WRC mainclass from 2027

[Fast Eddie WRC]

does the new rules have something like "if you build a wrc27 car you gotta build at least 10"?
i remember reading something but I couldnt find the article again. probably from dirt fish?
so if toyota is building the new car, they gotta build 10 so others can buy, right? (if that rule exsit, no idea if im imagining things now)

FIA sets out requirements for WRC27 'Constructors' ...

https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/fia-s...fYqPERWTYi7ujA

[saco0o]

starting next year, rally4s can be used in rallycross too. new class called rx4.
now we have rx1, rx3, rx4... no rx2 haha this is so annoying.

[WRCStan]

[W]ho says they need to only have one brand's vehicles.

Nobody, but it can also be a complete bullshit rumour.

[WRCStan]

FIA sets out requirements for WRC27 'Constructors' ...

https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/fia-s...fYqPERWTYi7ujA

Have to say I certainly feel a sort of vindication for the things I've written here for the past few years. Never again do we have to discuss 'how to attract manufacturers', 'suitable bodyshells', 'SUVs' and 'entrants vs marques' lol.

'Second constructors' is poorly explained (from FIA source) given they already defined a constructor as having to enter the championship, but I think I get the gist.

It's a pivotal moment for the series whether you like it or not, and whether it works out or not. E.g. 10 year homologation period. If people still want to say Lancia bodyshell Rally2 is clearly the future, I just don't know what's to say to them anymore.

[deephouse]

Nobody, but it can also be a complete bullshit rumour.

It could be, but licking Ford fingers for so long and get absolutely nothing (besides donated 5 Pumas) must eventually stop. They still could provide support for their customers with Fords, just don't run it in main category anymore. I don't see a bad thing if M-Sport would start using others cars than Ford. OfcourseI would rather see them continuing wirh them, but in full scale as proper factory team, with great development, budget and good drivers... But it seems Ford does like giving nothing and getting advertisement for free. That's why my opinion is, they should start looking at all options, or there where money is.

Remember also that Toyota did had (and still have) Clios for their youth programme, as they don't have their own car developed.

[WRCStan]

With WRC27 M-Sport can build an M-Sport car of M-Sport design and give it an M-Sport name and enter it under M-Sport, all without Ford or having to look for a Ford alternative. That's the point in it all.

If a production car company, Lynk and Co, asked them to run a team I'm sure they would, but it's all been opened up.

[Kenneth]

Wait does this "Constructors" thing mean that Manufacturers and Tuners will be on a same level actually? Because last info was that only manufacturers can design own cars, and tuners will be only able to change a bodypanels of manufacturer's cars.

[Kenneth]

Wait does this "Constructors" thing mean that Manufacturers and Tuners will be on a same level actually? Because last info was that only manufacturers can design own cars, and tuners will be only able to change a bodypanels of manufacturer's cars.

So M-Sport as it was wouldn't make an M-Sport car without co-operation of Ford or anyone other.

[WRCStan]

So M-Sport as it was wouldn't make an M-Sport car without co-operation of Ford or anyone other.

Why not? Group A is gone. Reference cars are gone (bespoke styles permitted). All M-Sport need is a production engine. I don't know if the volume was made public or not, but given M-Sport provide engines to another series - they should be OK I think. Besides in August, FIA said manufacturers with another requirement are welcome to explain it.

Wait does this "Constructors" thing mean that Manufacturers and Tuners will be on a same level actually? Because last info was that only manufacturers can design own cars, and tuners will be only able to change a bodypanels of manufacturer's cars.

Inside the sport, yes same level, and it makes sense:

This introduces a formal definition for Constructors – bringing the Manufacturer and Tuner entrants under a singular umbrella as entrants in FIA World Rally Championship.

Outside the sport and from a road-legal POV, it makes no sense still:

A Constructor is the entity responsible for designing and building the WRC27-type car, preparing and submitting the vehicle for FIA homologation, and commercialising the car and its associated components.

I read this as 'manufacturer' supplies a 'tuner':

Where a Constructor supplies a second Constructor for partial homologation, the minimum production of the base car or car variant may be reduced relative to the supply to the second Constructor.

As I understand these things from my own experience and understanding of what will happen, a 'bodywork tuner car' will still legally be a 'manufacturer car'. Because if the 'manufacturer' sells a rolling chassis without paperwork (which it wouldn't), the 'bodywork tuner' is de facto the 'manufacturer' upon registration under their own name. So, a bodywork tuner will be driving an identical car on paper, only it looks different. (Kind of like how a Vauxhall Astra can be an estate or hatchback - it's a poor analogy). Last time out, the FIA said tuners will have to align with the manufacturer for all parts, so this makes sense to itself.

But upon FIA homologation, it looks like what is a legal 'manufacturer car' will become a 'tuner car' within FIA walls because the tuner homologated it.

They could do with getting somebody who wrote the rules to explain it rather than passing post it notes to the press office to interpret.