Exactly my thought! Especially from this angleQuote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
http://www.4troxoi.gr/files/Image/00...C/ALBA7831.JPG
Printable View
Exactly my thought! Especially from this angleQuote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
http://www.4troxoi.gr/files/Image/00...C/ALBA7831.JPG
http://www.4troxoi.gr/default.php?pn...7&art_id=16662
The car may have changed but the PR bullshit hasn't:
"It's too early to say whether the car will be any good, these are the first kilometres"
Kopecky: "We don't know what we are doing next year" e.t.c.
Although the engineer expressed concerns that the rules don't have a good balance between cost and maintenance. Ie. They can make the car cheaply but then it wears out quicker.
That's exactly what br21 wrote on this forum some time a go ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
How strict is the cost price thing anyway?
I mean, wasn't there supposed to be a cap on S2000 too?
no it was impossible to be there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Aha, pity.Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
Much more strict. The main thing is a big list of particular components where each one of them has it's price limit. Several may be over the limit but others must be cheaper so that the total sum doesn't get over.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
It's not only matter of pure price limit for complete car or parts. It's the fact that you need to change some parts way more often than in WRC or S2000. When buying, those parts are cheaper comparing to S2000 ones for example, but you need to but 3 of those for i.e. 1000km and in S2000 you needed 1 for 1000km. Also many components in WRC/S2000 were design to be rebuildable, in R5 they are not, as their origin is in stock parts...
But honestly I have to say that when you get some knowledge about the car, way of running it, etc it's in fact better, more reliable than I was thinking at the beginning... of course it's about Fiesta, not 208...
Yes, of course You are right and I even mentioned Your experience in post 2043 ( ;) ) but the discussion regarding the limits was from a different point of view - that it's very difficult for the manufacturer to get in the limits.Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
For comparison:
http://www.ianhardy.net/gallery/main..._2005_0344.jpg
I think that stripes on new car are more aggressive :)
Abbring's 208 test.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5LPoeEURlAk&feature=youtu.be
Judging by the amount of tyre marks, it seems the 208 didn't break down after 10 KMs for once.
Well there is one talent the 208 does have - that it's entertaining. I prefer this to a Fiesta WRC any day of the week.Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
Is that the homologated car or the rumored non-homologated reliable development model which they try to homologate against the rules?Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
Besides that I agree with RS. 208 T16 is very spectacular car!
Can you maybe tell more about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
There were rumors that they prepared a reliable car but that one is not according to the existing homologation and since the rules for R5 don't allow major changes in several years they need a complete new homologation. However I think that under existing rules it's not possible to have two different homologations of the same model of car (208) in the same class. Maybe it's only rumors, I don't know.
It's a pitty that there is no way for a new homologation for reliability purposes.
@Mirek: do you know what is changed for it to be more reliable? Completely new engine? (since you mentioned before that the problem was traced to the engine block design)
As I said it's just rumors I heard, I know nothing. Maybe it's all bullshit.
What means "reliability purposes"? There is a joker or two for "safety" purposes like fuel pipe connector but if you totally screwed it from the basics it's only your problem, you have to accept it and leave with dignity. Though I am worried FIA is so corrupt that some backdoor will be employed for PSA.Quote:
Originally Posted by makinen_fan
Nope, in fact this situation shows that the rules are wrong. The intention was to save money of privateers who would be forced to buy updates too often. The problem is that as a result of these rules nobody wins and everybody looses. Peugeot looses because it has no results and no business but privateers loose too because they have no cars or at worse spent big money for useless cars without much hope for getting them better. The biggest looser is the sport which looses competitors especially if this situation leads to the end of rally program in Peugeot.
I know what the official intention was. The best way to save money of privateers is by loosening the homologation restrictions like it is in South America and other local regions who do not worship FIA's moves for "improving the sport". Here every nut and bolt is homologated and a few companies are total monopolists on the market so I am not sorry when one of them f***s it himself. The biggest losers are the people who paid for 208 in advance but this is life, like the people who "buy" apartments before the first truck enters the construction site - you got burned and that's it. The sport is fine because there is a Fiesta - a same one for everybody, and Fabia from next year.
I know the intention is good, but I hate 'development freezes' in motorsport, isn't that partly what the sport is all about from a manufacturers point of view? What do the engineers do for the 6 years between new cars :rolleyes:
I think they should allow the manufacturers some limited changes once per year, which I believe is the case in F1 with the new engines. One is way ahead of the others and it is not good for the sport.
Isn't that part of "R5 low costs" part of the plan?
Agree. I don't like that either...Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
It's not like it is all frozen. Development is possible but quite a lot limited.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
Yes indeed sadly it is like that. And that's why they should probably allow it. PSA is a big constructor and if it its true about the engine block they need another engine..
Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 5 met Tapatalk
Perhaps they can homologate new model - 208 LHWBD (Lets Hope it Won't Brake Down)?:D
Yesterday saturday Claudio de Cecco won the Rally Nova Gorica in Slovenia, driving for the first time his 208 T16(Friul Motor in Italy) ;)
But he hadn't really opponents there(Alex Humar who finished 2nd was driving a Clio R3 only) :mark:
absolutely! let's see next year how will sound given the fact wilson abandoned pipo moteur and will build in house the engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
I listened also ds3 r5, can we say they sound almost the same? I didn't find any raw exhaust, seems to me psa have decided to not distinguish their r5...or am I wrong?
Fiesta R5 engine was made in house at MSport, Pipo was not directly involved. French company was making engines for WRC cars, and from next year MSport will do them on their own. So Fiesta R5 sound will stay the same.
It sounds the same as the Fiesta WRC pretty much anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
I doubt the sound of the Fiesta WRC will change much anyway as it will probably be built to the same design still?
After the homologation(r5) each manufacturer has only one joker?about s2000 i have read the jokers was 10 jokers for the 5 first years and 5 for the next five years,is this right?about wrcars?
Principle only makes sense after the "drive-in" periode, and the car has gotten rid of all the gremlins. For some cars that takes two seasons, and for others two rallies. So all new R5s should get three jokers first year, and two the second year. After that one every two years, or some pattern like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
thanks for the precisation. so no possibility to listen a more raw sound from m-sport...Quote:
Originally Posted by br21
The sound of Fabia R5 live isn't any better...
I Iike the sound, it just needs more volume, but I guess it isn't going to happen, performance is more important :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
It would be interesting to know what Peugeot have done to make the 208 so much louder??
Has PSA found out what the R5 engine issue is, but can not do anything due to no Joker to be used?
Just watching Eurosport's coverage of ERC Cyprus and the first thing that takes my attention is Bruno Magalhaes' in-car camera position - behind the driver and co-driver! Praise the lord! Back to a sensible view where you can appreciate the drivers' input.
Have I been paying little attention over this year or have they generally been in that awful WRC position in the mucky area of the front screen not swept by the wipers? As far as I can remember I haven't seen an R5 with the old, better camera position...
There are tons of onboards from ERC Barum rally available on the website of Czech championship promoter. Most of them have nice camera position behind the crew (except factory Škodas, Tänak and Kajto). There are videos from all Czech events, Barum ones currently start at page 3: http://www.mediasport.cz/rally/onboardy.html?page=3
Some recommended ones :)
Breen SS Troják (with crash): http://www.mediasport.cz/rally/onboardy/6886.html
Pech, SS Semetín: http://www.mediasport.cz/rally/onboardy/6919.html
Tarabus, SS pindula: http://www.mediasport.cz/rally/onboardy/6915.html
Don’t they even check what they publish?
http://www.wrc.com/en/wrc/news/septe...6--12-12-.html
Power / Torque: 280hp@7500rpm / 450Nm@7500rpm :crazy:
With 450Nm@7500rpm the power would be 481 hp (with a 32 mm restrictor) :D.
"Could be seen in WRC2 next year" ? :-D I thought it has homologation only for Swedish championship. Anyway I am curious.
I'm afraid PR people doesn't have a clue about the law between the power and torque...