S2000 & Group N, The future of rallying?

Anything which brings 7 manufacturers into the WRC will be alright with me. Time will tell though.

Its another thing to produce a car of certain specifications and sell it to rich boys and another to run a full WRC program. i doubt that all the manufacturers that will produce an s2000 will take part in the WRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MJW

Time will tell about that, but it is long past the time that costs were controlled. Being a techno fan I feel a little loss at the super technology (electronics) on current cars, but from a sporting point of view if these new cars could be say €250,000 and not be out of date after 1 year, (see difference between 05 Focus and 07 car - not in the same rally) and have a 3 year life and down to €100,000 after a few years and young drivers could get a chance to prove themselves in a few year old works cars it would be good. Almost back to the days of say Petter and Markko Martin in Celicas 205s. Anything that rewards fast (young) drivers and returns us to 6+ manufactureres who pay drivers to drive rather than the blatant bring money situation we have now is a good thing. The proposals about mechanical sequential gearboxes should also reward "real drivers"

---

If this will happen it will be good, another way is of course to go in and say that basic homologations are for 3 years, and that just a few small things can be updated btw homologations - that would also create level playing fields for privateers and private teams !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sulland

If this will happen it will be good, another way is of course to go in and say that basic homologations are for 3 years, and that just a few small things can be updated btw homologations - that would also create level playing fields for privateers and private teams !!

---

I agree strongly with this. It nearly happened with Group A, and, to be fair, the Sierra Cosworth and BMW M3 in particular were competitive customer cars for several seasons without major changes.

If the cost goes down and more manufacturers join, it’s the right way. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sulland

Engine: Will be based on a S2000 engine, and a standard Turbo will be added, to get more torque, but not much more hp's than 270-280 that S2000 has today.

---

This would mean a quite standard engine like N4 nowadays. It would be nice if there were an option for the manufacturer to use a NA engine (2,5 l- 3,0 l) also. Not all manufacturers have a 2,5 l engine in it’s program but I think for the price of a turbo a 2,8 l – 3,2 l engine could be downsized to a 2,5 l.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sulland

Exterior: Will keep the large rear wing that they have today. Both for giving more downforce, but also to separate them from the S2000 cars.

---

The big rear wing is good because the S2000 (and S1600) have a tendency to land on their nose after jumps and the big rear wing helps with that problem. One pitfall is if the design of the wing is totally free, the manufacturers will spend a lot of time in the wind tunnel and that’s not cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sulland

Implementation: They aim to implement from 2010, and since the last version of todays WR Car will get homologated in 09, they will be allowed in the championship in 2010 in de tuned version, for non prioritized drivers, but not in 2011.

---

What will happen to all the WRC cars, obsolete?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

This would mean a quite standard engine like N4 nowadays. It would be nice if there were an option for the manufacturer to use a NA engine (2,5 l- 3,0 l) also. Not all manufacturers have a 2,5 l engine in it’s program but I think for the price of a turbo a 2,8 l – 3,2 l engine could be downsized to a 2,5 l.

---

Thing is it's cheaper to get power out of an engine with a turbo than it is to tune a bigger engine. At least in terms of a competition car :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Thing is it's cheaper to get power out of an engine with a turbo than it is to tune a bigger engine. At least in terms of a competition car :)

---

At least it’s easier to get more power from an engine with a turbo but in this case if the power is restricted to 270-280 hp, I don’t think a 2,5 l or 3,0 l NA engine has to be tuned so much to get the same power. A S2000 engine has to been modified anyway (compression ratio etc.) when a turbo is added.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

At least it’s easier to get more power from an engine with a turbo but in this case if the power is restricted to 270-280 hp, I don’t think a 2,5 l or 3,0 l NA engine has to be tuned so much to get the same power. A S2000 engine has to been modified anyway (compression ratio etc.) when a turbo is added.

---

I think a turbo is still cheaper :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

This would mean a quite standard engine like N4 nowadays. It would be nice if there were an option for the manufacturer to use a NA engine (2,5 l- 3,0 l) also. Not all manufacturers have a 2,5 l engine in it’s program but I think for the price of a turbo a 2,8 l – 3,2 l engine could be downsized to a 2,5 l.

---

I think it would be great to see a variety of different configurations of engine competing against each other, so long as they were equivalent. a 2.5L or 2.8L NA engine might even suit some manufacturers' marketing better than a 2.0L turbo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

The big rear wing is good because the S2000 (and S1600) have a tendency to land on their nose after jumps and the big rear wing helps with that problem. One pitfall is if the design of the wing is totally free, the manufacturers will spend a lot of time in the wind tunnel and that’s not cheap.

---

Not only do the WRC rear wings cost a lot do develop, but IMO they're ugly. At least you can imagine a S1600/S2000 rear wing on a road car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

What will happen to all the WRC cars, obsolete?

---

I'm imagining hillclimbs, rallycross, etc., like the group Bs when they were banned from the WRC. Plus, they'll probably still be legal in some national championships.

Having seen the article in Autosport, I am quite hopeful about the future. I just hope it attracts a good number of Manufacturers, and some new ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeonBrooke

I think it would be great to see a variety of different configurations of engine competing against each other, so long as they were equivalent. a 2.5L or 2.8L NA engine might even suit some manufacturers' marketing better than a 2.0L turbo.



Not only do the WRC rear wings cost a lot do develop, but IMO they're ugly. At least you can imagine a S1600/S2000 rear wing on a road car.



I'm imagining hillclimbs, rallycross, etc., like the group Bs when they were banned from the WRC. Plus, they'll probably still be legal in some national championships.

---

I would like to see a variety of different configurations- it can get boring listening to the same 'strangled fart' sound. At Epynt yesterday there were all kinds of engines and sounds. It would be nice if the WRC was ike this.
I'd like to go further though and see a variety of transmission configurations, i;e 4WD, FWD, RWD. So a 4WD car would have les power than FWD/RWD, but obviously superior traction. Whereas a FWD/RWD would have a lot more power but less traction. But I know this won't happen- it was remembering Ragnotti against the Lancia Deltas in Portugal in 1987 got me thinking.

I don't want turbo ! Because if so there will be a limiter like now on Gr.N = bad sound. S2000 is ok, sounds good (high RPM) and good speed that will only improve in years - I think in 2-3 years max we will have a very very nice top speed from some engines (think about Citroen they always do unbelievable work on engines power).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Helstar

I don't want turbo ! Because if so there will be a limiter like now on Gr.N = bad sound. S2000 is ok, sounds good (high RPM) and good speed that will only improve in years - I think in 2-3 years max we will have a very very nice top speed from some engines (think about Citroen they always do unbelievable work on engines power).

---

I agree turbo's suck but it is the cheapest way to get power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

I would like to see a variety of different configurations- it can get boring listening to the same 'strangled fart' sound. At Epynt yesterday there were all kinds of engines and sounds. It would be nice if the WRC was ike this.
I'd like to go further though and see a variety of transmission configurations, i;e 4WD, FWD, RWD. So a 4WD car would have les power than FWD/RWD, but obviously superior traction. Whereas a FWD/RWD would have a lot more power but less traction. But I know this won't happen- it was remembering Ragnotti against the Lancia Deltas in Portugal in 1987 got me thinking.

---

Was watching the 95 season review on dvd the other day and it was amazing. The cars sounded different and performed differently on different surfaces and there were rallies where 2wd car were up there also. Would it be possible to make the cars moldular in regards to drivetrain? IE car can be 4wd or FWD or RWD? I do think it would be good if the cars could at least have an option for 2wd in some form or another and be given allowances in tyre width and weight as the F2 cars had over WRCars in the 90's just to make things a bit different.

The best thing about the WRC in the 90's was that you had so many different factors in play. Specialists, 2wd cars, tyre manufacturer, one car being suited to a specific surface and so on.

These days you get the feeling that the cars are very similar underneath the bodywork :mark:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Was watching the 95 season review on dvd the other day and it was amazing. The cars sounded different and performed differently on different surfaces and there were rallies where 2wd car were up there also. Would it be possible to make the cars moldular in regards to drivetrain? IE car can be 4wd or FWD or RWD? I do think it would be good if the cars could at least have an option for 2wd in some form or another and be given allowances in tyre width and weight as the F2 cars had over WRCars in the 90's just to make things a bit different.

The best thing about the WRC in the 90's was that you had so many different factors in play. Specialists, 2wd cars, tyre manufacturer, one car being suited to a specific surface and so on.

These days you get the feeling that the cars are very similar underneath the bodywork :mark:

---

In my mind that was one of the stengths of the WRC - all the different variables - cars and tyres for gravel, some for tarmac, same with drivers; on Tar specialists would come into the team, on snow Eriksson, Jonsson, Radstrom, etc. I seem to remember somebody high up saying the teams having specialists wasn't good because you wouldn't get that in F1- i;e bringing in a driver for a certain circuit. So what WRC is not F1, thank goodness, that's half the problem now- changes made to make it F1 like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

I agree turbo's suck but it is the cheapest way to get power.

---

So if not Turbo, what about a Supercharger/Kompressor to boost the S2000 engine ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flat out fred

One of the main reasons the WRC coverage has become so poor is it is impossible to create an interesting program when you have only got 2 competitors winning rallies............

---

+1

That is it in a nutshell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abarth

So if not Turbo, what about a Supercharger/Kompressor to boost the S2000 engine ?

---

Why does the engine have to have forced induction? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

I agree turbo's suck .

---

But only on the inlet side

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

In my mind that was one of the stengths of the WRC - all the different variables - cars and tyres for gravel, some for tarmac, same with drivers; on Tar specialists would come into the team, on snow Eriksson, Jonsson, Radstrom, etc.

---

Aghini, Liatti, Blomqvist, Cunico, Bourne, Duncan.........

It used to be so much more exciting.

So, what do you think about the end of the not most powerfull, but the fastest rally cars ever made? Perhaps the C4WRC tarmac spec is the fastest ever.

Todays WRC cars are technological piece of engeneering, and i will really miss them, even with 2 seasons from end. The idea of the new being an S2000 "tuned" is just :( I really hop the new cars will be completely different from what S2000 are....because they´re quite boring to watch, when compared to WRC cars!

Its a pitty that few manufacturers are in today or, i should say, real contenders? Because for me the problem is not the number of manufacturers, but the fact that they are not competitive. We need that all brands get in with REAL intents for win, not just to make number. Years in the past, we had less manufacturers in the field to figth to the win.
Do you have present the number of manufacturers in F1? 5...(Ferrari/BMW/Renault/Toyota/Honda) the others are privateers, including Mclaren(with engines from Mercedes). But here, the privateers are competitive!

So, we also need more teams like Stobart. But there´s problems in that because a privateer can´t have is hown car in WRC.

And what to think about the new Subaru, a new car being developed to compite 1.5years :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Isthmus

I really hop the new cars will be completely different from what S2000 are....because they´re quite boring to watch, when compared to WRC cars!

---

I was of the same opinion at first, but after spectating in Sweden, and seeing Patrik Sandell in the Peugeot S2000 I've changed my mind. Sandell was the driver I was most looking forward to seeing of the whole field. The sound and attack of his driving was amazing to see. I agree though that as the S2000 regulations are now, we will pretty much get a field of very similar cars which is not very fun.

This sounds interesting.

http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/...shi/index.html

It says something about Mitsubishi coimg back to the WRC,although my german is not very good.
So now comes the usual question:
Can someone translate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

I would like to see a variety of different configurations- it can get boring listening to the same 'strangled fart' sound. At Epynt yesterday there were all kinds of engines and sounds. It would be nice if the WRC was ike this.
I'd like to go further though and see a variety of transmission configurations, i;e 4WD, FWD, RWD. So a 4WD car would have les power than FWD/RWD, but obviously superior traction. Whereas a FWD/RWD would have a lot more power but less traction. But I know this won't happen- it was remembering Ragnotti against the Lancia Deltas in Portugal in 1987 got me thinking.

---

That's always at the forefront of my mind too (as I keep going on about, endlessly). Remember the 1987 Manx International? If not, try and find a video of it. It's another classic example of the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

In my mind that was one of the stengths of the WRC - all the different variables - cars and tyres for gravel, some for tarmac, same with drivers; on Tar specialists would come into the team, on snow Eriksson, Jonsson, Radstrom, etc. I seem to remember somebody high up saying the teams having specialists wasn't good because you wouldn't get that in F1- i;e bringing in a driver for a certain circuit. So what WRC is not F1, thank goodness, that's half the problem now- changes made to make it F1 like.

---

Yes, around 1995-97 it was great. Of course, it used to be even more varied. Look at the fastest times Roger Clark set on the 1981 RAC. He was well past his prime by then, but they all occurred in his favourite Welsh forests; a whole string of fastest times, against Mikkola, Vatanen, Airikkala, etc. Nowadays, how many different drivers set fastest times in a single WRC event? Hardly any.

The tremendous battles in the old British Open Championship also provide good examples. Manta 400s used to be able to keep up with, and beat, Quattros. Why? Because the Opel Dealer Teams prepared them brilliantly, the drivers were excellent, and an element of local knowledge came into it. Bertie Fisher's scrap against Stig Blomqvist on the Ulster International in 1983 sums this up.

It's really the lack of variety in the plans for the WRC that concern me. Yes, it will be possible (hopefully) for more drivers and manufacturers to win, but their cars will all have to be the same. The problem, of course, is that the rules under which rallying was at its best in my opinion were not sufficiently 'tight' to be able to restrict further development, which led first to the Group B monsters of 1985-6 that were unsustainable, and then the WRCs of today. What's the way to stop this happening again with the next set of rules?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by urabus-denoS2000

This sounds interesting.

http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/...shi/index.html

It says something about Mitsubishi coimg back to the WRC,although my german is not very good.
So now comes the usual question:
Can someone translate?

---

Translated with: http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/tr


Door opener for Mitsubishi? The new technical rules of the Rallye world championship could up-push also for Mitsubishi the doors for a return to the Topliga. RETURN POSSIBLE: Mitsubishi could start in the future with a N+ in the WRC It prevails to departure tendency. At the end of March wants the FIA over important changes of rule in the Rallye WM to advise and could the way for new manufacturers to open. 2009 is already in-braked World Rally Cars and Super-2000-Autos with a turbo-kit certified. Starting from 2011 only the rigged S2000-Fahrzeuge becomes certified, however under the well-known names "WRC". For the armament of the Super2000 only about 30 per cent of additional parts should be necessary, the change takes maximally 48 hours. If a current Super2000 in full equipment costs about 250,000 euro, the new World Rally Cars is not to become more expensive than 300,000 euro, whereby the turbo-kit with approximately 50,000 euro is to show in the books and a drive with approximately 30,000 euro, strengthened by the increased torque, will have to be had. By these changes of rule also Mitsubishi could become again a WM candidate beside Fiats. According to Fiat haven boss Claudio Berro plans the FIA likewise to permit group cars like the new Lancer Evo X with an armament kit (likewise about 30 per cent of new parts) for the future WRC class. Mitsubishi Sportchef Isao Torii signaled already on the IAA in past September that its enterprise under these circumstances had large interest in a return to the WM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

Translated with: http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/tr


Door opener for Mitsubishi? The new technical rules of the Rallye world championship could up-push also for Mitsubishi the doors for a return to the Topliga. RETURN POSSIBLE: Mitsubishi could start in the future with a N+ in the WRC It prevails to departure tendency. At the end of March wants the FIA over important changes of rule in the Rallye WM to advise and could the way for new manufacturers to open. 2009 is already in-braked World Rally Cars and Super-2000-Autos with a turbo-kit certified. Starting from 2011 only the rigged S2000-Fahrzeuge becomes certified, however under the well-known names "WRC". For the armament of the Super2000 only about 30 per cent of additional parts should be necessary, the change takes maximally 48 hours. If a current Super2000 in full equipment costs about 250,000 euro, the new World Rally Cars is not to become more expensive than 300,000 euro, whereby the turbo-kit with approximately 50,000 euro is to show in the books and a drive with approximately 30,000 euro, strengthened by the increased torque, will have to be had. By these changes of rule also Mitsubishi could become again a WM candidate beside Fiats. According to Fiat haven boss Claudio Berro plans the FIA likewise to permit group cars like the new Lancer Evo X with an armament kit (likewise about 30 per cent of new parts) for the future WRC class. Mitsubishi Sportchef Isao Torii signaled already on the IAA in past September that its enterprise under these circumstances had large interest in a return to the WM.

---

Translation - my arse!
LOL, i still have trouble understanding it:P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grugsticles

Translation - my arse!
LOL, i still have trouble understanding it:P

---

What’s the problem, most of the words are in English. :) I didn’t claim that it was a translation,
it was translated with http://babelfish.altavista.digital.com/

Yeah, I know. Just joking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Helstar

Punto S2000 rules (I love that sound too !) :p
Also the Pug S2000 is a great car, funny to watch already now. Think about next years... when the speed bar will be raised.

It would be bad if Ford Citroen Subaru Suzuki won't develop a S2000 and quit. Then the change is not good. But all of these 4 plus the new manus, more cars, better :p
Gr. N sucks I must agree.

---

Well I hope this all works out. I am not sure if anybody has answerd this but I only disscoverd it today. Hopefully they can work out a way of using S2000 cars. I think that they should make different rules so they don't all sound or drive the same etheir, what just about everyone on this forum is saying. I know that over in Australia Ford made a Feista S2000. Best sounding rally car in Australia I reckon. It also did sound different to the Toyota Corolla S2000. I guess Citroen could make a C4 S2000. Suzuki could make an S2000 version of their SX4. Subaru could make oine around their new Impreza too. I think it would be good to get turbos in, get different things happening so they don't get boring.

Thats just my two cents. :D :D

Well, we know now that the future WRC cars will be based on S2000 and N group cars. My concern is when the power will be restricted to 270 – 280 hp, will the S2000+turbo cars also sound like the N-grp cars nowadays, i.e. boring. The turbo allowed to the S2000 should be the same type they used in the beginning of the 90’s when the cars where spectacular to watch and the revs where higher, although they had a turbo. It would also be nice with an option for a 2,5-3,0 litre NA engine for the manufacturers that prefer a NA prior to a turbo.

What about the N-grp based WRC cars then? I would assume they would have at least more freedom regarding the suspension.

bstrat: SX4 S2000 is under full development. Homologation is expected in the late summer. Citroën won't built C4 S2000 because it has already started development of new generation C3 S2000.

I haven't heard the name Isao Torii in a while!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldF

Well, we know now that the future WRC cars will be based on S2000 and N group cars. My concern is when the power will be restricted to 270 – 280 hp, will the S2000+turbo cars also sound like the N-grp cars nowadays, i.e. boring. The turbo allowed to the S2000 should be the same type they used in the beginning of the 90’s when the cars where spectacular to watch and the revs where higher, although they had a turbo. It would also be nice with an option for a 2,5-3,0 litre NA engine for the manufacturers that prefer a NA prior to a turbo.

What about the N-grp based WRC cars then? I would assume they would have at least more freedom regarding the suspension.

---

I read an interesting comment the other day (and then looked at a variety of times to confirm it).

Based on stage times, on many stages today's N4 cars are faster than the Group A cars of the mid to late 90s...

How our perceptions change...

So phasing out WRC cars for S2000/Grp. N cars will perhaps be more exciting?

Not too sure, but I am finding the IRC better... well i've lost track of the WRC now... unless I know it is on!

Oh with the calendar being 12 rounds a year... something about it making it 24 a season would that mean the next season will start in 2009 and finish at the end of 2010? (and WRChampion will be crowned in 2010 with both years points tallied up?)

This new S2000 + Turbo has got me thinking that it will improve the sport with more manufacturers, but one rule needs to change.
Please ignore this if it has been mentioned before.

Today with the WRC car format, if I’m not wrong, but to have it run in WRC events as well as registered for the manufacturer’s championship, basically the consent of the parent company is needed. Prodrive and MSport have this consent on behalf of Subaru and Ford respectively. Citroen and Suzuki are in-house.

It seems like S2000 cars can be built and campaigned by anyone with enough resources.
MSD make the MG S2000, TRD Australia with the Corolla S2000, VW South Africa with the Polo S2000, MEM are making the new Proton S2000 etc.

So with the basic S2000 built, it seems as if three quarters of the job is already done before taking the next step up to the top division, S2000 +Turbo.

Here's the problem I see. I can’t really see a private development team going this next step if their car can’t run for points in the manufacturers’ championship or even run in a WRC round.

Maybe the consent rule should be dropped.

S2000 cars by Peugeot, Abarth (Fiat), Skoda and the yet to be built Suzuki and Citroen are all in-house, so it would seem logically for them to step up to S2000 + Turbo. Unfortunately if the parent companies of these other brands aren’t interested we may never see a Proton, MG, VW or Toyota top flight car if the consent rule remains.

Say for interest sake that the VW parent company weren’t interested in either funding or consenting to a VW Polo S2000T. That shouldn’t stop the private developers still making one, and for it to be eligable to run in WRC events for points. We could see privateers, like Henning or Stohl using them with their own sponsors or even with the backing of local VW dealers/importers. Similar to Patrik Sandell with the Peugeot Sweden entry in the PWRC.

Anyway just some thoughts. I’m hoping for many more manufacturers in this next era of the WRC. More manufacturers equates to more bums on seats, which equates to more depth, which equates to better rallies! Hope the FIA get it right!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maui J.

This new S2000 + Turbo has got me thinking that it will improve the sport with more manufacturers, but one rule needs to change.
Please ignore this if it has been mentioned before.

Today with the WRC car format, if I’m not wrong, but to have it run in WRC events as well as registered for the manufacturer’s championship, basically the consent of the parent company is needed. Prodrive and MSport have this consent on behalf of Subaru and Ford respectively. Citroen and Suzuki are in-house.

It seems like S2000 cars can be built and campaigned by anyone with enough resources.
MSD make the MG S2000, TRD Australia with the Corolla S2000, VW South Africa with the Polo S2000, MEM are making the new Proton S2000 etc.

So with the basic S2000 built, it seems as if three quarters of the job is already done before taking the next step up to the top division, S2000 +Turbo.

Here's the problem I see. I can’t really see a private development team going this next step if their car can’t run for points in the manufacturers’ championship or even run in a WRC round.

Maybe the consent rule should be dropped.

S2000 cars by Peugeot, Abarth (Fiat), Skoda and the yet to be built Suzuki and Citroen are all in-house, so it would seem logically for them to step up to S2000 + Turbo. Unfortunately if the parent companies of these other brands aren’t interested we may never see a Proton, MG, VW or Toyota top flight car if the consent rule remains.

Say for interest sake that the VW parent company weren’t interested in either funding or consenting to a VW Polo S2000T. That shouldn’t stop the private developers still making one, and for it to be eligable to run in WRC events for points. We could see privateers, like Henning or Stohl using them with their own sponsors or even with the backing of local VW dealers/importers. Similar to Patrik Sandell with the Peugeot Sweden entry in the PWRC.

Anyway just some thoughts. I’m hoping for many more manufacturers in this next era of the WRC. More manufacturers equates to more bums on seats, which equates to more depth, which equates to better rallies! Hope the FIA get it right!

---

Good post mate, i think you have a point there. Hopefully FIA will see the point of it too, but i'm afraid they won't. ;)

First pics of the new car that probably will form the basis of the new Citroen S2000, and S2000 based WRC

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/au...itroen_c3.html

This is weird,they usually show the picture of the new rally car based on the new car and then the standard new car(both C2 S1600 and C4 WRC were shown before the C2 and C4)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sulland

First pics of the new car that probably will form the basis of the new Citroen S2000, and S2000 based WRC

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/au...itroen_c3.html

---

Nice joke :) Autoexpress is THE worst magazine in the world. They make stuff up. They made stuff up about a Ferrari Dino and photochopped it onto the background of a Porsche shoot.

Look at this. Pure fantasy. THey just crookedly chopped a 2cvesque nose onto a C3 middle section and then changed the back a bit. It's pure fantasy and will never happen.
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/au...v_is_back.html

By the time this car is supposed to debut Auto Express will have made up so many other cars that you'll forget about this one and how it was so wrong compared to the real thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by urabus-denoS2000

This is weird,they usually show the picture of the new rally car based on the new car and then the standard new car(both C2 S1600 and C4 WRC were shown before the C2 and C4)

---

As I said above this is Auto Express. They are forever breaking these exlusive bullpoop stories which have no link to reality at all. This is rubbish. It may look a tiny bit like the real thing but the real thing will probably be quite a bit different.

Changes ahead for the WRC - Part two

http://www.wrc.com/jsp/index.jsp?lnk...-%20Part%20two