[WRC] News & rumours (part III)

[Mirek]

I want to say that the best wrc days were when the sport was expensive.group b,the group a with the endless testing,the wrc with the 3 active differentials etc.if the cars are cheap i don't think it will be attractive for the public.we all want a little bit to see <exotic> cars!what i want to say is that high cost have helped the sport in the past.why not know?

Yes, also in those times common cars had 50 Hp and the rally cars had 10x more! Nowadays 300 Hp engine in a road car isn't that special. When You take a used car You don't need to be any rich to have one. Even if You take that most common cars have around 100-150 Hp it's still only 2x-3x less than WRC car. Nothing mind-blowing about that. I know that modern rallying is not about raw power but the raw power has always been very appealing to the general public. Many people dream about crazy cars with 600 Hp they can watch on Top Gear...

[RAS007]

There wasnt one guy totally dominating, that is the problem. Even when Makinen won 4 on the trot he didnt look invincible......Loeb was and now Ogier is, and he may win for the next 6 or 7 years.

I think that this has been a large contributing factor to the current state of the WRC; after Gronholm retired, there was simply no competition at all, and Loeb sleepwalked to 5 titles in row. With Ogier, as you said, it looks like more of the same.

[Doon]

nothing of these points is true. the first one to add to my ignore list after the forum has been renewed.

If none are true, then at least give me the list of Dakar's 'household' name drivers, please? In fact, just give me one?

Throughout the history of the Dakar, most non-fans will only remember one person. Mark Thatcher, because he got lost and was Maggie's son.

[A FONDO]

So you put anyone on ignore list as soon they have opposite thoughts than you? There´s anyway much truth in what Doon says, here in Sweden.

not the thoughts, the facts! you are the second

Chasing TV is old news. It’s 2014 – online streaming is the way to go for ‘Live’ coverage. Use TV for highlights/review programmes.
RedBull have their own online ‘TV station’ – and haven’t used it as they could have; look at the Mountain Biking World Cup as an example. That is what they should have done with the WRC.

Some series even stream on either YouTube or Dailymotion.

exactly.

[AMSS]

Yes, also in those times common cars had 50 Hp and the rally cars had 10x more! Nowadays 300 Hp engine in a road car isn't that special. When You take a used car You don't need to be any rich to have one. Even if You take that most common cars have around 100-150 Hp it's still only 2x-3x less than WRC car. Nothing mind-blowing about that. I know that modern rallying is not about raw power but the raw power has always been very appealing to the general public. Many people dream about crazy cars with 600 Hp they can watch on Top Gear...

Agreed completely, they could/should immediately change the rules to similar as in the WTCC(same base engine as in WRC as far as I know) with bigger restrictor (think it`s 36mm) and they have according to manufactorers around 380hp so in reality probably around 400hp..

[Rallyper]

not the thoughts, the facts! you are the second

Well, in that case you can´t read much, because everyone will be on your ignore list in the end.

[Gregor-y]

I think Andy's on to something. Online coverage would be able to reach most viewers that want to watch with no regard to location. Just keep a copy available so people in vastly different time zones can still watch. I remember waking up very early to watch Euro Vision's live Monte Carlo coverage (2009?) that was just fantastic. All you need is a sponsor with a global product to promote, like Red Bull.

Chasing TV is old news. It’s 2014 – online streaming is the way to go for ‘Live’ coverage. Use TV for highlights/review programmes.
RedBull have their own online ‘TV station’ – and haven’t used it as they could have; look at the Mountain Biking World Cup as an example. That is what they should have done with the WRC.

Some series even stream on either YouTube or Dailymotion.

[stefanvv]

You do understand that you are proposing to use less useful flying camera? Heli cams are great, it's just that landscape sets some boundaries. Drones in rallying are still pretty pointless because you can only use it for hovering. Their fly speeds are too small compared to the speed cars are doing. Also at the moment they've got more of an effect camera role like most action cameras.

Another thing with drones are the safety risks.

More on ground cameras is the way to go.

Yes, I know the difficulties and limited usage, but I prefer this instead of the stupid idea turning the Rally sport into Rally cross.

[Rally Power]

Nowadays WRC rallies aren’t challenging enough at the eyes of common public. The 9 to 5 schedule and the clover leaf itinerary (implemented by the mandatory use of single service areas) made WRC boring and tasteless.

The adventurous side of rallying has been lost and surely the VW/RB final day shootout plan will make things even worse, simply because it’ll put WRC even further from its original spirit.

We don’t need to be 100% purist and get back the classic layouts, but somehow there should be ways to WRC become again a physically demanding challenge for drivers and machines with huge popular recognition.

Avoiding an overall cost escalate, we could have 8 to 10 transnational rallies, without schedule restrictions, using flexible service areas and different road surfaces, instead of the current 13/14 regionally based lookalike events.

A hypothetical Lisboa-Madrid rally sounds much more appealing than nowadays algarve’s or catalunya’s WRC loops and shouldn’t be over-priced for organizers and competitors.

[SubaruNorway]

I don't know about everyone else but there are two big problems with the current WRC TV coverage. Well they're minor really but they reduce my enthusiasm for watching it so much.

1. In-car cameras used to be positioned behind the the driver/co-driver - not only could you see the scenery bearing down on the car but you could see the driver hard at work fighting the controls and the co-driver trying to keep cool whilst being thrown about. What was wrong with that and why do we now have to view through a tiny portion of the windscreen that often gets covered in muck, thereby reducing total visible action?

I talked to someone in Filmworks, the production company and it's the FIA limiting them from positioning the cameras where they want
stating that mounting it on the seat "ear" could cause it to go through the seat or coming loose and hurt them.

You would have to crash pretty bad for that to happen, mine even stuck on during Østberg's ski jump with the stock gopro 3m sticky mount...