A suitable amount of electric chock could also have a viagra effect.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
Printable View
A suitable amount of electric chock could also have a viagra effect.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by janvanvurpa
If this is the future of cars for WRC ???.......... it will be nice for classic cars rallys and rallycross championship. :-).
Then I say Goodbye to WRC............................................... ..........!!!
Let’s use this old thread for the commenting the 2017 technical regulations.
http://www.fia.com/news/new-regulati...orld-rally-car
The 2017 regulations see enhancements to the engine, and the visual impact created by an all-new aerodynamic package will dramatically enrich the spectacle of these cars and provide far greater diversity. The 1.6 litre turbo engine is retained but the power will be increased up to the level of the WTCC race cars. The diameter of the turbo restrictor will be increased from 33mm to 36mm while the turbo pressure remains at a maximum 2.5b absolute. The minimum weight of the car has also been reduced by 25 kilograms.
Greater freedom will also be afforded with the aerodynamics, setting this World Rally Car aside from many of its recent predecessors. A free zone defined around the bodyshell of the production car could see a front bumper overhang by an additional 60mm, potentially also with additional aero devices ahead of the front wheels, while the rear overhang can be increased by an extra 30mm. Bigger door sills will also be permitted. The fixed rear wing can be dramatically increased in size and while the rear diffuser will have maximum permitted dimensions, the shape will be free and may protrude up to 50mm from the rear bumper. The WRC car will be issued from a production car from which the overall homologated length must be greater than or equal to 3.9 metres, potentially adding further opportunities for manufacturers.
With a wider car and active central differential imo there’s a lot to develop on the car before 2017 season.
This is how the width will change for the Polo.
https://twitter.com/fernischumi
PAAVO retweeted
Iván Fernández @fernischumi 10h10 hours ago
No aparecen ni la mitad de cambios que se esperan para 2017 pero bueno... algo es algo. #WRC
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJ8FTCWWgAAUHdA.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJ8FSsBWEAA_9Qe.jpg
That would be good at tarmac event, but how about in gravel/snow..?
I'm really curious if they will use the whole width limit. 1875 mm is IMHO very impractical for some events with very narrow roads. We had here in the past some Peugeots 306 Maxi (circa 1850 mm) and despite them having traction control they were really struggling to keep wheels on the road on events like Barum where some roads are barely wider than the car.
Anyway I personally share the opinion of somebody else from previous discussion - restrictor change is ok but the modifications of aero package and active diffs are counter productive. I don't know for what it is good to have extremely fast cars which go like on rails (on asphalt at least) and look therfore slower than they are. I also agree with the opinion that it would be better to reduce aero kit and suspension travel.
I also share the opinion that aero changes and active diffs will deter the show. The power boost is welcomed but combined with the other two changes will make the cars just faster, not more spectacular or more difficult to handle.
The one thing that I would like to see is somehow to restrict suspension development, limit travel, dampers or something along these lines, to make cars move around more, like they use to in the 90s.
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned but does anyone think these new changes have come off the back of the recent success/rejuvenation of rallycross? I'd be amazed if that wasn't tabled as part of the discussion. It seems like a bit of a reaction to perceived WRX plus points.
This one looks more as a WTCC or DTM car.
Why is FIA doing this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldF
Because RedBull wants it. Possibly the carmakers too as they were involved in the process.