Page 19 of 30 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 294

Thread: WRC future

  1. #181
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,460
    Like
    5
    Liked 877 Times in 477 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mise View Post
    Think RRC was just a Ford marketing thing, but the group was R5
    No. They were allowed to compete in one class, soon afer they were banned for their price and speed. RRC Mini (with a different name, S2000 1.6T) and DS3 also exist. In the end there were some bolt-on/off things to be changed, but the car was pretty much a WRC, different rear wing, front bumper, tarmac brakes and smaller restrictor.
    Last edited by Tarmop; 6th December 2019 at 18:30.

  2. Likes: AnttiL (6th December 2019),pantealex (7th December 2019)
  3. #182
    Armchair General Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    20,694
    Like
    6,249
    Liked 8,366 Times in 3,412 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SubaruNorway View Post
    Any chance you could make the aero from fiberglass or plastic or would it break too easy?
    Ban wind tunnel testing? I guess the computer can calculate it good enough anyway now?
    It's sure possible. It just needs to be thicker and heavier.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  4. #183
    Armchair General Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    20,694
    Like
    6,249
    Liked 8,366 Times in 3,412 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mise View Post
    Think RRC was just a Ford marketing thing, but the group was R5
    No. RRC is an M-Sport name for something which is technically S2000 with 1.6T engine. R5 is completely different thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mise View Post
    Prefered the -16 rule that you could turn R5 to WRC and vise versa.
    WRC 2011-2016 were basically up-tuned S2000 (or RRC in case the S2000 had 1.6T engine). The S2000/RRC were reasonably more expensive than the R5 at the peak of their popularity. R5 is a different thing built according to different philosophy (much more stock parts, price caps not only for the whole car but also for the components etc.).

    The combination of regional rally car and world rally car proved to be a wrong thing. Basically mobody was converting the cars from RRC to WRC and back (some did but very rarely) and the only result was that the regional rally cars got way too expensive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarmop View Post
    RRC and WRC, R5 is totally different.
    This.
    Last edited by Mirek; 6th December 2019 at 18:54.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  5. Likes: AnttiL (6th December 2019),cali (7th December 2019),pantealex (7th December 2019)
  6. #184
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    352
    Like
    11
    Liked 82 Times in 34 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirek View Post
    No. RRC is an M-Sport name for something which is technically S2000 with 1.6T engine. R5 is completely different thing.



    WRC 2011-2016 were basically up-tuned S2000 (or RRC in case the S2000 had 1.6T engine). The S2000/RRC were reasonably more expensive than the R5 at the peak of their popularity. R5 is a different thing built according to different philosophy (much more stock parts, price caps not only for the whole car but also for the components etc.).

    The combination of regional rally car and world rally car proved to be a wrong thing. Basically mobody was converting the cars from RRC to WRC and back (some did but very rarely) and the only result was that the regional rally cars got way too expensive.



    This.
    Ok, I'll give up. Let the good times roll with 6 WRC cars.

  7. #185
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    7,841
    Like
    1,229
    Liked 1,549 Times in 821 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirek View Post
    If the aim is to kill the R5 for the privateers than making it the top level class is a good idea... otherwise, figure.
    Why not keep R5 cars as they are but make WRCar rules R5 based, ie. with upgrades? Make minimum length 4.3m if it brings more manufacturers in.

    Iím one of those quite uncomfortable with a growing lack of relation between the road cars and the rally car.

  8. #186
    Armchair General Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    20,694
    Like
    6,249
    Liked 8,366 Times in 3,412 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by RS View Post
    Why not keep R5 cars as they are but make WRCar rules R5 based, ie. with upgrades? Make minimum length 4.3m if it brings more manufacturers in.

    I’m one of those quite uncomfortable with a growing lack of relation between the road cars and the rally car.
    Because it will not work. It was mentioned here already plenty of times. Higher power and torque means that you can forget about using most of the R5 parts. You would end with new rules and different cars anyway.

    For what would be the minimal lenght 4,3 meters good for? For making those cars slower than the R5?
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  9. Likes: dimviii (6th December 2019),EstWRC (7th December 2019),pantealex (7th December 2019)
  10. #187
    Senior Member Rally Power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    2,664
    Like
    3,357
    Liked 2,553 Times in 1,158 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by T16 View Post
    Might be a daft question, but why would the GT manus not be welcome?
    Not daft at all; unfortunately that has been the case since Gr.B extinction (RGT is a deception as the cars aren't allowed to run in a competitive way, like they should).

    GT's apart, it seems the WRC may soon face a dilemma due to costs escalade: to keep current cars but to limit the length of the calendar and even of the events in order to decrease running costs or to keep the calendar expansion and the events layout but to replace current cars for less expensive (and less exciting) ones. It's a hard choice.
    Rally addict since 1982

  11. Likes: T16 (6th December 2019)
  12. #188
    Armchair General Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    20,694
    Like
    6,249
    Liked 8,366 Times in 3,412 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rally Power View Post
    GT's apart, it seems the WRC may soon face a dilemma due to costs escalade: to keep current cars but to limit the length of the calendar and even of the events in order to decrease running costs or to keep the calendar expansion and the events layout but to replace current cars for less expensive (and less exciting) ones. It's a hard choice.
    Sorry to disagree again. The issue is not the cost but the value in the current socia-political climate. Simply the manufacturers need to have a reason to invest. It doesn't help if you manage to decrease cost by let's say 20% (that's a lot) if the value is not there. The same applies vice versa.

    In other words - would you buy something which you neither need nor want just because it's cheap? Probably not, right?
    Last edited by Mirek; 6th December 2019 at 22:46.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  13. Likes: cali (7th December 2019),EstWRC (7th December 2019)
  14. #189
    Senior Member cali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    1,669
    Like
    3,397
    Liked 662 Times in 278 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mise View Post
    Ok, I'll give up. Let the good times roll with 6 WRC cars.
    So you do not remember group B days with only handful of cars and the participation was even more hectic on these days, yet everybody is crying to get these days back. The group A beginning was the same. Go figure how short human memory is.

    Rallying usually have had 2 - 3 teams so this is not something new for this sport. So by your standards rallying has had "good times" on most of it's existence.

    Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by cali; 7th December 2019 at 10:05.

  15. Likes: AnttiL (7th December 2019),EstWRC (7th December 2019),pantealex (7th December 2019),the sniper (7th December 2019),tommeke_B (7th December 2019)
  16. #190
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    7,841
    Like
    1,229
    Liked 1,549 Times in 821 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirek View Post
    For what would be the minimal lenght 4,3 meters good for? For making those cars slower than the R5?
    To address the problem you identified that certain manufacturers do not have a car smaller than this.

    I agree with your point that cheaper does not automatically mean better value, but FIA will have to make damn sure there is strong manufacturer interest in the new rules because as we are seeing now when a manufacturer pulls out it is very hard for privateer teams or drivers to fill the gap.

    They say they want to see stronger competition in R5 class to make up the difference. I hope that happens.. in order to help with that the promoter should give that category stronger media coverage.

  17. Likes: AndyRAC (7th December 2019)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •