General Forum (Archived)

Thread: WRC S2000Turbo future Go to Top of This Forum

 WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

28-Feb-08 05:06 AM


For the first time in a long time this actually makes me feel quite positive about WRCs future. I think the cars will be better to watch than currently and the lower cost should in theory bring more manufacturers in.

As said in the article though, the 'other' problems will need to be fixed, but a 12 event calendar is already a positive step.

Also I think it could work well for IRC and WRC as I still see IRC as better than pWRC or jWRC.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by oweh

28-Feb-08 05:39 AM 

It seems that the WRC guys feel the pressure to change things. I can't really tell if a S2000 + turbo (did I get that correctly that it will be a control turbocharger?) will be a bargain compared to a WRCar. It seems that WRC listen more to what the manufacturers want.

I think the WRC guys see that alienating event organizers (i know of Monte, Corsica, Germany being annoyed) starts to damage the value of the series as there is competition in the IRC.

In the long run there I don't see a coexistence of WRC and IRC prevailing. One of them will dry out sometime.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Adrian

28-Feb-08 07:48 AM 

Interesting this leaves Group N and world rally teams like Subaru who potentially have quite competitive 2.0non turbo cars in their line-up and surely have enough experience with 2.0turbo to put together a pretty aggressive wrc-s2000 car with a control turbo. But I must say im not convinced getting rid of WRCars is the best decision. There are a lot of other aspects that need fixing first!

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

28-Feb-08 08:07 AM 

A very good step indeed.

Although my suggestion was always to 4x4 instead of turbos for more spectacle at lower cost, which is also more to road market reality, I could easily live with such formula. Basically take
2WD non-turbo
2WD turbo
4x4 non-turbo
4x4 turbo,
all is fine by me except the 4x4 non-turbo solution. Two facts I always had in my mind
Spectacle full traction - no torque is the ultimate 1 spectacle killer!
Cost 4x4 costs a lot, but turbos make high revs and high compression meaningless for the engines, plus give us a chance to level out power, hence in the long run when rich teams developed like crazy, they are the cheaper solution.

Although I still see for 2WD a weight and cost advantage combined with less grip for everyone more spectacle, to the above points compare the main cars we have now
WRCars They have banned some of the active stuff, but i.e. Ford meanwhile admitted to having a clever ultra wheel travel trick suspension, and things like that make WRCars not only stupidly expensive but very boring to watch!
S2000 Not only do they sound tinny and struggling, they are struggling. Wheereever I have seen S2000 cars, live included, they were even worse than my expectations following my sentiments above. The weight and the grip of modern 4x4 combined with a torque that is less than that of a 1600cc Peugeot 207 RC road car! They have no brute to get moving out of corners, hence you dont see slides as we used to i.e. even from A8 cars a few years back, not to mention i.e. R3 Clios yes, despite these being FWD, though they do a lot of the spectacle on their simpler brakes, and sorry, something is simply missing there. Too much grip, too little force, torque.
Take these and despite me keeping talking of drooping 4x4, an S2000 turbo category is going to be more spectacular than either WRCar and S2000!

I also am excited about the prospect of banning things like launch control. I am not sure i this means control turbo chargers. I wouldnt like that idea, especially in the light of ever more advanced road car engineering - road cars which use turbos ever more regularly to give small engines big torque and such even help fuel consumption and environment. Manufacturers come up with all sorts of ideas, i.e. Peugeots parallel twin turbo layout 2 turbos in one bell housing and a butterfly, low revs operate one turbo for good response, at certain rpm the butterfly opens for turbo 2 and you have big power and torque. Although BMW uses this system for their smaller engines, compare to BMWs sequential twin scroll turbo layout a small turbo driving a big turbo placed behind with a bypass for the big turbo in low revs.. I would hate it if the WRC has cars of lesser sophistication that road cars and if WRC would lose the chance to develop and demonstrate such road car engineering.

However if this means control turbo or not, despite my sentiments just about clever twin turbo road car engineering, a control turbo or tougher regulations in this area would not be the end of the world. For one the cost factor. But also I am loudly complaining about the lack of sound and noise from WRcars as well as S2000 cars. My point, wheere I strictly contradict with FIA and many fans, turbo is not to blame for lack of sound and noise! Some of the most beautiful sounding rally cars of all time were Escort Cosworth, Imprezza 555, Toyota Celica, Audi Quattro all turbos! Today, at least to my taste, WRCars you need hearing aid to notice them and avoid me walking out in front of them, S2000 cars are not much louder if at all but sound just silly. About turbos I liked the sensation of all sorts of monster things they could do, flames, bangs, whistling, chirping, while the examples above also proved that this orchestra doesnt mean lack of crisp, throaty, full engine sound. Its crazy, its not that long ago I got bored when a groupN Mitsu Lancer drove past me. Today I wish a 307 WRC and some other WRCars would sound like a gN Lancer! And I do believe to blame for all this is some of the electronic experiments the manufacturers are doing. I.e. the chirping sound was always created by a simple dump valve with an easy and clever function. You can buy a dump valve for your turbo road car for around GBP100 and you end up having better response and longer turbo life duration, however you have to "bear" that chirping noise. In WRCars today they use a few far more clever items doing the same job, killing spectacle and costing probably GBP30,000.

Still, as already said, if this kills one of the two series I would like to doubt, but if it does I am still feel IRC is going to survive WRC. The car regs is definitely a plus point for WRC if S2000 turbo is what we are going to have. But there are so many other things done wrong in WRC in recent years.

For one, still car regs related, if they want S2000 turbo in WRC look different to S2000, I hope they re-consider the max measurements again. In all I wonder why for technical regs we dont look more at the road car market. I.e. it is not so long ago the WRCar max width was altered from 1770mm to 1800mm. People felt despite this the 307 WRC looked too much like a boring road car. No wonder, they could extend the meant to be mean, brutal wings only be 5mm each site! If Peugeot wanted to rally a 308 WRC, they would be a problem, the road car is "too good" to become a WRCar, standard width of a Peugeot 308 road car 1815mm!

SoupRally and nomination system for points - no comment!

The WRC publicity on TV is a joke compared to IRC.

The 12 rounds are a step into the right direction, but I am not convinced of kicking the traditional events in the arse with a rotation system, and I am certainly not convinced by the ion of events full stop. Safari gone, Monte only every odd year, who cares, but we make sure of Cyprus, Jordan, Turkey, Sardinia....

The schedule and layout of the events. They have lost character and challenge. We discussed it a lot already. See how Monte seems to be living up as an IRC event 2009. Let this be my final point in this already long post, but let me finish it with a funny story

Although I have not much joy these days with WRC, I am still too much rally maniac and after spending all night on my PC, I then go to bed reading rally stories. Last night I went to bed with Martin Holmes LOL. I read amongst other things his write up on the 1000 Lakes Rally Finland in his 1980 years book.

I quote from Martin Holmes "Rallying 3" 1980 page 93 "The 1000 Lakes Rally is clearly at the end of its natural development in its current form ... the question is whether a compact, short event should count equal to the bigger rallies like RAC, Safari or Monte Carlo. Certainly the 1000 Lakes misses many opportunities to promote the Finnish countryside ... blah blah ... these questions must await the decisions of the FIA meeting in early October to choose the championship rounds for 1981."

Martin not only complains about this event being too short, he even gets that loud as saying it doesnt deserve WRC status unless its format changes!

A look at the details made tears droop from my eyes. That 1000 Lakes Martin is complaining about started was 3 days, however including 2 nights, admittedly many shorter stages, but 48 of them!

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

28-Feb-08 10:15 AM 

I can confirm that the regulations being tabled include a common-control turbo for all cars.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Gregor

28-Feb-08 10:25 AM 

As Chris B mentions, the technical changes are maybe half of the equation The nature and location of the events are the other half. I haven't been a fan of S2000 in particular but I like their events, and I *really* like the rumblings I hear around here regarding the Safari, RAC, and Monte Carlo.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

28-Feb-08 05:21 PM 

I actually think that having less power than the WRC cars have is a good thing, that will separate the best from the second best drivers more clearly. It will not be enough power no matter what you do and what gear you are in.

I think looking at the S2000 cars, and yes they are struggling compared to a WRC, but they still have 280 hp, and that is enough !

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

28-Feb-08 08:02 PM 

Sorry Radiv, I think you might have a slight misunderstanding here. The suggested WRC future is S2000 cars with a turbo added. If non-turbo S2000 cars already reach 280BHP, S2000 + turbo will easily reach the power levels of an WRCar. Only then we can add an air restrictor and they all will have 300BHP, controllable and all level.

This is in fact not my main complaint but certainly one of my complaints about the S2000 idea of ping turbos. Air restrictors dont work on atmospheric engines and rich teams have the chance to develop like crazy into details, high revs tho there is a rev limiter, high compression. Turbo hasnt any of them, which is why I believe in the long run turbo engines are actually not at all more expensive. Take as an example 207 S2000 has 280BHP, Corolla S2000 has 250BHP. If you want to compare pilots on a level playfield, drooping turbos is not the way to go!

Apart from that I understand your point well. I am missing the torque in S2000 cars, because the lack of it combined with ultimate traction kills spectacle. I also like a variation of concepts. But I certainly share the point that power is not necessarily the key to spectacle. Best example was, I was lucky enough to see groupB live, when groupB was replaced for groupA - or say more up to date take the cars of same concept, 4x4 turbo WRCars, and droop from 300BHP everyone to 250BHP everyone, on the straights the cars will be slower, but in the corners they should be just as exciting.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

29-Feb-08 06:26 AM 

Hey, as long as the new formula sounds more like this:

and less like this:

then I am happy :)

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

29-Feb-08 08:25 AM 

I know turbos will be on the S2000T, or R5 as it might be called (?) but hopefully they will be limited to a certain HP limit on the wheels, and that that limit will be enforced by FIA using an appropriate instrument !

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

29-Feb-08 10:22 AM 

To Radiv, power limiting turbos and controlling that limit is no problem at all with air restrictors. Wit atmosperic engines this does not work.

The future S2000 + turbo cars are supposed to be also called WRCars. In France and Spain there is there is from 2008 a class called R3T, which is R3 turbo cars, costing very little, but obviously only having 2WD. Seeing some of the R3 cars I wouldn't be surprised if these low budget R3T's would beat S2000 cars sometimes at least on asphalt.

To Ron's post:

I really don't know what went wrong with modern WRCars. And I am convinced it is not the turbo to blame for lack of sound and noise. I would choose this one as an example:

- OK, it is just a road car. But even road cars sound better than WRCars today. I will not be asking too much, being unrealistic into extremes, whatever. Let's say if future WRCars just sounded like this road car, I will already be happy with this compromise :-)

Hmm, it's just too wonderful, I can't leave it. Wonderful, full engine sound with an added bonus orchestra of bangs and dump valve chirps and of course some flames. It's struggling for traction too, creating high engine revs, such thing will never happen with motern electronic cars either. I just love it, that's what rally should be about. This car is telling me: "I am a mean monster of a beast, if only that driver wouldn't try to tame me all that time" S2000 is a rattling shopping trolley in comparison, well educated, it doesn't really need a driver...

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by blatant

29-Feb-08 11:12 AM 

Heh heh, the audi quattro still makes me smile. Best sounding rally car ever!
Few things about this thread.
I also think its a good thing that the WRC is making these changes. WRCars as they stand now have reached there use-by-date. I very much like the idea of ditching semi-auto gearboxes. Does this mean back to manual change, ie driving with one hand? I hope so. Standard turbo and standard diff should also make the cars more even, and also I think easier to drive.
Maybe that sounds weird, let me explain. I think it was Markko Martin several years back who said that the current gen of WRcars was very easy to drive, but very difficult to find the perfect set-up. I sometimes think thats why new drivers take so long to get up to speed these days. The slightest thing wrong with a cars setup, and you are immidiatly way off the pace. The fine-tuning of all the diffs in the cars now is just way too complicated. A simpler car means its more down to the skill of the driver, and less so the engineer.
I mentioned in a diiferent thread that I was worried that the WRC/IRC split was going to go down the same road as IRL/ChampCar in America. Well, after ten years they have finally resolved their differences and are amalgamating! Lets hope the rally world can see sense and sort themselves out as well.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

2-Mar-08 03:21 AM 

The rally commission had a meeting last week they hammered out the blueprint of the new WRC regulations that will go effect 2010. They will try to get them approved at the council meeting on March 26.

On this meeting it was a new tone amongst the participants FIA, manufacturers and ISC the media rights holder. Since the last meeting the change was that now that all worked for the same target, a cheaper and more low-tech WR Car.

The most important things in the new rules are printed in the latest Autosport, and I will try to put in a condensed version here.

Engine Will be based on a S2000 engine, and a standard Turbo will be added, to get more torque, but not much more hps than 270-280 that S2000 has today.

Transmission Semi automatic boxes are out. Sequential box is in. Hydraulics on any of the diffs are out, mechanical diffs at all 3 places in.

Electronics Much more standard ECU, closer to a road car. Therefor Launch control out, toghether with all the rest of the electronic controls they have today.

Brakes Brakes will be smaller than today, especially the asphalt brakes. Water injection to cool them is out.

Interior Will look much more spartan and simple than today. Much because of the loss of all the electronics. Just gauges for pressures and temperatures will be there.

Exterior Will keep the large rear wing that they have today. Both for giving more downforce, but also to separate them the S2000 cars.

They are aiming to write the regs to try to make it difficult to use the WRC in any other championship than WRC, but as they are saying we do not dictate the national governing bodies - so lets see.

Implementation They aim to implement 2010, and since the last version of todays WR Car will get homologated in 09, they will be allowed in the championship in 2010 in de tuned version, for non prioritized drivers, but not in 2011.

We are doing this to save money, and by that getting more manufacturers WRC says Morrie Chandler to Autosport, and he is hoping for 7 manufacturers in 2010.

Well, Abarth has announced that they will start building a new WRC if when this is approved by FIA, and Suzuki, Skoda and Peugeot will also jump onboard I guess.

This also opens up the road to merge WRC and IRC if that in the future will be an issue, and IRC will steal too much glory !

Do You think this is the right way to go

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

2-Mar-08 06:47 AM 

For the car regs this is the right way to go. But I still wouldnt be happy about a merger of IRC and WRC. Too many strange regs in WRC about souprally, nominations, starting order, etc., and especially the event layouts, weird choice of events, rotation. The IRC is still the better series.

Most of the points above are definitely the right direction.

"Brakes Brakes will be smaller than today, especially the asphalt brakes. Water injection to cool them is out."

Not sure if this is a wise move, though not sure which freedom the WRCars have there currently. I.e. when back in 1996 I worked for Volkswagen Motorsport UK, on the Kit Cars we had water cooled brakes. It was a water circulation through the brake caliper. Nothing overly expensive and when on fast stages, say including fast downhill with good grip, the brakes are smaller and water cooling is banned, I see a safety problem!

"Interior Will look much more spartan and simple than today. Much because of the loss of all the electronics. Just gauges for pressures and temperatures will be there."

That I fully support. I deont understand why even in R3 cars this is allowed. The trick electronic dash is expensive and it doesnt even give a performance advantage. Its one of many examples the new suggestions definitely go the right direction.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

13-Mar-08 05:11 AM 

Article in today's Autosport says that whilst it is highly likely that the WRC teams and the FIA will accept the S2000Turbo rules proposal, apparantly the alternative is 2 wheel drive turbos, which I am sure would please Chris....

Morie Chandler said:

"At the end of the day, if the world council doesn't want what the WRC comission has put forward then it would be possible for them (world council) to go for two wheel drive."

Chandler added, however, that he would prefer a stipulation of rear-wheel-drive rather than two-wheel-drive should the decision be taken.

"Front wheel drive is totally unspectacular," said Chandler. "Okay, people would love to see rear wheel drive world rally cars with their tales sliding. That would be lots of fun, but it wouldn't represent the market. I don't think the marketing executives of the manufacturers competing - and spending around 50m-euro would be impressed to find that the car they are using can't even be bought by the man on the street. "

Ron says:

This Chandler guy says some strange things. He does appear to be trying and I applaud that, but his point on road car relevance is invalid as Citroen and Ford don't market 4wd cars either. The closest road car relevance without a doubt would be front wheel drive turbos.

I have put a poll up about which proposal you prefer for new WRCar regs. I voted S2000 turbo as it should be more spectacular than current WRCars and cheaper too.

 Page 1 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