European Rallycross Categories to be renamed

[tbtstt]

This is actually part of a story posted in another topic (so sorry to rip off your link Japanese Samurai!), but I thought it was worthy of its own thread.

Originally Posted by World Motor Sport Council

Rallycross categories will be renamed from 1 January 2011. Division 1 will be known as ‘SuperCars’, Division 1A ‘Super1600’, and Division 2 ‘TouringCars’.

Included as part of this annoucement here:

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre...sc_031110.aspx

Not massive news I know!

[FIRE]

SuperCars and Super1600 are okay for me but TouringCars? It's a meaningless name. Why not Super2000?

[1975DCS]

Originally Posted by FIRE

SuperCars and Super1600 are okay for me but TouringCars? It's a meaningless name. Why not Super2000?

Because it ain't Super2000's! They are lower spec cars, despite the bigger capacity. A bit like that R3 cars, half GpA, half GpN.

To be honest I think it is a stupid class, because some things are heavy restricted, while other things are completely free. Still don't like the RWD conversion idea, making it BMW and Ford drivelines, nothing to do with TouringCars. To bad the Fia killed the KitCars, that could have filled the gap: Super2000's!

Basicly the Super1600's have the least restrictions, even less than SuperCars!

[chunder]

I agree, totally pointless class in my view.

It is now been seen that unless you have a "Special" car you are never going to win there. Borseth, Tohill and Enerberg dominated in reality in bespoke, specials that are beyond most peoples budget and pretty much the same as things like Evans Micra over here many years back.

Bad decision al round, coz as usual it just hasn't been thought out very well. Some of the simpler cars are nice and look fun to drive, but those Fiesta's are far too trick and not really in the spirit of the regs.

The only way to make the class better is to allow much bigger engines, which would allow the cars to have more power than grip. Just like the Supernationals they are trying to be but failing.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by 1975DCS

Because it ain't Super2000's! They are lower spec cars, despite the bigger capacity. A bit like that R3 cars, half GpA, half GpN.

To be honest I think it is a stupid class, because some things are heavy restricted, while other things are completely free. Still don't like the RWD conversion idea, making it BMW and Ford drivelines, nothing to do with TouringCars. To bad the Fia killed the KitCars, that could have filled the gap: Super2000's!

Basicly the Super1600's have the least restrictions, even less than SuperCars!

It's rallycross and not rally so it doesn't matter it are not official Super2000 cars.

[WJM]

What's up with the mid-capital letters? It's Supercar or Super Car, but not SuperCar.

I'm agreeing with all of you on the 'TouringCar' class. It's now be going on for 4 seasons and still it doesn't attract a full C-final at most races. Three classes is just too much for the ERC.

[NaBUru38]

WJM, that's called CamelCase and I usually like it (e.g. IndyCar). But Super1600 and Super2000 glued together don't look good.

The new names will be both confusing and generic. How about RallyCross Super (RXS), RallyCross 2 (RX2) and RallyCross 3 (RX3)? It's what the FIM does.

[rx-guru]

Originally Posted by WJM

What's up with the mid-capital letters? It's Supercar or Super Car, but not SuperCar.

According to the FIA press release of November 3:
SuperCars
Super1600
TouringCars
with capital 'C' and plural 's' (but not Super1600's')

According to HdW, who has attended the FIA ORC meeting on October 5:
Supercar
Super1600
Touringcar
with small 'c' and no plural 's'

[rx-guru]

@ FIRE & NaBUru38: Your suggestions are useless now. Some months ago the FIA ORC had invited all RX enthusiasts to discuss the matter and to come up with name proposals. Not much echo by then! Now all is fixed and we have to live with the new tags for a long time. We had 'Division' in the ERC for no less than 29 years…

[HrRACING]

Originally Posted by chunder

It is now been seen that unless you have a "Special" car you are never going to win there. Borseth, Tohill and Enerberg dominated in reality in bespoke, specials that are beyond most peoples budget and pretty much the same as things like Evans Micra over here many years back.

Its still the cheapest class in the ERC though!

[leonidas]

If there has to be a third class in the ERC why not make it a Supernational class. Those cars are usually the most exciting cars to watch at any meeting. Who cares if grids are relatively small if the racing is good? If the Scandinavians who dominate this class don't want to travel too far just run it as a championship in the northern European rounds.

Either that or run the third class as a cheap one-make class for up and coming drivers, a class where talent counts more than budget.

[chunder]

I dont doubt that Si.

But that is only really because the Supercar class and certainly Div1 fwd use very trick cars that are actually often to a higher spec than they were rallied in.

I cant remember S1600 cars being reputed to produce 240ish hp as some do now, so these engines are being very heavily developed. That is to F2 road race levels of tune and insane.

I admit that a rwd class is a good idea, but who makes rwd cars anymore? No-one really apart from BMW, so what's the point?

In my view, anytime you are making a car very strucurally different to its original design you are introducing cost. There is no cheap class to run in ERC right now, AND be competitive in.

You could do it a bit in Group N and definately in 1400, so in my view these classes are a backward step.

They have just tried to introduce Supernational without realising why that class works, and that is because it has been established for decades and there are hundreds of cars and shells around that can be used. And the technology is fairly simple, though still pricey, so prices are known rather than hidden.

When you can buy that Pauwels Fabia for under 50 grand I would not call Supercar cheap, but that car (a possible top 3 car in the UK and Ireland and perhaps a C final machine in ERC) is cheaper than any top line A Final car in the other divisions. To buy maybe not to run.

[Hickey]

Was it marketed as a cheap class? Should there be a cheap class in the ERC? Not sure I want to see a bunch of bangers racing around in the ERC. I think you are being a bit unrealistic calling for a class that you can enter a cheap and competitive car in. Group N, standard Evo/Scoobys, a bunch of 1400 low modded cars pootling round at an ERC event? No thanks.

A bunch of Scandanavian supernationals though... yes please! So long as other nations start buying into this, otherwise it's not really inkeeping with a European championship (just more Scandanavians dominating!)

Hasn't it only been 3 years, WJM? And the first of these they weren't official, just a "Rallycross Cup" event. Only been official "division 2" for 2 years, and by the end of last year we were up to 20 entries. So, if we can get that for all rounds next year, and maybe build on it, that would be pretty good.

I think it's actually the best value and probably the most fun to drive in the ERC. Cos of the low entries, standard cars like Musik's BMW frequently get to run in C or B Finals, meaning the most track-time and some championship points. Plus he gets to sling the back out round all the corners.

[rx-guru]

Yep, between 1993 and 2002 we had a championship series for 1400cc Group N cars for ten years in the ERC. A true beginners class and not bad at all most of the times.

[leonidas]

Originally Posted by Hickey

I think it's actually the best value and probably the most fun to drive in the ERC. Cos of the low entries, standard cars like Musik's BMW frequently get to run in C or B Finals, meaning the most track-time and some championship points. Plus he gets to sling the back out round all the corners.

If you wanted a budget ERC class maybe a class based on single-make standard BMW One series would have made more sense? Cheap sideways action and a lot faster than the old 1400s...

[chunder]

"Coz of the low entries" That says it all really

You cant say a class is good because entries are low!! But I do see your point, for now its a cheap class to arce in as the quality is only within about 6 cars.

1400 was good from the start as was GpN in the early 90's.

I do think there is a need for a cheaper class in ERC, rallycross is no way big enough nto not need a European feeder class yet.

I have racked my brains and cant come up with something that works as a class that could be cheap and work as a more entry level thing.

Group N is too dear, Group N 2 litre didnt work, 1400 is too slow but good fun and cheap, S1600 mis pricey and Super2000 is too specialised to be quick though you can do it cheaply.

Perhaps a IRC level 4wd class in a few years? There must be tens of 207's Punto's and Fabia's that might be around soon.

Why not push the boundaries and get those cars using the 1.6 TC engine that is being used 2011? Too dear again!

[StockHatch782]

Originally Posted by chunder

Super2000 is too specialised to be quick though you can do it cheaply.

Perhaps a IRC level 4wd class in a few years? There must be tens of 207's Punto's and Fabia's that might be around soon.

That would be my wet dream: eight S2000 207s, Fiestas, Fabias and Protons on the grid, but the cars are even dearer than the S1600s so unfortunately it wouldn't be a cheap class by any means; it would be one of the most expensive classes you could bring in. You could build an A-final Div 1 car for the price of a new S2000.

Great mental soundscape, though. BWAAAAAAAAARP!

[mivec]

Originally Posted by 1975DCS

Because it ain't Super2000's! They are lower spec cars, despite the bigger capacity. A bit like that R3 cars, half GpA, half GpN.

...

Lower spec cars?
What is GpN on Division 2, euh, sorry... Touringcars ?
I think they are at least comparable whit GpA cars.

[dcdesign]

in power output, they are comparable, but when you compare times, the 1600s are a bit quicker... half GrN/half grA may be a good definition

[1975DCS]

Originally Posted by leonidas

If you wanted a budget ERC class maybe a class based on single-make standard BMW One series would have made more sense? Cheap sideways action and a lot faster than the old 1400s...

All of the same looking cars? No thanks! I hate cup classes, no matter what brand or form of Motorsport...

The whole point of different markes is to make a sporty competition and attract their fans... Imagine a DTM of only Mercedes cars (oh wait this is almost the case), wasn't DTM better with Opel, Alfa, BMW and Ford all in?

[chunder]

Of course DTM was better like that but as usual. once the German marques get involved in somehting they all outsepdn each other with vast sums to try and beat one another.

It happened in DTM, WSPC, ITC and FIA GT with Porsche, Mclaren etc.

It's what they do and always will be! Corporate gone mad, great at the time, but not very realistic.

I think they are more careful now, but a one-make thing for rallycross would only work if it was all S40/240 Volvo's Supernational spec in my eyes!!

If you could get a seres of 1 series running M3 spec motors on narrow tyres, fair enough!!

[leonidas]

Originally Posted by 1975DCS

All of the same looking cars? No thanks! I hate cup classes, no matter what brand or form of Motorsport...

The whole point of different markes is to make a sporty competition and attract their fans... Imagine a DTM of only Mercedes cars (oh wait this is almost the case), wasn't DTM better with Opel, Alfa, BMW and Ford all in?

Remember this is essentially a support class. Many big series - F1, British touring cars - have a long tradition of one-make support classes to provide younger talent with an affordable way of coming through.

It's a matter of personal preference I guess. However there are plenty of series where cars that look the same produce popular racing - the 'car of tomorrow' doesn't seem to have hurt NASCAR too much.

[dcdesign]

It isn't bad to have an only one-make series, but it isn't that great either...
As you know, rallycross isn't a series where most cars are paid for by sponsors, it mostly are guys who finance it themselves, by working for the money, or by doing all the work on the car by themselves... and logicly, there are many car technicians amongst them...

Now, how would you explain to your boss and biggest sponsor (a few hunderd pounds) who owns a Ford dealership, thet you are running a Suzuki Swift? And how do you convince your costumers of the qualities and reliability of the Citroën C2 you are selling them, while you self race with a Ford RST...

anyone see the difficulties?