do you know why DTM ended up getting only the normal GT3 and not GT3+? Because when they explained the idea to the manufacturers they call Berger crazy. An R5 is completely developed for what it is. Maybe you can put a bigger wing on the back, but that's it. More power will have significant costs in the development of the cars.

Mahonen also said in the podcast that he's seen the same happen in circuit racing, first they start with a cheap car and then the teams start demanding more gadgets on the cars and finally the manufacturer pulls the plug because it's too expensive.

[TheFlyingTuga]

Mahonen also said in the podcast that he's seen the same happen in circuit racing, first they start with a cheap car and then the teams start demanding more gadgets on the cars and finally the manufacturer pulls the plug because it's too expensive.

As long as manufactures are involved that will always happen. You have the examplte of the TCR cars. When the concept was introduced you had a lot of brands and companies working making cars. Since Hyundai and Lynk&Co. appeared the championship started to be extremely expensive and you almost can see privateers ono the grid. They will end up leaving when they realise that the investment is bigger that what they are gettingt in terms of media return.

[Rally Power]

But this thought was based on the idea of normal R5 being the main class, what Colin Clark et al on twitter tout about having the local guys being able to challenge the factory drivers in their home event. If we have an R5+ thing, it would solve nicely the problem by having again a more expensive top class with more performance...and out of reach of the local guys.

Even if more expensive than current R5, a R5+ would certainly cost way less than a Rally1H.

What mostly puzzles me is in this debate is that suggesting a reasonable R5 upgrade for WRC use is seen as an heresy, while apparently no one is bothered with having the strangest possible layout on ‘22 WRC cars: a WRC+ engine with an expensive (and yet to know how it’ll actually work) Hybrid system, mounted on a ‘buggy’ chassis using R5 transmission and suspensions, all covered by a scale down silhouette body...

Btw, for sure it’s great to have local crews fighting for international events wins, but that only works on regional series, like the ERC; we all know that in the WRC factory teams will always have the edge over privateers, even when running apparently identical cars.

[AnttiL]

What mostly puzzles me is in this debate is that suggesting a reasonable R5 upgrade for WRC use is seen as an heresy, while apparently no one is bothered with having the strangest possible layout on ‘22 WRC cars: a WRC+ engine with an expensive (and yet to know how it’ll actually work) Hybrid system, mounted on a ‘buggy’ chassis using R5 transmission and suspensions, all covered by a scale down silhouette body...

Not R5 transmission and suspension. Simpler than now, but not the same. Scaling down and tubular framework are there to make it easier for manufacturers to jump in if they don't have a car of the right size they want to market in rallying.

R5+ would be cheaper than the 2022 Rally1 hybrid cars, but the question is, would it give any value to the manufacturers?

[TheFlyingTuga]

Even if more expensive than current R5, a R5+ would certainly cost way less than a Rally1H.

Are you sure of that? Okay, let's assume that the car cost double down, so you'd have R5+ costing around 600k. I don't see a lot of privateers runing them, as they didn't run the 1.6WRC cars that were in the same cost region


What mostly puzzles me is in this debate is that suggesting a reasonable R5 upgrade for WRC use is seen as an heresy, while apparently no one is bothered with having the strangest possible layout on ‘22 WRC cars: a WRC+ engine with an expensive (and yet to know how it’ll actually work) Hybrid system, mounted on a ‘buggy’ chassis using R5 transmission and suspensions, all covered by a scale down silhouette body...

Have you seen the cars already? Because for me they are still a concept...


Btw, for sure it’s great to have local crews fighting for international events wins, but that only works on regional series, like the ERC; we all know that in the WRC factory teams will always have the edge over privateers, even when running apparently identical cars.

See that's the problem with your concept of R5+. If the local or privateer crews cannot fight for the ralis, and realistically for a place opn the top5 (assuming that you still had at least 3 manu's) why would you scale down on the spectacle of the cars? Would you realistically think that Citroen or Skoda would enter the championship? Or that Toyota would bother to create an R5 on purpose?

[Sulland]

To get bigger number of followers online, they need to utilize the technology that is awailable today.
- Split times, they need to have more splits. The split difference on each driver need to say if he is getting closer or loosing to the best in class. The commentators need to make it exiting, by using time diffs more than today.

- Split screen, so even if there is an interview at stage end you still see the next driver. They can also use it, split horisontally to compare drivers, to see where thy loose and gain.

- Better commentators, that always has an expert commentator, x-driver, that can explain driving styles, tyrechoices, team tactics and so on.

It has been the same since they started All-Live, time to evolve!

[AnttiL]

To get bigger number of followers online, they need to utilize the technology that is awailable today.
- Split times, they need to have more splits. The split difference on each driver need to say if he is getting closer or loosing to the best in class. The commentators need to make it exiting, by using time diffs more than today.

- Split screen, so even if there is an interview at stage end you still see the next driver. They can also use it, split horisontally to compare drivers, to see where thy loose and gain.

- Better commentators, that always has an expert commentator, x-driver, that can explain driving styles, tyrechoices, team tactics and so on.

It has been the same since they started All-Live, time to evolve!

I don't think we need more split times than what we have now, the commentators could just be more awake with them.

We already have picture in picture for showing the stage end interview at the same time as the next driver footage.

Split screen for comparison isn't as useful as it sounds like, it's difficult to follow two cars at the same time. The differences over the course of a kilometre can be very minimal between the current top drivers.

As for expert commentators, I agree, that's always best when we have an ex-driver or current driver commentating.

But this is just about what value we as paying customers get. You cannot get new followers from improving the service which is completely behind the paywall.

I would introduce new payment options. Something like

- Pay-per-rally. The month system is stupid because some months have more rallies than others. 8 euros per rally?
- Pay-per-stage. If you don't have time to watch all stages, you can just buy credits for stage. Maybe you buy 6 stages for a weekend. One euro per stage?
- Try one stage for free (or maybe half a stage and then you have to pay to continue :D)
- Add sample footage of one All Live stage youtube to show how it is. Right now you have have no samples anywhere except for shakedowns which are always a horrible mess. Stream the first Friday stage on YouTube for free, get people hooked on and start getting new subscriptions before the next stage?

[Rally Power]

Not R5 transmission and suspension. Simpler than now, but not the same.

If it’s not the same, it’ll be pretty close, with only 5 speeds and no active diff; https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/wrc-2022-rules-everything-you-need-to-know/

Btw, a R5 based solution (it could be called R5+ or anything else) was already advanced in January by MSport boss; https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/articles/rally/1-million-euro-wrc-hybrid-cars-too-expensive-says-malcolm-wilson

It’s interesting to notice that Matton and Wilson estimations on Rally1H price are hugely different; probably the real value will be in the middle, close to current WRC cars price as Makinen predicted some time ago.

[wyler]

If it’s not the same, it’ll be pretty close, with only 5 speeds and no active diff; https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/wrc-2022-rules-everything-you-need-to-know/

Btw, a R5 based solution (it could be called R5+ or anything else) was already advanced in January by MSport boss; https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/articles/rally/1-million-euro-wrc-hybrid-cars-too-expensive-says-malcolm-wilson

It’s interesting to notice that Matton and Wilson estimations on Rally1H price are hugely different; probably the real value will be in the middle, close to current WRC cars price as Makinen predicted some time ago.

Why are we talking (again) about things 1 year old, already surpassed by reality???

[TheFlyingTuga]

Btw, a R5 based solution (it could be called R5+ or anything else) was already advanced in January by MSport boss; https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/articles/rally/1-million-euro-wrc-hybrid-cars-too-expensive-says-malcolm-wilson

It's funny that Wilson says that the cost cap is 190k for Rally2 and you cannot get one for less than 300k. Business man will speak what it is best for their business. Wilson cannot match the top dollars brought by Toyota and Hyundai to R&D a new rally car, so he "cries" for the cost cap and try to push for a concept that M-Sport have already tested and proved... what an admiration

[Rally Power]

R5+ would be cheaper than the 2022 Rally1 hybrid cars, but the question is, would it give any value to the manufacturers?

Apparently it would. Besides MSport, Hyundai also looked in favor of closer to R5 specs, while Toyota seemed always pushing for more expensive features. At the end a compromise was reached, probably by giving MSport green light to use Rally1cars in national champs or by freezing GRE developments in order to control costs, as Hyundai asked.
https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/wrc-keeps-current-engine-base-for-2022-hybrid-move/

[AnttiL]

Apparently it would. Besides MSport, Hyundai also looked in favor of closer to R5 specs, while Toyota seemed always pushing for more expensive features. At the end a compromise was reached, probably by giving MSport green light to use Rally1cars in national champs or by freezing GRE developments in order to control costs, as Hyundai asked.
https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/wrc-keeps-current-engine-base-for-2022-hybrid-move/

I meant manufacturers, not teams.

Also that article talks only about the engine. A 2022 Rally1 car with an R5 engine would still be very different from an R5 car.

[Mirek]

I really don't see the point of this R+ discussion. It's dead and burried idea. Why so much fuss about it?

[Rally Power]

I really don't see the point of this R+ discussion. It's dead and burried idea. Why so much fuss about it?

Then why did you write long posts against it? Even if dead and buried, who knows if it won’t ‘resurrect’ on a near future, in case Rally1H fail to deliver a proper competition…

[Sulland]

Lets do an experiment, with an open mind.

- since very few car sold worldwide have 4wd, FIA and manus say that starting with 4wd cars was a mistake.
- We will revert back to 2wd cars for all rallyclasses.

- Rally1 and Rally2 will be Rear wheel drive
- Rally 3-5 will be front wheel drive.

FIA tech regs kept simple, to keep cost down.

What will happen?
Top Drivers will love it, they rally with Escorts and M3s for fun in their spare time.
Manufacturers will develop cars within a simple tech environment, with little or no electronic gizmos allowed.

Private teams can buy or develop their own cars, no need to get manufacturer Blessing to homologate. All good as long as they pass safety requirements.

So more competitive cars to compete.
More drivers to make a living from rally.

Privat teams will get sponsors to pay the bills and salaries for teams and driving crews.

For us as fans and audience, we would love seing the long slides, and perfect car control on the loose, and trying to stay narrow on asphalt, but not always manage.

Would be fun for all, in my book!

[Mirek]

Not this nonsense again, please.

[Sulland]

Not this nonsense again, please.

You are boring Mirek, should think you are a bean counter by profession.
Rally is, as all motorsport in the entertainment business, no more and no less. Same as football, or any sport.

A bit of fantasy have never hurt anyone.

[Mirek]

This is not a fantasy thread but a thread about WRC future.

If you open a fantasy thread I hereby promise you that I will never ever enter it.

[mknight]

I find RWD cars quite boring to watch tbh. Especially in slow and high speed corners. Slow corners it's just lots of wheelspin and nothing going on, high speed they are just slow as drivers cant push more without fearing they loose control.
FWD are even worse in slow speed, but on tarmac better to watch at high speed.

[Sulland]

This is not a fantasy thread but a thread about WRC future.

If you open a fantasy thread I hereby promise you that I will never ever enter it.

;)

[AndyRAC]

It's like a broken record; if the WRC series is in good shape and offers manufacturers what they want, they'll sign up. If it doesn't then they won't - at the moment we think (according to Dirtfish) both Toyota & Hyundai have signed up. As have M-Sport - but how much support will Ford bring....??? 4 fully funded manufacturers is the ideal number for the long term. 6,7+ tends to be short lived as a few realise they can't win and pull the plug.

Rallying doesn't inhabit some bubble, it's part of the greater motorsport world; it might help some people to take notice of what's going on in other series; I also think most other series tend to be a bit more proactive towards technology - WRC is quite often left behind.

[Rally Power]

Rally is, as all motorsport in the entertainment business, no more and no less. Same as football, or any sport.


Hard to agree with you on that one. Many sports can be seen as entertainment once they are mostly a game, but Rally, and motorsport in general, it’s much more than that. Rally drivers don’t ‘play’, they live a true risk by challenging the most demanding roads on powerfull machines that can become unpredictable at any second. I believe it’s that ‘larger than life’ element of Rally that make us following it in the media and, every possible time, to travel hundreds of kms and spend several days under all sorts of weather to watch it.

[wyler]

Hard to agree with you on that one. Many sports can be seen as entertainment once they are mostly a game, but Rally, and motorsport in general, it’s much more than that. Rally drivers don’t ‘play’, they live a true risk by challenging the most demanding roads on powerfull machines that can become unpredictable at any second. I believe it’s that ‘larger than life’ element of Rally that make us following it in the media and, every possible time, to travel hundreds of kms and spend several days under all sorts of weather to watch it.

yeah. agreed. (I think most people here think the same)
then take away the fanboy glasses and take a step back. It is a sport. the same as a game in the end. especially for non-fan. i guess here we are trying to be less fans and more pragmatic, to forecast the future as realistically as possible.

i guess a chess player, a soccer fan, everyone! with a true passion can give you a million words story about how romantic and best-in-the-world his passion is. i think we are not comparing passions here...

[AnttiL]

Hard to agree with you on that one. Many sports can be seen as entertainment once they are mostly a game, but Rally, and motorsport in general, it’s much more than that. Rally drivers don’t ‘play’, they live a true risk by challenging the most demanding roads on powerfull machines that can become unpredictable at any second. I believe it’s that ‘larger than life’ element of Rally that make us following it in the media and, every possible time, to travel hundreds of kms and spend several days under all sorts of weather to watch it.

I'm not familiar with other motorsports very much, but at least rallying differs from most conventional sports by being very expensive to run, and the money to run the sport on professional level comes from the marketing budgets of car manufacturers. It's entertainment for sure, but also marketing, very much, more than just the external sponsors like in most sports.

[Rally Power]

yeah. agreed. (I think most people here think the same)
then take away the fanboy glasses and take a step back. It is a sport. the same as a game in the end. especially for non-fan. i guess here we are trying to be less fans and more pragmatic, to forecast the future as realistically as possible.

i guess a chess player, a soccer fan, everyone! with a true passion can give you a million words story about how romantic and best-in-the-world his passion is. i think we are not comparing passions here...

Sorry mate; hard to follow you. The post is about considering Rally mainly as an entertainment, or not. It has nothing to do with forecasting its future or comparing fans passion. For gods sake.

[wyler]

Sorry mate; hard to follow you. The post is about considering Rally mainly as an entertainment, or not. It has nothing to do with forecasting its future or comparing fans passion. For gods sake.

really? having a title as "Wrc future?" I was thinking we were talking about this.
Rally as entertainment argument is just a good part of it, exactly as trying to forecast which direction it will take. I agree that a romantic depiction of braveness is just out of focus.

[Rally Power]

really? having a title as "Wrc future?" I was thinking we were talking about this.
Rally as entertainment argument is just a good part of it, exactly as trying to forecast which direction it will take. I agree that a romantic depiction of braveness is just out of focus.

Maybe you’ve been distracted but this forum is an open debate space and posts don’t need to strictly respect the thread title.

Anyway, once you’re mentioning it, probably what’s missing in this sport promotion is a better way to show that ‘romantic depiction of braveness’, because it’s real and makes thousands going to rally stages, at least to proper ones.

[AnttiL]

Maybe you’ve been distracted but this forum is an open debate space and posts don’t need to strictly respect the thread title.

Anyway, once you’re mentioning it, probably what’s missing in this sport promotion is a better way to show that ‘romantic depiction of braveness’, because it’s real and makes thousands going to rally stages, at least to proper ones.

Well right now no one can go to any rally stages, whether on circuit or on roads. But the series pushes on and someone pays the bills.

[wyler]

Maybe you’ve been distracted but this forum is an open debate space and posts don’t need to strictly respect the thread title.


Funny you say this having said that just a few lines above: "Sorry mate; hard to follow you. The post is about considering Rally mainly as an entertainment, or not. It has nothing to do with forecasting its future or comparing fans passion. For gods sake."

so can we speak freely, or we have to stick to the post? I'm more confused than distracted...

Let's go on with the real topic: i agree with the post above that is enough a point to continue the discussion. Btw this storytelling of braveness and romanticism fails to represent todays reality, as the new main actor of rallying wants to show something different. Maybe we fan would love that, but manus want to speak to a generic and casual attendee, the one that buys their cars.

[denkimi]

I'm not familiar with other motorsports very much, but at least rallying differs from most conventional sports by being very expensive to run, and the money to run the sport on professional level comes from the marketing budgets of car manufacturers. It's entertainment for sure, but also marketing, very much, more than just the external sponsors like in most sports.
Actually wrc is a cheap sport. For a few million dollars you can participate, and for a few tens of millions you can actually get a real shot at a world title.

Many other professional sports have much greater budgets.

[Rally Power]

Btw this storytelling of braveness and romanticism fails to represent todays reality, as the new main actor of rallying wants to show something different. Maybe we fan would love that, but manus want to speak to a generic and casual attendee, the one that buys their cars.

We keep seeing brands, from all sectors, using personal stories of resilience from their sponsored athlete’s to promote their products; for sure rally drivers bravery can also have marketing value.

[wyler]

We keep seeing brands, from all sectors, using personal stories of resilience from their sponsored athlete’s to promote their products; for sure rally drivers bravery can also have marketing value.

Not really imo, foe this to work you have to know the athlete.
the % of general public that knows rally heroes is very low. you can't compare the mediatic power of rally athletes to soccer or nba...

[the sniper]

I've got to be honest, I feel like now is almost* the most despondent I've felt about the future of the WRC. At least in 2009 the only way was up! Back then everyone knew the WRC was in trouble, now it feels like they're sleep walking into a worse situation. Back then we had two manufacturers. Now we essentially have two manufacturers, with M-Sport increasingly feeling like a zombie manufacturer team. But unlike 2009, the two manufactures seem more selfish in a way now. The future WRC car regulations don't seem to be being crafted sensibly given the current circumstances. At least in 2009 there seemed to be more of an understanding of the necessity to support the running of more WRC cars for the benefit of the sport. Back then I didn't feel like M-Sport or Citroen would disappear, but Hyundai seem uncertain to me. I know a lot has gone on this year, but Adamo seemed weird this weekend. M-Sport seemed rather detached from proceedings. Lappi's casual announcement at the end of the Power Stage that he wouldn't be back, though not unpredictable news, was quite striking to me a way.

Listening to Julian Porter talking glowingly about having a few more rallies like Rally Monza was depressing. Rally Monza was a good idea under the circumstances of this year/Covid, which ended up being made much better by unplannable weather intervention. If Porter is as usually on message as anyone on WRC+, the official mouth piece of WRC Promoter, I fear this is the direction the WRC wishes to go. As if that is a surprise. We've already lost so many of the classic rallies. Rallies are getting shorter still. Now we're aspirationally looking at what would once have been considered a joke, WRC rounds becoming glorified single venue events... How low can the WRC go? Is anybody interested in protecting the integrity of the WRC or has that ship long sailed?

This is the first time in a decade that I've felt underwhelmed by the prospect of the following season.

*The main difference between 2009 and now, there's a lot of talented young guys now that could flourish in a revived WRC. Whereas, in 2009, there was only one name, Sebastien... It almost makes the situation worse now though, as we could see so much talent wasted...

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Hyundai testing for Monte this week. So at least they seem committed to another season in WRC and not bailing to an electric series.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Ogier is now off The Sniper's christmas card list... ;)

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/154051/ogier-wrc-should-consider-more-showcase-evnts

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Autosport @autosport

The Monza Rally was an unusual way to end an unusual #WRC season, and while far from ideal, without it the series could have faced serious ramifications. To persuade stakeholders to commit to an uncertain future, Monza was an important showcase.

Anyone have access to this ?

http://www.autosport.com/wrc/feature/10854/why-the-wrc-unorthodox-ending-was-a-necessary-one

[wyler]

Autosport @autosport

The Monza Rally was an unusual way to end an unusual #WRC season, and while far from ideal, without it the series could have faced serious ramifications. To persuade stakeholders to commit to an uncertain future, Monza was an important showcase.

Anyone have access to this ?

http://www.autosport.com/wrc/feature/10854/why-the-wrc-unorthodox-ending-was-a-necessary-one

try using outline[dot]com

[the sniper]

Ogier is now off The Sniper's christmas card list... ;)

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/154051/ogier-wrc-should-consider-more-showcase-evnts

:D ;)

It'd be nice if he and Adamo would actually specify what it is that other event organisers are supposed to take from this event, because we all know, when the WRC bubble says jump, most of the organisers will oblige...

The main challenge seemed to be presented by the weather conditions, which also cancelled one stage and indirectly led to another being stopped. The weather probably can't be replicated, thus what is it that we're taking from this event and replicating? To me the likely results will be:
- We wave goodbye to Sardinia, as the WRC finally forces the ACI's hand on returning back to the mainland/Monza.
- We lose at least a day of Rally Catalunya to doing a few laps of Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya and its car parks.
- Wales Rally GB gets a late reprieve with the organisers getting their cheap day(s) at Oulton Park, a venue that'll be "perfect for spectators" but is still in the middle of nowhere with poor access.

Maybe there is something to be taken from Monza, but I can imagine some unfortunate interpretations.

[AnttiL]

Ogier is now off The Sniper's christmas card list... ;)

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/154051/ogier-wrc-should-consider-more-showcase-evnts

BTW these quotes are directly from the FIA press conference.

https://www.fia.com/news/wrc-s-ogier-season-definitely-has-been-special

[the sniper]

Autosport @autosport

The Monza Rally was an unusual way to end an unusual #WRC season, and while far from ideal, without it the series could have faced serious ramifications. To persuade stakeholders to commit to an uncertain future, Monza was an important showcase.

Anyone have access to this ?

http://www.autosport.com/wrc/feature/10854/why-the-wrc-unorthodox-ending-was-a-necessary-one

Looks something like this...


Over the years, the Monza Rally Show has brought colour to the close season when our thoughts are usually preoccupied by the dark, wet trudge through winter. It has also provided a mini Race of Champions, bringing stars from different disciplines together - not least the allure of those other-worldly types who race in MotoGP.

Monza without the megawatt star power of Valentino Rossi, without crowds and with little more than a grim determination to draw a line under 2020 was rather different. The sight of WRC cars endlessly pootling around the same muddy stage was unedifying at best. But be in no doubt that this was arguably the WRC's most important event for decades.

Why so important? Well, if Monza hadn't taken place then the WRC would have run less than 50% of its calendar. In the strictest reading of FIA law, the 2020 season wouldn't have happened at all.

That sort of detail can possibly get finessed away with an Act of God amendment or a force majeure clause, but without Monza the WRC may well have been in breach of its TV contracts and this would have been an infinitely bigger blow.

The WRC's host broadcasters do not bring in the sort of riches that Formula 1 commands - one broadcasting insider referred to the numbers involved as 'chicken feed' - but that's not the issue at stake.

The WRC is owned by Red Bull, which wants the maximum number of eyeballs on each event because its branding is plastered over the stages, the service park and most of the drivers. When it stepped in to save the series back in 2012, Red Bull was not acting out of charity. It knew that it had bought a property that could put its branding in the maximum possible number of living rooms worldwide.


Most global sports are trying to make money by selling themselves on pay-per-view. Red Bull makes money from the fizzy drinks that are advertised by the WRC and the strategy appears to be working very well. New records were set by the global audience for the three pre-COVID rounds of the WRC in 2020, leaping by 15% to 242 million viewers across a massive 2,679 broadcast hours.

Quite how the rest of the 2020 season has panned out is anyone's guess, but the 2019 figures make for astonishing reading. In total, 831 million people watched the WRC on TV last year. That is a billion shy of Formula 1's total, but equally it is more viewers than the next three biggest motorsport categories combined.

Quite how we go from the nervous confinement of Monza to the full, sprawling majesty of Monte Carlo in just six weeks is hard to comprehend
Formula E achieved 411 million viewers in 2019. The World Endurance Championship got itself to 255 million by counting Le Mans in both 2018 and 2019. NASCAR notched up 119 million viewers domestically across its 40 events.

Sustaining the WRC's global footprint is therefore fundamental to its future, and the show of faith given in Monza could well be priceless to that end. Nobody, after all, is under any illusions that our path towards the 'new normal' will be straightforward.

It is impossible to believe that the proposed 2021 calendar will run to plan as COVID-19 continues to menace the world. Quite how we go from the nervous confinement of Monza to the full, sprawling majesty of Monte Carlo in just six weeks is hard to comprehend.


For broadcasters to commit to that uncertain future, a show of faith was required and it is to be hoped that Monza delivered, because it was far from ideal in every other respect. The travelling circus had to expose itself to performing in Lombardy: one of the worst-hit regions in Europe during the COVID-19 crisis, where the number of deaths is currently at the same level that it was back in March.

Confining the teams and much of the running within the perimeter at Monza was sensible, if dull. But then, when the field was briefly able to stretch its legs in the mountains, crews found themselves trying to guess tyre choices and road conditions while their teams were stuck in the 'bubble' at the Autodromo.


The image of a marshal at the start of SS11 with his hand-written warning 'Maybe snow in the last 4km' will live long in the memory - all the more bitterly in the memories of Elfyn Evans and Scott Martin, of course.

"I think in what's probably going to be the hardest year, I hope, that we all have to ever go through, we've all done a fantastic job to pull together and make sure that we get these events running," said M-Sport team principal Richard Millener.

"And, yes, maybe they haven't been perfect or what we want from World Rally and what we expect, but I think we have to be proud of what we did in really difficult conditions."

The works teams are better insulated than M-Sport by having their budgets set in advance, but that has not made the battle to complete a meaningful season any easier.

"It's amazing to think what everyone has done to try to finish the season," said an emotional Hyundai team boss Andrea Adamo, who achieved his stated aim in defending the manufacturers' title. "I know what has been ahead of this, I spent difficult days. I'm not going to lament myself, but lots of tension, we had to justify our involvement."

At every level, the WRC community should be proud of what it has collectively achieved in 2020. Let's hope it brings new rewards in better days ahead.

I don't think anyone's doubting Monza served/serves a strong purpose in Covid times.

[mknight]

On the topic of Monza:

I too was thinking how interesting it was with rain, gravel parts etc on the circuit on Friday compared with the usual superspecials where everyone ends within 2s and only interesting thing is whether someone does a stupid mistake (looking at Meeke in 2017 GER, Neuville 2017 Sweden, Latvala in Poland 2009, Hirvonen Finland 2004...)

So when Tanak said on Friday evening that if anything is more interesting than this he would like to see it I was laughing like most other people.

And then we got onto normal stages and already on the first one with the new layer of slush at the end it immediately got more interesting than whole of Friday. In the afternoon it reached another level completely.
Guess we needed that to put the "excitement" of circuit stages into perspective.


-----------------------
Sure Monza served its purpose, after all until a week before the start it was actually very likely that only the circuit stages would be done.

What could be done imo is to wastly improve the super specials using the ideas at Monza. Great Orme is in a way already an SSS of sorts. So 1-2 longer "superspecials" per rally would be quite fine for me. If the service park is at a circuit it can be set around it. So much better than superspecials with 3 donuts and 2 corners...

[Mirek]

I'm probably biased bur for me the best superspecial-sorf-of is Barum Rally city stage.

[AndyRAC]

Listening to Julian Porter talking glowingly about having a few more rallies like Rally Monza was depressing. Rally Monza was a good idea under the circumstances of this year/Covid, which ended up being made much better by unplannable weather intervention. If Porter is as usually on message as anyone on WRC+, the official mouth piece of WRC Promoter, I fear this is the direction the WRC wishes to go. As if that is a surprise. We've already lost so many of the classic rallies. Rallies are getting shorter still. Now we're aspirationally looking at what would once have been considered a joke, WRC rounds becoming glorified single venue events... How low can the WRC go? Is anybody interested in protecting the integrity of the WRC or has that ship long sailed?



I think you've already answered the question. It can go lower, and they're not interested; or if they are, they're doing a bad job of showing it. About 20 years ago there was an article in either Autosport/MNews or one of the Rally magazines (which no longer exist). And it laid out what it takes to host a WRC event; I think the main requirement nowadays is a big bag of £$£$£$£$

If you compare to other global motorsport series, then the WRC has changed the most, and by a lot. Over the last 10-15-20+ years:

F1 is still basically the same; qualifying is now a 1 day event, which has been tweaked a few times. No more 'warm up' on race day, followed by an approx 90 mins race, as then.

MotoGP - Rebranded in early 2000, keeping the 3 classes with MotoGP (formerly 500cc) the headline act. Again qualifying has been tweaked, but Sunday see the main race still at approx 45 mins.
(The Dutch TT at Assen, traditionally held on the Saturday has only recently moved to Sunday)

WRC - I won't go into details, but it's basically a different sport from 20-25 year ago.

I was open minded about Rally Monza, but I didn't think it was great; the circuit stages were far too 'gimmicky' and stop/start with too many chicanes, etc I could just about accept that type of 'one off' event if the 'classic' events were allowed to return to their proper format; running Monte from Tuesday - Friday night, for example. And there's no chance of that......well not in the WRC.

I can see a 'WRC Rallysprint' series using various race circuits, and the outlying roads to be used for events, now that could work; imagine an event at the Nordschleife? - but as part of the supposed pinnacle of rallysport? Not for me.

[AnttiL]

WRC - I won't go into details, but it's basically a different sport from 20-25 year ago. .

No, the basic principles have remained unchanged from the 60's. The biggest change is that you can now restart in the rally (since early 00's) and you can get extra points from the power stage (since 2011). Yes, the events have become shorter, you don't get to service between every stage, you don't drive overnight, but the sport hasn't changed that much. In fact, the biggest change for rallying as a sport occurred in the early 60's (?) when special stages took over other driving tests, and the events weren't consisting anymore mostly of long road sections.

I wouldn't be worried about the likes of Monza. It's perfect for the COVID-era because you can control the spectators or run it easily with no spectators, but once we go to the normal, we should go back to normal rallies with normal stages. However, the drivers and teams have been dangerously positive about the shortened itineraries of the rallies...

Also, I could see some synergy and benefits at arranging the service park at a place like Monza, where you can get the VIP spectators and arrange a show stage and other program for them there with easy access, but the championships should be decided on proper roads and super special should only make up a small amount of a rally's route.

[AnttiL]

I don't understand how people see Monza resembling rallycross. I mean, in rallycross you drive against other cars on the same track, it's a different type of sport to driving against the clock. Similarly, the Monza stages were mostly very narrow and the service roads bumpy, whereas rallycross is driven on wide and smooth, albeit twisty circuits.

[AnttiL]

What could be done imo is to wastly improve the super specials using the ideas at Monza. Great Orme is in a way already an SSS of sorts. So 1-2 longer "superspecials" per rally would be quite fine for me. If the service park is at a circuit it can be set around it. So much better than superspecials with 3 donuts and 2 corners...

What I liked about the Monza stages was that there was no donuts, ramp jumps, loops or same segments driven in many directions within one stage. Also the varying surfaces made it tricky, especially on tarmac tyres and suspension.

I agree that there's a lot to improve in most super specials of the season, but then again, the most important thing is to just get the rally cars where there are people, and the stage doesn't matter so much.

I've always loved Harju as a super special, it has some proper drivable corners, a long tradition, and no artificial elements. I also liked very much the super special in Estonia. I'm fond of street stages when they use the actual natural corners of the street, not the barriers and donuts they usually put there. Twin-car rallycross stages are also usually decent in driving terms, because you can get proper drivable corners and long slides going on.

[mknight]

However, the drivers and teams have been dangerously positive about the shortened itineraries of the rallies...


That's also the main worry for me, much more than having a bit more SSS-like stages.

We went from events with 300-320 km over 3 or 4 days to suddenly having events with 220 km over 2.... and everyone thinks it's "great".

Result is that one small issue/problem and you have no chance to ever catch up, especially on events with small gaps like Estonia/Finland.

[AnttiL]

We went from events with 300-320 km over 3 or 4 days to suddenly having events with 220 km over 2.... and everyone thinks it's "great".

Well, all rallies this year had at least 3 days, even Estonia who had only SSS1 on Friday (Turkey had two real stages).

Also, still in 2018 the maximum length was 400 km and rallies like Monte and Argentina made their routes closer to that. So we're close to halving the event length...

[AndyRAC]

No, the basic principles have remained unchanged from the 60's. The biggest change is that you can now restart in the rally (since early 00's) and you can get extra points from the power stage (since 2011). Yes, the events have become shorter, you don't get to service between every stage, you don't drive overnight, but the sport hasn't changed that much. In fact, the biggest change for rallying as a sport occurred in the early 60's (?) when special stages took over other driving tests, and the events weren't consisting anymore mostly of long road sections.


So, it has changed; all those points you make are what makes it different. You can score points without doing the full event - and be classified ahead of somebody doing the full event; Loeb 2nd at Monte in 2006.

[TypeR]

Let's make it more simple..
One event consists of three ,,Guanajuato'' style 80km stages and check :D

[Mirek]

Let's make it more simple..
One event consists of three ,,Guanajuato'' style 80km stages and check :D

And the late runners will not drive a single one of them because it will be always canceled for them for some reason.

[AnttiL]

So, it has changed; all those points you make are what makes it different. You can score points without doing the full event - and be classified ahead of somebody doing the full event; Loeb 2nd at Monte in 2006.

You can't say "it's a different sport". In 99% cases the big points are made by finishing the event.

[Lancia Stratos]

I could just about accept that type of 'one off' event if the 'classic' events were allowed to return to their proper format; running Monte from Tuesday - Friday night, for example. And there's no chance of that......well not in the WRC.

Why on earth would they want to do that? Sunday lunchtime power stage on TV in Europe is essential for the sport.

[AnttiL]

Why on earth would they want to do that? Sunday lunchtime power stage on TV in Europe is essential for the sport.

According to Jarmo Mahonen, in the past Southern European rallies ran during the weekdays so they would actually have less people spectating, because too much spectators was a safety issue, while the UK people had too much TV air time competition from other sports during the weekends

[djip]

No, the basic principles have remained unchanged from the 60's. The biggest change is that you can now restart in the rally (since early 00's)

This is a MAJOR difference ! Rallying,aside from speed, has always been about endurance as well (in the sense surviving the environment). Being able to retire, re-start and still be classified is taking all this away ... and does not exist in any other sports. Can a F1 driver that crashed on the first lap can rejoin the race later on ? Nope,and too bad for TV ratings (don't serve me this argument).

To my opinion, this whole concept has totally killed the sport. I junderstand manufacturers want the car to be seen, and that it can serve the urpose of testing (given that there is little off-events test days) , but why on earth would you still be granted rewards (points for you and potentially less for your opponents ?)

[djip]

I've always loved Harju as a super special, it has some proper drivable corners, a long tradition, and no artificial elements. I also liked very much the super special in Estonia. I'm fond of street stages when they use the actual natural corners of the street, not the barriers and donuts they usually put there..

+1
SSS on "natural grounds" (e.g. mickey mouse stages in the old RAC rally, street course , even a race circuit) make sense provided there are'nt too many.
When it's full of cones and hayballs it does not make sense. And honestly speaking, this was the case in Monza. The bad weather thankfully
made them somehow disappear, but would it have been under the sun it would have looked ugly....
and what to say when they cancel half of the real stages because the weather is "bad". Isn't driving in challenging conditions just the essence of rallying ? when they cancel Dakar stages because too much sand or too hot, or the sail races becasue too much wind, do you think people will still listen ? WRC is shooting itself in the foot by trying to make it TV friendly ...

[AndyRAC]

Why on earth would they want to do that? Sunday lunchtime power stage on TV in Europe is essential for the sport.

Is it though?? I take anything they say with a pinch of salt. Have they tried a Power stage on a Saturday evening/ night?

[AnttiL]

+what to say when they cancel half of the real stages because the weather is "bad".

https://www.motorsportforums.com/showthread.php?41054-WRC-Monza-Rally-2020&p=1258652&viewfull=1#post1258652


Those who were angry about stage cancellation yesterday, some reading for you

https://www.severe-weather.eu/mcd/ex...lps-europe-mk/

It is exceptional situation and in exceptional circumstances, models does not work well, because they learn from existing cases.

If you go just a few tens of km-s north from rally route you can see already meters of snow. and if you read this article, you can see that maximum expected snow in the mountains region is over 5 meters, then you must understand that in the region hit severely by COVID and now by flooding and snowstorm, you just cannot direct all your best forces and machines to secure sport event. I know it is frustrating for us, but we have to understand also the general picture. Even if you have access by ambulance or firetruck along the stage (organizers put huge efforts to clean the stage overnight), if you access roads are blocked by snow and imagine the stage is blocked by crashed cars on the narrow steep downhill route, you just cannot take too much risks.

[AnttiL]

This is a MAJOR difference ! Rallying,aside from speed, has always been about endurance as well (in the sense surviving the environment). Being able to retire, re-start and still be classified is taking all this away ... and does not exist in any other sports. Can a F1 driver that crashed on the first lap can rejoin the race later on ? Nope,and too bad for TV ratings (don't serve me this argument).

To my opinion, this whole concept has totally killed the sport. I junderstand manufacturers want the car to be seen, and that it can serve the urpose of testing (given that there is little off-events test days) , but why on earth would you still be granted rewards (points for you and potentially less for your opponents ?)

You could claim there's now more endurance than in the past because you have to be able to run 80 km of stages and up to 200 km of liaison without servicing or changing tyres, other than what you have in the car. In the 80's you had service between every stage, even during the stage if necessary! ;)

It's extremely rare that you do a restart and end up on drivers' points. The penalty for missing a stage has been increased for this season.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

I see an Extreme-E team (Hamilton's X44) has now signed up Loeb.

His famous name now associated with this new series will do a lot to attract more motorsport fans to it.

WRC should have signed him up as an ambassador promoting it as much as possible around the world. But instead he's effectively allowed to do this for their future rivals.

[scn]

Seeing what is happening with M-Sport, I think everyone should consider R5+, with just a considerably bigger restrictor, a 6-speed transmission and no other modifications from R5.
I love modern WRC cars, they are the best ever to watch, much better even than GrB or Gr4, but if only two manufacturers in whole world can afford them there should be a serious cutting in cost, soon. And the cheapest and faster thing to do is just this: R5+

[AnttiL]

After seeing what is happening with M-Sport, I think everyone should consider R5+, with just a considerably bigger restrictor, a 6-speed transmission and no other modifications from R5.
I love modern WRC cars, they are the best ever to watch, much better even than GrB or Gr4, but if only two manufacturers in whole world can afford them there should be a serious cutting in cost, soon. And the cheapest and faster thing to do is just this: R5+

What is your guess, how much the team budget would change for these "R5+" cars? Let's say the yearly budget is now 100 million euros, how much of that would be reduced with cheaper cars? And how expensive would these "R5+" cars soon be if the manufacturer teams could start tossing money into them with the intention of winning the title (not making profit by selling cars to privateers)

Now, think again: could it be possible that there's currently only two manufacturers in the world who are interested in putting any money in supporting a whole WRC team, regardless of the car type?

[scn]

What is your guess, how much the team budget would change for these "R5+" cars? Let's say the yearly budget is now 100 million euros, how much of that would be reduced with cheaper cars?

Now, think again: could it be possible that there's currently only two manufacturers in the world who are interested in putting money in supporting a whole WRC team, no matter what the car is?

I do not know the numbers and what percentage of the total cost is the car development. If it is low percentage, then there is no point for a cheaper car. If it is high percentage, then there is. If you can show the actual numbers it would be very good.
I just see that there are seven manufacturers with R5 cars and this might be a good reason for attracting them.

[AnttiL]

I do not know the numbers and what percentage of the total cost is the car development. If it is low percentage, then there is no point for a cheaper car. If it is high percentage, then there is. If you can show the actual numbers it would be very good.

Obviously I don't have the numbers, but we can think about all the costs in running a WRC team, which are not depending on the car type: salaries (especially drivers), fuel, tyres, flights, cargo, accomodations, insurances, service park equipment, team headquarters, arranging test days etc.


I just see that there are seven manufacturers with R5 cars and this might be a good reason for attracting them.

Think about this again. Most of the models are already quite old, why would they want to promote these models now? Also, teams like Citroen and Skoda just ended their manufacturer teams a year ago and VW ended all its motorsport activities just a couple of weeks back. That would leave us again with Toyota, Hyundai, M-Sport and Proton as an oddball team with fewer resources and little chances to compete with them.

As for attracting new manufacturers, you need to think what gives them value. Do they want to market small ICE cars or maybe bigger models with hybrid?

[wyler]

also r5 is much more a "direct" market than wrc, that is mainly "promotional".

most of r5 manufacturer just sell the car without having an official team. that's also quite always the model for regional championships, where private teams wins the title and manus can claim their brand title as well.

i think it's not so automatic that making r5 top category will bring this manus to official involvement. probably it is more likely the opposite as in wrc2/3 already happens.

[Sulland]

Seeing what is happening with M-Sport, I think everyone should consider R5+, with just a considerably bigger restrictor, a 6-speed transmission and no other modifications from R5.
I love modern WRC cars, they are the best ever to watch, much better even than GrB or Gr4, but if only two manufacturers in whole world can afford them there should be a serious cutting in cost, soon. And the cheapest and faster thing to do is just this: R5+

Ok, and if so; what should the + consist of?

[AndyRAC]

Now, think again: could it be possible that there's currently only two manufacturers in the world who are interested in putting any money in supporting a whole WRC team, regardless of the car type?

It's looking that way. And in other news, another series, the WEC gains yet another manufacturer.......

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/154226/porsche-to-return-to-le-mans-with-lmdh-prototype

[AnttiL]

Ok, and if so; what should the + consist of?

He said it in the post. Bigger restrictor and 6-speed transmission.

[dck1989]

It's looking that way. And in other news, another series, the WEC gains yet another manufacturer.......

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/154226/porsche-to-return-to-le-mans-with-lmdh-prototype

and that is after Audi also announced it would be re-entering WEC

[Francis44]

It's looking that way. And in other news, another series, the WEC gains yet another manufacturer.......

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/154226/porsche-to-return-to-le-mans-with-lmdh-prototype

And with hybrids aswell. So maybe the problem is not the cars!

[the sniper]

It's looking that way. And in other news, another series, the WEC gains yet another manufacturer.......

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/154226/porsche-to-return-to-le-mans-with-lmdh-prototype

And what is it that every manufacturer talks about in their WEC/IMSA program announcements? They talk not about the series, but about their classic endurance events, Le Mans, Daytona, Sebring...

The last time manufacturers were joining the WRC in the early 2010s, the WRC was all about talking up longer events, returning to endurance... That lasted, what, a few years, before people realised it was too much like hard work?

If there's an announcement from a manufacturer re-joining the WRC, I doubt it'll sing the virtues of taking on a quick sprint around a small bit of Croatia. Though there won't be many classics left to mention.

[djip]

And what is it that every manufacturer talks about in their WEC/IMSA program announcements? They talk not about the series, but about their classic endurance events, Le Mans, Daytona, Sebring...

The last time manufacturers were joining the WRC in the early 2010s, the WRC was all about talking up longer events, returning to endurance... That lasted, what, a few years, before people realised it was too much like hard work?

If there's an announcement from a manufacturer re-joining the WRC, I doubt it'll sing the virtues of taking on a quick sprint around a small bit of Croatia. Though there won't be many classics left to mention.

+1 you make a story with history. Even the greedy promoters of F1 understand that you must keep the iconic events that relate to the past,and which can get average Joe's interest if properly marketed. Then you can wrap around new events, new ideas to cash in.

In our WRC world, this means MonteCarlo, Sweden, 1000 Lakes (and the name is important, not just dull "rally finland"), safari (even if very different), maybe Acropolis, RAC ...and then all the "old regulars" and new events, eventually rotating.

And please each with its own character : "extended" framework for some and short sprints for others - endurance on some, sheer speed on others, etc ... Rallying is about diversity, drivers able to compete everywhere, in every season, just like what people encounter in their driving life. Not the boring, always the same, 3-days, 2x3 stages, 9 to noon, 2 to 4 framework.

This would create a story that maybe PR guys would love to tell.

[Sulland]

He said it in the post. Bigger restrictor and 6-speed transmission.

sorry, my miss.
need new glasses....

[Mirek]

Seeing what is happening with M-Sport, I think everyone should consider R5+, with just a considerably bigger restrictor, a 6-speed transmission and no other modifications from R5.

Good luck with pushing for a car which will not finish a single WRC event without mechanical problems.

For reliable car with larger restrictor you need also stronger gearbox, clutch, differentials, driveshafts, propshaft and possibly also rear axle release clutch. New driveshafts may require new wheelhubs and uprights and... your engine may likely need redesign as well because it's not optimized for higher power and torque.

[Essaj]

... And we're back with 500k+ cars with no electricity/hybrid but with less aero than we have no. Would that mean more manufacturers? well no.

Also WRC car is a lot safer than R5, add that to the cost and we're back with WRC budget.

[AnttiL]

They say that these current cars are too expensive for privateers to run, but still we had a pretty high amount of private WRC2017 entries this year.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSZfPf3HIFFq-ggTv-K3Go3K9fVWatKdNZWOT1o6wfbK0GCARs9oqnXEjVoYOOmAyezP 0CY5r78UmzP/pubhtml

The number by year

2017 - 13
2018 - 4
2019 - 10
2020 - 13

and 2020 had only 7 rallies, others had 13.

[Andre Oliveira]

Gus privateer?

[AnttiL]

Yeah, I also wouldn't count Loubet and Veiby as privateers. That left us with only 4 real privateer starts.

Loubet and Veiby used Hyundai’s customer car, with their own fundings. However, Katsuta is paid by the factory.

What M-Sport does is blurring the lines because they are both a world rally team and a rally car rental service.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Interesting podcast:
https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/podcast-what-could-rallyings-green-future-hold/

[Tanelv]

Interesting podcast:
https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/podcast-what-could-rallyings-green-future-hold/

Really good points brought out there.

[Rally Power]

The debate was started in the 'Rally Bar' thread but it makes sense to bring it here: Should private tuners be allowed to homologate WRC cars in the future, once WRC cars will stop being based in production models? Wouldn't privately funded WRC cars help to boost the series, always short of manus teams? Is there any valid reason to keep the WRC as a manus monopoly, unlike most of the top motorsport series?

When everybody is talking about the need to evolve the sport, it's extraordinary how private tuners potential role in Rally keeps being forgotten.

[tommeke_B]

At FIA there seems to be a lot of lobbying from big companies, be it about safety equipment, tires, or the cars themselves... Car manufacturers will likely find a way to persuade people from the FIA why it wouldn't be a good idea to make the homologation of cars more available for private teams. Private teams aren't even allowed to choose their own fuel or tires, giving them the freedom to develop their own cars would be a drastic move... ;)

[Fast Eddie WRC]

For me the 2022 Regs were the WRC Promoter trying to balance keeping the existing teams on-board, hoping to attract new ones and making the series more 'eco-friendly'... and they have only succeeding with the first part.

This being the case the 2022 Cars look like being a hugely-costly mistake, taking the sport nowhere and actually making its future even less secure.

[denkimi]

The debate was started in the 'Rally Bar' thread but it makes sense to bring it here: Should private tuners be allowed to homologate WRC cars in the future, once WRC cars will stop being based in production models? Wouldn't privately funded WRC cars help to boost the series, always short of manus teams? Is there any valid reason to keep the WRC as a manus monopoly, unlike most of the top motorsport series?

When everybody is talking about the need to evolve the sport, it's extraordinary how private tuners potential role in Rally keeps being forgotten.
they should have been allowed since always. everyone should be able to take the car they want and build it into a rally car. there is absolutely no reason why a constructor should be involved in that.

the fia has been holding the sport back for many decades now due to their stupid rules.

image if f1 would apply the same rules, we would have like 8 to 12 cars max at the start. we would not have seen the likes of williams, lotus or redbull.

[mknight]

At this time my view is that 2022 regulations were absolutely necessary to keep the sport alive. If they only kept current ones, I think Ford would withdraw any last bits of their support.
I would even say they are 1-2 years too late. I dare say that if they arrived 1-2 years ago Citroen would stay and Skoda would have joined. Both Citroen and VW have even been vocal about this.
COVID certainly accelerated the petrol->hybrid->electric transformation though.

The other options were:
- "simpler" cars with petrol engines. It was said multiple times that manus did not want this
- "more EV (like?)" cars. While it would have been possible (see Paddons car and the Skoda car), it would mean quite a big step to go from petrol only to full EV. Combined with COVID it would definitely lead to them being postponed a lot and we end up with WRX situation, where manus withdraw.

Keeping current rules was a very fast way to 2 teams and possible even less (WEC-like).

[Franky]

In the Dirtfish podcast, thin Quinn said that the sport needs to remain relevant. But here's a question. Relevant for who, the manufacturers or the audience?

Obviously for the manufacturers it means following the trends in production vehicles. But I'd like to argue that the audience is not as technically savvy as a few decades ago. Like who services a brand new Fiesta themselves? Not to mention an EV. And nearly all sports have become just shows/entertainment.

How should the sport stay relevant, if the two sides aren't on the same path anymore?

[AnttiL]

The debate was started in the 'Rally Bar' thread but it makes sense to bring it here: Should private tuners be allowed to homologate WRC cars in the future, once WRC cars will stop being based in production models? Wouldn't privately funded WRC cars help to boost the series, always short of manus teams? Is there any valid reason to keep the WRC as a manus monopoly, unlike most of the top motorsport series?

When everybody is talking about the need to evolve the sport, it's extraordinary how private tuners potential role in Rally keeps being forgotten.

I posted the same thing in the Bar thread but it's relevant to bring up here:

Rallying is different to most motorsports in the way that the cars need to be road legal to complete the road sections between special stages. The current rally cars are always basically a tuning kit installed on a normally manufactured car. I have believed this is a reason why rallying cannot be done on prototype cars, and also why manufacturers must homologate the rally versions.

I don't know how we could make a privately built prototype car (for example Prodrive Super Turbo Rally1) street legal. We can't assume every country can make a waiver to their legislations that non-registrated rally cars can be allowed to drive on public roads. Maybe someone who knows these things better could explain or confirm my doubt.

However, it's a different thing if we want to allow some other garage to be able to tune up a base model street car to specs of a rally car. At that point we come to the question whether some manufacturer allows their brand to be used as a modified version (like when you have a VW Polo Proto with Mitsubishi tech inside, you cannot call it VW).

Also, I don't know how the street legal thing is handled with the 2022 regulations when you can build a tubular spaceframe scaled down car which will only look like its street model, but be totally different on the inside. Remember, in Group B there was always a matching street model (with 200 cars built).

I also doubt that a private team would have the budget to develop a car from scratch and run a season with it. Manufacturer money is much needed in this sport.

[Franky]

Antti, using a production car shell doesn't make it immediately street legal. And in fact think that a rally car is so heavily modified that it wouldn't be allowed to be declared street legal based on the production model. Some Estonian might correct me, but believe that in Estonia a full roll cage is not allowed for a road car.

And of course you can make one-off or limited run of cars road legal, just costs time and money to go through all the procedures.

[pantealex]

What I have heard:

-Tommi Mäkinen was in favor of "R5 based WRC" even that Toyota doesn´t have it, biggest reason was/is safety. They still haven´t found way to make hybrid system safe. Remember that even TGR haven´t tested Hybrid car yet. Ask your self: WHY not ?

-Hyundai hasn´t started building their "Hybrid Rally1 22´) Ask your self: WHY not ?

This is all I know. Can´t answer to any questions about it.

I hope we have new machinery for 2022 but I don´t believe in it.

[AnttiL]

What I have heard:

-Tommi Mäkinen was in favor of "R5 based WRC" even that Toyota doesn´t have it, biggest reason was/is safety. They still haven´t found way to make hybrid system safe. Remember that even TGR haven´t tested Hybrid car yet. Ask your self: WHY not ?

-Hyundai hasn´t started building their "Hybrid Rally1 22´) Ask your self: WHY not ?

This is all I know. Can´t answer to any questions about it.

I hope we have new machinery for 2022 but I don´t believe in it.

Because the hybrid unit from the external company hasn't been supplied to the teams yet?

I thought Tommi was against R5 based WRC because they don't have an R5 engine like other teams

[pantealex]

Because the hybrid unit from the external company hasn't been supplied to the teams yet?

I thought Tommi was against R5 based WRC because they don't have an R5 engine like other teams

Both true.

Toyota has many different hybrid systems and have studied those but they haven´t found way to use those safely enough

Tommi agreed that current WRC is too expensive so something new must come...
Hybrid technology isn´t ready so he was voting for current "R5" as main class for 2-3 years and then maybe 2025 "Rally1 Hybrid"
And he said all this when TGR doesn´t have "R5"

Safety problems is "the KEY"
Remember that weight balance of car must be as low as possible, very hard to make safely with "up in the Ass of Timo" kind of stages.

[wyler]

Makinen wanted R5 for having TMR contracted by Toyota to build-it all the same as current WRC.
(remember the r5 issue rumored with Tanak's leave? Maybe things are connecting in the end)

[AnttiL]

Both true.

Toyota has many different hybrid systems and have studied those but they haven´t found way to use those safely enough

Tommi agreed that current WRC is too expensive so something new must come...
Hybrid technology isn´t ready so he was voting for current "R5" as main class for 2-3 years and then maybe 2025 "Rally1 Hybrid"
And he said all this when TGR doesn´t have "R5"

Safety problems is "the KEY"
Remember that weight balance of car must be as low as possible, very hard to make safely with "up in the Ass of Timo" kind of stages.

This is your inside information, not what he's said in public?

[djip]

Tommi agreed that current WRC is too expensive so something new must come...
Hybrid technology isn´t ready so he was voting for current "R5" as main class for 2-3 years and then maybe 2025 "Rally1 Hybrid"
And he said all this when TGR doesn´t have "R5"

If this is truej, then why isn't it hapenning ? I guess MSport would be thrilled to hazve R5 the main category (they have a competitive car and a large customer base). Hyundai has the car ready as well. My understanding was that toyota, which is not short of cash, was the blocking point. If not, then who on earth is pipe dreaming that the new uber-expensive hybrid RC1 will bring manufacturers in ? MSport will struggle, Hyundai is rumoured to leave ... If it is FIA (Matton) who is too stubborn to admit that times have changed (trying to be nice and not mentionnin being wrong ...) then it is terrible and WRC ought to die.

[Sulland]

Tommi agreed that current WRC is too expensive so something new must come...
Hybrid technology isn´t ready so he was voting for current "R5" as main class for 2-3 years and then maybe 2025 "Rally1 Hybrid"
And he said all this when TGR doesn´t have "R5"



Could Tommis view on this important strategic question have something to do with his sudden job-switch?

[mknight]

What I have heard:

...biggest reason was/is safety. They still haven´t found way to make hybrid system safe....



Toyota has many different hybrid systems and have studied those but they haven´t found way to use those safely enough
...
Safety problems is "the KEY"
Remember that weight balance of car must be as low as possible, very hard to make safely with "up in the Ass of Timo" kind of stages.

I find this extremely hard to believe. In a 2022 hybrid the battery does not need to be very large afaik (haven't seen any details). Certainly not on the order of the whole car bottom like it is on production cars.

How hard is it to place it behind the seats in a hard+soft shell when it is say 200 kg and the size of two two spare wheels max?

There are some 7+ million EV and plug in hybrids on the road in the world right now. They do crash, just like all other cars. How many horrific stories of deaths/injuries from those crashes you have heard of ? I noticed a few burned cars with no injuries (cause the fire starts slowly), that is all. For sure any story related to the battery would be blown up on all front pages.

WEC hybrids had 300 kg battery systems and they did crash at quite high speeds. F1 has had hybrids (without batteries) for very long etc...

----------

As to why nobody tested the car yet.
The first "public" 2017 car tests were spring/summer 2016 (think it was VW). MSport and Hyundai cars first appeared in late summer or after that. That was with quite small changes and without any pandemic and now we should think it's strange they haven't tested in second week of January?

[Fast Eddie WRC]

And didnt the WRC put back the date the teams must be testing the new cars to July 2021 ?

[Fast Eddie WRC]

MSport were cracking on with the new car during lockdown last year. They should be well into testing soon.

https://www.motorsport.com/wrc/news/msport-2022-ford-new-car/4795754/

[Rally Power]

I posted the same thing in the Bar thread but it's relevant to bring up here:

Rallying is different to most motorsports in the way that the cars need to be road legal to complete the road sections between special stages. The current rally cars are always basically a tuning kit installed on a normally manufactured car. I have believed this is a reason why rallying cannot be done on prototype cars, and also why manufacturers must homologate the rally versions.

I don't know how we could make a privately built prototype car (for example Prodrive Super Turbo Rally1) street legal. We can't assume every country can make a waiver to their legislations that non-registrated rally cars can be allowed to drive on public roads. Maybe someone who knows these things better could explain or confirm my doubt.

However, it's a different thing if we want to allow some other garage to be able to tune up a base model street car to specs of a rally car. At that point we come to the question whether some manufacturer allows their brand to be used as a modified version (like when you have a VW Polo Proto with Mitsubishi tech inside, you cannot call it VW).

Also, I don't know how the street legal thing is handled with the 2022 regulations when you can build a tubular spaceframe scaled down car which will only look like its street model, but be totally different on the inside. Remember, in Group B there was always a matching street model (with 200 cars built).

I also doubt that a private team would have the budget to develop a car from scratch and run a season with it. Manufacturer money is much needed in this sport.

The road legal thing isn't a issue; in Rally-Raids there are tubular chassis protos from all sizes and shapes and they're free to use open public roads on liasions. Besides, road homologation of a one-off protos is done by national certification agencies, not by the FIA; it may be easier in some countries than others, but once a proto gets a valid plate it can go anywere.

On having a rally car tuned up on a garage from a base model, that's what Rally2-Kit already allows and Victor Cartier Yaris is a perfect example.

Anyway, in Rally1 case we're not talking about home made protos but on top private tuners machines, probably funded by big companies that would get an incentive to be more involved in the sport with a less strict FIA homologation system. As Red Bull has been showing in F1, the marketing value of becoming a full entrant it's way higher than just to sponsor an existing manu team.

[pantealex]

Let´s put it this way:

2022 car rules were made long long time ago

Do you really believe that lack of "quite small hybrid component" is the reason that Teams haven´t started building their 2022 cars ?

6 months testing could be enough but why every Team is just "waiting", only because of that missing Hybrid system ?
FIA for sure has delivered all tecnical information about it to Teams (weight, size etc.)

I hope I´m totally wrong with my "stories" but we will see...

[seb_sh]

I'm not very confident about the future of the WRC and the 2022 proto hybrids. Unless they are cheap to make and they allow non manufacturers it might be a dead end. Maybe the next rules should have simply been an R5 based car, maybe with a standard hybrid to tick the box.

Also something to consider, when WTCC died they went to TCR rules where the are only "customer" teams. Ok some of them are almost official teams but the cars are cheap and there are many privateers and championships all over the world. GT3 is similar, customers and semi works teams only and many many privateers all over the world. Maybe WRC should have gone that way. The only problem is those series are BOP so sometimes the winner is determined in an excel sheet. On the plus side the variety of cars is huge compared to any other era and the battles are tight and fun and the balancing is mostly ok, you can tell as they are ALL complaining about it so it must be pretty equal :D

[NickRally]

The road legal thing isn't a issue; in Rally-Raids there are tubular chassis protos from all sizes and shapes and they're free to use open public roads on liasions. Besides, road homologation of a one-off protos is done by national certification agencies, not by the FIA; it may be easier in some countries than others, but once a proto gets a valid plate it can go anywere.

On having a rally car tuned up on a garage from a base model, that's what Rally2-Kit already allows and Victor Cartier Yaris is a perfect example.

Anyway, in Rally1 case we're not talking about home made protos but on top private tuners machines, probably funded by big companies that would get an incentive to be more involved in the sport with a less strict FIA homologation system. As Red Bull has been showing in F1, the marketing value of becoming a full entrant it's way higher than just to sponsor an existing manu team.

That's a pretty spot on description of the situation regarding the road legality of potential independently prepared rally cars.

[RS]

Let´s put it this way:

2022 car rules were made long long time ago

Do you really believe that lack of "quite small hybrid component" is the reason that Teams haven´t started building their 2022 cars ?

6 months testing could be enough but why every Team is just "waiting", only because of that missing Hybrid system ?
FIA for sure has delivered all tecnical information about it to Teams (weight, size etc.)

I hope I´m totally wrong with my "stories" but we will see...

Is it not actually quite a fundamental part of the powertrain of the new cars, and a fairly big change?

Have the teams not even had one unit to run dyno tests?

[dimviii]

https://twitter.com/BRRBaumschlager/status/1350363926316408835

[TypeR]

https://twitter.com/BRRBaumschlager/status/1350363926316408835
Earplug sales will rocket up :D till now only for little kids, but with electric rally cars everybody wants them :D

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Toyota think M-Sport are leading...

https://dirtfish.com/rally/toyota-aims-to-have-2022-car-running-in-first-quarter-of-this-year/

[AnttiL]

Toyota think M-Sport are leading...

https://dirtfish.com/rally/toyota-aims-to-have-2022-car-running-in-first-quarter-of-this-year/

what a nice quote from you :D Tom Fowler believes M-Sport will be the first team to get the 2022 Rally1 car running.

[Eli]

https://www.autosport.com/fwd/news/154643/wrc-focused-on-chinese-manufacturers-and-hybrids

' The World Rally Championship kicks off with Rally Monte Carlo, part of a 12-round calendar that features first events for Croatia and Belgium and a return of the Safari Rally.

Rallying has an enduring appeal for millions around the world, adding rich diversity to the range of motorsport disciplines. But what does the long-term future for rallying look like?

For the first #ThinkingForward of 2021 we speak to WRC director Peter Thul about the qualities needed to excel in rally, why WRC is backing F1's strategy that hybrid engines and biofuels are the future rather than electric and why so many co-drivers end up running teams and federations.

Peter, WRC is one of the most spectacular forms of motorsport, can you sum up what you think is the essential appeal of rallying?

Peter Thul: "Rally drivers - not to say they are best drivers of the world - but they are the most versatile. That means they are able to control the car, under each and every circumstance, surfaces and so on. It's purely spectacular. And it's very close to the fans - the paddock area is open, fans can directly access the drivers.

"The technology is fascinating; it's driving to the edge and these cars are accelerating, like no other you see; they have a short ratio gearbox limited up to 180 or 200 kph. And under braking, it's really incredible. If you put somebody in the co-driver's seat in a modern rally car, they are even more impressed by the braking. It's all so harsh, not comparable to any road car, even not to a sports car."

So how has the driving style needed to succeed in rallying changed in recent years?

PT: "Technology made a huge change. Remember, in the good old times of Walter Rohrl and Hannu Mikkola it was kind of a marathon; you had to make your car survive on the big bumps, the rough surfaces. And now it's a sprint. It's incredible. If you see the wheel travel on a modern WRC rally car, how fast you can go over these rough roads and how much grip.

"A few years ago, there was a time gap even of one hour between the winner and second. In 2018 Sardinia, the gap between Neuville and Ogier was 0.7 seconds! They all go and flat out there is no rally where somebody can say 'let's play tactics'."

You started out as a co-driver. It seems that quite a few ex co-drivers have gone on to senior roles in motorsport's administration - people like Jean Todt, David Richards, and Daniele Audetto. What did that experience give you and why do we see co-drivers going on to have senior roles in motorsport?

PT: "I would not put myself into this role of legendary co-driver - but I think we are well organised, because a co-driver is kind of the bookkeeper in the rally car. A good co-driver on board means the driver can just put the pedal to the metal, go fast. All the rest, the administrative things, belong to the co-driver.

"Co-drivers are used to working under time pressure and you cannot recall a decision. You have to take a decision and you have to take the consequences. There's often no second chance; like you're giving a pace note, "Left flat over crest", you cannot say in the air, "Oh maybe it's a little bit slower", you are off.

"So this means you have a responsibility, you can handle the pressure. I think it's not bad to have been in a baptism of fire in a rally car, it helps in some situations."

It was always the dream to have live pictures from a rally but always seemed hard to achieve in the old fashioned TV broadcasting days and has been made possible by digital transformation. You now have a direct to consumer OTT platform WRC+ which carries live signals from the rally cars. What's it done for the fan following and how do you build from here for the future?

PT: "It means a fan can get out of bed in the morning, can just log in and witness the action. And we are not only having the coverage onboard from the cameras, we have backup information so we can bring the fascination of a sport which is much more difficult to transport compared to Formula 1. On top of that, the TV coverage we now generate is really impressive worldwide."You started out as a co-driver. It seems that quite a few ex co-drivers have gone on to senior roles in motorsport's administration - people like Jean Todt, David Richards, and Daniele Audetto. What did that experience give you and why do we see co-drivers going on to have senior roles in motorsport?

PT: "I would not put myself into this role of legendary co-driver - but I think we are well organised, because a co-driver is kind of the bookkeeper in the rally car. A good co-driver on board means the driver can just put the pedal to the metal, go fast. All the rest, the administrative things, belong to the co-driver.

"Co-drivers are used to working under time pressure and you cannot recall a decision. You have to take a decision and you have to take the consequences. There's often no second chance; like you're giving a pace note, "Left flat over crest", you cannot say in the air, "Oh maybe it's a little bit slower", you are off.

Part 1

[Eli]

"So this means you have a responsibility, you can handle the pressure. I think it's not bad to have been in a baptism of fire in a rally car, it helps in some situations."

It was always the dream to have live pictures from a rally but always seemed hard to achieve in the old fashioned TV broadcasting days and has been made possible by digital transformation. You now have a direct to consumer OTT platform WRC+ which carries live signals from the rally cars. What's it done for the fan following and how do you build from here for the future?

PT: "It means a fan can get out of bed in the morning, can just log in and witness the action. And we are not only having the coverage onboard from the cameras, we have backup information so we can bring the fascination of a sport which is much more difficult to transport compared to Formula 1. On top of that, the TV coverage we now generate is really impressive worldwide."

Next year WRC is going hybrid, a little bit later than other branches of motorsport, but the package does sound pretty exciting. Power output of around 500 horsepower from the internal combustion engine plus the hybrid system, which sounds like a heck of a lot of power for something that's sliding around on gravel. Tell us about your hopes for a hybrid future.

PT: "First we have to look at the situation in the car industry in general. Following a study there were 74% of combustion engines, 30% of hybrid and around 3% purely electric cars on the road in 2013. The assumption is among the 132 million cars sold on the market this year, we will have 38% combustion but we will have 37% hybrid cars plus 25% electric. So it's the ideal move at the right time. And it has two roles.

"First these cars will be spectacular, you have additional torque from the electric engine to come, you have recuperation, you will regain energy. But on top of that, we will show the benefits of the plug-in hybrid; a system which is very smart if you are as a driver charging it permanently. And so we will have the technology showcase, proving that it works under every circumstance. Plus, we can educate, because a plug in hybrid works the best if you plug it in and get the energy."

Can WRC ever imagine an all-electric or a hydrogen future?

PT: "I think a smart mix of technologies in the future will work. That means hybrids, plug in hybrids and electric cars will be the midterm future. I know that some traditionalists, some fans are hesitating towards this new electrification. But first of all, we have no other choice.

"And for the electric range, I think there are other [competition] formats, which are much more suitable, for example Rallycross is a perfect stage; you have short races, you can also go with spectacular amount of power, then you recharge. But it all depends on the battery capacity, how fast you can charge them. So I would not exclude anything at the moment."

And looking further down the line as far as the rally calendar is concerned, what's the growth objective?

PT: "We have two clear strategic markets we would like to hit. First of all US is very important for us also for our stakeholders, for the manufacturers. And for sure China. We had an attempt some years ago, it did not work because there were all kinds of problems. But we see this as a strategic market and we want to be present in every important car market with the rally."

COVID-19 has been tough for manufacturers. And we've seen the likes of Honda, Audi, BMW at the top end of the sport in F1 and Formula E making significant changes to their racing programmes. What does the manufacturer participation in WRC look like going forward? And how important are they to you?

PT: "Manufacturers are very important for all kinds of aspects, for the competition for the PR. And we are happy that we have such strong committed partners with Toyota, Hyundai and M-Sport Ford.

"We have clear focus to get more manufacturers and it's no secret we are targeting China in the future; why not a big Chinese manufacturer especially when we are talking about plug in hybrids? There's also another Japanese manufacturer, potentially also candidate."

Like all motorsports, WRC has to confront the climate change debate and with a new US President in the White House, it's looking like that debate will now accelerate even more. I wonder what you say about the optics of driving fossil fuel cars through forests? In an environmentally conscious world will you have to adapt to thrive?

PT: "When an organiser is doing a rally, he is in close contact anyway to the local authorities. And we are not running in every area of the world due to respect of nature, if you see Finland, the forest, for example, the roads are maintained afterwards.

"And fuel consumption now, it's really modern technology. In co-operation with us, the FIA just launched an energy tender about sustainable fuels that is not only facing sustainable fuels, it's about the overall CO2 footprint, everything involved about the charging and so on. So we are clearly aware that we have to be on this field very strong. And we can do it due to technical development, possibilities we can showcase. We take this challenge, and I think we can play our role. And you have seen that Formula 1 already switched to sustainable fuel. So motorsport is aware and we have a strong chance to be in the future still an essential part for the people."

And finally, Peter, how positive do you think the future is for rallying?

PT: "I think rally is always something which fascinated people. We have 50 years of WRC to celebrate. The fascination is global. It's a sport that can also easily adapt to the circumstances. So therefore, yes, I am positive and I love the sport for sure." '

Part 2, the article itself isn't divided to two parts, however, I had to spilt it so everything that's in the article you'll be able to see.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

WRC Promotor Peter Thul interview on the future of the WRC:

https://motorsport.tv/embed/WqUknaiq-thinkingforward-with-peter-thul

[AnttiL]

WRC Promotor Peter Thul interview on the future of the WRC:

https://motorsport.tv/embed/WqUknaiq-thinkingforward-with-peter-thul

The same interview as was posted above in textual form?

[Eli]

Yes, it is.

[AnttiL]

All right, everything is solved, the replies to this tweet know it all :D

https://twitter.com/RallyingUK/status/1353795563985248256?s=20

[cali]

All right, everything is solved, the replies to this tweet know it all :D

https://twitter.com/RallyingUK/status/1353795563985248256?s=20Dear God.....

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

[Franky]

Dear God.....

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

It keeps getting better and better. Pub really is the sane place to be :D

[Mirek]

Pub really is the sane place to be :D

If only there was any opened :(

[T16]

It keeps getting better and better. Pub really is the sane place to be :D

Colin Clarke, again showing why he’s regarded as me of the finest rallying journalists around.

[cali]

Colin Clarke, again showing why he’s regarded as me of the finest rallying journalists around.Haha this must be sarcastic post

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

[Sulland]

I quite liked CCs Kithen Table casts. Many of them were spot on and good journalism.
He and his dirtfish mate are very different in form, and some times I feel he is bullying CC, in a very upstairs downstairs way.
But of course he came from "the bible", where he was very alone on reporting on Rally.

But Dirtfish will find its form.
I feel Colin is best as outgoing reporter in depots and stage ends, or in a Kitchen Table format.

[the sniper]

All right, everything is solved, the replies to this tweet know it all :D

https://twitter.com/RallyingUK/status/1353795563985248256?s=20

Hayley Edmonds (stage end reporter) likes the idea. Luckily for her, her level of experience would probably be enough to qualify to be one of these female WRC drivers, such is the shallowness of the pool they'd be choosing from...

On the one hand Colin Clark get's offended by people who challenge what he says, on the other hand he likes to troll like this...

[Sulland]

@RallyingUK
Mr Todt gives you a wild card to add or take away i rule in WRC, what would it be?

Mr Quinn suggests:
"€280K maximum price cap for WRC cars, accessibility for WRC cars into non WRC events.
Making the sport affordable and accessible while stimulating growth across the rally car preparation and sales business" #sustainability #sport #business

[Steve Boyd]

It keeps getting better and better. Pub really is the sane place to be :D

If only there was any opened :(

I'd be here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gd9nRll4c_A
if it was open.

[AnttiL]

Paddon tells about their Hyundai Kona EV rally car:

- Battery can be changed in 5 mins
- Battery can be charged in 10-40 mins
- Car is faster already than R5 and AP4
- Risk of fire is smaller than in combustion engine cars
- There will be a sound

https://moottori.fi/ajoneuvot/jutut/entinen-wrc-kuski-hybridit-eivat-voi-olla-pitkan-aikavalin-ratkaisu/

[Mirek]

- Battery can be charged in 10-40 mins

Useless information without knowing the battery capacity. Anyway fast charging can't charge more than 80% of the battery capacity of the existing battery designs, i.e. in that case full battery capacity can't be used (or the charging takes a lot more time).


- Risk of fire is smaller than in combustion engine cars

Sorry but that is technicaly nonsense. The first problem is that nobody has any hard data for EV used in rallying, therefore nobody can compare the probability.

The second thing with battery fires is that they carry their own oxygen and therefore don't need air to burn, hence why it is impossible to extinguish the fire before it burns all. In other words if the car catches fire in a forest it will burn for an hour or so not for five minutes as with the combustion-engine powered car and the fire brigade can basically only localize the scene and wait - that is extremely hazardeous in windy and dry conditions and you need tons and tons of water for that.

The third and not smaller problem is that the fire is very very difficult to anticipate because the fire can start basically anytime after a battery-damaging incident over a very long period of time. The first issue here is that it's often impossible to recognize what is "battery-damaging" incident. It can be a hit on the vehicle floor which causes no visible structural damage. That is something which happens pretty often in rallying. How to prevent that? Will the batteries go to a quarantine after every service stop and stay there for couple of weeks? IMHO that is hardly possible.

There are also numerous incidents known where the batteries started fire repeatedly again and again, especially if they were well-charged in time of the incident.


He also completely omits the hazards connected with the high voltage and accessability of the vehicle for untrained personel in case of incidents on rally roads (fans, common stage marshals etc.). These people will reach the vehicles before any specialist can reach the spot because it's not a circuit closed from public.


The risks may be "low" but first someone needs to hard define what "low" means. The probability of a spectator being involved in an accident is also low, yet we do everything we can to prevent it.

[AnttiL]

Hayden seems to be replying to questions on twitter so maybe worth asking there instead of here

10 minutes was quick charging, 40 minutes normal charging.

On fire issue:

https://twitter.com/HaydenPaddon/status/1355647998424846336

https://twitter.com/HaydenPaddon/status/1355647571759271937

https://twitter.com/HaydenPaddon/status/1355642870103871491

[wyler]

Useless information without knowing the battery capacity. Anyway fast charging can't charge more than 80% of the battery capacity of the existing battery designs, i.e. in that case full battery capacity can't be used (or the charging takes a lot more time).



Sorry but that is technicaly nonsense. The first problem is that nobody has any hard data for EV used in rallying, therefore nobody can compare the probability.

The second thing with battery fires is that they carry their own oxygen and therefore don't need air to burn, hence why it is impossible to extinguish the fire before it burns all. In other words if the car catches fire in a forest it will burn for an hour or so not for five minutes as with the combustion-engine powered car and the fire brigade can basically only localize the scene and wait - that is extremely hazardeous in windy and dry conditions and you need tons and tons of water for that.

The third and not smaller problem is that the fire is very very difficult to anticipate because the fire can start basically anytime after a battery-damaging incident over a very long period of time. The first issue here is that it's often impossible to recognize what is "battery-damaging" incident. It can be a hit on the vehicle floor which causes no visible structural damage. That is something which happens pretty often in rallying. How to prevent that? Will the batteries go to a quarantine after every service stop and stay there for couple of weeks? IMHO that is hardly possible.

There are also numerous incidents known where the batteries started fire repeatedly again and again, especially if they were well-charged in time of the incident.


He also completely omits the hazards connected with the high voltage and accessability of the vehicle for untrained personel in case of incidents on rally roads (fans, common stage marshals etc.). These people will reach the vehicles before any specialist can reach the spot because it's not a circuit closed from public.


The risks may be "low" but first someone needs to hard define what "low" means. The probability of a spectator being involved in an accident is also low, yet we do everything we can to prevent it.

i really can't understand how you know this better than who built the car!

[tommeke_B]

i really can't understand how you know this better than who built the car!
Mirek is an engineer with experience in the automotive industry, I'm sure that if he takes time to write something down, it's because he knows about it. ;)

[br21]

Mirek is fully right.
I did some ERX past year and there are plenty of small things I didn't imagine before.

[wyler]

Mirek is an engineer with experience in the automotive industry, I'm sure that if he takes time to write something down, it's because he knows about it. ;)

not questioning mirek's knowledge on his own work. other thing is speculating on others without knowing the technicalities used.
i think that if someone actually built a car in this specs, and used, surely he came across this kind of problem and found a viable solution.
i find it hard to think they build it and claim things without any consciousness to the point of being "technical nonsense".
btw, as written below the comment, some of the question were already answered by paddon in other media...
the dismissing tone of mirek post just startled me!

[Franky]

Regarding the Kona. We have to keep in mind that Paddon is wearing the same suit as Wilson now. And we all know what's Wilson's public stance on his car's potential.

[Mirek]

not questioning mirek's knowledge on his own work. other thing is speculating on others without knowing the technicalities used.
i think that if someone actually built a car in this specs, and used, surely he came across this kind of problem and found a viable solution.
i find it hard to think they build it and claim things without any consciousness to the point of being "technical nonsense".
btw, as written below the comment, some of the question were already answered by paddon in other media...
the dismissing tone of mirek post just startled me!

I have named only issues for which there is no known solution at the moment.

I stated that the claim of lower fire probability than with CE cars is nonsense because it is. There are simply no statistical data existing to support such claim and a probability is a statistical function. That is a fact.

[doubled1978]

I have named only issues for which there is no known solution at the moment.

I stated that the claim of lower fire probability than with CE cars is nonsense because it is. There are simply no statistical data existing to support such claim and a probability is a statistical function. That is a fact.

I agree with Mirek in his previous post, the small amount of experience I have had with Lithium batteries, is just what he said, unpredictable and uncontrollable once they go.
Obviously F1 & WEC have been using them for years, and I must admit that I am surprised that I don’t think I have seen a full battery meltdown/failure, although I may be mistaken there despite some massive accidents. But as he says, the remoteness and possibility for fire spread in WRC makes the consequences of that happening, potentially far greater.

[wyler]

I have named only issues for which there is no known solution at the moment. I stated that the claim of lower fire probability than with CE cars is nonsense because it is. There are simply no statistical data existing to support such claim and a probability is a statistical function. That is a fact.

another fact: if there's no statistic for claiming a thing, there's the same no statistic to claim the opposite. older way sometime is not the best way, despite our habits. so let's wait for the statistic before take a part. i get there's a strong bias going on, but time will tell.

[wyler]

I agree with Mirek in his previous post, the small amount of experience I have had with Lithium batteries, is just what he said, unpredictable and uncontrollable once they go.
Obviously F1 & WEC have been using them for years, and I must admit that I am surprised that I don’t think I have seen a full battery meltdown/failure, although I may be mistaken there despite some massive accidents. But as he says, the remoteness and possibility for fire spread in WRC makes the consequences of that happening, potentially far greater.

paddon stated that they come up with a device that flood and destroy batteries in case of a fire menace: "The batteries you are now seeing in Motorsport cars like ours have a flooding system, so worse case scenario we pump water into the battery which destroys the battery, but saves the car."

[mknight]

another fact: if there's no statistic for claiming a thing, there's the same no statistic to claim the opposite. older way sometime is not the best way, despite our habits. so let's wait for the statistic before take a part. i get there's a strong bias going on, but time will tell.

We do have some recent statistics of WRC cars burning out completely at WRC ralies, only those that I rememeber immediately- Lappi Fiesta Mexico 2020, Breen C3 Turkey 2018, Paddon/Tanak Portugal 2016?

(In neither of these the crew or other with extinguishers managed to stop the fire)

That's only completely burned out, parts or vegetation catching fire from hot exhaust is relatively common, though usually put out.

There was off course the large number of Polos (and Fabias) burned, even though that was a fuel tank design issue.

[Mirek]

another fact: if there's no statistic for claiming a thing, there's the same no statistic to claim the opposite.

I'm not claiming the otherwise. I'm calling the claim factually false.

[Steve Boyd]

I agree with Mirek in his previous post, the small amount of experience I have had with Lithium batteries, is just what he said, unpredictable and uncontrollable once they go.
Obviously F1 & WEC have been using them for years, and I must admit that I am surprised that I don’t think I have seen a full battery meltdown/failure, although I may be mistaken there despite some massive accidents. But as he says, the remoteness and possibility for fire spread in WRC makes the consequences of that happening, potentially far greater.

Ae we sure F1 & WEC are using lithium batteries and not supercapacitors, which would be more suitable for short term storage and high charge/discharge rates?

[Steve Boyd]

paddon stated that they come up with a device that flood and destroy batteries in case of a fire menace: "The batteries you are now seeing in Motorsport cars like ours have a flooding system, so worse case scenario we pump water into the battery which destroys the battery, but saves the car."

Where does the water come from?

I'd also like to know what happens if the water comes into contact with hot lithium. Doessn't that release hydrogen which in itself is a fire/explosion hazard.

[doubled1978]

Ae we sure F1 & WEC are using lithium batteries and not supercapacitors, which would be more suitable for short term storage and high charge/discharge rates?


Yeah they do use Lithium.
In WEC initially Toyota used supercapcitors, and Audi a flywheel energy store, but both moved to lithium to compete with the Porsche which was lithium from the off.
Technically I don’t know why their initial solutions weren’t as good as lithium batteries, but I do know Porsche was able to reach the 8MJ sub class straight away, while the others could not.
F1 is definitely lithium as it’s controlled in the rules.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Amongst Mikkelsen's interview with Dirtfish: “I think we know there are not likely to be any new manufacturers coming in for 2022".

[NickRally]

Ae we sure F1 & WEC are using lithium batteries and not supercapacitors, which would be more suitable for short term storage and high charge/discharge rates?

Steve, F1 sacrifice a bit of energy density in order to obtain huge power densities - as I have mentioned previously the F1 battery cells can be safely charged/discharged in less than a minute. Cooling plays significant part in the above.

[wyler]

I'm not claiming the otherwise. I'm calling the claim factually false.

how?
if there are no statistics, how can you call it factually false? There's no fact.
so your statement is as true (or false) as theirs. no actual data to compare. u can base your claim on your competence -i don't doubt is high-, they can base it on their experience in actually build that car. u can say they can't prove it true, they can say u can't prove it wrong. it can be either true or false in both cases until we get data. time will tell.
anyway, didn't want to fire up an argument! : )

[wyler]

Where does the water come from?

I'd also like to know what happens if the water comes into contact with hot lithium. Doessn't that release hydrogen which in itself is a fire/explosion hazard.

don't know, just reporting paddon's answer! you can try to ask him on twitter, he's responding to a lot of question on the project!

[SubaruNorway]

Where does the water come from?

I'd also like to know what happens if the water comes into contact with hot lithium. Doessn't that release hydrogen which in itself is a fire/explosion hazard.

The battery is already water cooled like an road car i guess so probably just an valve to lett the water into the cells, it also heats the battery up on cold days extending the range.

[Mirek]

how?
if there are no statistics, how can you call it factually false? There's no fact.

The fact is that there are no data to support the claim. Why is that so difficult to understand? It's up to the one who claims something to support his claim however we know (that is the fact) that his claim is unfounded because no relevant data for electric rallycars exists.

Without data it's possible to talk about prognosis or calculated probability but that is most likely going to be very different than the reality and therefore it can not be compared with statistical probability coming from hard data of the tough life of rallycars. Simply said you can't take known number of incident among existing CE rallycars and compare it with pure theory. Those are uncomparable values.

[Mirek]

The battery is already water cooled like an road car i guess so probably just an valve to lett the water into the cells, it also heats the battery up on cold days extending the range.

AFAIK (and I may be wrong) no vehicle battery at the moment uses water-flooding system (maybe some motorsport ones do) but in theory it shall work - however since the system was never used in rallying before, it is not possible to speak about probabilty comparison with CE cars. If the thermal runaway is detected early the flooding probably is able to stop the thermal runaway from spreading over multiple cells. It would help if the water was de-ionised (but it will gradually become electrically conductive anyway with polution from the fire).

[wyler]

The fact is that there no data to support the claim. Why is that so difficult to understand? It's up to the one who claims something to support his claim however we know (that is the fact) that his claim is unfounded because no relevant data for electric rallycars exists.

Without data it's possible to talk about prognosis or calculated probability but that is most likely going to be very different than the reality and therefore it can not be compared with statistical probability coming from hard data of the tough life of rallycars. Simply said you can't take known number of incident among existing CE rallycars and compare it with pure theory. Those are uncomparable values.

i do understand. it's just rethoric...

it's like the existence of god. there's no data. you can't prove is there. you also cannot prove isn't there.
and both can ask the others to give proof:
"It's up to the one who claims something to support his claim" is valid both ways: you can't support your claim on EV either, for the same reason. no data! you can't use CE data to speak about EV behaviour. you can have data from CE experience, but that's not the point, don't mix it up! The point is the claim on EV! As u said first, u cannot compare it with pure speculation. so both positions on EV are speculation!

Anyway, I don't care so much to argue more! I'm ok with the blind trust of the petrolheads! discussion on rethoric is a bit off topic!

[Mirek]

i do understand. it's just rethoric...

it's like the existence of god. there's no data. you can't prove is there. you also cannot prove isn't there.
and both can ask the others to give proof:
"It's up to the one who claims something to support his claim" is valid both ways: you can't support your claim on EV either, for the same reason. no data! you can't use CE data to speak about EV behaviour. you can have data from CE experience, but that's not the point, don't mix it up! The point is the claim on EV! As u said first, u cannot compare it with pure speculation. so both positions on EV are speculation!

Anyway, I don't care so much to argue more! I'm ok with the blind trust of the petrolheads! discussion on rethoric is a bit off topic!

No, you don't understand at all.

Last attempt - you read what I never wrote. In that my sentence I didn't claim anything about CE fire probability being better - not at all. I only said the Paddon's claim was false because it was unsupported. It doesn't mean it can't turn out to be true but at this very monent it's just unsupported claim and nothing else.

[wyler]

No, you don't understand at all.

Last attempt - you read what I never wrote. In that my sentence I didn't claim anything about CE fire probability being better - not at all. I only said the Paddon's claim was false because it was unsupported. It doesn't mean it can't turn out to be true but at this very monent it's just unsupported claim and nothing else.

last attempt here too: lack of support doesn't make it false. just... unsupported.

to make it false it has to be proven false, as much as to be proven true. at this very moment is not true nor false. it's just speculation based on each other theoretical knowledge.
paddon can ask you to prove him to be wrong as much as you are asking him to prove to be right. again: "no data" is a valid support for both.

he is running the car to prove the point.

[focus206]

to make it false it has to be proven false, as much as to be proven true. at this very moment is not true nor false. it's just speculation based on each other theoretical knowledge.
paddon can ask you to prove him to be wrong as much as you are asking him to prove to be right. again: "no data" is a valid support for both.


You make it sound like both Paddon and Mirek claimed something that is not supported and not yet proven and they're on equal ground, when in reality Mirek said that Paddon's statement is not yet proven because we lack statistics, simple as that. Nobody is treating what Paddon said as if it's an absolute wrong 1+1=3 statement. It's up to Paddon to prove himself right either by datas or facts, it's not up to anybody to prove that their doubts about an unsupported statement are legitimate. Even because, if it's not legitimate to have doubts on an unsupported statement, it would mean we should just believe what everybody says without asking for datas/proofs? We could believe in Paddon's good faith and wait for him to show us, but it's not a mandatory law.

[Steve Boyd]

@doubled1978
@NickRally
@SubaruNorway

Thanks for the replies.

[wyler]

You make it sound like both Paddon and Mirek claimed something that is not supported and not yet proven and they're on equal ground, when in reality Mirek said that Paddon's statement is not yet proven because we lack statistics, simple as that. Nobody is treating what Paddon said as if it's an absolute wrong 1+1=3 statement. It's up to Paddon to prove himself right either by datas or facts, it's not up to anybody to prove that their doubts about an unsupported statement are legitimate. Even because, if it's not legitimate to have doubts on an unsupported statement, it would mean we should just believe what everybody says without asking for datas/proofs? We could believe in Paddon's good faith and wait for him to show us, but it's not a mandatory law.

sorry, nope! It's not me making Mirek sound like. Just taking what he said. Just check!
Mirek didn't just said that claim was unsupported. he claimed it's false: "I only said the Paddon's claim was false because it was unsupported".

I'm not questioning anyone's legitimate doubt for sure! on that, I completely agree with you, I'm not taking it for granted me too, I've said a lot of time "time will tell".

I'm questioning the incorrect association no proof=false.

just this, not trying to diminish Mirek's knowledge or anything. a claim not proven can be controversial as you want and generate any kind of doubt, but doesn't mean it is false.
on this basis, nothing new can be achieved. I claim I can do something, then I go experimenting. doubt are normal and logical, but it's not that is automatically wrong (false) just because it was not done before (lack of data). when they set up for the moon, no claim on going there could be proven that moment, right?

anyway: a far too long "phylosofic" discourse for a rally forum. and way off topic. let's move on, shall we?

[AnttiL]

"The car has multiple fail safes which mean it’s safe for the public to touch. We service the car as normal. If something was to go wrong (which is very unlikely), our external emergency lights (very clear) will flash red as a warning."

https://twitter.com/HaydenPaddon/status/1356531579644911616

[Franky]

There are people who basically stand right next to the racing line, while there's a car coming towards them at full tilt. If flirting with death doesn't scare them, then I doubt some red flashing light would make any difference. Of course not all are like that but we can't forget that kind of people.

[Mirek]

There are people who basically stand right next to the racing line, while there's a car coming towards them at full tilt. If flirting with death doesn't scare them, then I doubt some red flashing light would make any difference. Of course not all are like that but we can't forget that kind of people.

The red flashing light is standard feature for many circuit EV series but as you said it has basically zero safety function in relation to general untrained (and sometimes drunk) public.

[Sulland]

If Hyundai say no in June, WRC have a real Challenge on their hand.
4 top factory drivers is not good.

And had I been sitting in the board knowing what is coming, I would have said no.
Hyundai have a 800v Ionic 5 coming, that is a quick charger, and they would need a charging truck btw stages.
https://practicalmotoring.com.au/car-news/the-importance-of-800-volt-for-hyundais-performance-cars/

So to push all the needed money into Hybrid now, is too late.

As said by others: FIA missed an option not going ahead with the all electric WRX series a few years back. They would have been much more of a suitable testbed. Lets see what the Extreme E series get out of its first season
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMsfLJB5S9E

[Francis44]

If Hyundai say no in June, WRC have a real Challenge on their hand.
4 top factory drivers is not good.

And had I been sitting in the board knowing what is coming, I would have said no.
Hyundai have a 800v Ionic 5 coming, that is a quick charger, and they would need a charging truck btw stages.
https://practicalmotoring.com.au/car-news/the-importance-of-800-volt-for-hyundais-performance-cars/

So to push all the needed money into Hybrid now, is too late.

As said by others: FIA missed an option not going ahead with the all electric WRX series a few years back. They would have been much more of a suitable testbed. Lets see what the Extreme E series get out of its first season
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMsfLJB5S9E

For me the most exciting title race and championship in the last decade was in 2011, with just two manufacteurs entries (Citroen and Ford).

Also, when someone mentions the need for full electric cars to guarantee the survival of a series, why does everyone fail the mention the complete failure of WRX when the full electric cars were announced?!

[mknight]

Also, when someone mentions the need for full electric cars to guarantee the survival of a series, why does everyone fail the mention the complete failure of WRX when the full electric cars were announced?!

What? WRX collapsed after electric cars were delayed... manus (mostly VW with two brands - VW and Audi, followed by Peugeot) said it was too long to wait two years.

[Francis44]

What? WRX collapsed after electric cars were delayed... manus (mostly VW with two brands - VW and Audi, followed by Peugeot) said it was too long to wait two years.

And why were they delayed?! Because manus were not ready to commit and build the cars. If the electric proposition was so interesting for them by now we would have them back running electric cars.

Also, funnily enough, no relevant manufacteur has shown interested or have commited to re-enter the series under the 2022 electric regulations, yet. And Audi has commited after that to two series with combustion engines (Dakar and WEC).

[mknight]

And why were they delayed?! Because manus were not ready to commit and build the cars. If the electric proposition was so interesting for them by now we would have them back running electric cars.

Also, funnily enough, no relevant manufacteur has shown interested or have commited to re-enter the series under the 2022 electric regulations, yet. And Audi has commited after that to two series with combustion engines (Dakar and WEC).

They were delayed cause FIA and "teams" (not VW/Peugeot etc leadership but actuall rallycross team leadership) were too slow making new rules.

Corporate leadership might want something but making the rules work is the job of FIA in talks with team bosses. Who often have competing interests and argue about everything. The corporate leadership just looks at results of their work.

Sounds familiar eh?

Extremely funny that you mention Dakar when it's marketed as "EV with a generator", not "hybrid". It's more like wanting to do an EV but having to keep engine as a generator as pure EV wouldn't work in that setting.

[NickRally]

And Audi has commited after that to two series with combustion engines (Dakar and WEC).

Francis, Audi’s Dakar racer is marketed as an electric car (as mknight pointed) with combustion engine range extender, though I agree there is a strong indication it is a thinly disguised combustion powered vehicle – this will become clearer once we know what battery capacity they run versus engine power. As I have mentioned previously this is a very cunning move on the part of Audi as they can claim the heart of the racer is electric and the combustion engine’s role will gradually be reduced as batteries develop. It satisfies the electric community while providing as much range as the engineers care to design in.

Going beyond the rally raids and although this series hybrid type arrangement is probably not efficient enough for a road car travelling at relatively constant speed, it might just fit in nicely in a rally car with large variation in engine operating range and strong acceleration and braking events. If I was to design an electrically powered rally car with today’s technology and given sufficient technical freedom, that would be my solution of choice.

To emphasize, the electrical portion of such drivetrain and its development is very much applicable to the development of modern battery powered electric road cars.

[Dug83]

Paddon in action with the Kona

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFMwLKqYtMU

[Sulland]

Will this help?
https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/next-wrc-rules-cycle-could-last-three-years/

[scn]

Electric cars need:
a) Noise generators in the cars or otherwise enforcement of total spectator control, to the point of impossibility. Or even banning of spectators. Otherwise, due to lack of noise there will be many accidents with spectators.
b) Solutions and change of rules regarding temperature control and/or the weather conditions in rallying. Lithium batteries have lower and upper temperature limits. Right now, no electric car can endure a traditional Acropolis rally with temperatures in the car reaching 55 degrees Celsius.
c) Change of rules for roll-cages. A roll-cage that can withstand forces generated from 1250 kg is different than a cage that can withstand forces generated from 1600 kg.

I wish the best to the young generations of rally fans. I myself will stick to my old-school rally car. And most likely I will also buy a rwd Celica TA4 or Escort MkII or Ascona B. If you have one for sale, let me know.

[TypeR]

Will this help?
https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/next-wrc-rules-cycle-could-last-three-years/
Getting worse and worse..
This news is like a spit in the face for a team like M-Sport..
There are no new manus for 22' and no way that any new manu will join before 25', because why would someone develop a hundreds of thousands worth car for 2 years only..

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Hyundai still haven't committed for 2022. How are they going to get a car ready so late ?

Adamo: "At the moment the development of the car hasn't started and that will only happen when and if we have a positive answer from our HQ in Korea."

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/155055/hyundai-still-awaiting-approval-to-compete-in-2022/

[AnttiL]

Hyundai still haven't committed for 2022. How are they going to get a car ready so late ?

Adamo: "At the moment the development of the car hasn't started and that will only happen when and if we have a positive answer from our HQ in Korea."

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/155055/hyundai-still-awaiting-approval-to-compete-in-2022/

So, who's going to write this same article next week?

[Lancia Stratos]

Hyundai still haven't committed for 2022. How are they going to get a car ready so late ?

Adamo: "At the moment the development of the car hasn't started and that will only happen when and if we have a positive answer from our HQ in Korea."

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/155055/hyundai-still-awaiting-approval-to-compete-in-2022/

Adamo politics.

[mknight]

Electric cars need:
a) Noise generators in the cars or otherwise enforcement of total spectator control, to the point of impossibility. Or even banning of spectators. Otherwise, due to lack of noise there will be many accidents with spectators.
b) Solutions and change of rules regarding temperature control and/or the weather conditions in rallying. Lithium batteries have lower and upper temperature limits. Right now, no electric car can endure a traditional Acropolis rally with temperatures in the car reaching 55 degrees Celsius.
c) Change of rules for roll-cages. A roll-cage that can withstand forces generated from 1250 kg is different than a cage that can withstand forces generated from 1600 kg.

I wish the best to the young generations of rally fans. I myself will stick to my old-school rally car. And most likely I will also buy a rwd Celica TA4 or Escort MkII or Ascona B. If you have one for sale, let me know.


a) I agree that some extra sound is neeed. Paddon already added "sound amplifier" to his electric car, keeping same sound just making it louder. I'd say it's a better solution than putting artificial V12 sound or something. Not quite sure his current sound is all that great

b) Obviously you are not following EV cars much. Yes lithium batteries need certain temperature range to work best.... which is why the whole difficulty of efficient EV design is battery temperature control (and aerodynamics). Since Tesla S introduction 9 years ago integrated fluid-based battery temperature management has become standard on EVs. Basically no single non-basic EV today does not have it.
Those work at +55 and at -20 as well. For too high temperature it's only a question of cooling sizing, bigger radiator and bigger water pump... for too low it's a question of how much electricity you use to warm up the battery. If effiiency/range is not a big concern (like in a rally car) this is not a problem. Certainly not compared to current cars with white-hot turbos and red-hot exhausts on full ALS running trough the length of the car (guess what makes the car go +55 on Acropolis)

c) Sure, that's just a technicality though. Check out what forces F1 crash structure can take and what size it is.

I like watching steam engines too... or sailboat racing for that matter. Don't have a problem watching EV rally car.

[scn]

I watch WRC since 1984.
Of all cars, my favorite ones are the past generation of WRC with mechanical diffs, in 2015-2016, due to crazy sliding angles.
But, the most spectacular cars ever, due to insane speeds, are the current ones. More spectacular than any previous car, including GrB.
Is it sure that the right thing to do is to change them to something more heavy, more expensive and slower?

[mknight]

The current cars are such an epic success that we are now down to 2 manus, maybe 1,5 next year.

(EDIT: Current rules were great in 2017 (5 manus!), and the first 3 years of the cycle. These last two extra years they are overdue for replacement)

So obviously you need to change something. Hybrid by itself does not necessarily lead to them being slower.

Lack of active central diff will, as well as some reduced suspension travel and less aero. Not sure about suspension travel but the other two are the two biggest cost drivers.
Active diff due to zillion settings that require tons of very expensive testing.
Aero due to the cost of replacing carbon parts that get knocked off.

In terms of sliding 2022 should be closer to 2015-2016 than current ones due to the dif change.

[scn]

b) Obviously you are not following EV cars much. Yes lithium batteries need certain temperature range to work best.... which is why the whole difficulty of efficient EV design is battery temperature control (and aerodynamics). Since Tesla S introduction 9 years ago integrated fluid-based battery temperature management has become standard on EVs. Basically no single non-basic EV today does not have it.
Those work at +55 and at -20 as well. For too high temperature it's only a question of cooling sizing, bigger radiator and bigger water pump... for too low it's a question of how much electricity you use to warm up the battery. If effiiency/range is not a big concern (like in a rally car) this is not a problem. Certainly not compared to current cars with white-hot turbos and red-hot exhausts on full ALS running trough the length of the car (guess what makes the car go +55 on Acropolis)

c) Sure, that's just a technicality though. Check out what forces F1 crash structure can take and what size it is.

I like watching steam engines too... or sailboat racing for that matter. Don't have a problem watching EV rally car.

55 degrees is normal in any car without insulation in Greece in summer, even with its engine out of operation. With exhaust working the temperatures are higher.
I know about the temperature control stuff, this is why I said about "a solution". However, this is extra weight and extra weight is murder to the drivability and endurance, especially in places like Greece, Turkey and Cyprus.
Regarding roll-cages, I would first like to see the cost of the technical solution before saying "just a technicality". And, mainly, the cost for lower categories.
My main concern is not WRC. It is the lower categories. Lower categories are already far too expensive for young drivers and this is the main reason the sport is slowly dying all around the world. I am afraid that electric cars will accelerate the decline.

I also like sailing and actually I am into it. And what I love most is the combination of the effort, the view of the wild sea and the noise from the wind and the sails when I am out there with 6 or 7 on Beaufort scale. If suddenly someone put earplugs on me so that I could not listen to the noise, I would not regard it sailing but a very bad joke. It is the same with rallying. If someone made me wear earplugs while driving my rally car or spectating, I would feel that one of the most important ingredients of the whole procedure is missing. Try it for yourself. Next time you go to watch WRC or drive your rally car, wear earplugs.

And finally, my opinion about cars is the one that Walter Rohrl has expressed: The most important thing in driving a car is that it has low weight. If someone hasn't driven a 680 kg car, even if mediocre in every other sector, I don't expect him to have any understanding of what Rorhl said. However, Rohrl spoke the truth.

EDIT. Resembling a Gr2 or Gr4 rally car with a steam engine?! Have you ever been in one? This is not a rhetorical question, I am actually asking to find out the level of experience, because to me the biggest mistake I have made in this life is when I sold my Gr2 to go to more modern cars.

[AnttiL]

Maybe the new tubular frames of the cars can be designed to a lower weight in order to compensate the weight of the batteries?

[denkimi]

The current cars are such an epic success that we are now down to 2 manus, maybe 1,5 next year.

Before the current cars we had also just 2 manufacturers + m-sport.

[rage82]

Before the current cars we had also just 2 manufacturers + m-sport.I think we have 3 Manus + M-sport: Citroen, VW and Hyundai.

Sent from my Redmi Note 5 using Tapatalk

[AnttiL]

Yeh, except for 2016 when Citroen took a year off to develop the C3...and Meeke won two rallies :D

[RS]

Paddon in action with the Kona

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFMwLKqYtMU

Looks good to me in terms of speed and handling. The problem is the noise, but then I don’t like fake noise either.

[pantealex]

Getting worse and worse..
This news is like a spit in the face for a team like M-Sport..
There are no new manus for 22' and no way that any new manu will join before 25', because why would someone develop a hundreds of thousands worth car for 2 years only..

Yes an no.

2022Hybrids will be too old technic if used until 2027... Manus will go away...

[AndyRAC]

It will be history repeating; 3-4 manufacturers, if we're lucky - and that is par for the course. For all the good intentions the WRCar formula brought, apart from the early years, it hasn't been what you'd hoped. And in it's final year, we have 3*; Hyundai, Toyota & M-Sport - as opposed to 1997; Subaru, Mitsubishi, Ford & Toyota with a mid/late season debut.

How many will we see next year - the usual 3? And how many extra will join? Matton doesn't really fill me with confidence.

[Francis44]

Yes an no.

2022Hybrids will be too old technic if used until 2027... Manus will go away...

Such nonsense......

You do know several teams have commited to F1 until 2025, with hybrid technologic, right?!
And do you know aswell most are sure beyond 2025 hybrid PU's will continue (they want it more hybridisation, but combustion focused nonetheless). So if its good enough for F1 I really dont see how it cannot be for WRC.

[AnttiL]

Manufacturers likely would like to have their own input in developing the hybrid element, and maybe the role of the hybrid element will be increased. Also shortening the cycle would open the door for moving to electric cars, if the world is ready for that and manufacturers are interested. Meanwhile, they can still just extend the homologation cycle (like they did with the current cars, which were supposed to run only for three years initially)

[pantealex]

Such nonsense......

You do know several teams have commited to F1 until 2025, with hybrid technologic, right?!
And do you know aswell most are sure beyond 2025 hybrid PU's will continue (they want it more hybridisation, but combustion focused nonetheless). So if its good enough for F1 I really dont see how it cannot be for WRC.

True!

But FE (Formula Electric) has more "real" manufacturers involved than F1...

Rallying is way different PR-wise than F1.

Rally cars must present road cars, otherwise we could continue with petrol cars forever. That (old fashion benzine cars) would be my ideal scenario.

[Francis44]

Maybe, just maybe, something the sport needs to look into the immediate future:

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry-news/porsche-begin-producing-synthetic-fuels-2022

[T16]

All new Ford vehicles will be electric by the end of the decade.
Make of that what you will.

[Franky]

All new Ford vehicles will be electric by the end of the decade.
Make of that what you will.

In Europe.

[T16]

In Europe.

ah - missed that bit. Still a significant move though.

[Francis44]

A bit offtopic, but I think relevant nonetheless.

Ferrari as just confirmed its awaited official endurance racing return, after so many years out, starting from 2023.

So maybe hybrids are the right choice after all.

[AndyRAC]

Well they, (the FiA/ ACO) are doing something right; Peugeot, Toyota, Porsche, Audi, Glickenhaus, and now Ferrari.......all in the top class. That's very good...hopefully they all turn up.

[Sulland]

Is it the right signal to send young drivers that 2wd cars will no longer have a championship to fight for?

[RS]

Is it the right signal to send young drivers that 2wd cars will no longer have a championship to fight for?

They will, in ERC.

[AnttiL]

The current JWRC doesn’t seem to get anyone’s career anywhere

Evans, Tidemand and Lefebvre, champions 2012-2014 are the last JWRC champions to start in a WRC car...

[Mirek]

It's no wonder, it's been about a decade in whichs the championship to play the junior role for WRC was ERC/IRC.

[AnttiL]

If a driver gets the budget together for JWRC and wins it, they have nowhere to go, unless they can triple(?) their budget and get in WRC2/3. I think that gap has stopped the progress of many drivers. Meanwhile, there's also a new car to learn, 4WD, more setup and more speed.

Now it will be more expensive to get a budget for a WRC3 Junior season, but at the same time, you will be closer to the level of where you need to be the year after.

I wouldn't mind having a FWD cup somewhere as well, but I understand there cannot be an endless amount of them.

[Jarek Z]

What happens now is a slow death of the sport. Witness how many old cars we still have in French, Italian, German, Spanish and British rallying. Actually, these old cars keep the sport alive. Without them, rallies would not have enough participants to be financially viable. But, for how long? And for how long can the sport afford to have only rich young drivers in it?

I copy&pasted this opinion from the Audi thread, because it refers to the future of rallying. On the one hand I agree with you about a slow death of the rally sport. But on the other hand... we are in the middle of the coronavirus crisis, the economy is down, but at the same time:

1) I have just seen a provisional entry list for Rallye le Touquet, the first round of 2021 French rally championship, and, believe it or not, there are over 260 crews with 36 R5 cars on it!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ObYon0ivUrloJYtYmBc00KhFOzsk_xuu/view?fbclid=IwAR2SulYMPtJVln1HhnHH3Z_-oZN1IJElS_WRTXb7SprC0S6Q2JK5mwsESAk

2) I have just seen entry list for Rally Il Ciocco, the first round of 2021 Italian rally championship with over 100 crews and 37 R5 cars:
https://www.cioccorally.it/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/RCVS21-ElencoIscritti_CIR.pdf

From this perspective it doesn't look like a dying sport...

[AnttiL]

https://twitter.com/belgakinen/status/1369212004930641923


Lots of interesting infos given in the new SpeedMagazine by Yves Matton about the new class pyramid. Here are a few bits:
-Two new rally3 cars should join the Fiesta in the future
-Rally5 will allow electric and hydrogen cars
-Rally1 might run on synthetic fuel as soon as 2021
-No new Rally1 manufacturer until at least 2023
-Hybrid "Boost" of Rally1 only allowed on the start line and on the exit of predetermined slow corners on stages

And way, way more informations in this single article. Always highly recommend this magazine.

[AnttiL]

I copy&pasted this opinion from the Audi thread, because it refers to the future of rallying. On the one hand I agree with you about a slow death of the rally sport. But on the other hand... we are in the middle of the coronavirus crisis, the economy is down, but at the same time:

1) I have just seen a provisional entry list for Rallye le Touquet, the first round of 2021 French rally championship, and, believe it or not, there are over 260 crews with 36 R5 cars on it!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ObYon0ivUrloJYtYmBc00KhFOzsk_xuu/view?fbclid=IwAR2SulYMPtJVln1HhnHH3Z_-oZN1IJElS_WRTXb7SprC0S6Q2JK5mwsESAk

2) I have just seen entry list for Rally Il Ciocco, the first round of 2021 Italian rally championship with over 100 crews and 37 R5 cars:
https://www.cioccorally.it/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/RCVS21-ElencoIscritti_CIR.pdf

From this perspective it doesn't look like a dying sport...

Same with the huge Rally2 entries on the latest WRC events. However, could it be that when there is few events to run, the ones that can be run gather more competitors?

[wyler]

Same with the huge Rally2 entries on the latest WRC events. However, could it be that when there is few events to run, the ones that can be run gather more competitors?

it is, at least for Italy. Federation is looking for the post-covid era (hopefully 2022) fewer events that will be a bit longer (atm in Italy are quite ridiculous). So that seems to be a good trend for the future.

[AnttiL]

https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/wrc-teams-frustrated-by-early-hybrid-issues/

The teams have the hybrid units but the charger and software are missing.

It also says the cost of a hybrid unit is 100 000 euros (not 500 000 like mentioned somewhere in discussions) and the system will gather energy during road section to be used on stages and city sections.

[TypeR]

To me even 100k is pretty expensive.. as the system isn't something revolutionary..
Toyota Motor Co could have done it a lot cheaper and faster as they have been building hybrids for 20 years..
But let's see how the tests will go from now on.

[Mirek]

To me even 100k is pretty expensive.. as the system isn't something revolutionary..
Toyota Motor Co could have done it a lot cheaper and faster as they have been building hybrids for 20 years..
But let's see how the tests will go from now on.

I'd like to see your price calculations...

Seriously any system is hugely expensive if it is made in small numbers, in this case essentially in single units mainly because all the R&D costs is not dispersed over huge quantity of the units. The very same system would cost fraction of the price if it was made in hundreds of thousands. Saying "that's expensive" is the easiest thing one can do but building something cheaper usually turns out to be a much bigger issue.


Just some random numbers...

Let's say you have five people working on the project. The cost of them including all taxes, insurance, tools (including software), building etc. is let's say 10k Euro/month/person. They work on that for one year. that's roughly 2,5 million Euro. Then you build prototypes and test them. Those are hugely expensive, let's say you spend 1 million on them. You have 3,5 million Euro R&D cost and you know you will produce maximum 50 units. That makes it 70 thousand Euro R&D cost per unit alone (without material production, delivery and of cource some profit). Make 1000 of them and it's 3500 Euro per unit. Make 100000 of them and it's 35 Euro per unit.

[denkimi]

I'd like to see your price calculations...

Seriously any system is hugely expensive if it is made in small numbers, in this case essentially in single units mainly because all the R&D costs is not dispersed over huge quantity of the units. The very same system would cost fraction of the price if it was made in hundreds of thousands. Saying "that's expensive" is the easiest thing one can do but building something cheaper usually turns out to be a much bigger issue.


Just some random numbers...

Let's say you have five people working on the project. The cost of them including all taxes, insurance, tools (including software), building etc. is let's say 10k Euro/month/person. They work on that for one year. that's roughly 2,5 million Euro. Then you build prototypes and test them. Those are hugely expensive, let's say you spend 1 million on them. You have 3,5 million Euro R&D cost and you know you will produce maximum 50 units. That makes it 70 thousand Euro R&D cost per unit alone (without material production, delivery and of cource some profit). Make 1000 of them and it's 3500 Euro per unit. Make 100000 of them and it's 35 Euro per unit.
As TypeR says, there's nothing new or revolutionary about it. There is no reason why there should be high costs for development. There's no reason why 10 people should work a year to do some small changes to an existing system.

If the system is the same for everyone, there's no reason for it to be expensive.

[TypeR]

yes, I know You know a lot about everything.

I said ,,to me''.
No need to explain that production, workers, softwares etc take money.

Your random number calculation doesn't say anything much..
Let's make 1mil units and the price goes down to 3.5 euros? Doesn't work that way..

If I said that it sounds quite cheap, then would You have agreed? Or said opposite and that it is a huge amount of money for teams and their budgets..

[Mirek]

Let's make 1mil units and the price goes down to 3.5 euros? Doesn't work that way..

Sorry but it looks like you don't understand.

It's not the price to go down to 3,5 Euro. It's solely the R&D cost which has to be paid within the price of the product. With a thing produced in low dozens the R&D price may create half of the product price or even more. In mass-produced product such as the stock systems the R&D expense creates negligible percentage of the product price. The other expenses such as materials, production, delivery etc. there is never such a huge dependence on the production volume.

Let's say that to produce the system costs 20 thousand Euro (material, production manhours, subdeliveries, production facility, quality control etc.). In my example with 50 parts the total expense is 90000 per piece. In a case of 100000 products the total expense is 20035 Euro per piece.

In other words, if WRC low-production system costs 100 thousand Euro it was definitely developed with lower expenses than in my example and I'm quite sure that gigantic and hugely bureaucratic companies such as Toyota won't develop it cheaper (after spending 10 years in a global automotive company I dare to say that). What makes their final products cheap is the quantity and the optimization of mass production. I'm willing to bet the R&D cost alone is higher for these companies than for the small specialized ones.

[Sulland]

The hybrid systems used in single seaters, are they bought from a sole source, or are they developed by teams or engine manufacturers?
I am guessing it differs from series to series.

Can or are Rally as a sport using lessons learned from single seater series in this prosess?

[Fast Eddie WRC]

wrc_tv_italy

Jari-Matti Latvala, Toyota WRC team principal, told 'Ralli.fi' that the team will soon begin testing the new Rally1 car.

Latvala claims that Toyota is lagging behind on the hybrid car in fact they will mount the hybrid component on the current Yaris WRC , as the GR Yaris model, the model on which Rally1 will be based, is not yet ready.

Latvala believes the GR Yaris Rally1 will only be ready for testing in the summer:

“We will probably test with a mixed package this spring. There is some of the old, namely the chassis of the current WRC car, and there will be new components and other parts added.
With this car that will host parts of the new one we will start testing in the spring. In the summer, we should therefore have a hybrid car ready for road tests. But surely we will have to wait until the summer before this machine is ready. "

[Sulland]

Who is the new manu coming into WRC next?

[AndyRAC]

Good question - they're hardly queuing up to join, are they?

[Tauri_J]

One would rather leave than join.

[wyler]

Who is the new manu coming into WRC next?

Ford!

[M3 Jambo]

Can't see it!

[the sniper]

Audi, no...? WRC.com told me they're coming!