So... Who thinks Latvala might struggle on day one? As a massive fanboy I really hope he'll maintain a steady pace through his road sweeping day and then bounce back.
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Printable View
So... Who thinks Latvala might struggle on day one? As a massive fanboy I really hope he'll maintain a steady pace through his road sweeping day and then bounce back.
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
My sixth sense tells me that this year Ogier is going to have a hard time making it five in a row...
Latvala is the real menace.
Ogier knows why!
Prodrive hit some kind of wall incompetence in 2006 and the Impreza could never compete. I'm surprised Subaru took so long to stop the program and allowed them to build a new car for 2008. As for why I suspect it was Prodrive's branching out - particularly a plan for an F1 team - that took away resources from the WRC program.Quote:
Originally Posted by steve.mandzij
It sounds like Suzuki's WRC program was dead before the season started and it was like a zombie out there, literally and figuratively.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor-y
I think considering what they had to work with, they worked miracles..
Look
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4062/...955c063fe1.jpg
You know what sits in front of that bellhousing?
ALL of this:
http://m.blog.hu/to/tommy-autosport/...-wrc2007_6.jpg
When was the last time a car hanging the entire engine waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out 100% in front of the front wheel centerline did anything in WRC?
15-16 years prior.
And everybody else was leaning theirs back so the weight was directly over the spindles, much closer in, reducing polar moment by a metric shit-ton..
The other thing was the engine itself.. You know what the bore was?
And what EVERYBODY else had for bore?
Does the words "flame front propagation" make you raise one eyebrow??
I think there is the problem and there was no way around those 2 huge problems...
A little late but you know what their new FJ or whatever they call the new thing has for bore?
That doesn't explain what happened to the program in 06, though. Plus it's not a terribly large motor to hang ahead of the front axle.
I always got the impression they found it increasingly hard to be competitive as WRC moved further away from production base - like the aspects fo the car that were positives for production based rallying became limitations under the WRC rules, while other platforms (Citroen etc) were able to make better use of the freedom in WRC rules.
It seemed like Subaru as a company were less interested in non-production based rallying too, but maybe that was a result of not being so competitive there while still being a dominant force in Group-N.
I'm suggesting that everybody else just had everything else nailed. You know in WRC we see speed differences often less than 0,5% between winner and 2-3-4th...If everybody else has their weight and F?R balance more of less the same---you look for anomalies.. That engine--and they aren't that light---relative to what the others are using---for example Ford's 2,0 Duratec is lighter-- and its bore size---you din't even respond to those questions (sniff)----are 2 things which are WAY different...and I don't think it takes a lot of imagination to sorta zero in on what is drastically different and at least wonder what role those anomalies have in the demise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor-y
Additionally I believe Prodrive internally was getting awfully big head and I've read interviews where their chief engineer was saying in essence "The cars are far to complex now for mere bumpkin drivers are able to understand anything..I know what is needed so they must just shut up and drive because they don't understand"
What do you think happened?
That´s what could happen to big companys as well. Making themselves best in class, just stops developing and the longterm backwards movement starts ending up in disaster for whatever company or brand.Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
Understand what I mean?
Every engine hanging complete ahead of front axle is a fundamentally bad idea. Success in motorsport is about being better than others in details because every professional is able to solve major things. When You start with non-solvable handicap You can hardly expect success.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor-y
To Jan's point. Boxer engine always has to have short stroke and large bore because it would be simply too big. Also there are two heads, two sets of cams, long intake and exhaust pipes (with one turbo I guess it's a lot more problematic than with two). The boxer conception itself isn't weight effective at all.
no intelligence,its just plain stupidity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
The 06 Focus was new, and the Xsara was still a proven winner so yes, designs improve. But the Impreza specifically got worse, and that was relative to its own earlier performance. Rather than blame a consistent factor like the motor why not consider what changed? And now we've both mentioned Prodrive's operations as being a cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor-y
Sorry this thread seems to be getting walled off from Mexico by a couple of Americans...
Jajaja...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor-y
I had a memory that the problems for Subaru started when the cars width was increased from 1770 mm to 1800 mm but that was already from the beginning of 2005 (http://juwra.com/rules_2005.html). But the Subaru 2006 season is documented so just watch and judge yourselves what was the reason.
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...d+Rally+-+Part+
Regarding the Prodrive Subaru lack of performance, it has been discussed here before, but its multilayered:Quote:
Originally Posted by GravelBen
At the introduction of the WRC rules, Prodrive was definitely the company that pushed the boundaries. And from the start they had to work around the fact that the engine hung in front of the front axle.
But Prodrive Engineers - lead by David Lapworth - was a clever bunch, and they where in front of the other rally teams in most areas.
As an example, in 2003 Prodrive launched an active suspension, this was an answer to Peugeots active roll bar.
But as the WRC class progressed, there was introduced a larger number of limitations in the regulations, and Prodrive struggled to out-engineer the deficits in regards to car size, engine placing, bore etc. And the others got better.
On top of that there was a tire war.
Michelin introduced their "super tire", I think in 2005? And Pirelli was left for dead.
But Prodrive also made som tactical mistakes. David Richards dreamt of F1, and hired a lot of circuit engineers. In 2005 Prodrive introduced a car that had the rear wing fall of because the mounts wasnt "fit for rally." They had to slow down in water splashes because the car wasnt "fit for rally", and they had to run som extreme rake to get the car to steer, prob because of failing geometry. The BOS suspension was also a prob, but here I have heard unconfirmed rumours that the failing development was because they wern´t paid sufficiently by Prodrive.
On top of that the active front and rear diff was banned. And then came the S14....
The S14 has some major design flaws, both in geometry, but also around braking. Some one with better engineering capabilities than me can explain this better, but I think the Pedal box also was a structural integral part. Anyway, there was no feeling with the brakes (I remember talking to Petter after he first tested the S14, and he was would I would describe as in a state of panic, this was mainly because there was big problems in braking with no feeling.)
Had Prodrive/Subaru been competitive Subaru would never have pulled out, but their failing performance and their struggling star that was once "Mr. Hollywood", but became more and more negative, lead to them using the financial crisis of 2008 as an excuse.
Prodrive then countered with what I would say was an effort to cleance them selves of all charges (and maybe sell of the rest of the cars) by entering Marcus Grönholm in the 2009 Rally Portugal - on Öhlins suspension. He set some competitive times, but could not match his earlier stage winning speed, (second and third, second, 4th, 5th, 10th) and crashed out on SS8.
Prodrive/Subaru was a great chapter in the history of the WRC, but unfortunately it would all come to a bitter end.
With regards to engine location though - the production versions of the Xsara and Focus etc also had the engine hung out in front of the front axle, but the rules obviously permitted the engine to be moved in a way that was possible with their transverse engine but not the Subarus longitudinal engine?
I think that in WRC it was only angled backwards. Anyway with the transverse I4 engines it's a lot better because the engines are way shorter in X vehicle axis (in X dimension it's two cylinders with very large bore for boxer instead of just one with small bore for I4) and are placed partially upon the front axle while the boxer is long and sits all in front of the axle. The center of gravity of the transversal I4 is a lot closer to the front axle than of the boxer. With regards to the overall inertia of the vehicle it's good to remind that it grows with the square of distance from the rotation point therefore the distance is more important than the weight itself.
The reason I mentioned Subaru in the first place was the clear parallel to where Citroen seems to be atm (yes, based on only 2 rounds). Got quite a déjà vu feeling over the whole thing.
- top team slowly getting worse (Subaru with titles in 2001 and 2003, Citroen with titles up to 2012). First being slower than one car then the other (Subaru slower than Citroen, then slower than Ford; Citroen slower than VW then slower than Hyundai?)
- main driver inconsistent possible due to overdriving the car (Solberg / Meek)
- introduce a new car for catching up and that car does not deliver (S14 /C3 (so far))
=> Leave WRC when first "excuse" is available?
so, rally mexico? yeah.....
It's coming, don't worry.
This is what happens the thread is started so long before the rally and there is nothing else to talk about!Quote:
Originally Posted by EstWRC
:vader:
I thought it was something like that - angled backwards from a fixed point at the bottom (or from the crank maybe)? A rule that obviously gave the transverse platform a big advantage over the longitudinal boxer layout, letting them not only move the engine mass much further back but also much lower (where the boxer probably had an advantage in production format).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
I guess we'll never know how competitive they could have been if all cars had to keep the production engine position.
I think this video explains why they were saying the cars were so complicated. Also explains where their attention was at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=469mi4UOVK0
So back to topic then. So guys, who do you think wins RMx? To me Neuville is hot candidate.
It's very difficult.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
Neuville and Meeke will have huge advantage the first day but this is one of Ogier's favourite and he is not opening the road this time. Anyway it's going to be tough even in second position with those two guys behind.
Also Paddon is in a good position if I'm not mistaken.
I think there is no hope for Latvala, I'm quite sure he will go off as happens everytime he is very happy and "confident" before starting. (I hope not of course).
I'm very curious to see what Tanak will do. If he manages to have another mature drive and grab a podium again it would be a strong confirmation about his late improvements.
You summed it up very well. However there is also technical side and it's curious who's engine "breathes" more proper.Quote:
Originally Posted by AL14
Neuville has to tidy his driving though, there is lot of concrete in Mexico.
I think the Toyota will turn out to be very fast but none of the drivers will be consistent enough to win. I'm most worried that with the speed and grip losing a bit of areo makes cars so unstable they're effectively out of contention and retire for the day to get fixed.
I'm very curious what Nandan will tell Neuville, "Just go and drive", or "I wan't you to finish this rally".
If the second case, I don't expect Neuville to win.
Yes right, I'm curious too, maybe we will finally see the C3 shine :)Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
like i said on the first pages, this rally is Neuville's to lose (like the two first rallies:D) or Meeke's if they get their issues sorted ..the fight for second and third will be great between, Latvala, Ogier, Tänak, Meeke, Paddon...this is my gut feeling.
but i hope Tänak's trend continues to climb up the in the results and this time it is time for number one :p
May be, we know they have good engine development process. What we don't is whether they have simulated Mexico conditions.Quote:
Originally Posted by AL14
Should be a even more spicy Mexico this season, the rallies in the past have been all Ogier's (except Latvala last year). Neuville has done alright there in the past, 2x podiums and crashing out of 2nd in 2015 (surprise surprise). Meeke also needs the win and with his road position he really needs to set the pace. Paddon could produce some surprises.
Preview Wrc Rally Mexico 2017 ➡ http://bit.ly/2mbnGE5
i hope same !Quote:
Originally Posted by steve.mandzij
c3 transport wheels
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6MzfDfUsAAQmc8.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6RDQJXUsAEMyD0.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6Q_U6tVUAAs6Y0.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6Q_XCOUsAEX0NQ.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6QdjXNVUAEnzjU.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6P0ERSVAAEqYDI.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6RPUWMXQAAfWLT.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6TT0LQWYAA2vDh.jpg
Can someone check who is registered as owner of Ogier's recce car?
Why the hell do you want to know?Quote:
Originally Posted by A FONDO
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by AL14
Could be interesting to know if its Ford Motor Company?