WRC mainclass from 2027

[WRCStan]

to me, and to most of people in the rally world, a manufacturer is a company that produces road cars.

Rally is a road sport, and bespoke-design spaceframe build rally cars are road cars. I get your point though, I'm not going to argue you should change it, but it's not logically definitive.

but we can also refer to company/entity that builds their own shells, works the same, as the majority of names you did are just tuners, or company/entity that uses others' shells to prepare a race car.

Forget what these hypothetical example 'tuners' might have done before, think what they might do. If they are building a car from scratch and the car's legal registration papers have their name/make then they're not using another company's chassis or body.

We could also digress into body-on-chassis cars like a lot of the big American SUVs are and older cars were. And we could get into the makes that contract out the construction of shells; but if this is your belief, fine. What I'm hearing from you is "series-production manufacturer with funds and capable of churning out 10,000s cars per year for the average consumer" Fine.

honestly, i don't get all the part about lancia. if u are saying that fia must change the homologation standard, i can agree. anyway, the minimum quantity for rally2 (and lesser) is 2500, not 25000, that is not that far from low volume to me. rally1, as being a space frame doesn't have a minimum quantity.

Yes, 2500 for others; 25,000 of a model family for WRC and Rally1. For me this conversation is revolving around WRC top class so I may have conflated points; and I would think that a WRC2027 without powertrain would be largely the same up and down the pyramid. Willing to be corrected on that, but as a Fiesta body made it to every step, I think it's doable and good practice in the long term.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

I just listened to the DF Stage Mode podcast with Andrea's Mikkelsen. He said that everyone he speaks to (about a drive) says they wont make 2027 because the Rules are still not out. Its already so late. He heard that maybe Toyota will be the only ones ready.

[wyler]

Rally is a road sport, and bespoke-design spaceframe build rally cars are road cars. I get your point though, I'm not going to argue you should change it, but it's not logically definitive.



Forget what these hypothetical example 'tuners' might have done before, think what they might do. If they are building a car from scratch and the car's legal registration papers have their name/make then they're not using another company's chassis or body.

We could also digress into body-on-chassis cars like a lot of the big American SUVs are and older cars were. And we could get into the makes that contract out the construction of shells; but if this is your belief, fine. What I'm hearing from you is "series-production manufacturer with funds and capable of churning out 10,000s cars per year for the average consumer" Fine.

it's really not about what me or you prefer. it's just what the motorsport governing body refers to to make the regulations. you, me or anyone else can disagree on it, still it's them that define what a manufacturer is.

and i don't like the "wht ifs..." hypotetically everyone can do everything in the future, realistically, we still don't have a clear path to '27 and no new brand officially committed (actually we are losing them from the last wrc era)

[WRCStan]

A Rally1 car is neither a buggy nor a touring car, it's a rally car.

Fully agree!

It's probably the furthest you can get to still call it a rally car, since at the very least they resemble a road car.

Disagree! Rally cars are road cars, they legally have to be.

But I don't know what you mean by touring car, to me a touring car is a Civic TCR. A regular, road going Civic is a road car to me.

Historically, a touring car was used to go touring. You take your friends and family and luggage and go somewhere nice for leisure and pleasure. It's from way back when there was no commute, no suburbs, no out of town shopping centres or weekly family shop at the supermarket, no motorways or even much tarmac. If you needed to be somewhere you took the train. Other options at the time were runabout, towncar, limousine, cab, doctor's car, etc which had different build qualities around those purposes.

~100 years ago, FIA considered three types of cars for motorsport purposes: Racing Cars, Sports cars, and Touring Cars. Rallying, being a touring road sport and not requiring speed originally, mainly used TCs but began to allow sports cars (and GTs) more in the 40s/50s/60s, and as special stage rallying took off. Then in the late 80s all cars had to be four seater touring cars in Groups A and N. Then Group R rally cars were invented but they had to be based on Group A touring cars out of a tradition and everybody pretends they've been modified, like 'there were rear seats in Rossel's C3 but we ripped them out for the rally and we will put them back' (I'm being dramatic).

At least the Rally1 regs do not even mention touring cars. They are defined as 'single example competition cars' but must have a 'series production reference car' for what it looks like. There's no evidence to say that has to be a touring car, and the Puma isn't even homologated in Group A.

This name 'touring car' dropped off in English but stayed on in French, so what used to be called The British Saloon Car Championship became the British Touring Car Championship to match FIA words in the 1980s. (Maybe they had to be Group A? Supertourers and all that?) So there's no surprise if you are an English speaker and associate Touring cars with racing, but this is a poor choice from those original 3. You're not going touring in a TCR, it's a racing car and not road legal. And if you don't call the Civic 'road car' a touring car, it's because it's a stupid name for most people's purposes, but at least you can go touring in it if you wanted to.

A Buggy is a...

Honestly, I didn't mention this and you can check. I don't need an explanation. I'm describing WRC2027 rules as I understand them and Rally1 because they're the spaceframe example. In construction terms, there's no difference between Rally1 and WRC2027. We've difference in opinion of what a road car is and if you choose to call them buggies, feel free.

So back to discussion, Rally1 being visually based on 'series production cars' but there's no 'series production car manufacturers' interested in WRC. The rules are being changed to allow bespoke rally designs and for 'tuners' to build chasses; I've no idea what they mean by Tuners, because I cannot see what they are 'tuning' as like you suggest a 'tuner' would 'tune' something already existing. I agree with that definition. If you can tell me why I am in the wrong for thinking a small cheese can build a WRC2027 car, I'd be grateful.

[WRCStan]

I just listened to the DF Stage Mode podcast with Andrea's Mikkelsen. He said that everyone he speaks to (about a drive) says they wont make 2027 because the Rules are still not out. Its already so late. He heard that maybe Toyota will be the only ones ready.

I'm willing to agree with this.

[WRCStan]

it's really not about what me or you prefer. it's just what the motorsport governing body refers to to make the regulations. you, me or anyone else can disagree on it, still it's them that define what a manufacturer is.

and i don't like the "wht ifs..." hypotetically everyone can do everything in the future, realistically, we still don't have a clear path to '27 and no new brand officially committed (actually we are losing them from the last wrc era)

I'm here to discuss what is planned. I'm long past hearing people's opinions on what they should be doing believe me. Yes there's a lot of unknowns but like I said to Focus, if you can tell me where I'm wrong about my interpretation of what's planned then I'm not wasting my time coming here.

[giu canbera]

I just listened to the DF Stage Mode podcast with Andrea's Mikkelsen. He said that everyone he speaks to (about a drive) says they wont make 2027 because the Rules are still not out. Its already so late. He heard that maybe Toyota will be the only ones ready.

I can bet on this:
January 2027 P.R.:
"Can the new Toyotas WRC27 beat the +40 R5s in every event?"

Fans after Monte Carlo:
"FIA killed the sport! They should DEMAND Toyota to run only R5s, otherwise this is just like those crappy years in WEC where they ran alone on the front. What a joke"

[wyler]

I'm here to discuss what is planned. I'm long past hearing people's opinions on what they should be doing believe me. Yes there's a lot of unknowns but like I said to Focus, if you can tell me where I'm wrong about my interpretation of what's planned then I'm not wasting my time coming here.

everybody is here to discuss the news, and free to do so!

i can't tell if your vision is wrong or not, i can tell what i see, the same way you do.

and what i see is that, to me, is totally unrealistic to think than any small cheese can build a wrc27. or better: it's true. anyone can do it, but almost no one could then run it in the wrc championship, nor would sustain the production rhytm to make selling those cars profitable or even sustainable. there's too much money needed to logistics, even without thinking about test and development to challenge the resource of toyota. and just being there is not enough, cause few people will buy them a car that can't compete. is momething that we already seen with m-sport, and we can also not consider rally1 in it. they are a good tuner example in the rally2 market... they can compete in the fisrst times, being the first in the market (think fiesta r5) but then they faded against giants like skoda, toyota. and they are big "tuner", a company that employs hundreds of people.

i just think this solution is a bit too simplistic/optimistic. sure thing, making building cars accessible is a good thing, but to me, the problems arise in running it a full season(s) and building hundreds quickly to make it profitable. i think that are the topics that are slowing down things for '27. as for wrc+ and rally1: the point was not building the cars, but run it...

[focus206]

Historically, a touring car was used to go touring. You take your friends and family and luggage and go somewhere nice for leisure and pleasure. It's from way back when there was no commute, no suburbs, no out of town shopping centres or weekly family shop at the supermarket, no motorways or even much tarmac. If you needed to be somewhere you took the train. Other options at the time were runabout, towncar, limousine, cab, doctor's car, etc which had different build qualities around those purposes.

~100 years ago, FIA considered three types of cars for motorsport purposes: Racing Cars, Sports cars, and Touring Cars. Rallying, being a touring road sport and not requiring speed originally, mainly used TCs but began to allow sports cars (and GTs) more in the 40s/50s/60s, and as special stage rallying took off. Then in the late 80s all cars had to be four seater touring cars in Groups A and N. Then Group R rally cars were invented but they had to be based on Group A touring cars out of a tradition and everybody pretends they've been modified, like 'there were rear seats in Rossel's C3 but we ripped them out for the rally and we will put them back' (I'm being dramatic).

At least the Rally1 regs do not even mention touring cars. They are defined as 'single example competition cars' but must have a 'series production reference car' for what it looks like. There's no evidence to say that has to be a touring car, and the Puma isn't even homologated in Group A.

This name 'touring car' dropped off in English but stayed on in French, so what used to be called The British Saloon Car Championship became the British Touring Car Championship to match FIA words in the 1980s. (Maybe they had to be Group A? Supertourers and all that?) So there's no surprise if you are an English speaker and associate Touring cars with racing, but this is a poor choice from those original 3. You're not going touring in a TCR, it's a racing car and not road legal. And if you don't call the Civic 'road car' a touring car, it's because it's a stupid name for most people's purposes, but at least you can go touring in it if you wanted to.

I'm aware of the historical definition, I just didn't think anyone would still use it today. Last time I saw (on ewrc-results) a rally dividing cars into touring and great touring classes, it was probably from the 60's. So a touring car is a regular road legal car, like almost all vehicles we see on the road? Pretty sure in many other languages if you say touring car, it means exclusively a race car such as TCR nowdays.

Honestly, I didn't mention this and you can check. I don't need an explanation. I'm describing WRC2027 rules as I understand them and Rally1 because they're the spaceframe example. In construction terms, there's no difference between Rally1 and WRC2027. We've difference in opinion of what a road car is and if you choose to call them buggies, feel free.

So back to discussion, Rally1 being visually based on 'series production cars' but there's no 'series production car manufacturers' interested in WRC. The rules are being changed to allow bespoke rally designs and for 'tuners' to build chasses; I've no idea what they mean by Tuners, because I cannot see what they are 'tuning' as like you suggest a 'tuner' would 'tune' something already existing. I agree with that definition. If you can tell me why I am in the wrong for thinking a small cheese can build a WRC2027 car, I'd be grateful.

You didn't mention them, you described them, if you meant in 2027+ rally championship should allow vehicles that aren't road legal and don't resemble road/touring cars. And that goes beyond the official manufacturer vs tuner difference. Audi had a buggy for Dakar, if they entered it without making a road version, it would still be a buggy to me.

I don't think you're wrong for thinking that tuners or non official manufacturers can build a rally car. I think you're wrong in considering something like a McRae R4, which is not a road car and never had any type of production except for cross country rally costumers, a rally car that should be allowed to take part in rally championships. To me, that could bring in the future companies like let's say Red Bull, making their own purpose-made vehicle exclusively to tackle WRC, which is a sight I hope I'll never see.
If, in theory, we get things like AP4 or the Swedish Mirage R5, I'd be happy to welcome them. In practice, I doubt it's so simple.

[WRCStan]

So a touring car is a regular road legal car, like almost all vehicles we see on the road?

Not for me. It's the FIA's definition for Group A and N. Group B was for GTs but also included sports specials it allowed the beasts that got banned and so WRC manufacturers championship never saw a GT or sportscar again because they're still stuck on those Groups' rules written in the 70s.

Which is a good time to also mention from before Groups N, A and B; Lancia's space frame Stratos rally special, Alpine's backbone chassis, fibre body, A110 sportscar. Two seater Porsche 911s. Apparently not the DNA of rallying?

You didn't mention them, you described them, if you meant in 2027+ rally championship should allow vehicles that aren't road legal and don't resemble road/touring cars.

I really didn't, try quoting me! Anybody can build a road legal car to their own design at home, though as those 70s examples above and Group B (037, RS200) show is in spirit, I would love to step away from having to resemble 'touring cars' even if they had to be series-produced. If you think the R4 is a buggy, what do you think of those?

in the future companies like let's say Red Bull, making their own purpose-made vehicle exclusively to tackle WRC, which is a sight I hope I'll never see.

You'll still watch it �� and it's probably what they want to achieve.