Really? Do you mean only in terms of top end power or overall performance?Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
Printable View
Really? Do you mean only in terms of top end power or overall performance?Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
In general. Hyundai feels most powerful, Skoda also very close, but with evo2 engine Fiesta is really not far away... OK, Skoda is always with long gear ratios, etc. but differences are not that big. I don't have big experience with different fuels in all R5 cars, but Fiesta on one sport fuel have 10/15hp difference comparing to the other sport fuel. So this is also a factor. Same like factory/customer spec mappings, etc. So there are many variables...Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
Do you think it's possible that rules with a single fuel supplier (like in WRC or in Belgium) may favour one of the cars? Could it be more fair to allow any type of fuel for everyone?
For sure yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by tommeke_B
Some fuels are better (new spec ETS, VP, etc) and some worse (WRC Panta), and some engines cope better with worse performance fuel (less prone for knocking, etc.). So for sure this will make a difference. On the other hand all manufacturers have mappings for few different fuels but not every mapping is done same way, some are done 100%, some let's say 90% because some customer wanted to use this fuel, so they made mapping for it and offer it also for everyone else, but it's not done with so much attention, etc. So if they know they all need to use some XXX brand fuel everywhere in the world for example they focus on mapping for it and then it's more even with performance, but still some differences, as some fuels favor more some engines, etc.
Other thing is that in R5 main concern is pop-off valve so strategy for it is most important, as in ideal conditions one engine can be super strong but then will have many issues with pop-off so will loose most... so all is about finding proper balance. Better to loose some 0,1-0,2b boost (as most R5 cars allow to do manually or automatically by software itself), so of course loosing hp/Nm then but still better than loosing 0,8b boost when pop-off opens. Similar rules with ALS strategies, etc.
Homologation jokers:
Fiesta engine
Fabia engine x2 and fuel circuit
Latter related to fires?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Oliveira
Fiesta has few Jokers already, some related to engine, some to drivetrain, suspension, steering, aero, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Oliveira
It's in Czech but quite interesting article based on ewrc-results database regarding R5 cars statistics. Likely not 100% but in the amount of data it can be fairly accurate. https://www.ewrc.cz/clanek/31611-f-f...spolehlivosti/
Particularly interesting for me is percentage of retirements from technical reasons:
Fabia 7,18%, Fiesta 9,84%, 208 15,91%, i20 17,11%, DS3 18,31%, Mirage 27,27%
Aren't these retirement stats for the R5 Fiesta going to be biased against it as it was the earliest R5 ?
Of the total number in use, many Fiesta's are going to be older cars and have done more mileage and events.
They were also cheaper to buy originally.
I mentioned only stats for 2017. Fiesta had pretty good numbers (not that good in 2014 when it was new).Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
I don't think that the age of the rally car makes it worse in relation to reliability. That is more about particular team preparation and maintenance and I think that we can assume that all cars get in average similar maintenance. How old is the bodyshell is imho not very important (see Loeb's Xsara WRC stats).
On the other hand we may ask whether older cars actually aren't generally more reliable because their technical solutions are proven. The new cars often tend to be unreliable because some issues are very hard to find and solve during testing.
The older cars were still being driven in 2017 though. Plus they would be getting cheaper and into the hands of smaller, less well financed teams. IMO such stats prove nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
I don't know what You're trying to say. Old bodyshell means nothing. Fiesta R5 has much better reliability stats in 2017 then it had in 2014 so what's Your point? Both Fiesta and Fabia reliability stats show that the cars became more reliable with every following year, i.e. they had the worst reliability when they were new and since then they become gradually better and that is perfectly logical.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
By the way Loeb used to drive 4-5 years old bodyshells of Xsara WRC and it didn't stop him from winning WRC titles.
he is msport fan so.....
What's wrong with M-Sport stats there? They are pretty good, aren't they?Quote:
Originally Posted by nafpaktos
Mirek you started highlighting the stats on reliability... what were You trying to say ?
I dont suppose it's because they favoured Škoda...
I don't understand why you seem surprised about these stats? Škoda is a bit better than Ford (quite small margin), everyone know PSA R5 is (at least was) rubbish, I20 relatively new car with possibly not eliminated defects, and Mirage is garage made rally car; everything is true, and reflects in those stats. Old bodyshell is irrelevant - it's all about maintaining car, replacing parts, and how driver using it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
I have posted an article with an analysis based on very large amount of data which us fans don't have. I am not author of the analysis (neither have I any sort of relation to the author or ewrc server) and I don't claim anything besides what is described in the article. It's You who came with a statement which is in direct contradiction with recorded stats therefore it's up to You to back up Your claims (i.e. that older cars become less reliable while the recorded trend shows exactly opposite).
I haven't posted this article because I like Škoda (I like M-Sport too and FYI I worked for years on Ford vehicle development). Yes, it shows Škoda as the most reliable but I think that it's hardly a surprise for anyone. Maybe the fact that M-Sport was on near same numbers is more of a surprise especially considering that M-Sport is much cheaper. M-Sport also has better customer support.
It’s never too much to praise and thank eWRC guys for their fantastic work (as long as they keep the site free ;)), but for them or any other people gathering rally data it may not be easy to establish retirements real causes, as those aren’t always reported by the teams or the organizers.
If a driver destroys a suspension (for example hitting a rock or a tree) and retires, how many times that kind of retirement is classified as 'technical' (mechanical faillure) and not as 'accident' (driver mistake)? Otherwise, a driver can go off the road and even roll due to a brake failure and no technical problem is indicated as the accident cause. On a recent CNR rally, former champ Moura got 2 punctures and retired, after a deep corner cut; somehow the retirement cause appears as ‘mechanical’.
That’s why we should take these reliability stats in a light way.
Yes, that is for sure a concern but logically this kind of mistake is from its nature global, i.e. it shall not depend on vehicle type. It means that there is for sure a certain error in the stats but this error shall be statistically same for all cars.
You don't need to go after tenths of percent to see that the cars are basically in three largely different groups. First most reliable one is Fabia and Fiesta. Second much worse is PSA cars and i20 and the third worst one is represented by the only private car Mirage. The differences between the groups are so big that few mistakenly reported retirements don't change anything.
I think that it all corresponds with the generally knows stuff, i.e. Škoda and M-Sport put a lot of effort into R5 because it's very important for them. Hyundai R5 seemed to be always a bit of side-project with lower importance. PSA cars are known for many design flaws which were partially fixed in time but many still remain and finally the Mirage as a private project suffers from the same problems as all other similar ones before.
Anyway it's interesting statistic and thanx for sharing it! Even if there are some questions about data from ewrc for sure final results are quite logical, understandable and like expected, so error margin in those stats is small.
As a guy who wrote that eWRC article, I can assure you, that I´m not so big fan of Skoda, my most favourite drivers usualy drive some different machinery, usually from M-Sport :) So, no Skoda bias. And I am aware of limitations of data, it was written in the beggining of text, that I counted as crash only those retirement which were labeled as "accident" or "accident damage", so i would suppose, that in real, number of retirement related with accident would be even bigger. Last but not leas, I´m happy, that you like it even if it was in Czech
No matter the way we tend to analyze the data, the article is indeed quite interesting and you and your partners at eWRC deserve huge congratulations. Keep up the good work!Quote:
Originally Posted by kure91
I didnt suggest any Skoda bias by eWRC, I was just wondering why only the part on reliability was highlighted here by a Czech...Quote:
Originally Posted by kure91
The M-Sport Fiesta R5 is a huge success in every way and no interpretation of statistics can show otherwise.
Where are you trying to go with this? Nobody said anything negative about M-Sport here. But you are "bullshitting" because they aren't on top in some interesting but unimportant statistics. If one person is biased, I know who it is... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Quite funny suggestion, coming from you... guess Mirek didn't praise M-Sport and British drivers enough in his simply reporting statistics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
I am huge fan of M-Sport and eWRC-results.com member and i garantee all are done with most accurrate possible ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
thanks lot but if it possible next time write in english.we are more no Czechs than Czechs that read the erwc and this forum!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by kure91
And the automatic translations make it sound like the author is too fond of the greatest Czech product......:beer:Quote:
Originally Posted by nafpaktos
https://www.rallit.fi/volkswagenin-u...-kay-kaupaksi/ (in Finnish)
All 15-18 Polo R5's that will be built this year are already sold. Next year they plan to build 40-50 cars.
It's relatively small numbers, I think; for example Škoda's 70th chassis started in Rally Portugal 2016 - one year after homologation. In two years (1 and half actually) they build around 100 cars (based on ewrc-results stats). And (I believe Mirek mentioned that) Škoda's facilities are quite small. VW has WRC program, so they should have enough room to build more cars, also to find customers shouldn't be problem, as ~18 cars already sold before homologation.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
It's not only about building the cars. You need to have enough parts to build them from (they are often from small specialized companies with limited production capacity). You need to have enough testing capacities, enough spare parts for customers and You need to be able to provide aftersale services for the customers. The whole machine needs some time to get in shape.
They don't push with sales, they choose the teams to which they will sell their 2018 cars
Do you know criteria they use to choose customers?Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
Their own choice, but in general bigger teams, with some history, etc, most likely for some good drivers, also teams which will cooperate with them close, use engineer from VW, etcQuote:
Originally Posted by electroliquid
For sure BRR Racing of Raimund Baumschlager - he´s already tested the Polo R5.Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
BMA already declared they will have 2 or 3 this year. We will see if it really happens..
Yeah, in Belgium DG Sport also should have one, and Citroën probably also
I think their priority will be teams close to local dealers. I know there is really big interest in Polo R5, almost everybody wants to have it and there are big fights "behind the scene" to have it...