Too true, I had 13in alloys on my Felicia which looked ok, now you need 15in minimum on a Citigo or 16in on a Fabia to look right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Printable View
Too true, I had 13in alloys on my Felicia which looked ok, now you need 15in minimum on a Citigo or 16in on a Fabia to look right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
I'm working in car industry R&D although only in interior controls but even there we need to do kind of crash tests like a head impact on the rotary knob by which You adjust the temperature... maybe it's all crazy but in the end it helps people to survive crashes and if the only thing which we need to sacrifice is a bit of the sexy look I think it's a right thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
It's ok for the safety. Though it seem to me only the smaller cars need that bonnet uplifting, cause I don't see the same in bigger car classes. So somehow when the bonnet is shorter (on a small car) the safety must be compensated. BTW I'm far from the definition as "sexy" of aesthetic design. This is narrow minded, and I don't really care how people would call it, there are some universal proportions which are in harmony and just "catch the eye", most people would really call it "sexy".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
At the end this is how the world spins, the technology develops, manufacturers can construct smaller vehicles with same effectiveness, no need of extra parts/weight like middle differential like in Ur Quattro, engines must be smaller, etc. etc. No one today cares much how their racing cars look like, and how close to the road cars which anyone would by. Probably this is one of the problems with the relation sport - marketing.
It's the same with bigger classes. Just put Passat B5 next to B6 to see the difference in one generation (they could go a little back with B7 since they stopped using PD engines with high cylinder head). The thing which compensates it partly with the bigger and more expensive cars is bigger wheels. Nowadays the standard rims for C class are 17" while not so long time a go it was 15". And of course making 40 mm higher bonnet is way more visible on a small car than on a big car even though it's the same value.
Actually here are the Passats, it's easy to see on the windshield lower edge.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/asurro...n/photostream/
True, these are more visible on smaller cars indeed. Here the difference also comes from the bigger wheels probably and overall car height, but the most visible difference is the height of the bonnet. Overall it suits much better bigger cars no doubt.
Cars like the GT86/BRZ and BMW 2-Series manage to look good in the bonnet height department and they're quite small. Perhaps because they don't have any direct predecessors to compare them with?
OK OK I know, the 1-Series coupe is the 2-Series' predecessor, but that's one generation ago, not a direct equivalent from 1994
Speaking of the BMW 2-Series I often google a car with 'WRC' or 'WTCC' or 'DTM' tagged on the end to see if anyone has photoshopped one and I give you the BMW M235i WRC :D
http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/u...am-88323_1.jpg
I buy that for my rally needs!
Interesting article in this week's Motorsport News, semi-related:
New gr.N Impreza?
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.n...6c62d1695a6a8b
Yes, they already did some events (Hokkaido + end of japanese champ, Subaru Canada bought one for Rowe)
But in Canada they have a slightly modified version, with sequential gearbox and a ligther car...
New Focus RS could also be nice base for a group N rallycar.
It's unlikely but that would be great! There's actually quite a lot of cars in that class with a 4WD performance variant and a rally class based around them would be great. Cheap too if the modifications were kept to a minimum.
Other than standard safety mods i.e roll cage, engine shut-off, fire extinguisher etc. they could be reduced in weight by chucking out all the unnecessaries (including the silencer in the exhaust :D) and have small engine mods allowed to equalise power.
It can't be used. Engine is a 2.3l EcoBoost.
How did You come to a conclusion that every stock 4WD is suitable for making a good and cheap rallycar? It's quite opposite. Most of these cars would need a costly fundamental redesign to be competitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack4688`
All I'm suggesting is that cars such as the Focus RS, Golf R, M135i xDrive could be a good starting point for a standalone class. Obviously I haven't done months of R&D with these cars working out what mechanical parts are not suitable for rallying, what modifications are necessitated, how much cost would actually be involved etc. Or should I have done that before expressing a thought on a forum?
You mean Open Class? (like David Higgins's Impreza).Quote:
Originally Posted by Co-driven
And this STi model is the best Impreza since GC.
Does FIA even homologate any new N-group cars? If it’s true what Wikipedia tells, no new homologations from 2013.
“The Group N regulations were officially replaced in 2013.[1] No new cars will be homologated under Group A or Group N regulations, and instead existing cars are reclassified according to Group R rules (specifically the R4 class). The R4 class itself will be gradually phased out.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_N
The N4 cars was also renamed to R4.
“Current Group N4 cars will be renamed as R4, in order to integrate them into the rally pyramid. This applies to all cars in the category worldwide.”
http://www.fia.com/world-motor-sport...l-2014-beijing
Maybe some new R4 regulations from 2017? Otherwise there will be a gap in the pyramid.:dozey:
Impreza?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnold Triyudho Wardono
it´s just Subaru WRX STI
current impreza is boring 5-door car with 1.6 non turbo engine.
I have to quote myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
I checked today from our ASN about the N-group homologation and yes, it’s still possible to homologate new N-group cars. The info on FIA’s pages are not so up to date.
If you could design the rules and regulations for a new entry class for the 4 wd world.
3 pre conditions
a. Tuners can homologate via national ASN.
b. Hp per kg limit
c. Standard gearbox, diffs and suspension, made for durability.
There has to be a way apart from one class to get a new car class that is could form a starting point for privat drivers both nationally and internationally?
Gearbox must be sekvential dogbox. No driver want to drive with standard gearboxes. Also a reliability matter. There are so many good gb to buy, Sadev, Quaife, Hewland...
This is oxymoron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulland
Standard was a bad choice of word.
but what I meant was that as in S2000 you have 1 or 2 manufacturers of gearboxes will be allowed to make sequential gearboxes for this class after a spec.
So not standard as for Gr N.
What can be done to keep the cost down for the rest of the driveline, apart from engine?
I don't think that limiting a part to a single supplier would make it cheaper.
I feel there is a lack of constructive suggestions on how to fill the R4 hole in the ladder with somethong new.
The reason might of course be that you mean that the is no need to fill it - that is fine, say that.
But if you mean there is a need for an entry level class in to 4 wd rallying, not neccesarely for the World Rally Championship, but more for the national scenes, and maybe the regional as in ERC.
What is the best way to get a reliable and Affordable car for the privateer. I am thinking in the bracket of 60-70 000 euro.
Is the only option to go for a one car class, or can it be achieved using other means to keep the price down as well?
Is this a non starter, if so why?
If you see that this could fly, how?
http://www.motorsport.org.nz/sites/d...lly%20Cars.pdf
This is where NZ was 8 months ago with their replacement car program, things have progressed since then and are getting closer to finalisation
Teemu/Rallirinki.net retweeted https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...87e_bigger.jpg Jack Hintz @rallymadmedia 14h14 hours agoQuote:
Originally Posted by Mk2 RS2000
This looks familiar...excited that it has been revealed!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCmxmWZWYAAQu86.jpg
This is probably a part of the progress.
Bigger pick.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCmxmWZWYAAQu86.jpg:large
The clock start to click for the Evo. Last 1000 examples batch of evos called “Lancer Evolution Final Edition”.
http://digital.motorsportmonday.com/...4-cff2d280cd27
If you want a new 4wd car you need to digg deep into your pockets for an r5. 200k plus and add some maintenance costs.
4wd rally has never been cheaper:)
What is price of these cars?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
New R4 in the far future. Could it be this MotorsportMonday (page 94)? Probably it’s very similar to this one. Google translated Finnish section Mitsubishi Colt Evo - Build info. The Polish replica use the Kaps sequential gearbox but as said in the Google translation the gearbox is a H-pattern dog box with an Ikeaya Formula sequantial shifter because it’s a poor man’s option (=persaukisen).
Btw, it seems that the Maxi Rally Car formula isn’t as free as I though it is.
http://www.rally.com.au/arc-news/what-is-a-maxi-car-qaa
The cars all use a standard design safety cage together with control front and rear sub-frames, wishbones, hubs & uprights and are fitted to series production car body shells.
http://www.rallysportmag.com.au/home...axi-rally-cars
The suspension geometry and cross members are the same between each car, so effectively you can buy a “kit” from someone like Barattero, pick a body shell, then slice and dice the chosen car to accept all the parts. About the only thing that varies between them, other than appearance, is the wheel-base.
Maxi Rally Car spare parts from Baratec.
http://www.baratec-rally.com.ar/bajar/catalogo_ing.pdf
Gearbox sequential kit is from Modena Engineering.
Here are the specific regulations for Maxi Rally cars in Spanish
http://www.cdaaca.org.ar/be/%5Cadjun...6201417921.pdf
And Google translated
https://translate.google.com/transla....pdf&edit-text=
It looks pretty much the same as the S2000 specific regulations but section 5.3, paragraph h) and i) are not in the S2000 Regulations.
h) Front axle:
The same should be done according to the plan contained in the homologation respecting all
dimensions in the plane. (See homologation each illustrative diagram).
Installation of the front axle shall be effected in compliance with the dimensions and measurements shown in Alternative Kit "Maxi Rally".
i) Rear axle:
The same should be done according to the plan contained in the homologation respecting all
dimensions in the plane. (See homologation each illustrative diagram).
Installation of the front axle shall be effected in compliance with the dimensions and measurements shown in Alternative Kit "Maxi Rally"
What I also like is the max track instead of max body shell width.
Yes, maybe the Polish option, that build on different shells could be a good option.
or maybe a RWD class ala the Touring Car class?
at least it will be fun to watch, and many drivers love RWD!!
What will it be this time? Something similar as maxi rally cars?
http://digital.motorsportmonday.com//launch.aspx?eid=63e13dd9-0e32-4111-b2cd-3b2d5bf4e4df
Page 97
…and creating a new R4 kit category aimed at providing a budget-friendly four-wheel-drive category whose costs and performance lie between R3 and R5 cars.
Are they serious? Why bother to sort a new 4wd category if they can’t manage to impose cost limits? R5 is growing up steadily, so why this sudden need to destabilize the market?Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
FIA just need to promote a sort of a pact with the involved manus in order to prevent R5 cars to get even more costly, assuring regs stability (to allow larger volume of sales) and ease up homologation methods (aiming private tuners to built them).
Only after that, and if manus persist reluctant to get their profit margins down, it'd be time to think on a new category.
It should be easier to make the subaru's and Mitsubishi's (N4/R4/VR4's) good enough to fight with the R5's.
I don't agree. There is no point in trying to help a dying man to run faster. Lancers are dead. No new model is planned by Mitsubishi and the last widely used Subaru on rally stages is not even from previous generation of the car! No manufacturers are interested in gr.N anymore. That's it.
On the other hand in my opinion R5 is enough. If they come again with something "cheaper" they will only make R5 more expensive. They shall concentrate on keeping an eye on R5. The formula isn't that bad and the mechanisms to drive the cost are set. It's about observing and enforcing them.
R4 was the opportunity to do so, but FIA miss it by putting aside larger restrictor and seq gearbox. Somehow it was understandable, because then R4 would match S2000 (and the coming R5) for a fraction of the cost, making harder for manus to get involved in R5 and turning national rally fields into a sort of endless Impreza's trophy...Quote:
Originally Posted by skarderud
Something similar can happen if FIA decides to introduce another 4wd rally formula, putting R5 growing at risk. FIA must also consider the continuous cutoff of second level categories (S2000, R4 and, in a near future, RRC), because the sport needs regs stability and R5 cost handicap can be diminish with proper pressure over manus.
The idea of FIA is to make a rule, which allow to make a "kit", which you should be able to use in different cars...