WRC future

[AnttiL]

https://yle.fi/urheilu/3-11665104

Jarmo Mahonen said in an interview that two big manufacturers are interested in joining WRC. He also says the current teams haven't yet signed the paper on committing to the rules, but it has been agreed verbally.

I have to also clarify this. What he actually says is that two manufacturers were interested in joining the 2017 WRC rules, but it has been quiet from them now. The news article was misleading.

[Francis44]

With Audi leaving FE and investing heavily again in motorsport with combustion engines (albeit in a slightly different way in Dakar) could we see another VAG brand joining the party in rallying?!

[Sulland]

I'm translating direct quotes from Mahonen about creating the 2017 rules because this stuff is golden

"We have to accept that when car manufacturers are involved, it's extremely difficult to control costs"

About going to R5
"We considered going to R5 but we would lose 150 million Euros coming to the sport"

It is hard to control cost if you keep changing the regulations, and use political reasons to do so.
In large parts of the world ICE will be 99% of the market for years to come.
Fully electric is currently nor possible in rally
Hybrid is a Parentises in the car history, no use going there for rally.

So manufacturers pay 150 mill to FIA to participate.

Still I think looking at the current corona situation, and that car manus struggle with sales, FIA should keep it simple and run with R5/Rally2 as top dog for a few years. Give FIA and the manufacturers more time to agree on rules for lets say 2024. Corona will be a challenge for at leat one more year from date, if not longer.

That will give all some time to breathe and find the way ahead.

[AnttiL]

How about we won't start this debate once again. However, I want to correct one of your statements

So manufacturers pay 150 mill to FIA to participate.

This is obviously the yearly budget of two manufacturers. If they chose not to participate in the sport, that money would go elsewhere than rallying. Like Mahonen said "the money would not come to the sport". The drivers, mechanics, events, organizations etc. would not get the money, other sports would get it.

[Mirek]

It is hard to control cost if you keep changing the regulations, and use political reasons to do so.

Change of regulations is the basic tool to keep the championship atractive by giving newcommers and unsuccessful ones a chance of restart. Like it or not without this restart the sport is down to two manufacturers after five years or so and the public interest falters in boredom. That was proved over and over again in the past when the period between the changes was kept too long. Yes, it costs money but it brings much more benefits.

[Sulland]

Change of regulations is the basic tool to keep the championship atractive by giving newcommers and unsuccessful ones a chance of restart. Like it or not without this restart the sport is down to two manufacturers after five years or so and the public interest falters in boredom. That was proved over and over again in the past when the period between the changes was kept too long. Yes, it costs money but it brings much more benefits.

In normal circumstanses i agree, but now we do not have normal economical circumstances for car manufacturers, since they have red number on the bottom line. Hard to convince the board, that now is the time to develop a complete new beast.

[Rally Power]

Change of regulations is the basic tool to keep the championship atractive by giving newcommers and unsuccessful ones a chance of restart. Like it or not without this restart the sport is down to two manufacturers after five years or so and the public interest falters in boredom. That was proved over and over again in the past when the period between the changes was kept too long. Yes, it costs money but it brings much more benefits.

Sulland is right on the political motivation for the rules changes and we all know they’re not made to attract new manus but mainly to keep the current ones, making hard to believe the WRC interest will raise because of '22 rules. Besides, apart Gr.B, WRC+ era is about to become the shortest in the series history.

Probably a R5 based solution (on an upgraded mild hybrid form) would allow a larger top field, but once the new rules were finished a year ago and the teams are already working on them, despite the Covid, it seems there’s little point to keep disputing them.

[AnttiL]

Besides, apart Gr.B, WRC+ era is about to become the shortest in the WRC history.

The original 1.6 rules lasted for six years (2011-2016), only one year longer than the current era.

[Rally Power]

The original 1.6 rules lasted for six years (2011-2016), only one year longer than the current era.

That doesn't change what I've write: WRC+ is about to become the shortest WRC era, apart Gr.B (actually if we consider '82 as the beginning of Gr.B era, WRC+ will actually become the shortest one, alongside Gr.B). Besides, '17 rules were mostly an evolution of previous WRC1.6T, quite different from a fundamental change as '22 rules are.

[Mirek]

Sulland is right on the political motivation for the rules changes and we all know they’re not made to attract new manus but mainly to keep the current ones, making hard to believe the WRC interest will raise because of '22 rules.

The manufacturers themselves are part of the political motivation. It's them calling for hybridization and electrification for years. The point is that without the change even the current manus would likely loose reason to stay and the new ones would definitely not come (nobody jumps on the running train which moreover doesn't carry what you want). Also the restart gives everyone a free sheet of paper which is especially important for Ford/M-Sport which at this moment is just adding numbers.

Also the use of tubular spaceframe is much easier for whatever manufacturers to jump in than the current cars. Such cars have good potential to attract big private teams, just like in Dakar or various circuit series if the homologation process will allow that (if not it's a huge mistake from FIA).