Technical Analysis: WRC Cars 2017

I understand that people don't need details but this is not about simplification of details. It's not simplified because it's bollocks.

Here on the forum there are very knowledgeable people who work with the stuff and know it by heart, yet people argue with them about bullshit they do not understand just because it's on a fancy media server. Nobody knows everything, that's natural but it's sad to ignore those who know and who share pieces of their knowledge with us. Don't tell me that somebody who has been on this forum for years hasn't still recognized that Br21 is a person to trust regarding technical stuff.

PS I know I used to argue about things I had no clue about as well. Luckily it gets better with time with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

I know this won't be a popular view on here, but Sportscar racing has far better journalism and better analysis than rallying. Where is the rallying equivalent of DSC (DailySportscar, for example?

---

Your on to something VERY important here AndyRAC!
Rallying on the top level (WRC) is very small, and a journalist may know a lot of things, but can't tell them because he or she is too connected, so they can either get reprimands, or be shut out of the sport.

One example: Colin Clark obviously have a great deal of sources in the WRC, and sources are the main source of journalistic leads.
He does his low key "kitchen table ramblings", and announced a big story a short while ago (it was Latvala signing for Toyota), but the episode of Kitchen table was delayed.
Then the news broke other places anyway, but he was quite open about the reason for it being delayed was that Toyota had asked him to delay it.
When you get this kind of "control" over the media, the stories that filter through are not really interesting, and we get them after we have learned from our own sources what has happened.

All sports that are really big have a prying media, that really dig up good stories, because stories is what gather human interest, and has been for 10.000´s of years.

In the silly season we have just been through it has been a crazy amount of rumours, leads etc etc, but very little has surfaced in the main stream motorsport media. So a lot of the big drama - a drama that can attract big audiences - have gone largely unnoticed by the general motorsport public.

So I agree fully with you, the WRC (and rallying) needs a daring news source where hungry and competent journalists dig up good stories, and are not afraid of going in to deep details.

I am not a soccer fan, but if you read soccer journalism it is REALLY nerdy, down to what the players had for breakfast.

In regards to the technical article that is written, well, its no masterpiece. It is very light hearted, and threats fans like they are ignorant. And thus, it wont be very popular.
But if you read the articles on the same web page made on F1 by Giorgo Piola, they are really detailed down to the last centimetre, and thus a great read where you really learn a lot about stuff like areodynamics.

The big differences between the 16 and 17 WRC are basically:
- Aero
- Power
- Diff
- Width
- Weight

All of these subjects are great for going in depth and discover how they affect the car.

Get an engineer to tell us how the new active diffs work.
Talk to some different suppliers about them.
Get an aerodynamicist - for example from the DTM - to explain the new WRC aerodynamics.
Let us know from a damper suppliers what really goes on inside a WRC damper.
Etc etc.

There are so many good stories to write - and thus read. And WRC really need it to grow.

In the WRC the thought have long been that you cater to the general public to try to grow the sport, but that never works. You can off course do that with the events, but you need a really good media to cater for the real fans, and build the fan base out of that.
Just see what they do in NASCAR, and how they present the sport. Its the worlds biggest motorsport BY FAR, and they go in extreme detail with expert commentators, even interviewing the drivers live in the races etc etc.

WRC is heading in to very interesting times, and the new regulations (and getting Sec out of the VW) is a big step forward, but now the media needs to follow :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lundefaret

Just see what they do in NASCAR, and how they present the sport. Its the worlds biggest motorsport BY FAR, and they go in extreme detail with expert commentators, even interviewing the drivers live in the races etc etc.

---

Similar with the V8 supertaxis, most presenters are ex-drivers (with plenty of banter) and have a decent knowledge of the technical stuff, as well as using experts for more detailed explanations at times.

Google trans this, good article, Citroen have done well

http://es.motorsport.com/wrc/news/an...arte-1-865549/

Nice with new cars with bigger restrictor is that drivers are able to rev them higher, which makes sound nicer, etc.
Toyota has little bit different ALS sound.
Citroen lower front bumper design seems to be cutting snow much more than others, interesting if it can be an issue.

copy from French forum,and translated via google translate.

FX Demaison gives his opinion on the WRC 2017 ... Auto-Hebdo (which released a special WRC guide this Wednesday)
This is the opinion of a real engineer ...

So for him the C3 is really very stable with a lot of motricity. From the engine point of view it seems very well armed ...
The i20 is "not bad". This is the one whose body parts will best survive the various shocks. An effort seems to have been made on the chassis, the car is now lower on asphalt, while the old i20 was higher (open door squeezing mode on!).
The base of the Fiesta looks good, but it is not as stable as the C3. In the engine he does not see it at the level of the Citroën, and at the level of the aerottes, the fins bring support but will cost in term of top speed.
The Toyota is far from the engine level, the auto moves a lot and does not give the impression of having a lot of grip. For him it does not offer many possibilities of adjustments at the level of the trains (it means that the French engineers who have largely developed the Citroën, the i20 and the VW fire like to have arms of adjustable lengths to adjust pile- Hair camber, hunting, clamp ...)

really good interview,confirms what almost everyone in this forum believes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lundefaret

Your on to something VERY important here AndyRAC!
Rallying on the top level (WRC) is very small, and a journalist may know a lot of things, but can't tell them because he or she is too connected, so they can either get reprimands, or be shut out of the sport.

One example: Colin Clark obviously have a great deal of sources in the WRC, and sources are the main source of journalistic leads.
He does his low key "kitchen table ramblings", and announced a big story a short while ago (it was Latvala signing for Toyota), but the episode of Kitchen table was delayed.
Then the news broke other places anyway, but he was quite open about the reason for it being delayed was that Toyota had asked him to delay it.
When you get this kind of "control" over the media, the stories that filter through are not really interesting, and we get them after we have learned from our own sources what has happened.

All sports that are really big have a prying media, that really dig up good stories, because stories is what gather human interest, and has been for 10.000´s of years.

In the silly season we have just been through it has been a crazy amount of rumours, leads etc etc, but very little has surfaced in the main stream motorsport media. So a lot of the big drama - a drama that can attract big audiences - have gone largely unnoticed by the general motorsport public.

So I agree fully with you, the WRC (and rallying) needs a daring news source where hungry and competent journalists dig up good stories, and are not afraid of going in to deep details.

I am not a soccer fan, but if you read soccer journalism it is REALLY nerdy, down to what the players had for breakfast.

In regards to the technical article that is written, well, its no masterpiece. It is very light hearted, and threats fans like they are ignorant. And thus, it wont be very popular.
But if you read the articles on the same web page made on F1 by Giorgo Piola, they are really detailed down to the last centimetre, and thus a great read where you really learn a lot about stuff like areodynamics.

The big differences between the 16 and 17 WRC are basically:
- Aero
- Power
- Diff
- Width
- Weight

All of these subjects are great for going in depth and discover how they affect the car.

Get an engineer to tell us how the new active diffs work.
Talk to some different suppliers about them.
Get an aerodynamicist - for example from the DTM - to explain the new WRC aerodynamics.
Let us know from a damper suppliers what really goes on inside a WRC damper.
Etc etc.

There are so many good stories to write - and thus read. And WRC really need it to grow.

In the WRC the thought have long been that you cater to the general public to try to grow the sport, but that never works. You can off course do that with the events, but you need a really good media to cater for the real fans, and build the fan base out of that.
Just see what they do in NASCAR, and how they present the sport. Its the worlds biggest motorsport BY FAR, and they go in extreme detail with expert commentators, even interviewing the drivers live in the races etc etc.

WRC is heading in to very interesting times, and the new regulations (and getting Sec out of the VW) is a big step forward, but now the media needs to follow :)

---

some detail on Citroen here, in thos normally very detailled magazine:
http://www.racecar-engineering.com/cars/citroen-c3-wrc/

More of this!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by br21

Nice with new cars with bigger restrictor is that drivers are able to rev them higher, which makes sound nicer, etc.
Toyota has little bit different ALS sound.
Citroen lower front bumper design seems to be cutting snow much more than others, interesting if it can be an issue.

---

Yes, you are absolutely right. Can that be fixed/adjusted?
Here is confirmation:
https://s25.postimg.org/5k9mfgi2n/Sc...8_23_33_54.png

Seems like you are the only one with a solution. Almost everyone else knows what is wrong with the analysis of Matt Somerfield but no one can do any better.
Typical pessimism of hardcore enthusiasts. The future awaits those who are willing to adapt.