Doesn't matter, diesel already has so much bad press the common man isn't going to research what fuels, environmental or not, they can run on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
Printable View
Doesn't matter, diesel already has so much bad press the common man isn't going to research what fuels, environmental or not, they can run on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
Same genuine question. What environmental friendly fuel can diesel burn?Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm75
And also probably use a lot of energy to produce the things, transport them, etc in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
You could make that argument about pretty much any form of energy though. Even cavemen burnt fires.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm75
Indeed you could. Would be interesting to know how much energy a wind turbine farm would need to produce before it became carbon neutral though.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
Don't ask me, I'm not suggesting they can. Merely pointing out the irony of Volkswagen pulling out of wrc because of the diesel gate scandal and the subsequent bent on electricity when the performance arm of there sister company is going from what is perceived to be cleaner petrol engines to diesels which will always have a stigma attached to them nowadays.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Where I live, people are encouraged to recycle waste cooking oil. They can leave it at supermarkets or even on public buses. A company then processes it into diesel fuel and the same buses run it. I don't know if that is environmentally friendly though, because whenever a bus drives by me I want to buy a hamburger and chips!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
In terms of using byproducts instead of crude oil, it is...but burning it is not. I´d say in pollution terms, the opposite...but using old oil as fuel mostly makes me think about w123 Mercs also. :D
All that talk now remaind me of that orange Scoda from one rally when they have exhaust mounted on the hood and it was smoking from it like some old locomotive. Still makes me laugh 😂
I tried to argue here that enforcing hybrids as new core technology in new tech regulations might not be motivating for manufacturers because by that time it is old technology aldready and carries little marketing value. Seems that VW is making this decision already now : https://www.thedrive.com/news/31162/...Pa5yd8x8o4u3ug
Their effort to look squeaky clean after their "diesel gate" fiasco a few years ago i'd imagine....
It won’t be a total ICE ban as VW America presented a couple of days ago their new program for next year Baja 1000, using the ‘good old’ WRC engine: https://www.thedrive.com/accelerator...2020-baja-1000Quote:
Originally Posted by Indreq
Btw, VW will plant 1000 trees to compensate the program carbon impact; it’d be great if instead endorsing full EVs in motorsport they plant a thousands more to return to the WRC!
FIA to have back-up plan if interest in hybrid WRC 2022 stalls:
https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/1...id-push-stalls
So already before revealing new regs, they basically assume it will fail.. To me, Matton is the biggest ,,problem,, when talking about 2022 rules.. It has been postponed for so long, that manufacturers will soon run short of time with developing new cars..
Could it be that Citroen was the loudest about hybrid era cars and maybe ,,requested'' some certain things about the new cars? And now when they left, Matton/FIA has to rethink the rules..?
Don't forget that the manufacturers have to find compromise as well. It's not only an FIA game and since I have been working with car manufacturers for a long time I know that it can be extremely difficult to find some compromise with them, especially if it's more manufacturers who need to agree on something.Quote:
Originally Posted by TypeR
Very true. The unanimity on WRC ’17 rules was an exception as most of the times manus have different views and it’s not easy to get a consensus (it took ages to replace WRC 2L cars). In this case, Matton started by saying that FIA’s option would be a common spec low budget hybrid; later we get to know that manus would be free to develop their systems after a short transition period; now it seems Hybrids may not happen at all…Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Matton ‘ultimatum’ makes one to believe that a figth over the new rules is going on. It’s not hard to imagine that Toyota is probably pushing for high tech in-house developed hybrids, once they’re used to them in the WEC. With current WRC costs being already an issue, as Citroen pull-out remembered, to allow expensive hybrids would be disastrous.
To keep current cars, as they’ve the wow factor the series needs, while adopting low budget hybrids (like other series are doing: https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/m...logy-btcc-2022 ) is probably the most sensible option for WRC future.
I like this from Colin McMaster:
What about R5+ ? MSport even made one once.
Put a full aero kit onto an R5 & open up the restrictor [and/or add a control-spec hybrid unit]
With the world’s best wheelmen on-board they would look amazing.
Could bodyshell hold up, and safety? I think it's more complicated. But there are many engineers and 2 years time to develop that, so not a stupid idea at all
They should just keep the current engines but give them all the name "hybrid".
The fans don't want or care about hybrids, and the people that do care about them don't care or know anything about the sport.
Just like ford named their engine ecoboost.
Highly-modified versions of my road car have hybrid turbo's ! ;)
I'm pretty sure it made it's debut on the Grizedale Stages in 2013/14??? can't remember now, whether Matt or Elfyn drove it; I did film it on my old i-Phone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
However, I certainly think R5+ but with a 'spec'/ control hybrid could work. I also think that everybody has to be pragmatic (FiA, Manufacturers, the Promoter, etc), whilst trying to keep the sport relevant to those same Manufacturers.
Brakes, suspension, gearbox...we would see a lot more broken parts due to higher power. And if you start reinforcing them, it's soon back to WRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by deephouse
Does anyone have any idea what's the cost difference between a spaceframe and production chassis based cars?
Correct me if i'm wrong, but shouldn't this WMC meeting had been to the aproval of the 2022 WRC regulations?
They only aproved the guidelines? But wasn't this been done in the last June WMC?
I think all this process is being later month by month...
The teams have now until April to decide whether they commit to the 2022 rules or not.
With Matton in a position of power I fear the worst. Bloke inspires no confidence, just look what he's caused at Citroen before jumping ship.
As for R5 cars, they just lack spectacle and a wow factor. And I don't think its all speed related, they just dont sound great at all.
The s2000s weren't hugely fast (slower than current R5s obviously), but nobody can deny they were spectacular when stood stage side in a forest hearing them popping and banging for miles. It's no coincidence the IRC exploded in popularity with those cars (the same series wouldn't have grown anywhere near as much if the class below the wrc remained group N). That's why any sort of full electric won't work in the WRC unless they produce some realistic artificial noise (as naff as that sounds). I watched a clip of the electric rally cross car driven by Stohl and Delecour, and it looked incredibly fast. The drivers were amazed, but a washing machine makes more noise and I wouldn't go to watch rally cars like that for free.
Wich rules? The guidelines or the regulations?Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
I dare to say that the space frame is in the end cheaper option for the manufacturers. For sure it's much easier one to manage because it is in no way connected with the burden of serial production and can be designed and perfectly optimized from scratch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
it will depend on what the rules for the spaceframe will be. you could build one out of carbonfiber and titanium, but it will cost more than a bodyshell out of steel.
You can use exotic materials on whatever solution. That's only a matter of rules but I don't see a point in going into an extrememum just to prove that something can be made expensive. Of course it can but anything can be made expensive if you allow that.
FIA should look at a single manufacturer for a control central spaceframe chassis option. The suspension add ons can be car brand specific. Use DTM type safety cells that would be difficult to add to road car body shells etc. Cost control might be better - one maker building a larger volume of space frames - development costs spread etc, Maybe better mounting/ protection of hybrid system battery.
https://www.heggemann.com/markets-products/automotive
We wait all these years for a homologation special (Toyota Yaris GR-4), only for the WRC to switch to spaceframe chassis...
For me, unless moving to spaceframe chassis definitely brings in more manufacturers, like Suburu coming in with a scaled down Impre(tend)za(?), I'll personally really lament losing the only real tie to production road cars. Part of the appeal for me is manufacturers having to transform what they're sending down production line into what we see out on the stages.
Anyone read the very first post in this thread recently?
How prescient!
Just do whatever it was Skoda did to this Fabia R5 test car.. clearly still a Fabia R5 but sounds much more aggressive than the normal one, somehow.Quote:
Originally Posted by er88
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbBCTzc5LFg
Come on, no manufacturer have been building pefrormance cars to suit WRC conversion for more than a decade. This concept has been long dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
Sadly not, but underneath every WRCar is a core skeleton much like any other BIW that came off that model's production line. All were born equal, some went on to live more interesting lives than you're average runabout... While the manufacturers make little of that transformation, I think there's a beauty to that connection, the different path the rally car has taken...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
To me, I just don't see what a space frame chassis means to a manufacturer or to consumers, particularly an outsourced standard FIA spec one as suggested by Zeakiwi2? People already complain about the disconnect between rallying and road going vehicles. Where does the value lie in competing or winning in rallying with that prototype? What does it prove?
+1000! Sadly, we’ll probably end with some Frankenstein silhouettes inspired in tasteless SUVs…Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
Actually, it seems he was pushed out…anyway even if his Citroen days weren’t promising, it may not be fair blaming him for this ‘hybridgate’, as there’s little info about what’s going on. My bet is that manus are divided about what system to use and Matton lost monthes trying to find common ground, apparently in vain. April’s final call and the announcement of a B plan are probably signs that Matton is feed up with talks and will push manus to accept Hybrid rules once for all. Time will tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by er88
It gives an opportunity to join to any manufacturer (unlike the production-based vehicles). That is a big reason alone. Aside of that it makes the development of the car way easier for the manufacturers.Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
Who complains? The few of old-fashioned hardcore fans? Those make a tiny percentage of the target audience.Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
It proves exactly the same as the current generation of WRC cars or the one before, or the other before. Or do you really belive you bought a half-WRC car when you bought a stock Citroën C4?Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
I'm not sure why you're addressing me like an idiot. We'll have to agree to disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek