2023 WRC News & Rumours

[Steve Boyd]

The current Rally1 rules for WRC came from the manufacturers. They wanted to run prototypes, like in sportscar racing, because it was cheaper for them than homologating production cars. Manufacturers outside the current three were also consulted. It hasn't increased the entries, though.

Are you suggesting that ACM (organisers of Monte Carlo) should have a similar say in WRC to that of ACM is WEC? Would that result in a more "manufacturer friendly" rule set?

[Sal yet again]

I think the sport needs to look at all the mixed messaging it puts out there as well as thinking about the machinery.

The recent Goodwood Festival of Speed in the UK saw all 3 WRC manufacturers present for the first time since 2019. At the FOS one of the main features was all the cars performing donuts as part of their runs/displays to the delight of the crowds. What happens when that happens on or after the finish of a WRC round? A fine for the driver...You have the current and probably 2023 WRC Champion competing in Drifting seen as probably the biggest fan draw away for rallying yet bringing some of the that raw/outlaw appeal that supposedly draws in a lot of the WRC’s target demographic, is actively discouraged. Way back in the 70s and 80s Rally Portugal featured a stage at Estoril race circuit and after the main rally there was a “gymkhana” type event for the crews, even some of the team’s service barges took part! Why couldn’t something like that take place on the odd event during the year? Would be far better than the current arrangements.

Trying to preach the sustainability gospel then allowing the teams to drag 3 storey pre-fab buildings around the globe seems bizarre. To then say that these buildings are stopping fan access and start talking of “grid walks” so the fans can get up close is just plain misguided. I’m lucky enough to be able to remember when servicing took place where ever it could and there was no need to worry about access and whilst I appreciate that those were “different” times it still seems like a massive own goal.

As for the tv/online coverage WRC+ is patently not fit for purpose and is purely just another cash making exercise for the promotor. The gormless end of stage interview format and lack of outside cameras on events just fails to excite. I’d rather wait for footage from the likes of Passats de Canto for my fill than watch endless in-car but appreciate not everyone has the patience/attention span that I do.

[skarderud]

The current Rally1 rules for WRC came from the manufacturers. They wanted to run prototypes, like in sportscar racing, because it was cheaper for them than homologating production cars. Manufacturers outside the current three were also consulted. It hasn't increased the entries, though.

Are you suggesting that ACM (organisers of Monte Carlo) should have a similar say in WRC to that of ACM is WEC? Would that result in a more "manufacturer friendly" rule set?

Yes, i remember that round, but can anyone of the manu's or FIA says this ended as a sucsess?

Hardly.

No new manu's, uninterested competition, less fans, no privateers (good ones), nothing.

Yes, the cars are incredible spectacular, but that is not what fans or other manu's really want, obviously.


Sent fra min SM-S901B via Tapatalk

[AndyRAC]

The current Rally1 rules for WRC came from the manufacturers. They wanted to run prototypes, like in sportscar racing, because it was cheaper for them than homologating production cars. Manufacturers outside the current three were also consulted. It hasn't increased the entries, though.

Which is pretty damning - and tells you all you need to know. The WRC offers very little for manufacturers....whereas other series do.

[mknight]

When new rules (Rally1) have many things common with previous ones the existing manus have a big starting advantage, which is one of the reasons new manus are mostly interested in joinnig when there is a big rule change.

For WRC17 to Rally1 transition I would expect the engine rules had a lot to say. Current manus have 5+++ years experience running 1.6 turbos and there was a deadline for freezed homologation in mid 2021.

----
Sure this could be overcome if a manu has strong will (money) to join, but at the same time no manu atm is focused on trying to sell hybrids alone (only Toyota, but they were already in and even they are moving to trying to sell EVs).

----
I said it before that the hybrids were simply too late, should have come in 2020 latest. If they did there was a chance for Skoda and for Citroen staying.

As said multiple times this is not something new. Rally has been behind the trend during all major engine changes last 20 years. First WRC/Gr N was running turbos when no roadcars had it, then they moved to S2000 N/A engines just as all manus started downsizing. Now they went for hybrid just as manus are going to EVs.

[doubled1978]

The current Rally1 rules for WRC came from the manufacturers. They wanted to run prototypes, like in sportscar racing, because it was cheaper for them than homologating production cars. Manufacturers outside the current three were also consulted. It hasn't increased the entries, though.

Are you suggesting that ACM (organisers of Monte Carlo) should have a similar say in WRC to that of ACM is WEC? Would that result in a more "manufacturer friendly" rule set?

No, the ACM don’t have enough sway over the WRC to shape the rules. The ACO in the past did have that over the WEC (or the other series that pre-dated it) because their event was essentially 75% of the championship in marketing terms. They would often decide on a rule set that was a technology advancing one, which comes at a cost, in the case of LMP1, a very large one. Nowadays, the ACO are much more on board with the whole global system of sportscars and are much more in harmony with the WEC and also IMSA. LMDh and Hypercar are far from technology driven categories, the hybrid isn’t really a performance part, it’s just there for marketing.

[RS]

Stupid rule. Open the competition to all tyres.

It would be better for the tyre manufacturers too. Pirelli could brag about beating their competitors instead of just being famous for puncturing.

[AndyRAC]

It would be better for the tyre manufacturers too. Pirelli could brag about beating their competitors instead of just being famous for puncturing.

Ah, so you've been watching the MTB World Cup......they've had a few there as well.....cost Evie the win in Nove Mesto.

[RS]

Ah, so you've been watching the MTB World Cup......they've had a few there as well.....cost Evie the win in Nove Mesto.

No, just rallying!

[Steve Boyd]

Stupid rule. Open the competition to all tyres.

It would be better for the tyre manufacturers too. Pirelli could brag about beating their competitors instead of just being famous for puncturing.

But would it be better for the sport? How many teams would get a tyre sponsorship deal? How many tyre manufacturers would want to get into a development war. If "brand X" tyres had an exclusive deal with one team and their tyres were much better than the rest, where would that leave the other teams? How much would the teams without a deal have to pay for tyres compared with now?
Opening up to all tyres might only work if you make all tyres available to all teams and ban any links between tyre manufacturers and teams. Would the teams be intersted in this? Without knowing details of the current tyre supply deal, we can't say.