Printable View
Sad to see a move away from production bodyshells... I wonder who pushed for that. Here's hoping we don't get any odd looking 'scaled' cars like the Mustang in Australian Supercars! Standard tire for WRC2 seems like poor idea, could discourage entrants. Standardisation of Hybrid systems is the sensible solution.
meh
Sounds like a good compromise to me. There´s no option than to go hybrid if we want more than 1-2 manufacturers in the championship in the years to come. Not sure about the bodyshell part though.
The standard hybrid part is sensible, so it doesn’t immediately turn into an arms race.
The scaled bodyshells bit could be odd, but it depends on each case. I agree the Mustang in Supercars looks weird.
Does scaled body shells mean that you could take an STI and just make the whole car smaller...?
Essentially yes....Quote:
Originally Posted by SubaruNorway
The upside to it is that if manufacturers want to promote a model globally that doesn’t fit the regs size wise, they can scale the shell to make it happen. I suppose an example would be Mercedes deciding that after the budget cap in F1, they want to spend a bit of the excess budget rallying, they can use the A45 and make it fit.
https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/1...RReo4b0zeWMEYg
The FIA has confirmed the introduction of a new generation of hybrid powered cars for the 2022 World Rally Championship.
In a raft of decisions coming from World Motor Sport Council meeting in Paris on Friday, the governing body has also raised the potential for the reintroduction of C segment World Rally cars, as well as a return to a control tyre for a three-year period from 2021 onwards.
The next homologation cycle for the WRC will include common electric motors and batteries for the first three seasons.
But the FIA has now introduced the potential for a second level of hybridisation to be introduced from 2025, which would allow for harvested energy to be used in competition and allow greater technical freedom for competing manufacturers.
The level of technological change - and the amount the teams will be permitted to do themselves - after the first three years will depend on the success of the first period of the hybrid rules.
An FIA statement explained that: "The cars will feature a supplementary hybrid system, to be comprised of common components and software for the first three years, with the potential for more technical freedom in 2025.
"The aim is to enable the cars to run on pure electric power in cities and provide an electric power boost on special stages."
On the subject of the size and shape of the new cars, the FIA statement read: "Manufacturers will be allowed to use a production bodyshell or a prototype tubular structure to current WRC size guidelines, while the FIA is set to define carry-over elements from production vehicles for key visual elements.
"There will also be an option for 'scaling' of the body within prescribed limits, to allow larger cars to comply with dimension targets."
The main field of the WRC will return to a control tyre formula for the first time since 2010, covering the 2021-2024 seasons.
Pirelli was the last single tyre supplier in the series - running from 2008-2010 - but since the start of '11, Michelin has won every round of the world championship except for DMACK's '17 Rally GB success with Elfyn Evans.
The FIA statement explained the move was "to reduce costs by preventing an escalation in tyre development". In other news announced by the WMSC, M-Sport will offer two WRC outings in a Ford Fiesta WRC in a new Junior WRC initiative sanctioned by the FIA.
The current Junior WRC structure will continue for the next two years, with the winner getting a Ford Fiesta R5 plus support package.
In addition, if that driver then wins the following year's WRC2 title, M-Sport will field a Fiesta WRC for them on two world championship rounds.
"To support this programme, M-Sport, in conjunction with Pirelli, has developed a national 'feeder' programme across Finland, the United Kingdom, Estonia and Italy that will allow them to step up into the world stage the following season," the FIA statement explained.
In regards to the 2020 WRC calendar, the schedule has been spiked and will be the subject of an electronic vote before the end of June.
The FIA statement read: "Approval of the 2020 FIA World Rally Championship calendar was deferred to the end of June 2019.
In the intervening period it will consider the potential rotation of competitions."
The FIA also confirmed a long-term extension to the current agreement with WRC Promoter.
Really sad to imagine this could be the first step for having silhouette WRC cars, based on control chassis…Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
The possible return of events rotation is also a big surprise. As expected, common hybrid system seems to be a smart move.
Technically the cars are bound to be really quite interesting with the regs. I am a little skeptical about the prototype shells (particularly with the whole scaling thing, which I find ridiculous), but if the teams are allowed to make bonkers looking cars I'm all for it. Group B had homologation specials but cars like the S4, the 037 and the S1 E2 were crazy looking despite not being nearly at all stock or road relevant. And with the current state of road relevance we've got right now (which is to say, at least aesthetically, not much, and even less in some cases than others) I don't really pity the further loss of it.
Sure enough, maybe I'd like a return to Group A or early WRC levels of similarity, but if the WRC is going to evolve it's cars from what they are now it's a nearer step for them to move towards silhouettes rather than return to the basics (that might sound a little confusing: if road relevance were expressed as a line, and the current WRCs a point on that line, the point would be closer to the silhouette side than the early WRC side, I believe).
The ongoing trends in the automotive world go directly against usability of said cars in competition and as such it makes sense to ease the rules to allow the teams to build a rally car no matter what they produce in stock. In the current world it makes sense and I am not against it. I would be against twenty years a go but not in 2019.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
In what way? They seem to manage now and Fiesta, i20, Yaris, C3, Fabia, Polo etc are all pretty mainstream.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
We are talking about the future not about today.
IMO the best announcement was the rotation of events. Hope it goes through.
So it is the first rally this season that none of our leading trio for the championship made it to the podium. As a result it is the lowest combined score (25 points), the second lowest was Sweden (51 points).
The gap between the top 3 went from 10 points after Portugal to 7. (smallest gap so far this season was 5 points after Corsica).
Once again, there may be one man faster out there, but from a championship point of view, it is still anyone's to take.
Enjoy the summer folks, see you in Finland.
Agree. So you are going to visit NRF then...?Quote:
Originally Posted by spiderem
I wish but it's too far from west coast of Canada unfortunately. Hopefully when I move back to Europe then I can visit NRF (amongst other rallys which are on my bucket list). For now it's WRC+ / tweeter and this forum!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
Aaah. Of course you are with us anyway! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by spiderem
4-5th in Finland with Sordo in Hyundai is extremely optimistic. Paddon barely managed 4th last year and even he needed Lappi to crash out to get it.
In fact unless the announced upgrade comes and drastically improves the car in Finland I'd say 4th is a dream result there no matter the driver.
Your revisionist description of history is quite funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
"barely managed 4th" = held 4th for most of the rally despite brake problems on saturday and not taking risks because Neuville and Mikkelsen were both well out of contention and the team needed points. Had about 40 seconds margin over Ogier at the end.
"needed Lappi to crash out to get it" = Lappi did have a big charge late saturday to catch Paddon who was 'taking it easy' (his words), but couldn't sustain that pace without crashing.
The Hyundai does seem to struggle there, I don't disagree with that. But there is no need to try and twist history to make an argument.
This seems to be his party trick.Quote:
Originally Posted by GravelBen
That's what he does here, don't even bother to read his long out of reality blabberings anymoreQuote:
Originally Posted by GravelBen
Eric Camilli in C3 WRC? Please yes!
https://www.rallyssimo.it/2019/06/19...itroen-c3-wrc/
Why? He is nobody. Ostberg who is by the way clearly better driver in any way is sitting in lower class car.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Oliveira
I'd far rather have a half decent young 'nobody' than literally nobody in a third C3 WRC, which would probably otherwise be the case...Quote:
Originally Posted by deephouse
He had his chance. Blew with top WRC machine at M-Sport, had the chance with weaker machine R5 again in M-Sport, blew it away. He had a go with Polo in VW colors and still not acomplish anything. And they are by the way the same age.Quote:
Originally Posted by the sniper
Too young and unexperienced for WRC indeed at that time, but what did he blow away in WRC2 exactly?
M-Sport R5 season 2017: 11 starts, 2 wins+ 4 podiums, 2 4th places...an some technical issues an mistakes while driving in podium places.
Polo outings: A) RACC SS11 stopped from 2. place- gearshift issue ; B) Corsica SS12 Castagniccia 2 (47.18 km) Fire, car burn out
You are the one going full retard and making an argument for nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by GravelBen
Paddon wouldn't end 4th if Lappi didn't crash from ahead of him, fact. That counts as "barely managed 4th" and "needed Lappi to crash out to get it". 3rd was 1 min ahead so 4th was the best possible result.
So far Camilli is only testing the C3. Maybe this is Citroen’s answer to Katsuta, Hänninen and Huttunen? Remember, non-P1 drivers have a quota of extra testing days.
Could be.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
Østberg is still at P1 list, so he is not allowed to test without spending testing days.
Camilli going up to WRC without any experience at all was a terrible move for everyone involved, and his results that year were nothing short of catastrophic. However, he has been improving in WRC2 for sure. I think he's a much better driver now thAn three years ago, and might deserve a chance at the top level, if at least for a single outing, to judge whether he improved or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by deephouse
That's not a fact that's speculation the only fact in your statement there is that lappi crashed that is the only factQuote:
Originally Posted by mknight
If one is to go retard he must go full retard.Quote:
Originally Posted by wia5958
Never go FULL retard ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by racerx1979
No, it isn't. Like Lappi's crash would've been the only variable there is :oQuote:
Originally Posted by mknight
Maybe Camilli is the best Citroen can do (afford?) in testing. And if so why Budar complained about current WRC cars entering National rallies.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
Hyundai and Toyota have the budgets for this and Citroen and M-Sport dont. Maybe the testing rules do need tightening to keep things fair and more level...
M-Sport in Estonia with Evans so they have something going for them....Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Estonia is compulsory event.Quote:
Originally Posted by racerx1979
Yes, it's a lot different to taking a car to a random national event. It's in co-operation with the WRC Promoter who probably demands at least one car from each team and also there's most likely financial support to get it happening from the promoter and from the event organizers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
Who else do you have who has driven a 2017 WRC car (albeit only in test tracks) but has not collected manu points this or last year and is not a gentleman driver? Also, Camilli has done also other testing work like with the Polo, so he's good for the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
EDIT: I think Lefebvre would also fit the conditions.