Quote Originally Posted by wyler View Post
you need a manufacturer but has it happens with those same f1 teams to have engines by others, i don't think that's the problem stopping them.
i mean, with money enough, i assume that manufacturer can give homologation permits.

even the same ford, can maybe have more than 1 team, right?
maybe something like a dirtfish subaru team usa by haas could also be...
It seems if there was a rule saying you need to place the koh-i-noor on the dark side of the moon, folk will still argue the cost is the issue. Thankfully Andy has put us right on Mitsubishi, that money is sometimes not the problem. This manufacturer rule is simply out of date and potentially throttling engagement.

Quote Originally Posted by AndyRAC View Post
I'm not sure why people are using a comparison with F1 constructors; it's slightly different. Some are owned by a car manufacturer; others are solely in business to race in F1, without selling production cars.

The WRC is a motorsport series using cars based on production cars, built by mainstream manufacturers......That's not likely to change unless the FiA decide to.
I brought F1 up because CNC machines and energy drinks are going racing, constructing their own race cars without need for building thousands of non-identical road cars. I get there's still engine suppliers etc, it's not the ideal. Point is, WRC was based on production cars, but it's not now, so why is everybody imposing this 'road car manufacturers'. Actually, I'm wondering over these recent posts if consensus is that the manufacturers championship is for 'rally car manufacturers'.

Anyway, I'll bet the FIA will realise this, and we'll get Dirtfish Haas Team USA using any suppliers they want before seeing Rally2 as flagship class. IMO it's certainly in the best interests of promoting and growing the global sport as we often discuss.