The new FIA WRC-car concept 2017

[stefanvv]

There is lot in common in all motorsport - crazy speed and lot of noise. If FIA/promoter want more public in Rally, they should do something in that direction (as simple it may sounds). Behind the curtains there is lot more to achieve that in ever aspect of motorsport - circuit races are easier to organize and cheaper - more races, probably more public (just like the football - almost every weekend). I agree though Rally looses its identity in that direction. Many people are nostalgic about Group B including me - for that times it just worked.... for awhile. There was just some "magic" about it. It is not anymore to get more and more people in the stages, difficulties with the safety you know, but actually transfer the "real" Rally to internet/TV. So far the promoter is doing well in that respect.

[dimviii]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EkrmN1mSjew

[itix]

NASCAR (Sprint Cup Series) is the one of the biggest (if not the biggest) motorsports in the World - and enjoys the largest, and most loyal fanbase. It consists of 36 racers (where the Daytona 500 is one of the largest public sporting events in the World.)

So itix, the main question here is not if You or I as individuals like NASCAR racing or not, but to find out why so many do, and what they love about it. That way we can open up our minds and learn something.

For when whole families couch down in front of their TVs to watch a several hours long race where very similar looking cars go around a circle 500 times, one should pay attention, because then there is something there!

I usually think your analysis is very good and detailed but your both wrong and right in this instance.

You are right that Nascar is achieving well for it's spectacle... over achieving quite a lot i'd say. But it is also molded for an american audience to fit like a glove on a hand. If americans seriously promoted rallying and if it had american roots, they would manage to make an equal following out of that.

Fortunately (I say as a european), that's not the case as I would not enjoy it. For me, nascar is beyond boring. I'd rather watch paint dry or grass grow. No one thinks of them as cars, they don't even look like cars you can buy. All they ever do is drive in circles forever and ever and ever.... the races are many many hours long and nothing ever happens.

I'd say part of it's success in america is the american tendency to add drama to everything. Discovery channel came and did a documentary/show once out of one of my old workplaces. Everything was calm, standard and smooth sailing, nothing strange at all and yet when you watched the documentary afterwards and how they had produced it, it seemed like everything was falling apart all the time and we were just managing to keep the operations together and there was the hurry and the time stress etc etc... which was all BS and exaggeration.

The WRC promoter does kinda the opposite. They take away drama where there is drama (in my opinion anyway) and the TV production is seriously lacking what is actually going on out on the stages. Don't get me wrong, they have very nice looking TV pictures of cars going past pretty locations, but the drama is lacking.

I think we should maybe look at Nascar TV production and where they do well in those respects rather than try to copy their machinery which really isn't the best aspect of the nascar spectacle.

[omer yetis]

maybe because it was tarmac test ?

I don't think front bumper & splitter has anything to do with the tarmac test but the aero pack?

[Fast Eddie WRC]

I don't think front bumper & splitter has anything to do with the tarmac test but the aero pack?

It may only be fitted for tarmac... that splitter wouldn't last long on a bumpy gravel event ...

Plus the car wouldn't look so much like a 'track-car' on on its gravel suspension.

[Lundefaret]

I usually think your analysis is very good and detailed but your both wrong and right in this instance.

You are right that Nascar is achieving well for it's spectacle... over achieving quite a lot i'd say. But it is also molded for an american audience to fit like a glove on a hand. If americans seriously promoted rallying and if it had american roots, they would manage to make an equal following out of that.

Fortunately (I say as a european), that's not the case as I would not enjoy it. For me, nascar is beyond boring. I'd rather watch paint dry or grass grow. No one thinks of them as cars, they don't even look like cars you can buy. All they ever do is drive in circles forever and ever and ever.... the races are many many hours long and nothing ever happens.

I'd say part of it's success in america is the american tendency to add drama to everything. Discovery channel came and did a documentary/show once out of one of my old workplaces. Everything was calm, standard and smooth sailing, nothing strange at all and yet when you watched the documentary afterwards and how they had produced it, it seemed like everything was falling apart all the time and we were just managing to keep the operations together and there was the hurry and the time stress etc etc... which was all BS and exaggeration.

The WRC promoter does kinda the opposite. They take away drama where there is drama (in my opinion anyway) and the TV production is seriously lacking what is actually going on out on the stages. Don't get me wrong, they have very nice looking TV pictures of cars going past pretty locations, but the drama is lacking.

I think we should maybe look at their TV production and where they do well in those respects rather than try to copy their machinery which really isn't the best aspect of the nascar spectacle.

I think You are right on the money itix, and this is what I was referring to.

If You have a sport that in the outset has the potential to be extremely boring (cars driving around in circles), and You make that extremely appealing, then there is something to be learned.

I completely agree with You in that I also think (know), that much of the problem lays with how rally is broadcast. What stories are told. What stories are left untold. And how they are told.

When it comes to NASCAR they are extremely good at this, and the fan involvement is second to no sport in the whole world. They even have fans calling to the show, and put them over so they can talk with their star drivers while they are racing (when there is a caution flag), and they even promote the drivers to tweet during the race (in the caution). So they are extremely good at getting the word across - and the WRC should learn a lot of NASCAR.

The space frame thing, is really not so important for me. I just know that it could cut the cost by a huge margin, and open up for the possibility of putting the driver in the centre of the car, and the codriver behind him (I think driver safety is VERY important). And it was used in rallying during rallyings most epic years (group B with Peugeot 205, Lancia S4, Lancia 037 etc), and I dont hear anyone complain about them cars not being road car derived.

The latest "Group B" car was the Pikes Peak Peugeot, which also was a space frame, and I think that car looks a lot cooler than todays WRC cars. Space frame opens up for changing the body, without developing a whole new car, wich would cut the development cost by a significant amount.

But as I say - the WRC has a lot to learn from NASCAR in a lot of ways

[makinen_fan]

[dimviii]

they managed to make polo ugly.
What a bunch of amateurs...

[Arnold Triyudho Wardono]

That front splitter is hideous..!!
It's more like pre-2011 COT..

[itix]

It's beyond hideous. I have never been a fan of big splitters and this is no exception. The polo was in my opinion already the most ugly of the WRC cars and now it is even uglier. I know you are trying to create a fleet of Audi Quattro S1's but I doubt anyone likes that car for it's looks (more likely the sound and the way it goes).

The bigger restrictor and increased power were steps in the right direction. The increased track width was probably too... the greater overhang and increased spoiler size allowed was probably not so much :/