[WRC] News & Rumours 2019

[Mirek]

It's quite funny to say "money talks" when speaking about Germany being replaced by Kenya

[the sniper]

Can someone understand the reasoning at the promoter and the FIA?

You'd have to think it's down to money, as it's otherwise pretty incomprehensible for 2020. To exclude the ONLY event you have in Central Europe and near the Benelux/Northern France region, surely the core market for rallying, seems like madness! But maybe there is a plan here? Maybe they're doing this to give the FFSA a kick up the arse, hoping it'll instigate Rally France moving back up to the North, with Germany being sacrificed to achieve that end goal in 2021. Todt has talked about wanting cross border events...

It's quite funny to say "money talks" when speaking about Germany being replaced by Kenya

It is ironic, but we all know there's more money to be made from the Kenyan Government than the ADAC.

[Eli]

Doesn't Turkey need to be decided yet if they're in the calendar for next year and if they're not then Germany stays no?

[AnttiL]

It is ironic, but we all know there's more money to be made from the Kenyan Government than the ADAC.

Yes. I'm talking about money from the event organizers to the promoter doing the talking, not the money coming from spectators to the organizers.

[cali]

From what I can read it seems pretty much confirmed that Corsica and Germany are booted out in favor for Japan and Kenya.

I can understand Corsica, but Germany?

It's well visited, liked by teams and fans, short haul for the teams and really well organized. I truly do not understand the reasoning here.

We have shit rounds like Australia that means sending everything on a ship half around the world to a crap rally on crap stages in the middle of nowhere, visited by maybe 20 drunk morons every year that lie down right next to the stage and risk getting run over.

Can someone understand the reasoning at the promoter and the FIA?

Plus Germany is huge car market

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

[EstWRC]

FIA issues rear wing clarification after WRC Rally Finland anomalies

The FIA has instructed World Rally Championship manufacturers to comply with a clarification document concerning the rear wings on their World Rally Cars after anomalies were discovered during Rally Finland.

The governing body emphasised no parts were being run illegally - all manufacturer World Rally Cars comply with the homologation documents - but that the regulation concerning aerodynamics needed clarification.

The FIA has given the teams until next month's Rally Turkey to comply. Autosport understands Toyota's rear wing was at the heart of the debate, with clarification required to confirm its specification and measurements.

The suggestion to Autosport was that Toyota's rear wing sat outside the regulations, although the aerodynamic specification of the Yaris' rear wing has not changed since it was homologated at the start of 2017.

Asked specifically about Toyota, FIA rally director Yves Matton told Autosport: "There is no story about the Toyota rear wing. There has been a clarification concerning the rear wings from the World Rally Cars.

"We have asked all the manufacturers to do the work, and put them in conformity for Turkey. There is an action plan that we have asked all the manufacturers [to comply with]."



Following two late-night meetings on Friday, the teams put together a combined statement: "There is some problem on the homologation on the rear wing.

"All together we have to settle this because things are not very clear, and we have to settle all of this for Rally Turkey. Something has to be done to settle the homologation for all of the teams [regarding the rear wing]."

Toyota declined to comment beyond the statement, but a source told Autosport: "What caused this confusion?

"The car was presented to the FIA for homologation at the start of 2017. The FIA passed the car for homologation. These are the facts. Since then, the car has passed scrutineering every time, because the rear wing complies with the homologation document."

Matton accepted the FIA was at fault in the original homologation process, adding: "I would say, if there is a fault, it's the FIA.

"This is not Toyota, I told you all the cars are part of this action plan [for Turkey]."

Yves Matton Q&A

Why was this clarification needed?
When you make a homologation process, there are different interpretations between manufacturers, and this was the case here. That's why the clarification has been asked.

If you're given dimensions to work with, how can that be interpreted differently?
It's not so easy like that. It's not [that] you give a dimension... it's an aero regulation which is quite complicated, based on different figures, and different measurements and conditions. It's not just, [for example], 'this dimension from there to there'.

You have to take in all of these conditions, and there could be some different interpretations. That's the reason we had to check this, and this is why this clarification has been asked.

But the regulations don't allow the 30mm of overhang the Toyota has?
If you check the regulation, it's more difficult than this.

But no other car has an issue with the rear wing?
It's not the reality. We asked all the manufacturers to adapt their homologation. So does that mean none of the four manufacturers complies with the rules? No. All four manufacturers are complying with their homologation papers.

So they are in contravention of regulations, but homologated by the FIA?
No. Then whose fault is it that we need this clarification? I would say if there is a fault, it's the FIA, then. This is not Toyota [at fault], I told you all the cars are part of this action plan.

What's in the action plan?
That's between us and the manufacturers.

But there's no room here for different interpretation in the clarification?
We clarified how the text needs to be read. Why was that regulation not written tightly enough in the first place? The regulation will not change.

OK, why was there need for the clarification...
Before [now], nobody asked about this regulation. Maybe it's our fault that we have not seen this regulation could be interpreted differently. But now it's clear.

https://www.autosport.com/wrc/news/1...land-anomalies

[mknight]

So Toyota was homomogated with 3cm bigger rear wing than others and running it for 1,5 years?

That's certainly interesting as 3cm can make quite some difference.

EDIT:This article has much more details than the Autosport one: https://www.rallye-magazin.de/wrc/ar...sbedarf-41593/
It says Citroen found that out when they were trying to copy Toyota wing for their aero upgrade and that it is 30 mm longer than it should be.


EDIT2: Btw. if you remember Yaris did not comply with the rules when homologated and got a deadline by FIA to change at least 2 things on the car within 2 rallies as far as I remember. Don't remember the other thing, but one was illegal materials used in engine (think it was valves).
Maybe the officials doing the homologation were so busy with these issues and wondering what to do about them that they didn't pay enough attention to aero?

[EstWRC]

i read it like 3 times but still so confusing and messy for me

Like, "they did wrong but actually they didnt because its our fault but still they did wrong"

[reff92]

It seems that those fia french's are in panic,because this time isnt world champ from french. Very intresting to read that they almost say that we accept homoligation because thats our fault.

[pantealex]

Toyota wing is NOT actually bigger than others but their base car is smaller so wing/car is up to 3cm more than others have.

It´s true that they had to change some aerodynamics during homologation.

Sorry that I can´t explain it better.