Not on a different planet, I just have a different opinion to you, thats all ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
Printable View
Not on a different planet, I just have a different opinion to you, thats all ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
Why you take seriously posts from Navtheace and plan9 ??? these guys are a bit strange, posting random stuff without any reason behind them...leave them alone to short their heads out....don't argue...
And what kind of engine cc limit? As if for example the WRC truned into a load of R3 DS3s then even less people would watch and it really would be the death of the sport!Quote:
Originally Posted by navtheace
We have all heard how Jean Todt wants to return to the old days with rallying, with longer linear routes and move away from the cloverleaf format which lets face it was the David Richards ISC formula. Now Jean Todt has not had it all his own way, with the current manufacturers (especially Ford?) favouring the paddock club type service park arrangements. A lot of us thought its going to get messy, with no doubt the manufacturers threatening to quit unless they have it their way. Now with the Antonov episode, NOS in administration, Eurosport seemingly gone cold (well they do have a vested interest in IRC) if FIA WRC dies as a championship will it be a convenient ?
What's the betting on a "new WRC" for teams / privateers being launched, quite possibly a soft merger with IRC so that Monte is in, that way a teams cup, non manufacturer powerbased championship will never threaten F1, and can live in the spirit of Jean Todt's WRC era, i.e. long routes, night stages, less service park paddock etc.
Is the current crisis the end game in killing off everything the DR era stood for?
I wonder if the future premier rally series will have Monte Carlo, Corsica, and San Remo as rounds?
Funny how this all happened after the jewel in the crown event of Monte finished.
In hindsight maybe this should have been posted in rally future media thread - if so can a moderator please move it?
In manufacturer competition it almost doesn't matter if the car is 1.0 FWD Toyota Aygo or the same car rebuild to two meters wide 3.0V6 RWD. Manufacturers will spend all their budget on it anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allyc85
It's called R categories. As in make them the only categories you can rally and manufacturers will not need to spend anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Rallying now has to adjust to the road cars manufacturers currently make, ie let R1, R2, R3, R4 and R-GT be the only categories for rallying and watch the manufacturers adjust themselves.
So again. You can build competitive R4 from two single cars in the world which are hardly more than last mohycans in a world which turned to another era. Any other manufacturer who would want to make something competitive against these two would have to spend billions in development, manufacturing, service, promotion, staff training etc. for a car which in current world can't make any profit and moreover makes problems with emission standards, corporate emission limits, too high fuel consumption. As a cherry on top of the cake is that most of the parts developed and manufactured for this car are useless for any other car. That's completely opposite to what manufacturers try - as much standardization across their portfolio as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by navtheace
I agree that Your idea is nice but it's utopia in the year 2012. What must be found is real solution, not dreams.
Listening to Jean Todt's press conference in Monaco I thought it sounded really good and I really hope that his influence and attempts to get back to the "old" idea of rallying can come to fruition. I think the problem lies with the manufacturers and as we saw the comments from both Ford and Citroen about Monte being too long and having too many extra days which don't give anything extra for them in terms of extra exposure for the sake of it. I suppose I'd reluctantly have to agree with that, but again it is all down to the TV coverage to show the cars off on. The current issues really don't help, but if the teams were to get, say, 20% extra exposure on tv for an extra day of a rally then I hope they would think it would be worthwhile.
Certainly from my own personal (and purely selfish spectating) point of view, I would love for events to be longer with chances to go to watch more stages, and long for a "safari" type event. I was at the Classic Safari Rally last November and it was 2100km of stages (4000km total) in 10 days, and that was something very special indeed which will stay with me forever.
As for the cars, I don't mind too much what is used as long as it is NOT Group N, I have no time for them!! :s
Only good thing in this whole situation is that there's no more Quesnell. :D
Hahaha! +1 :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Barreis
I too would agree with it, but largely on the grounds that the two extra days added very little to the challenge of the event. To me, if a rally is to be long it needs to have the stage mileage to match (and without too much repetition, too.)Quote:
Originally Posted by J4MIE
I couldn't agree more, though while pure production cars may be dull in rallying terms, I think there is a place for retaining the link between competition cars and production models through homologation. Group A, in itself, was not a bad formula.Quote:
Originally Posted by sollitt
Agreed.
Yes defo :)
GpA was an excellent formula. When it was around, no manufacturer complained about not being able to put on a body kit. They rallied what they sold as the road car.
They complained and that's why WRC formula was created. It wasn't a whim of FIA.
It was in days when cars suitable for gr.A rules were ending their production with no successors - Escort Cosworth, Toyota Celica GT-Four or Lancia Delta Integrale.
If I remember right Ford and Peugeot were the main forces to support WRC - which turned to be one of the most successful formulas the rally world ever saw. In my opinion it later started to die not for cost reasons but for their ban in regional and national championships.
Group A was much better then WRC. In Italy it was at least 10 tuners for making very good group A cars. 300 000 DEM (150 000euros) was excellent group A escort cosworth. Now nothing.
OK. Now tell me from which Ford You would build a gr.A car from in 1998? By that time Cossie was history and Ford didn't plan anything like that for the future. Development of Focus started many years before and I believe it was since the beginning developed as FWD only.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barreis
From focus ST with 4wd. :D
A serious answer, please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barreis
You just don't see the causality. 4WD sport cars didn't disappear because gr.A was turned into WRC but vice versa. Gr.A disappeared because car makers were no longer interested in 4WD sport cars.
Don't no but now it's so expensive top rallying.
Yes, we all know that. But crying for good old days won't make it cheaper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barreis
Know that also.
Don't think it was that cheap at that time either, not everyone had that 300kDM or 150k€ as their pocket money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Exactly right!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
The cost to a manufacturer of the design & type approval of a road car with limited sales just so you could have a competitive rally car in the world championship was so high that Ford and the others said "no more". The WRC formula meant that the total cost to the car maker to compete in WRC is lower, even if each car might be a bit more expensive.
I've been around long enough to have seen this cycle happen before. When rallying started it was mostly privateers in standard cars. Then manufacturers got involved and started developing special parts. People complained & said it was too expensive, so homologation was introduced to make competitors use standard cars. Standard cars either broke or weren't quick enough & people said it's too expensive to make lots of standard cars with the parts you need to go rallying (homologation specials). The homologation rules were changed to allow limited production of special parts. This was too expensive, so GpB was introduced. This was too dangerous so they tried to go back to standard cars and we got back on the cycle again.
Top level rallying has always been expensive & people have always complained about the cost. They complained that BDA engines for Escorts were too expensive in the 70's. They complained that everything for Quattro's was too expensive in the 80's. I got bored & stopped listening then so I can't tell you what was too expensive in the 90's & 00's but people did complain so that's why we are where we are. People are still complaining, I guess they always will.
I believe some of the solutions to the WRC's problems are to be found in the past. By this I don't mean reverting to rear-wheel-drive, of course, but only if one looks at the modern WRC and sees something that can't possibly be improved upon is it possible to argue that things weren't better before. Most would argue that this simply isn't the case. Maybe, therefore, there are lessons to be drawn from times gone by?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
Quite so.Quote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
This is all very interesting, and I agree with much of it, but are you too not of the view that something, somewhere, has gone seriously wrong for rallying to have ended up in the situation in which it finds itself today? Given the breadth of your perspective, I'd be fascinated to hear your views on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Boyd
Now it's fortune to buy a carQuote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
The figures have changed but through inflation you almost get the same amount as it were back in the days. It's all about inflation ;) It's was expensive and still is ... numbers have changed but you get the same for the valueQuote:
Originally Posted by Barreis
In which case, why has any problem developed? Global economic circumstances do not provide the complete answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by cali
Maybe I shall make some my statement so that it doesn't look I'm just arrogant type disagreeing with all :)
So, what can WRC offer to the audience?
Mind-blowing machinery? No for obvious reasons. In 2012 none can be astonished by a Fiesta with 300 Hp. For that it would have to be 1000 Hp strong but than we have the safety magic formula. I don't see much space for improvement here...
Adventure? No. Who can see any kind of adventure in just 1,5 hours of competing over nothing more than a common working period? Teams have luxurious service hospitalities, everyone sleeps in hotels. The feeling of adventure is definitely THE thing which appeals to the crowd in 21st century. There is plenty of space for improvement here. We need real stories at the end of the day not just a table with numbers. The audience has to find itself living the event with their heroes.
Events with unique character? No. Some events remain unique thanks to their nature but at least the format shall differ to allow event creating their own spirit. And we have too many same looking ones...
Spectacle? Yes, sure. I still can't believe why it is so difficult to sell so much action-packed images...
Stunning scenery? Yes, sure. Rallying and marathons have by far the biggest potential of all motorsport kinds in this matter.
Some other points...
Why the hell do we need a competition fuel? We use 5x more expensive fuel to make just an average power from engine with tiny restrictor. That doesn't make sense.
For what do we need homologations? To protect business of manufacturers or to make sport more safe or more fair? IMHO the first is right. A simple set of common rules would work way better for large majority of competitors. We don't need parts which cost ten times more just because they have the right marking on them.
Do we need to make cars more and more standardized and more and more ancient in comparison with stock machinery? No, motorsport needs to keep the engineering spirit. Allow everyone bring their own ideas and open the door to all those crazy inventors who fill Dakar, hill climbs etc.
The time showed that making cars simpler under current homologation rules is just a waste of time. What simpler can we bring to the top level of rallying than S2000? It's year 2012 for God's sake! The car is full packed of 1980' inventions and still expensive like hell. What will be next? A one liter FWD? A full factory shopping bag won't cost less , if You ask me...
Why do we need a special formula for world championship? To make it unique? But than why do we speak about cost? These two ideas are in complete contradiction. We can't make something cheaper if we limit the production to few single pieces. Did super hi-tech WRC (in comparison with 2012 ones) do bad in 2000? No, they did excellent. Did S2000 do bad? No, they did excellent. 300 pieces sold worldwide in some five years. Peugeot itself sold 100 pieces of 207! What common have these two cases? They were allowed everywhere. Is it accidental that WRC started to die after it was banned in regional and national championships? I believe it isn't...
As regards encouraging manufacturers to enter the sport at the top I don't think there's too much wrong with the current WRC formula. It's kept Citröen & Ford in and Mini & VW have joined (not withstanding the spat between BMW & Prodrive). The R1, R2 & R3 categories are beginning to be taken up at lower levels but the bit between them & WRC (R4, S2000 & 1.6T with different size restrictors) is a bit of a muddle, though that should clear with time.
I think the "standard style event" regulations of the recent past have taken away a lot of the romance & perceived challenge that the classic events used to have. It remains to be seen how events will evolve following Jean Todt's statements & how many complaints longer, tougher events will produce!
The key thing for me is media coverage and that must include free to air terrestrial TV. I don't believe that live TV is necessary. A well edited daily summary that tells the story would be better in my view. It works for the major cycling tours & worked for the RAC Rally in the days of BBC Top Gear Rally Report. If longer and tougher events with TV coverage can generate a feeling in the general population that rallying is something challenging & exciting then we will see another revival - but it will still be too expensive!
My reply was strictly for "now it's a fortune to buy a car" comment. Back in the days the grass was greener mentality ...
But ofcourse there is more than that, nothing to argue about
I've said it before, but my biggest bugbear with the current regs is if I want a Fiesta WRCar or a Mini WRCar, I have to go to M-Sport/ Prodrive. In the old GpA days, you could pick were you wanted to get your car from.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. I'd add: do we think it coincidental that, to me at least, the sport was strongest — whether in terms of driver talent, public interest in events, etc — when national/regional championships ran the same equipment at their top levels as did the world championship? This, I believe, is crucial.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
The cost point, especially the comparison between 'then and now', I find most interesting. Of course, I appreciate the fact that rallying, especially top-level rallying, has never been a cheap business. But I don't believe this tells the full story, for, surely, there was a time (perhaps, one might say, before the advent of the Group B 'supercars') that relatively top-line machinery was available to a wider pool of drivers than are today's WRCars? Something, somewhere, has gone awry.
A fair point, but I don't think it's been good for the sport as a whole. Certainly, regional and national championships have hardly thrived during this era.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Boyd
They have also taken away many opportunities for people to actually see rallies taking place. The disappearance of the RAC as we know it is a classic case in point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Boyd
It will, but at least each rally would again have a hope of becoming an event in the national sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Boyd
So why did S2000 become so popular?
Since it did something must have been right with that class.
In my book it is simple: it sound like a competition car, it looks like a competition car and moves like a competition car.
It is difficult to drive, and separates the best from the second best.
Hmm, sounds like a winner.
Learn from that when finalizing the R4T class regs.."....
One key here is standard ECU, so the manufacurers cant make their own classes of the same car.......
If they are able to score with that class and keep the price right, then we will get a real World Rally Car.
Yes, I would say that it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
I think they never should have been allowed in National Championships.
But as you started to say, I will not seem like someone who does not agree with someone else.
But when we criticize the FIA, we must remember that they depend on making regulations which lasts for some time, if they are to enable manufacturers to invest in a WRC car.
And what direction the world takes, when we talk about the economy, people's interest in sports, how good the various sports is to promote their sport, how environmental thinking etc etc etc are things FIA must guess the same way as stock speculators guessing when they buy shares. All share speculators think they are very smart, but we can probably conclude that not all is.
And make good explanations in after time, are extremely easy.
How can national championships then be expected to flourish if, in terms of the cars used, they are distinctly second class?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach 2
They seem now to be most interested only in what goes on in the FIA-sanctioned championships rather than looking at the wider interests of the sports under their jurisdiction as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach 2
This is slightly misleading and not entirely correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by navtheace
The 'road car' was actually the commercialised version of the rally car. The manufacturers had no reason to complain about not being permitted to add a bodykit as, when this was wanted, it was already incorporated into the design, and hence, the homologation.