General Forum (Archived)

Thread: WRC S2000Turbo future Go to Top of This Forum

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

17-May-08 04:41 PM 

ML: "Maybe they should concentrate on getting their normal S2000 car right..."

They are second best to Peugeot - to my mind that's good enough LOL



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Kabous

22-May-08 10:11 AM 

S2000 is the best thing that can happen to the WRC. We have been running the S2000 cars for a while now and believe me they are spectatular.

With an added turbo and other mods these cars are going to be monsters.



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

23-May-08 05:41 PM 

In this weeks Autosport they have a piece on the new regulations.

As it stands now they seem to get closer to todays WRC than originally planned:
- Hydraulic gears still to be allowed (said to have longer life than mechanical)
- 100 kg heavier than today
- Not a bolt on turbo-kit but have to change the whole engine
- Changing from S2000 to S2000+ has to happen i two hours with 8 mechanics (engine in addition they said)
- No carbon, kevlar or ceramic bearings allowed
- Single-supplier turbo and intercooler
- bolt on aero kit

It is probably more, but this is the main issues.

If this is not approved on the meeting of the World Motorsport Council next month the new regs will be pure S2000 or Gr N from 2010. This since the last chance for the teams to come up with changes on the document was last week.


Are these regs ok, or are they getting to near the current ones, and it is no reason for change ?

What if they are not getting to an agreement and the new WRC will be pure S2000 and Gr N - is that ok ?

PS. I just read this so it might be something I missed or did not get right, so pls correct me if there is a need !



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

23-May-08 06:35 PM 

Sounds OK. I don't understand why we need hydraulic gears and 100kg more weight. But anything but gN and S2000 for the top league is good!



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

24-May-08 00:31 AM 

The latest modifications to the rules are a step in the wrong direction.

- 100kg heavier will just make the cars looks less agile.

- Hydraulic gears will apprantly also mean an active centre diff like today so the cars could still looks quite boring.

- A totally new engine will mean the manufactuers will have to develop an S2000 engine plus a turbo one which will increaase costs and decrease the likelihood of manufacturers making the step up.

However, I do hope they still get approved as I think they are a better starting point than the current WRC regs.



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

24-May-08 06:12 AM 

It also says " With the new car based on S2000, All current teams will have to build new cars from ground up."

So looks like Gr N is completely out of the picture.
____________________________

What worries me more is that it looks like the new regs are closer to todays WRC, and will add hydraulic box and centre diff to S2000 (R4) as well. this will make them more expensive, and less mechanical, and easy to maintain.

They are saying that cost on a new S2000+ will now be 30% less than todays WRC. That is not enough, for a major revamp to make it cheaper and get more manufacturer in to Rally at the top level.

They also say that there will be a 3 year homologation periods. (2010-2013, 2013-2016 and so on) this will keep galloping costs, but not sure if the factories will agree.

For me this looks like having too many uncertainties, and a part of me hopes that they will not agree on 24 June, and that S2000/Gr N will be the way ahead - but I know to little to be clear on this as of today.

But we have seen what the current S2000 can do, and I do not find them boring at all !



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

24-May-08 07:31 AM 

On the points, a totally new engine is maybe on the cards anyway. You can't simply add a turbo to an existing engine, you have to lower compression, which usually means different pistons and head.

All other things I agree. More weight and active centre diff will make the cars look less agile.

However that is why I am against S2000 and gN. gN is worst for looking non-agile. S2000 is better than gN, but even here I hear ever more fans seeing them live complaining that out of corners they severely lack grunt and agility! They have too much grip and weight for too little torque. The S2000 + turbo formula could have been the chance to address that, but now they spoil it all it seems.

Yes, S2000 slide more than WRCars, but they really lack grunt uphills and out of corners. Fully works tuned Punto S2000 and 207 S2000 have less torque than their road car equivalents!

Also what is that about 3-year homologation periods - not good, if you are behind you are behind for 3 years. And that they are 30% less expensive than WRCars - that's half a Million per car, way too expensive!!!!

Then better no change at all. Worst that could happen is to do a WRC with groupN cars and equivalent. S2000 + turbo was such a good idea - WAS...



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

24-May-08 07:35 AM 

Forgot to say on S2000 slide more than WRCars despite they lack grunt out of corners....

An interesting discussion would be how the tyres compare. In IRC and even in PWRC we have far more punctures than in WRC. I believe despite control tyres in WRC we have tyres far superior in grip. Put them tyres on an S2000 car and they slide less.



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

24-May-08 12:06 AM 

Why do you want them to slide less ?



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

24-May-08 04:17 PM 

No, I don't want them to slide less! That's why I compare the tyres used in WRC to PWRC and IRC and that's why I am not convinced of 4x4 minus turbo and of the new suggestions of S2000 + turbo!



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

25-May-08 05:30 PM 

I disagree with you Chris B, I like the S2000 and think that would be enough for the future WRC as well.

As the rules are proposed now, I think the differences to todays WRC is to small. If you are to make a change, the 30 % cost cut is to small. It will be eaten up by development in a few years, and we are back to square 1.

Make a simple and easy set of rules of cars that are cheap to produce. In a year or two this discussion is forgotten, and we love it - and get impressed by the driving.
This is a new GrB to GrA situation as in 86. Technology is moving fast - so we need to make a real cut now !!



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

26-May-08 07:24 AM 

Well, risking to sound repetitive, but with new armonition :-)

GroupB was not forgotten in a year or two, but curiously I personally found early groupA much more interesting than WRCars today. Yes, the rule makers have made a mistake, this mistake was much criticised and it was this mistake that allowed boring Lancia domination with nobody able to catch up. But what I am missing in this context is the variation of concepts we had, if Audi 200 T Quattro, Renault R11 Turbo, BMW M3, Ford Sierra Cosworth, Toyota Supra, Nissan Silvia 200SX... just imagine for a moment there was no Lancia Delta, what a time that would have been!

Anyway, to subject:

"As the rules are proposed now, I think the differences to todays WRC is to small. If you are to make a change, the 30 % cost cut is to small. It will be eaten up by development in a few years, and we are back to square 1."

In this you are absolutely right! This cut is too small, but I think if it is only S2000 (and boring groupN), this concept also bears a threat of being back to square 1 in a short time. If we need a drastic cut, why not remove 4x4? Yes, I know what you are all saying...

For a start I find it wrong to remove turbos from the sport when every road car has a turbo soon.

I also don't like the atmo engines for lack of torque and lack of usuable power band. They need high revs and loads of gear changes. This will spirral development costs no end. And wear too. We need high revs, we need 7-speed gearboxes, if the FIA then allows more freedom in transmissions too, oh my God!

I have talked to engineers and they all say so. I believe at the moment S2000 looks alright, but seeing the Toyota case vs Peugeot and Abarth, the spiral has already started and give it 3-4 years and we are where we are with WRCars now.

I also strictly believe S2000 are not as exciting as people like to make out. Meanwhile I have seen them live at several events and I do find they are very much race style under braking and they do lack grunt and torque for pulling out of curves in an interesting manner. And today I find ever more people saying that same!

I believe there are 2 reasons why people find them spectacular for now:

One is that we mainly look at IRC and IRC is a series with spectacular events and with those drivers that have no money for WRC but have the talent to slot in right where in WRC only Loeb and Grönholm are, or right behind. There are a number of drivers in IRC that are utter nutters!

Secondly - or not secondly but the other is - that I believe in WRC teams and technology are more professional than in IRC, ERC or national championships. I would bet mount WRC tyres on an S2000 car and you will see them slide no more - or even less - than a modern WRCar, despite the lack of active electronics.

To back this believe of mine up, I refer to today's GPWeek mag (a very nice mag btw):
http://mag.gpweek.com/
See page 45, interview Martin Holmes vs Didier Auriol, especially chapter 2 "What do you think about S2000?"

Didi says the exact same that disappoints me when I see an S2000 car (apart from S2000 sounding like a 2-stroke Trabant), he misses the torque, he can't drive sideways, neither under braking, nor under acceleration.

Hence my firm believe still stands: If we are in for a big cut, keep the turbos and find another way to safe cost and have the cars have less grip, more sideways!



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

26-May-08 01:08 PM 

I don't believe the S2000s would be as boring as the WRCs if they were on the same tyres - this years WRC tyres were specifically designed with a greater "slip angle" to try and make the cars look more spectacular, whereas the tyres used in IRC are actually probably tuned more for performance as there are still brands competing against each other. So in fact, the opposite may be true.

I believe the S2000s look more agile because of their lighter weight and less sophisticated transmission and suspension. S2000T would have been the perfect choice because the turbo would have cured the lack of torque out of slow corners (which is the only area in which I find them defficient) and retained their agility. Now I am worried that the cars are hardly going to be any different from the current WRCars and the Focus could retain it's dull engine sounds and bouncy sofa suspension.



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

26-May-08 02:20 PM 

On the tyres, isn't it that despite control tyre the Pirellis for WRC are still specially made WRC tyres? Because I note in PWRC and IRC we have far more punctures than in WRC too, hence I believe WRC tyres are more sophisticated.



 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

26-May-08 02:46 PM 

They may be harder wearing as they don't have any competition in WRC so they can use harder compounds.


 Page 4 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