Rally Italia Sardegna '16

Not sure if already posted but Paddon crash from a distance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixrR4qQ_F2k

Seen this today

https://www.facebook.com/rallyemag/p...type=3&theater

My video, with drone ! Enjoy it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHQcss-iPQQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

Broke rules? I find it more peculiar that a shape of a windowwhich even didn´t fit on that doormodel can make FIA fine 50k Euros is most unethical.

They could have said: "Hey, guys, you´ve messed this up with the scrutineer/homolgationdepartment at FIA and on Monday morning you have to fix this immediately so papers are in order next rally in Poland. Or else we have to fine you at least 5000 Euros."

To me it had looked more justice than this 50k fine for almost nothing.

---

Imagine how much surprise the scrutineers and stewards would have if this were pressed further..

"That window didn't fit----50,000 please.

Wait, we can't seem to fit this intercooler---under this hood..(ching ching) 70,000 and this gearbox seems to have some different gears 10,000; 10,000; 10,000---and it has a LSD inside that doesn't fit.. 200,000 ching---
and this control arm is about twice as long and made of tube---the Original is a steel stamping.....133,000 thank you, and it what do you call this suspension? 1 million Euros please, it is not in conformity to the original.."


Please remit ALL YOUR MONIES!! REACH FOR THE SKY STUNGATZ! Dis is a stick up!"



or maybe something like this (substituting "rally team" for "Army")
http://<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cNZKUozrBl4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cNZKUozrBl4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Good one John!
However rules are rules regarding gearboxes, engines weights overal etz. That´s fine to me.

But rear windows? Me o mine, that´s just too much fining 50k . Who made that rule up?

Hint:
FIA heads can make a fortune out of fluids weight change if they charge €10 000 per gram difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

But rear windows? Me o mine, that´s just too much fining 50k . Who made that rule up?

---

It's the car makers themselves who wanted this extreme system of homologations so that they secure selling more spare parts to privateers. No heardache from my side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

It's the car makers themselves who wanted this extreme system of homologations so that they secure selling more spare parts to privateers. No heardache from my side.

---

Ok. But fines 50k for 36g? 1390 Euros/gram.

Biggest problem with the windows wasnt the weight,but different kind of attachment of windows to the bodyshell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

Ok. But fines 50k for 36g? 1390 Euros/gram.

---

Per, I have written that at least five times already. They were not penalized for the weight! Please read the documents again. The shape of the windows was wrong (the part which is not visible and by which the window is attached to the door).

So now the question is why some get time penalty and some get fines? Do drivers have a choice what type of punishment they get? I'm not saying that Prokop would be more happy with a 30k euro fine, but for me it looks like they have no problems with kicking small guys/teams and there are different rules for manufacturers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

Per, I have written that at least five times already. They were not penalized for the weight! Please read the documents again. The shape of the windows was wrong (the part which is not visible and by which the window is attached to the door).

---

Relax Mirek, there are none so blind as those who won’t see.

The simply do not understand that it is not about the weight, it is about non-compliance with the homologation papers.
They do not understand that cars must be as described in the paperwork and that being slightly non-compliant is just like being slightly pregnant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mariusz

So now the question is why some get time penalty and some get fines? Do drivers have a choice what type of punishment they get? I'm not saying that Prokop would be more happy with a 30k euro fine, but for me it looks like they have no problems with kicking small guys/teams and there are different rules for manufacturers.

---

Two different infringments. Performance advantage vs silly mistake in homologation papers? I am sure if Hyundai broke the transmission seal they would be given same penalty as Prokop.

Why you are arguing over an infringement that did not change the results ??

be serious kids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

Per, I have written that at least five times already. They were not penalized for the weight! Please read the documents again. The shape of the windows was wrong (the part which is not visible and by which the window is attached to the door).

---

Yeah, I saw that before, but figures are funny sometimes anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mk2 RS2000

Relax Mirek, there are none so blind as those who won’t see.

The simply do not understand that it is not about the weight, it is about non-compliance with the homologation papers.
They do not understand that cars must be as described in the paperwork and that being slightly non-compliant is just like being slightly pregnant

---

Blind I´m not.
Homologation I know much about.
Rearwindows in pure glass or plexi or whatever. Fine. decide what you want and homologate it.
BUT -attaching rearwindow on car should not be an issue for homologation, why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N.O.T

Why you are arguing over an infringement that did not change the results ??

be serious kids.

---

Still better than Ostberg's discussions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by makinen_fan

Two different infringments. Performance advantage vs silly mistake in homologation papers? I am sure if Hyundai broke the transmission seal they would be given same penalty as Prokop.

---

I'm not a very technical guy, so please explain how exactly Prokop's car performance was improved? There was also Kubica's case in Sweden 2015 where his turbo boost went over a homologated value for some short periods of time and as stated by M-Sport this couldn't had any performance advantage and still, he got 5 min penalty. There are just some double standards.
I'm happy for Thierry though, he did a great job last weekend and was faster than Latvala.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

BUT -attaching not homologated rearwindow on car should be an issue for homologation

---

May be this is the answer?!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stefanvv

May be this is the answer?!?

---

Think it´s one word too much htere. Should be: "attaching homologated rear window should not be an issue of homologation". Meaning how you attach homologated window, how could it be an issue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

Think it´s one word too much htere. Should be: "attaching homologated rear window should not be an issue of homologation". Meaning how you attach homologated window, how could it be an issue?

---

but it is not, is it?
http://www.rallyitaliasardegna.com/?ddownload=2246

this whole homologation thing is just a money making machine for the fia and the manufacturers.
in pretty much every other racing series the organizer just writes the general rules, and competitors have to make sure their car applies to them.
but in rally, the opposite is true. parts have to be homologated, even though no special rules apply to them.

in the case of windows, the only rule should be a full filling of the chassis holes, a certain material and some specific thickness. shape of weight are not specified, so they should never cause a penalty.

Ok, they screw up homologating rearwindow that had never been fitted on the 16´i20. For me it´s still not worth 50k.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by denkimi

this whole homologation thing is just a money making machine for the fia and the manufacturers.
in pretty much every other racing series the organizer just writes the general rules, and competitors have to make sure their car applies to them.
but in rally, the opposite is true. parts have to be homologated, even though no special rules apply to them.

in the case of windows, the only rule should be a full filling of the chassis holes, a certain material and some specific thickness. shape of weight are not specified, so they should never cause a penalty.

---

May be it isn't fair or something but all other cars comply with this. So money machine or not, these are "the rules" as You say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

Think it´s one word too much htere. Should be: "attaching homologated rear window should not be an issue of homologation". Meaning how you attach homologated window, how could it be an issue?

---

My understanding is that the window has to be able to be removed without the use of tools, if that is so then the method of attachment could be an issue. Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by denkimi

this whole homologation thing is just a money making machine for the fia and the manufacturers.
in pretty much every other racing series the organizer just writes the general rules, and competitors have to make sure their car applies to them.
but in rally, the opposite is true. parts have to be homologated, even though no special rules apply to them.

in the case of windows, the only rule should be a full filling of the chassis holes, a certain material and some specific thickness. shape of weight are not specified, so they should never cause a penalty.

---

Or they get a waiver...... ;)

And they still keep on about it ladies and gentlemen !!!! they still care about things they do not matter !!! Isn't humanity amazing and very very disappointing at the same time ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N.O.T

And they still keep on about it ladies and gentlemen !!!! they still care about things they do not matter !!! Isn't humanity amazing and very very disappointing at the same time ?

---

Please, do not be disappointed, here, take this picture, I know you like this kind of stuff

https://scontent-mxp1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...21&oe=57C8CD30

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rallyper

Ok, they screw up homologating rearwindow that had never been fitted on the 16´i20. For me it´s still not worth 50k.

---

The 50.000 Euros may seem harsh, but Hyundai’s was lucky to escape from a time penalty like it happen with Citroen in ’09 Australia Rally. Then it was an anti-roll bar link problem, but the main issue is the same: no conformity with homologation form.
http://www.motorsport.com/wrc/news/r...ter-penalties/

In both cases there was no technical advantage from the use of the non homologated parts, so it makes sense to have only money penalty for this kind of administrative mistake, like it was decided this time.

Prokop’s problem seems to be totally different: breaking seals is a major fault and time penalties are established for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by makinen_fan

Two different infringments. Performance advantage vs silly mistake in homologation papers? I am sure if Hyundai broke the transmission seal they would be given same penalty as Prokop.

---

It is a relevant question from Mariusz. FIA has shown in the past that the penalties for various infringements are more or less random. The stewards have absolute freedom in choosing the penalty and it is true that they have been generally a lot stricter to privateers than to the works teams, for example some were disqualified for expired gloves etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mariusz

I'm not a very technical guy, so please explain how exactly Prokop's car performance was improved? There was also Kubica's case in Sweden 2015 where his turbo boost went over a homologated value for some short periods of time and as stated by M-Sport this couldn't had any performance advantage and still, he got 5 min penalty. There are just some double standards.
I'm happy for Thierry though, he did a great job last weekend and was faster than Latvala.

---

Sorry but are you telling us that braking a seal or running an over-the-limit turbo pressure does not provide a competition advantage? M-Sport statement is irrelevant as they were the guilty party who had to make itself looking like innocent. In both cases they probably didn't brake the rules in purpose but they did.

http://www.ewrc.cz/images/2016/photo.../lk_1ogier.jpg
http://www.ewrc.cz/images/2016/photo...e_img_6037.jpg
http://forum-rallye.com/uploads/mont...1465909094.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

Sorry but are you telling us that braking a seal or running an over-the-limit turbo pressure does not provide a competition advantage? M-Sport statement is irrelevant as they were the guilty party who had to make itself looking like innocent. In both cases they probably didn't brake the rules in purpose but they did.

---

No, I'm asking what is the performance advantage gained from breaking a seal, because I don't know. The extra turbo pressure for sure gave something, but this 'something' could have been like 0,01 seconds gained, probably just the same as the total time gained since Monte Carlo for all Hyundais because of the window weight difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

It is a relevant question from Mariusz. FIA has shown in the past that the penalties for various infringements are more or less random. The stewards have absolute freedom in choosing the penalty and it is true that they have been generally a lot stricter to privateers than to the works teams, for example some were disqualified for expired gloves etc.

---

But regarding Prokop issue, penalty was completely clear. See regulations:

27.2.2 Should identification marks (see Arts. 26.1.6 and 63) be affixed, it is the responsibility of the competitor to see that these are preserved intact from pre-rally scrutineering until the end of the rally or until it will be allowed by these regulations to cut the seals. Should they be missing, this will be reported to the Stewards.

64.5.1 Transmissions and turbochargers must remain sealed until the end of the last rally of the link (except with approval from the FIA Technical delegate).

If the seals are found to be destroyed without the written approval of the FIA Technical delegate, a 5-minute penalty will be imposed by the Stewards at the next rally.

Had a great rally in Sardinia, like every year. One of the most spectator-friendly events in the WRC. The shakedown was disappointing, but the rest of the event was ok. Also a short but very nice powerstage on sunday, far better than Cala Flumini, which they used the last couple of years. Happy to see Neuville win from Latvala, I didn't expect it at all! :)

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...39475173_o.jpg

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...16819004_o.jpg

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...34673642_o.jpg

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...83468764_o.jpg

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...53391503_o.jpg

A few more on my fb page: https://www.facebook.com/rallyimage/...25119710833245

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mariusz

No, I'm asking what is the performance advantage gained from breaking a seal, because I don't know. The extra turbo pressure for sure gave something, but this 'something' could have been like 0,01 seconds gained, probably just the same as the total time gained since Monte Carlo for all Hyundais because of the window weight difference.

---

How do You know how much gain the extra turbo pressure gave? It's only Your belief since it's near impossible to determine. For that reason the maximum allowed pressure is set to prevent any discussion and it's up to the teams to keep it under the limit. If they are not sure they must have some safety margin and if they get so close that the margin is not enough than it's their problem. How much they cross the line is perfectly irrelevant. Once You are over You violated the rules. Simple as that.


Let's make a hypothetical example how crossing the line by near nothing can bring a significant advantage (not saying that it was this case).

The max. turbo pressure is 2,5 bar. Team A knows from its testing that they are able to keep the pressure 100% of the time in +/- 0,1 bar. For that reason they run on nominal 2,35 bar to be always within the limit.

Team B has exactly the same experience but studied the statistics and found that in fact for 98% of the time they are within +/-0,05 and only in 2% get on +/- 0,1. They take the risk and run 2,45 bar nominal. During the whole rally they have approximately 0,1 bar more pressure than their rival and everything is ok but one day the pressure gets over by veeery small margin so they can say that such violation has no impact on the performance while in fat they took a calculated risk to enhance their performance.

PS I'm not motoring engineer and I don't know what exact deviations from the nominal are achievable in the WRC engine so the values are just an example of the principle.

Mirek is right with turbo pressure. And about Prokops case - it's not only about breaking the seal, but when seal is broken then you can look inside the diff, replace some parts or change setup, which for sure can give you big advantage. We don't know how it was exactly in Prokops case, but nobody knows except them, so the rule made by FIA is good. They don't check preloads, ramps, FFs, etc, they just seal what they receive and control the seal during next events, plain simple.

Makes sense. Thank you for the explanation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

It is a relevant question from Mariusz. FIA has shown in the past that the penalties for various infringements are more or less random. The stewards have absolute freedom in choosing the penalty and it is true that they have been generally a lot stricter to privateers than to the works teams, for example some were disqualified for expired gloves etc.

---

Thats true that penalties are not always consistent when there are is no clear cut penalty in the regulations. For homologation infringements, it is understandable to have massive variation depending on the nature of infringement.
As for the stewards being less strict with works teams, I have not really noticed that to be honest. I expect works team to be a lot more careful not to break the rules but also the stewards to trust them a bit more that they are not doing anything stupid.

What worries me the most with the Hyundai case, is that they were running these windows for 6 rallies and nobody have noticed it until now. One wonders what other parts are illegal (from any of the works team and maybe intentionally or by genuine mistake) and are not noticed during scrutineering.

well.. assistant tehnical delegate was Estonian, they notice everything :P