Printable View
I too favour the S2000 model. It seems to me that moving to a 1600 turbo charged engine is another development programme that the sport doesn't need.
If any performance gains are desired over S2000 I would have thought allowing the engine out to 2.3 or thereabouts would have done the job without complication.
From what I've seen S2000 looks pretty good.
Seems to me this is just leading to a lot more confusion :(
The FIA incapacity to decide WRC future it’s outrageous!!!
First decision to replace WRC for S2000 based cars was taken at the WMSC of June 2007, and almost 2 years after the new WRC regulations are still drawn in discussion and uncertainty…
MJW is totally right: this delays, which have allowed WRC cars to compete one more year, and the now proposed 1.6T engines*, can only benefit Citroën and Ford but will certainly raise many doubts to a large number of manufactures that were left to believe that S2000 was the way to go!
I just hope that the organizers of IRC will maximize the WRC disorientation, and consider rescaling their competition to a maximum of 8/9 rallies, in order to attract not only factory teams but also top privateers, and turn the series into the leading formula of international rallying.
*someone has pointed that 1.6T engines are now common, but aren’t 2.0 atmo engines much more widespread ?!?
Well, I think that it is good decision to move straight to 1.6T engines rather than doing one or two years with s2000. That would have meant developing two different engines in a short period of time for some tems. And small tbo engines is the way where all car manu's are moving in these days. N/a engines are old tech in small/medium size cars.
but the s2000 sound greatQuote:
Originally Posted by f-cup
I think that it is quite pointless to run one more year with WRCar as the top class. Currently both, Citroen and Ford are developing S2000 cars (those cars are meant for national championships as well, that means there is still point to develop those cars).
So. The best solution is to run S2000 in 2010 and if someone is ready then 1600t is also allowed (for testing purposes) but at the same time eligible for manu and driver points. Most probably there wont be very big difference between well developed S2000 and 1600t on development phase. That means, those who have S2000 cars well developed can participate and at the same time those who are developing 1600t cars are able to test their cars in competition mode. And manu points must be calculated not according to those who are factory drivers but the best positioned cars (But manufacturer have to be registered). I think that the current situation is bad enough to introduce something so freaking difficult :-)
Well, It is really hard to express my ideas in words at the moment.. difficult weekend.. most probably :-)
As a spectator I certainly hope that there is a big difference between those two engines. And these should be, if 1.6T has a reasonable restrictor in it. S2000 just is too slow and not what is expected in rallying's top level. And yes, yes, S2000 has a good sound, but It is pointless because the speed does not match the sound even close.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluuford
I second that. If they allow a decent sized restrictor in the 1.6T the transition to a smaller and somewhat more restricted engine will not be so dramatic. I really applaud if FIA brings this rule forward, instead of running two interim seasons (2011 and 2012) to S2000 engine rule, which from the onset seemed meaningless.Quote:
Originally Posted by f-cup
Many of you like the sound of S2000 n/a engine. Is that why you follow rallying - to listen to the cars? As long as the cars sound nice you don`t mind them performing like shopping trolleys? Not my cup of tea, I regret to inform...
I too agree that 1.6T is the right way to go for road car relation and easy high torque, and that it would be stupid to change to 2.0N/A engines and then change again two years down the line again...
But..
I will remain sceptical until we see them for real. It will be useless if they end up as boring to watch, as boring to listen to and as expensive as now. I can just imagine the teams will start whingeing 6 months down the line saying we need this and that to make the cars safe, or make the parts last or whatever and we will be back at square one.
But if they are literally an S2000 car with a 1.6T engine, then they should be pretty good :up:
I too think that a 1.6T would be better than the N/A S2000, (knowledege of the rebuild costs on a S1600 n/a are enough) and it does fit the roadcar trend, and will give better torque. Also agree (to a point) with Iskald that its good that we dont have an interim 2 years. What does worry me is that for 2010 we will have the same two manufacturer teams, that means there are not the opportunities for drivers, and that Seb, Sordo, Mikko, JML is all we have, as the others will need to pay huge sums of money to drive 'de-tuned' customer cars, and if IRC have openings for professional drivers will these go there for the money, and the competition the extra year 2010 will damage WRC further, and as yet no new manufacturer has commited to join, let alone build a 1.6T. Fact is there are Citroen and Ford (4 seats) compared to a fleet of Peugeots, FIATs, and Proton commited to entering IRC events.
I believe WRC should be the pinnacle, I just want more manufactureres and drivers in that and I fear that this could drive these manufacturers to IRC permanently.