That concept was based on the 'World Engine' concept. It wasn't just about WRC, but also Touring Cars, F2, F3 etc etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eli
Printable View
That concept was based on the 'World Engine' concept. It wasn't just about WRC, but also Touring Cars, F2, F3 etc etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eli
Modern D-segment cars just wouldn't work. Remember how ridiculous the Audi 200 quattro looked as a rally car? I think the Subaru Legacy RS was about the limit of how big a rally car that still looks good can go.
hehe, still won 1-2 Safari '87 hasn't it. Some people believe other measures like tyres & suspension would make more spectacle, why not bigger cars?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack4688`
I like the idea of bigger cars and the plan to add more variety but cars that big will just look ridiculous
Modern day equivalent :D
Someone put LSD in water during meetings of the FIA. Toyota is working on Yaris, Hyundai on the new i20 and now they want to put competing the Passat, DS5, Mondeo, i40 and Avensis?
They would be fun to watch; though maybe not with 1.6L.
Why not C-segment cars?
B-segment cars was a good bet because, are the ones who sell more and are more agile than those of segment C, that are much larger than they were before. If something must change in the WRC, I think it's the start order rule.
D segment is complete craziness. All those cars are around 4,8 meters long. C segment... why not.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICARDO75
I did not dare in my mind to hope for something so progressive. I like it - A LOT!!! Bigger differences car and engine vise is a huge step in the correct direction IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by makinen_fan
If they follow up by limiting suspension travel and tires, I will be happy:)
Fuel-flow controlled power is a good idea but D-segment cars is stupid IMHO. Those cars are way too big, around 4,8 meters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundefaret
You would hope we would see some variety; so a mix of car sizes, engines, etc
However, it's not just the cars that need sorting; sort the events out, and drop the 'shoot out' garbage......
in which segment Celica was?
no, it isn't, this is much larger. btw the biggest problem of 200 wasn't its length, but the heavy front.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack4688`
Celica wasn't exactly related to these general segments. However even if it was it would not be relevant for today because cars are "growing with their owners" from generation to generation. Today's typical segment B car Polo is as big as typical segment C car Golf in its first generation. Octavia I was 4,5 meters long, Octavia III is almost 4,7 meters therefore bigger than most of segment D cars from 20 years a go etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
The 100/200 became the A6, the A7 is just a 5-door 'fastback' version of it. So that image which I happened upon on google is close enough for me
That’s my opinion too. If the manufacturer can choose which kind of engine to use, why not the model. There could be some problems with the weight though. Can even a C-segment car reach the 1200 kg weight?Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
According to wikipedia d segmet audis are a4-a5 the most. As Mirek said, these classifications evolve in time. I see nothing wrong with a4 rally version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack4688`
Depends on the rules and base model. With recent WRC rules it is certainly difficult but not impossible. When the main trend in car industry was safety cars got pretty heavy but now when all is about fuel consumption and emissions the trend reversed with new cars being reasonably lighter then their predecessors. Especially VW cars on MQB platform are very light. For example Octavia III is approximately 100 kg lighter although it's a lot bigger than second generation (for example 1.6 TDI model has 1280 kg including driver - for a car of 4,7 meters; petrol versions are naturally even lighter).Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
Up to D-Segment doesn't mean large cars will be mandatory, simply that there will be a wider choice of models available.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Controlled fuel flow will certainly bring hybrid systems to the WRC, reflecting the global automotive move towards environmental friendly technologies.
Totally agree. The championship structure needs to be reformed respecting the sport traditional values. Less events but more wider and challenging rallys in order to bring back the endurance spirit that made rallying a respectable sport!Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
Maybe You didn't get what I meant. Nobody sane would choose D-segment car if he can choose smaller one. So if it's C or D than everybody will go for C. Simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
As I stated in some previous threads the hybrids are not safe for WRC. On circuits there are no spectators touching the cars and marshals know that they must not touch the cars when warning light is on. It's risky to bring hybrids to a competition where bunch of drunk people can push half-destroyed car out of a water splash.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
Also the hybrids are extremely complex and costly therefore unsuitable for privateers. Only if FIA and RBMH want WRC to be only for manufacturers...
You can write it down: hybrid systems will be used in WRC from 2017!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Security and cost problems about these system will be minimized, because this is not a technical question but a political issue, and FIA is showing (wisely IMO) that environmental concern it's a priority in today and future motorsport.
I worked at Opel and had training on the Opel Ampera. Mirek is right in saying that they are dangerous. Even a mechanic runs many dangers to work on this type of cars
My guess is that segment C cars wil be the most common (maybe that Merc A Class photoshop / mock up that's been on the internet for months) I also think that FIA and manufacturers will push for Hybrid, Citroen did an excercise with a Hybrid C4 some years ago where they would use battery poer for road sections and ICE for stage mode. IF this happens, and I am not convinced, you can guarantee that these cars will be extremely expensive and 'works only' privateers will have to chosse theR5 route. - Thats if WRC survives to 2017.
I'm afraid You are right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
It IS a technical issue. How can You guarantee that the high voltage won't harm anybody when the car may be touched by any spectator or children while being seriously damaged, wet etc.?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
And it also IS an issue of cost. It's not only politics. Even if the cars are given for free it is extremely difficult (and therefore costly) to maintain them.
As Mirek said, the use of hybrid technology on rallies can be really dangerous.
If you can, take a look at Racecar Engineering's last issue, on the Nissan Zeod on Le Mans article.
They had a huge investment in teaching everyone involved in the project how to deal with it.
I also consider hybrid cars dangerous for rallying. What I found was that Toyota Prius use 650 V AC for the motor and the batteries has 201,6 V DC. DC voltage is even worse than AC because DC goes all the time in same direction and it is more difficult to get loose from tensional part. AC voltage change direction all the time and is zero several time in a second depending on the frequency.
If a car has rolled and the wiring or some other tensional part touch the body-shell but the car landed on the wheels, everything is still OK (no sparks). But if somebody touch the body-shell that is tensional and the human body is well grounded = goodbye :burn:. If a human body is well grounded depend much on the conditions (dry / wet / clothes / shoes). The current doesn’t have to be high before it cause severe damages to the human body, so be careful when using electrical equipment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_shock
And that's just getting roasted from electricity... I have often wondered what happens when the battery case shatters and soaks everybody with acid like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
It's one thing if crew melts. They're highly paid to drive and they know the risks but if we melt 5-8 speccies and a few officials so there's just pools of bloody paska with some flat brim Red Bull hats floating in it people will get upset possibly..
And what about the enviroment---every crash becomes a toxic waste dump...
A dead zone for ever...
Such potential danger... Not worth the risk..
A suitable amount of electric chock could also have a viagra effect.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
If this is the future of cars for WRC ???.......... it will be nice for classic cars rallys and rallycross championship. :-).
Then I say Goodbye to WRC............................................... ..........!!!
Let’s use this old thread for the commenting the 2017 technical regulations.
http://www.fia.com/news/new-regulati...orld-rally-car
The 2017 regulations see enhancements to the engine, and the visual impact created by an all-new aerodynamic package will dramatically enrich the spectacle of these cars and provide far greater diversity. The 1.6 litre turbo engine is retained but the power will be increased up to the level of the WTCC race cars. The diameter of the turbo restrictor will be increased from 33mm to 36mm while the turbo pressure remains at a maximum 2.5b absolute. The minimum weight of the car has also been reduced by 25 kilograms.
Greater freedom will also be afforded with the aerodynamics, setting this World Rally Car aside from many of its recent predecessors. A free zone defined around the bodyshell of the production car could see a front bumper overhang by an additional 60mm, potentially also with additional aero devices ahead of the front wheels, while the rear overhang can be increased by an extra 30mm. Bigger door sills will also be permitted. The fixed rear wing can be dramatically increased in size and while the rear diffuser will have maximum permitted dimensions, the shape will be free and may protrude up to 50mm from the rear bumper. The WRC car will be issued from a production car from which the overall homologated length must be greater than or equal to 3.9 metres, potentially adding further opportunities for manufacturers.
With a wider car and active central differential imo there’s a lot to develop on the car before 2017 season.
This is how the width will change for the Polo.
https://twitter.com/fernischumi
PAAVO retweeted
Iván Fernández @fernischumi 10h10 hours ago
No aparecen ni la mitad de cambios que se esperan para 2017 pero bueno... algo es algo. #WRC
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJ8FTCWWgAAUHdA.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJ8FSsBWEAA_9Qe.jpg
That would be good at tarmac event, but how about in gravel/snow..?
I'm really curious if they will use the whole width limit. 1875 mm is IMHO very impractical for some events with very narrow roads. We had here in the past some Peugeots 306 Maxi (circa 1850 mm) and despite them having traction control they were really struggling to keep wheels on the road on events like Barum where some roads are barely wider than the car.
Anyway I personally share the opinion of somebody else from previous discussion - restrictor change is ok but the modifications of aero package and active diffs are counter productive. I don't know for what it is good to have extremely fast cars which go like on rails (on asphalt at least) and look therfore slower than they are. I also agree with the opinion that it would be better to reduce aero kit and suspension travel.
I also share the opinion that aero changes and active diffs will deter the show. The power boost is welcomed but combined with the other two changes will make the cars just faster, not more spectacular or more difficult to handle.
The one thing that I would like to see is somehow to restrict suspension development, limit travel, dampers or something along these lines, to make cars move around more, like they use to in the 90s.
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned but does anyone think these new changes have come off the back of the recent success/rejuvenation of rallycross? I'd be amazed if that wasn't tabled as part of the discussion. It seems like a bit of a reaction to perceived WRX plus points.
This one looks more as a WTCC or DTM car.
Why is FIA doing this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
Because RedBull wants it. Possibly the carmakers too as they were involved in the process.