General Forum (Archived)

Thread: WRC S2000Turbo future Go to Top of This Forum

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

20-Nov-08 10:17 AM 

So Turbo fan, we are back to 1,3 - 1,4 Ltr Turbo (1,7) = 2,2 - 2,4 ltr

Do more people than ChrisB think this is the right direction - or is the 2 - 2,5 ltr NA route the best ?

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

20-Nov-08 11:16 AM 

Not necessarily 1.3 or 1.4, like silly tuned Zakspeed Turbo Capri, but in engine something similar to today, more restricted like that 2bar limit idea, more like modern day road cars. Why not 1.6 or 2.0 turbo.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

20-Nov-08 12:45 AM 

Hey, this now makes two saying the same, Chris B and Séb L ... LOL

I thought it was Silverstone and not Barcelona where he tested the F1 car?

But general point Loeb finds S2000 boring, no power, no torque, boring to drive, while his last sentence states

"It doesn't matter if the cars are a bit heavier or have less technology. In fact, if this happens, then it can be more fun, for the spectators as well."

I underline yet again that the turbo kit is NOT what makes WRCars so expensive, as FIA seems to believe or is led to believe.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

20-Nov-08 04:03 PM 

Seb drove at Silverstone for a brief shakedown last weekend and then at Barcelona on Monday this week with the other F1 drivers.

"But general point Loeb finds S2000 boring, no power, no torque, boring to drive,"

As far as I am aware Seb has not actually driven an S2000 car? Unless he has had a secret go in the 207?

I don't think the FIA believes the turbo kit is expensive, as it was them who suggested this route in the first place. I think what they are saying to the teams is "Either settle on this cheap bolt on kit or we just make you have S2000 cars full stop"

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

20-Nov-08 07:52 PM 

"As far as I am aware Seb has not actually driven an S2000 car? Unless he has had a secret go in the 207?"

If you are a real insider, know the physics, speak to other drivers, like Loeb, do you actually need to drive the car before you can make an intelligent judgement? Plus he has actually driven S1600 a lot, which in engine characteristics are similar.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by AndyRAC

21-Nov-08 03:03 AM 

Whether Seb is right or wrong doesn't matter - it's not up to him to decide what direction the future rules are. If going S2000 means more Teams/cars/drivers then I'm all for it. People are not seeing the 'bigger picture' - a competitive WRC!!

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

21-Nov-08 07:02 AM 

Hmm, disagree here, but it raises an interesting question to the general situation of the FIA or any ruling body of a global series. Because I feel the ruling body should listen to people like Loeb. I am sure Loeb is not the only driver feeling like that and his opinion is very valuaable and could help making the sport better in future. At the same time I am contradicting myself in saying the FIA should listen to the manufacturers in this case, because it really does seem to me that Prodrive, M-Sport and co want the dearer version for their own profit.

Point is, I discrivbed the dangers of a 4x4 kit car formula and I believe it will go the same way as all other kit car formulas we had, by name F2, WRCar, S1600: Costs spiralling out of control - and without turbo I already see Peugeot and Abarth running away from the poorer teams. While at the moment we have a very competitive IRC, and new manufacturers are coming in, the IRC 07-08 had only Peugeot winning for over a year and that it became tight in the end between Vouilloz, Rossetti and Basso is thanks to the IRC rules, not to the car concept.

Basically this is what is going on:
- The FIA had the really genius idea to base a future WRCar on S2000+T.
- The manufacturers, at least Subaru and Ford it seems, say in such rule they need more technical freedom - which I think is utter bollox, how did i.e. the non-active, not even sequential gearbox of the Audi Quattro cope with 500BHP and all its torque...
- At least Loeb says S2000 without turbo is naff.
- The FIA sits between chairs. The S2000+T was actually an FIA idea, none argues that, just the FIA fears if they believe the manufacturers it is going to be expensive. So as was said before, maybe the FIA simply pushes the manufacturers now as in "Take S2000+T as it is or we go gN."

The point - Admitted personal opinion, but I am very sure on the facts - I am trying to air and see now backed up by the drivers (at least Loeb), is that S2000+T is going to be a lot more spectacular and fun for drivers and spectators alike than S2000 alone and gN. At the same time I do not see the problem with adding a turbo. See groupB and early groupA, turbo without active diffs works! And the turbo itself does not cost that much. In contrary, with the FIA planned air restrictors and boost limits it will ease engine development cost and level out the field. I really don't see the problem in S2000+T. But I know that I would rather see an S2000 car with 350BHP and 500NM and without that tinny, exhausted sound than an S2000 with less torque than most road cars or a silent groupN.

I am sure, with so many manufacturers having an S2000 car, if you only have to add a turbo and an aero kit, we are talking at the most 20,000 Euros and an hours work (-OK, some engine de-tuning actually needed for compression then comes from turbo-) and you have a WRCar. I can see this being attractive to every S2000 manufacturer there is. The turbo is surely not what drives the prices on a WRCar. I more see the problem of kit car rules with little road relation full stop. 3 years ago we got rid of all sorts active in WRCars, water injection banned, active suspension banned. And did that make WRCars cheaper? Nope, it made them more expensive! How that could happen, see the trick suspension on Focus WRCars on photos, the enormous suspension travel. So now we have S2000, if with or without turbo, a non-active custom gearbox compulsory. Would that have stoped Ford creaating a trick suspension like that? Nope!

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

21-Nov-08 12:12 AM 

This discussion was here in 1986 as well. Circumstances were very different, but speed and security of Gr B is similar factors.

We then went from 600 to 300 hp, but kept turbo.

Technology has developed a lot, so if they are to do something they need to do enough, so the cut is not eaten up by tech development in 3 years, and the price will still be too high.

If you ask the drivers that has driven both WRC and S2000 in anger, what do they say about how boring S2000 is ?

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by blatant

22-Nov-08 04:04 AM 

What I would really like to see is the re-introduction of manual gearboxes. All this keeping two hands on the wheel all the time stuff is just too computer game for my liking. I wanna see drivers having to do their thing with one hand, and I want to see the drivers having to do a bit of heel-and-toe! They got it too easy these days...

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

22-Nov-08 05:09 AM 

"If you ask the drivers that has driven both WRC and S2000 in anger, what do they say about how boring S2000 is "

Interesting question!

Well, Loeb has repeatedly driven an S1600 car and does so again next weekend. He knows of the characters of an S2000 engine, which apart having 50BHP more is very similar to S1600.

In contrast Vouilloz has just turned down a PHSport C4 WRC program in favour of IRC in the Kronos 207 S2000. Vouilloz has extensive WRCar experience. He has won the French Championship 2006 in a 307 WRC before turning to IRC in 2007. However here I understand the reason he turned down the WRC offer is because he saw little point in driving an M2 car in Sardinia, Poland and Cyprus and reach a couple of podiums with an enormous lot of luck, depending how many works cars retire. The IRC is far more rewarding and better for his CV, never mind he won everything already. I understand the car concept had no bearing on his decision.

In France I think of Ludovic Gal, young upcoming Peugeot regular, although not coming the Cup. In 2007 Gal drove all season in a 306 Maxi. In 2008 he had a BSA Yacco contract to drive all season with a 207 S2000. After a disappointing start he switched to the 307 WRC mid season and stated he would never drive an S2000 again in his life!

Maybe Gal is a far fetched example. What did Daniel Sola say I havent heard his verdict. He came a Focus WRC via the Honda R3 207 and then Abarth S2000. But I think this former JWRChamp is meanwhile in a situation that he is happy for anything he gets.

Didier Auriol also is interesting. He said severel times that the S2000 are harder work than a WRCar and indicated repeatedly that he doesnt like S2000 much. He competed in the IRC because he likes the series and its events, its great fun for him. I also believe that the car is harder work than WRCar is not Didis problem, after all his best results came in Lancia Delta and Toyota Celica in early groupA, they cars were far active and easy! But he keeps pointing out that in S2000 something is missing, there is no torque to slide and work with.

Maybe it is down to the drivers characters -and maybe therefore I would actually like to see different concepts allowed, mixing the favs between rallies- as I remember in the 206 WRC days Francois Delecour complained for a very different reason about WRCars. The 306 Maxi is his fav rally car because the revs are incredible and he likes working with high revs. Back in a turbo 4x4 he had to virtually re-learn zero that the available torque was gained through other driving maneuvres and was disconnected to the revs.

Then again I remember several drivers through history saying that turbo was actually safer. Although a traditional turbo engine is less responsive, if you know your driving tricks, you always had torque to get you out of impossible situations.

Hmm, this was again a long reply to a short sentense, but I hope this is interesting.

To blatants manual gearboxes

I said it before, but not loud enough and not in this context here I believe. I dont mind the steering wheel paddle shift, as today some road cars have it and I love it. But definitely we should get rid of active gearboxes and quick shift transmissions. Even S2000 is too quick shift for my taste!

Well, I keep saying turbos sound more exciting than atmos. The FIA, when introducing S2000, said this was not . I disagree, compare the sound of an S2000 to other concepts, even a 306 Maxi, a BMW M3, and Escort BDA, even a Clio R3, they all sound better than S2000. Yes, even Clio R3!!!! And while I understand people find the groupN Lancers utterly boring in the sound department, these silly little gN Lancers deliver more popping and banging and fire spitting than many WRCars these days! To me the monster sound sensation problem is not because of turbo but because of clever transmissions. Listen to a modern Ford Focus WRCar when it changes gear. Do you even detect it It sounds like a DAF Variomatic to me!

I fully agree with blatant. One big thing that is missing modern WRC is seeing and HEARING how the drivers work hard! Get rid of these clever gearboxes and transmissions. I might as well watch a remote control car championship, these cars do everything for the drivers and cruise robot perfect past us.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

22-Nov-08 05:52 AM 

For examples, here is your DAF Variomatic:

If you can't detect gear changes there, in this following short video it goes 1st, 2nd, 3rd - I believe!

Even this course opening car on a shakedown stage sounds better, with chirping and banging and other bangs.... it is a Subaru...

Now to some proper chirping and popping and fire spitting ... what a beast, what a monster of a car, shivers down my spine, goose bumps everywheere, a Focus WRC can't do this for me, a non-turbo will never do this for me.

Note as well, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Richards, that this car has over 500BHP, huge turbo torque and a non-active transmission, yet it did not retire ever 500 yards with a broken transmission.

Note above the scene at around 2m13, how the driver has to work hard with the throttle, never mind 4x4.

So here my working hard bonus. Admitted it is no turbo and a bit extreme with RWD in snow, but it is an N-GT car, basically groupN standards. Marc Duez is a very good driver, isn't it wonderful how he has to really work hard!

Poah, I need a cold shower now or an S2000 video to cool down again!

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

22-Nov-08 06:09 AM 

Loeb also said that a Grp N was "not interesting to drive" so it is not all about the power/torque as a GrpN has levels of torque approaching that of a WRCar.

Most people seem to like driving S2000s, apart from people who are not very good with them like Gal or Auriol maybe, lol. Not sure Auriol said that you can't slide an S2000 car, but he did say the torque is not there to pull you out of trouble if you run offline in a corner, and he was struggling to adapt.

I think an S2000+Turbo should be great to watch. In some situations an S2000 already looks more agile than a WRCar and with the extra torque it should help powersliding too.

Other than that, it could be quite healthy for the sport to have all manufacturers who want to be in WRC also having an S2000, and vice vera. Ie. If you already have an S2000 it is easier to step up to WRC.

I started a new front page poll on our homepage at to ask which of the proposed options our visitors prefer.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

22-Nov-08 12:21 AM 

On the options awail on the poll I voted S2000/Gr N.

But I feel that combo is wrong, and that Gr N should be killed off as a top level class, and that PWRC should go the R3 track, and JWRC R2.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Nordschleife

22-Nov-08 01:48 PM 

blatant says:"What I would really like to see is the re-introduction of manual gearboxes. All this keeping two hands on the wheel all the time stuff is just too computer game for my liking. I wanna see drivers having to do their thing with one hand, and I want to see the drivers having to do a bit of heel-and-toe! They got it too easy these days..."

I couldn't agree more.I've read the comments of Walter Röhrl during the Pirelli Star Driver Shootout in GP Week magazine and he says:
"Today's cars are highly sophisticated!They are too efficient for the spectators to enjoy.They are also too expensive for the drivers and I think [b]they are too easy to drive[/b].
With the present day World Rally Cars many drivers are able to drive fast."
GP Week Issue 35 Page 20

What do we want? I want close competition, close performing cars and a championship able to deliver to places to the talented not rich!
They need to do whatever to keep the costs down.S2000?, GrN?... Nothing is worse than this situation today.You see even though IRC is a two horse (almost one) race, it is much more way exciting compared to the World Rally Circus.
Last words:"I believe in S2000/S2000+.Good or bad performing, many people are able to build cars to that specification.Just think about it.RED, Rene Georges, MSD, MEM... If only they had been financially backed what would be the situation now!"
We only need the simplest formula=lowest cost=equal competition.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

22-Nov-08 03:53 PM 

Radiv wrote:

"On the options awail on the poll I voted S2000/Gr N.

But I feel that combo is wrong, and that Gr N should be killed off as a top level class, and that PWRC should go the R3 track, and JWRC R2."

I personally voted for S2000+Turbo for the top category, to satisfy the people wanting more power, but in reality I would probably be quite happy with straight S2000 too. Although as IRC has S2000 cars already, would there be much point in WRC at all then?

I am surprised anybody is voting to keep the current WRCar formula, (MSport or Prodrive employees??!) I can't think of a single good reason to keep them. They are expensive, they are not spectacular, they sound crap and there doesn't seem to be much future in them.

I agree about your sentiments for jWRC/pWRC though Radiv. Or why not just scrap those two altogether and have one 'WRC2' championship running all R-category cars?

 Page 9 of 25 - Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | Next Page