Funny. The clip I saw from Fabia S2000 test seemed pretty good. It took the tarmac hairpins with a slide and didn't seem suffering "no torque".Quote:
Originally Posted by Torsen
Apparently, what you loose with the engine, you fix with a glove...
Printable View
Funny. The clip I saw from Fabia S2000 test seemed pretty good. It took the tarmac hairpins with a slide and didn't seem suffering "no torque".Quote:
Originally Posted by Torsen
Apparently, what you loose with the engine, you fix with a glove...
Apparently, what you loose with the engine, you fix with gear rations...still lacking torque these 2.0l N/A engines.Quote:
Originally Posted by A.F.F.
I guess it's only to be expected that Morrie Chandler would get lambasted on this forum. After all everyone from Balestre to the Easter Bunny have been bagged here.Quote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
Knowing Morrie, as I have for many years, as a seasoned competitor, astute businessman, inspirational leader and experienced administrator I was hoping for some positive change when he took the reigns.
I too am disappointed that the sport continues to be tinkered with at this level with some totally off the wall ideas emerging. But unsure how much autonomy Morrie has or how much these visions are generated or influenced by other quarters I'm equally unsure how much blame can apportioned.
Perhaps that's why he's looking to stand down next year at which time, no doubt, there'll be yet another lamb led to the slaughter.
Thus the creative part I was talking about. Put a turbo or compressor under the hood, that's all it would take to wake up an S2000.Quote:
Originally Posted by Torsen
Exactly. The Fabia also has a long stroke engine which is good for low and mid range torque.Quote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
But I bet you we see more sliding round the hairpins at Monte Carlo 2009 than we did in 2008....
I suspect that he is merely the F1A's puppet - these are their ideas, but he announces them to see how the teams react. As surely as someone with WRC's best interests can see these ideas are crazy.Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
DR was another who came up with ideas as the rights holder, the changes for TV/Media - they worked in the short term, but in the end the Championship is poorer for the loss of the character the sport had.
Have You ordered some snow? :s mokin:Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
Really are you sure? I understand his main job is to present FIA the ideas that comes from the rally comission, so if you present idiotic suggestions you get idiotic solutions too, what we need is some guy who understand about rally and do not take all stupid ideas to FIA, a guy who is capable to filter the stupid from good ideas.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
What again comes to him sending e-mails to teams about their drivers haircut is nothing but stupidity.
The sport needs a promotor, then we get rid of political compromises like Mehta and Chandler.
Anyone Knows or remember why the french guy from FFSA (don´ t remember his neme) left FIA -rallies commission.
Think it was for the same reasons i.e. wanted him as a puppet
No, I'm not sure, but knowing what the F1A are like and how seriously they take the WRC who knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
Personally , any new Promoter is not going to have a free reign like Bernie does with F1. Anything that looks too exciting won't be allowed. Look what has happened previously to World Sportscars and WRC - anything that threatens F1 is killed.
There was not a lot wrong with WRC 10-15 years ago - just a bit of fine tuning. Now look, almost dead in the water.
So why won't anyone step up a tell the FIA to take a hike? What will it take before the people in World Rally wakeup. The IRC is in the best position to do something great but they are stuck on S2000 and seem perfectly content under the FIAs oversight.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
Wakeup People!!!
What makes you think anything will be any different anywhere else? Despite Tomi's remarks, rather than being "political compromises", Mehta & Chandler were probably, on paper, two of the most qualified people to run the WRC. If they can't pull it off to your satisfaction then who can? What will a change of controlling body do when the problem likely lies elsewhere?
The problem with the WRC is the connection with the FIA. The FIA has been supressing the WRC ever since 1986, it is a connection that needs to be severed immediately.
The F1A are the governing body of World Motorsport - you can't just 'jump ship'. It would help if there was a 'Rally friendly' President - at the moment the impression is that the WRC is an irrelevance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
So European countrys require FIA oversight? Is it in the European Union or something? I'm from the America where the F1A is a choice not a requirement. How does the F1A have a stranglehold on the world? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
It does on the motorsport world, at least in Europe, as well FIFA has in football (soccer)
But what countries require FIA oversight? I don't understand their stranglehold on motor sports.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donney
It would be alsmost impossible to drop FIA, all championships in the world runs under FIA, and the national federations as well somehow are tight to FIA too.
Why would it be inpossible? What is the overwhelming infulence that the FIA possesses that can't be severed? If a new independent world rally commission was started how could they impose their oversight on them?
Who would choose the new independent rally comission??Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
I think its better to stay under FIA, because the organisation is already there, and skipping FIA would also mean to rebuild all national organisations too, that would take years, much better would be to get a promoter who dont feel he ows people something because he was elected, like the situation seems to be now.
So stay under the 20+ years of oppression like we have now? That sounds real productive. If there isn’t a problem then don’t fix it, but guys we have a problem!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
sad that you have had so long oppression, but it is the rally comission that suggest FIA if they want changes, if they make stupid suggestions they get stupid changes, that wont change with a "independent" comission because the same guys would propably sit in the "independent" comission too, because after national federations would have cut the work with FIA, the same people would still work in the national federations, and the comission is people from national federations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
An auto association here in the U.S. (NASA or National Auto Sport Association) got into rally a few years ago and started from nothing; new rallies, new organizers and everything. Now Rally America feels threatened by them and they host the oldest events in the country. Anything is possible, the only thing stopping change is the people who are scared of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
lol, sure yes, better to find a little better examples, if you have nothing its very easy to skip it and start from 0.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
Do you know how solve the 'problem'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
You are missing some big parts of history.
NASA was formed in 1991. They didn't start doing anything for rallies until around 2002.
NASA was not founded to run rallies. NASA RallySport was, but, NASA was not.
NASA RallySport was formed out of a dissatisfaction with the SCCA (much like the IRC was formed out of a dissatisfaction with the WRC). NASARS events run very similarly to RallyAmerica events, because organizers are organizers. There are fundamental differences that the alignment with NASA proper requires, some different safety regulations, fairly different classing, and some other structural differences.
The big difference is a perceived difference between organizing philosophies. Arguably, Rally-America is handicapped by having inherritted a national championship based program. NASA as a ground up organization has built themselves as a network of rallies. Come people perceive this as being more focused on the clubmen. The reality is that NASA isn't more or less focused on clubmen, the truth is that they don't have anything else to focus on (like a national championship).
As far as the FIA alignment issue.
The US has for the main part gone on its own for many many years in motorsports organization. Heck, most people into motorsport in the US couldn't even tell you who the FIA member body organization is here in the US. Many overseas governing bodies utilize the FIA for class structure (to promote competition in other countries) but also for validation as a legitimate governing body. Organizing an event in many countries could be all but impossible without the support and approval of the motorsport governing body (least of which might financial or infrastructure support that events rely on).
The reality is that the FIA for most of the world serves the same purpose as groups like the SCCA, NASA, or NASCAR, serve in the US. The FIA is the validation vehicle for many overseas governing bodies and those governing bodies are key to many rallies. Without the FIA those governing bodies might not be able or willing to support their championship events.
Which would be worse? A poorly run WRC, or a WRC with no events?
People talk about the cars being boring but you want to keep the same people who made it this way in the first place and won’t allow change (just wait and see how boring it gets if they inflect S2000 on the WRC).
You talk about the FIA keeping a new promoter on a tight leash, not letting them do anything that might infringe on their precious F1’s glory but don’t want to do anything to change it.
No wonder world rally is on the edge of oblivion….
No, I asked you who would choose the "independent" comission.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
I know the histroy of NASA and NASARallySport, thanks for varifying my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by L5->R5/CR
Which would be better? A poorly run WRC under the FIAs oversight, or a self promoting self governing WRC that reaps it's own rewards of success.
Well I would think it would be the people putting millions upon millions of dollars/euros/yen into world rally every year.... Ford, Subaru, Citroen, Skoda, Peugeoet, Mitsubishi, Fiat, Opel, etc, etc, etc,Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
It would not be an independent comission then, it would be a comission of the manufacturers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
No... But it has to start somewhere and they are the ones dumping money into the sport handover fist. Who would you suggest?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
I would leave the comission the way it is, but i would get a promotor choosed by the manufacturers to run the ideas between the different parts (comission,manufacturer,FIA), the biggest problem i think has been too many rule changes, the manufacturers cant adapt if they dont know whats happens in next coming few years, also the rules should be thinked over properly before they are adapted ( maybe tested first on national level too), a good example is to ban the mousse tyre, it was supposed to save money, but now already cost more money to the teams. Also it would be good if they could find a solution to make it easier for new manufacturers to join, but the big teams dont want to make it easier for them now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
Also the event organisers should be obligated to make their events more public friendly so that the event attracts more people, and I dont mean building water splashes or 2m snowbanks, but better facilities, transportation to the stages and so on.
Well, the title of world champion should be given by an official body. I live in the US so so i know how, here, we're quick to give the title of "world Champion" for the winner of privately run events (Super Bowl, World Serie, and even in rally (I hope Pastrana updated his web site)).Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
Same thing happended in Chess when Kasparov broke away from the FIDE. He ultimatly (granted after losing "his" title) acknowledged this was a mistake. Even though everyone was recognizing him in the 93-00 period as a the best player, he was not the official world champion.
Actualy, I dont like the FIA any more than I like the FIDE. Though, they are the governing body of the sport. Things can be changed democractly: the FIA board is elected from FIA member (at least i think it's the way it works). So presure your National federation to elect a better one next time around!
I guess that it is daydreaming and corruption run probably as deep in the FIA than the FIDE. But even if IRC, for instance, become popular and the best drivers go there, the winner of the serie will not be the world champion.
Saabaru, I would like to know more about this 20 years of oppression/suppression that rallying has suffered at the hands of the FIA. Please elaborate.
Pastrana and his shameless self promoting web site is just that; shameless, tasteless self promotion. And you shouldn't reference the entire country as being as tastless as one person. And the title of world champion should be where the best of the best are racing, under whatever sanctioning body they are racing. If all the big boys in the WRC went to the IRC next year, which series do you think everyone would watch?Quote:
Originally Posted by xavier
There has been entire threads on this site and others about how the FIA has undermined the WRC to protect it's precious cash cow F1 series. They killed Group B, because it was threatening F1 using safty as the reason and after they had killed it off they didn't even address any of the major safty issues. Actions speak louder than words.Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
I agree, there have been entire threads about this. And most of them have been absolute nonsense.
The world over, in most national administrations, rallying plays 2nd fiddle to circuit racing for the very reason you've stated, that racing brings in the cash and rallying doesn't.
At world championship level the situation is no doubt the same.
However recognising this fact, and perhaps even acknowledging it is not, in itself, suppression.
Your claim, that the FIA has "suppressed rallying for 20 years" has been made by others before, however, just as in your case, it's always been a throw away line with no substance.
The one example that you have given, the canning of Group B, is emotive nonsense. It ignores the facts that there had been deaths and that there had been meetings staged and calls made by teams and drivers who wanted immediate steps taken to change direction.
Further, you state that although safety was the published reason for change no steps were taken to fix the safety issues. The issue was the formula and a move to a production based model was the fix.
It's very easy to blame the administration, especially from a position of anonymity but usually it's from one of ignorance.
Tomi is on the money. Better to fix from within than to throw the baby out with the bath water.
"Actions speak louder than words". If you want to read press releases and eat up every word they feed you then go ahead but don't call me ignorant because I choose to look at the facts and what actually happens instead of living in the dark like some people. Group B is just where it got started and it nevered ended and if you want proof then all you have to do is wait and see what a tight leash they keep on this new promoter. The manufactures wanted to fix Group B not get rid of it. Audi pulled it's Group B cars not because of the car itself but in protest of the crowed control, a safety issue that was never addressed.
But this is just ignorance talking, after you read those press releases you can enlighten us all...
If you want to see some spectacular racing that would kill there boring F1 money machine; unplug the stability control system and throw away the restrictor on todays WRC cars. Maybe we could call them PGB cars (Production Group B) and they could put the restrictors on those F1 gocart things.
This debate about the FIA ineptitude it’s over judged. Over the 36 years of the WRC there are obviously some wrong technical and political decisions from the ruling body, but only a handful of them could be considered really damaging to the sport.
The extinction of Gr.B (and the projected successor Gr.S) is one of them, mostly because of the emotional environment in witch was decided, but even then it took only 2 or 3 seasons to WRC regain interest, as shown by the large number of manufacturers involved at the Gr.A era.
The introduction of the WRC formula was also a step up, with more liberal homologation formats allowing new manufacturers to be involved, despite their industrial limitations (related to the lack of suitable 4wd products in their model range).
Problems came latter (coincidently with the larger involvement of Mr. David Richards in WRC guidance), with the uncontained technical developments of the WRC formula and the “mediatic” fury that perverted WRC nature and balance.
If the wildly expensive progresses of WRC cars had a real contribution for the reduction of manufacturers participation, the structural changes to WRC rally’s format dramatically deprived the series character.
Limitation of day courses and service areas and the proliferation of visited countries (some with limited rally tradition) had a negative impact over the sport, contributing for the dispersion of fans attention to other series.
FIA actual orientations (12 courses calendar and S2000+ cars) seemed reasonable in order to invert the decadent trajectory of WRC, but the recent revelled incapacity of generate consensus over this measures cannot predict a bright future…