Citroens vs. Peugeots.

[Speeddemon555]

Can't wait to see the Citroen battle the Peugeots next year in who gets to win the manufacturers title. Looks like it will be a see saw battle.

[Lee Janotta]

Oy... The French teams are going to run away with both titles... It should be a hell of a points fight between Grönholm and Loeb, at least.

But it's bugging the hell out of me that the WRC regs are giving the French manufacturers such an edge! Arggh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[alfasud]

In what ways do the current rules favour the French manufacturers? The 4000mm length limit is convenient for any manufacturer who's car is the right size, but is there is something particularly French about this size of car?

[racer69]

I agree, the two manufacturers (well, from one stable) are just doing the best job,.

I don't think Citroen will get either world title in their first full-on assault, however i think they will be the closest challenger Peugeot will have.

[Lee Janotta]

Maybe I wasn't clear enough... The rules don't "favor" the French teams persay, but they've fully exploited a very liberal rules package, while teams like Ford, Mitsubishi and Subaru have been slow to move away from the Group A approach. And so in reality, the rules package does give them an edge, because they started their current programs with clean-sheet approaches based tightly around the rules.

[Dani Filth]

It's gonna be intresting the battle in the PSA .. will Peugeot give up rallying and let Citroen led the flag or will a internal ballte ...

[JAG]

I think Ford will have there strongest challenge in 2003 primarily because Ford are developing a tarmac only Focus WRC, as Peugeot and Citroen already have. These specially developed cars are why the 2 French cars have such an apparant advantage on tarmac.

BTW the Focus was the first clean sheet WRC design.

[Lee Janotta]

Yeah, but the Focus was still build to the dimensions of a production cars... The French cars have some significant deviations in proportion from the production versions.

I admire them for so fully exploiting the rules, it's just the liberal rules that I'm so PO'd about...

[SJ Spode]

Maybe Ford ought to do what Audi did with the Quattro and reduce the wheelbase by taking a chunk out the middle.

[racer69]

As long as it doesn't end up looking like the short wheelbase Quattro Sport did.

[JAG]

Originally posted by Lee Janotta
Yeah, but the Focus was still build to the dimensions of a production cars... The French cars have some significant deviations in proportion from the production versions.

I admire them for so fully exploiting the rules, it's just the liberal rules that I'm so PO'd about...

All the WRC cars have different proportions to the road cars as they are allowed to widen the wheel arches and add splitters and rear wings in order to be competitive. All the WRCs exploit the rules to the maximum, except maybe Mitsubishi.

The Focus is decieving as it looks standard, but actually has much wider wheel arches than the standard car. It does not stand out like on the 206 WRC as the Focus road car wheel arches look very similar.

The only concession given to the French cars are that the 206 has marginally bigger bumpers to meet minimum requirements. For this Peugeot built 2500 road cars (the Group A minimum).

The rules are not liberal. They are very strict and based on Group A. homologation rules have always been a disater. Either to liberal (Group B) or to strict (Group A) increasing costs unesicerily.

The WRCs are Group A cars without the road car production, and subsequent cost.

The WRC rules are (very roughly as follows):-

Road car based - 25,000 minimum production requirement

Engine - from the road car range with turbos allowed to be added.

Bodywork - wider whell arches, rear wing, splitter, cooling.

4WD can be added to a 2 wheel drive car.

Ralling is at last following other forms of motorsport and abandoning homolgation of road cars. For example the BTCC and ETCC have a set of rules which cars are built to. No nonsense of having to be build you own Sierra Cosworth RS500 or Nissan Skyline GTR road cars first.

The Group A cars had no relation to the road car range. They had all the extras fitted to a WRC e.g. 4WD, Turbo, Wings,. wider wheel arches etc. but having to also build 2500 uneccessary road car versions

[Lee Janotta]

Y'know, rallying is _not_ F1, Jag. This is supposed to be about pushing real cars to their limits.

The homologation models were always a wonderful spark of life in hopelessly bland model lineups for many of these companies.

They were _not_ an overwhelming burden on these enormous corporations, who are now arguably spending just as much on extremely high-tech parts and much faster rollover of R&D.

Homologation is not nonsense, it's an enforcement of truth in advertising. If you're going to use your racing as an example of your engineering excellence, the cars you're selling for street use damn well better be up to the same standards, _especially_ in rallying, which started out as competitions to prove that a car was capable of getting from point A to point B without breaking down!

The Group A cars were indeed related to the road car range, because they _were_ road cars. Limited production, but production nontheless. And the requirements for homologation did force the companies into extending the cost-cutting measures in their other products to include the homologation cars.

[JAG]

The Group A cars were a burden on manufacturers. At the end of Group A only Ford, Subaru and Mitsubishi were competing. Toyota were still banned but did not have a suitable road car and would therefore have to produce a special. No one else were prepared to compete. The problem with homologation was that someone could produce a mid engined carbon fibre Group A car that would be legal an would instantly outdate the competition.

Now the money is spent on the cars that compete, not the road cars.

We now have many more rally based road cars as manufactuers can produce them as road cars rather than unsuitable homologation specials. Subaru, Ford, Mitsubishi, Skoda all produce rally based road cars with more to follow.

In the old Group 1 tp 4 days the cars were allowed modificatins for rallying such as bigger wheel arches. Nowadays 4wd is essential and so this is allowed in the modifications.

Touring cars gave up on homologation specials years ago yet no one would deny these cars are not road car based.

[Lee Janotta]

Right... It's a burden on them to build decent cars...

If someone _had_ come up with a Group A car that advanced, the FIA would surely have outlawed such a car immediatly.

Now the money is spent on the cars that compete, not the road cars.

So screw the customers? Jeez man, that's a pretty warped view of what this sport is really about.

There can be no comparison between allowing larger wheel arches and allowing turbos, paddle-shift gearboxes, and all wheel drive systems that were never even considered for the road cars.

Why _should_ rally cars go the way of touring cars? Why can't they remain real street machines lightly modified for competition? We have such a situation in our Speed World Challenge Touring and GT series... Cars pulled from the production line and turned into racers are providing perhaps the most exciting competition of any series on the planet!

[JAG]

You miss understand me. I'm not saying money is not spent on road cars, just that manufacturers build a specific rally car for competition with the WRC. They can then spend money developing road cars that benefit from the experience and technology from the WRC car that benefits the whole range, not just a single special.

A good average road car does not need 4wd, turbos etc. However they can benefit from semi-autos etc. Just because they are not 4wd does not mean they are not good cars.

Technology from the WRC such as semi-auto gearboxes, traction control, brake and tyre technology is now filtering through to the whole road car range.

Reading your message you seem to be advocating near standard road cars. If this is the case then the 'old' Group A cars like the Escort Cosworth would not fit the bill. These cars are specials, unrelated to the other road cars. If you want near standard cars rallying then you would have to only allow, say, cars built in numbers of 25,000 cars. This would stop 'high performance' road cars such as an Escort Cosworth competing and make all manufactuers enter their Fwd 2 litre cars.

We are obviously at polar opposites with regard to the kind of cars we would like to see competing. You like almost standard cars. At world championship level I would like to see the ultimate cars and technolgy that will filter through to the average road car. We now see even the smallest road cars with paddle/button shift gearboxes, all technology that has been perfected in the WRC.

[JAG]

If someone _had_ come up with a Group A car that advanced, the FIA would surely have outlawed such a car immediatly.

Thisis precisely why homologation specials don't work. It would be legal if 2500 road cars were built. The only option for the FIA would be to up minimum production number to 5,000 or 10,000.

This would rule out even more manufactures from competing due to the fact that Subaru could continue with there Impreza WRX 4WD, produced in numbers over 5,000, which would force other manufactuers to produce a similar specification road car to have evne the slightest chance of competing.

Remember when Lancia and Toyota were the only ones with the resources to produce 4wd, turbo road cars in 5,000 numbers in the early days of group A.

[Lee Janotta]

Well, firstly, I don't like semiauto gearboxes to begin with. Not in race cars, and certainly not in my own car. Heel-toe downshifting is quickly becoming a lost art. Nor am I a big fan of traction or stability control. Not having to shift or work to keep the car under control makes some very stupid drivers feel invulnerable. And when those systems can't compensate, the results are _very_ ugly. You can't get lazy when you're shifting manually and trying to manage oversteer in the rain or snow, or on gravel. And people who can't manage to do that perhaps shouldn't be on the road. ABS, I tolerate, because threshold braking is difficult for even the most experienced and skilled driver when in a panic situation. Your first reaction is always to put the pedal flat to the floor.

I think you're right, we do have very different images what we want WRC to look like. For me, the ideal is already strong production cars racing in lightly modified forms... Higher boost, bigger wheels and tires, etc... And you _could_, in theory, turn a street car into it's Group N or Group A equivalent with bolt-on parts.

And the FIA, in the case of a carbon-fiber supercar in Group A guise, could simply have outlawed whatever made the car unique, be it the carbon fiber, the mid-engined layout... Whatever.

[JAG]

Whatever we think about the cars, its good to see someone whos paaionate about rallying in North America. Is the sport developing weel there.

Talk is that a WRC event will be in the US in 2-3 years time if all goes well.

BTW your preference for a rally car would be to add on 'bolt-on' parts to increase the spec/performance. Is this not what a WRCeady is alr. Bolt-on 4wd, turbos (remeber not all manufactuers have suitable turbo road cars), wings etc.

As for the 'ultimate mid-engined' Group A car I mentioned, how far would you go. Would you ban Fords Homologation special Escort Cosworth, which would mean Ford could not compete against Subarus 'standard' Impreza WRX and would force Ford out of the WRC.

[Lee Janotta]

Y'see though, AWD is _not_ a bolt-on... It requires adding a transmission tunnel, engineering a whole new rear suspension (probably forcing you to replace the whole subframe), brake and axle setup, a new gearbox...

Neither are turbochargers, because you'll need completely different head castings, intakes, camshaft profiles, oil cooling sprays built into the block to cool the underside of the pistons...

_But_, and I think this might have worked if the FIA had held it's ground on the WRC regs, if the companies get used to the idea of building cars with AWD, they might start making it available as an option on some of their other models, which benefits everyone.

[JAG]

After a few years when 4wd was being used less in road cars, it really seems to have made a big comeback both as a performance and safety option. It seems all the big European manufactuers have 4wd options in there range or plan to do so in the near future.