General Forum (Archived)

Thread: WRC S2000Turbo future Go to Top of This Forum

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

15-Jul-08 05:01 PM 

"Anyone that knows why ?"

Because it doesn't make a difference. If you read my today's post in:

"FIA World Council decisions"

what is the difference of deciding something and U-turning everything (as is tradition) 4 weeks later, or not decide at all in the first place? Well, there is a difference as teams would start preparing in the wrong direction. But LOL, what funny comedians.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by k1w1taxi

22-Jul-08 04:26 AM 

Sorry to be so late with this reply but to belabour Chris's point (mind you, I couldn't tell a Spanish soccer playground from a German or a British one, but point made.) even further.

You may having difficulty telling a Brit pitch from a Serie A pitch but Both pitches enable the stars to show their skills to their best advantage without the risk of breaking a leg every time the attempt to kick the ball!!

Unlike a certain other sport we all know :)


 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

9-Aug-08 09:27 AM 

When is the next meeting in the Rally Comission, and when will they again bring this issue up for decision ?

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

1-Sep-08 05:35 AM 

WR Comission was not able to reach a decision this time either on the way ahead.

Is there a cut off date (Point of no return)when it is sure that the solution for 2010 will be a normal S2000 car for WRC ?

I guess the factories will need to know yesterday to have a car ready !

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

1-Sep-08 02:28 PM 

If it's for 2010 then surely it has to be before the end of this year that the decision is made?

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

4-Sep-08 01:54 AM 

Got Autosport the other day. Their insider say that there were several meetings last week in Paris, but they could not get to a conclusion.

He says that the plan was to have an agreed tech regulation to be approved on the November meeting. Now this has to be moved to the December meeting, and if they are not able to get the new WRCar tech reg stamped and approved by the Rally Commission, the World Coucil will most likely go for the S2000 as it stands today as the new WRCar 1 January 2010.

Autosport also points to Lapworth as one if not the only one that express a wish to ensure the new format car maintains certain levels of technology.
As a side comment to Lapworth I would like to say that, for subaru S2000 would be a good move back to a technology they can manage, since they have been lost in the tech jungle since 2004. When they tried to put too much F1 thinking constructing a rally car.

For most people the show and car control made the drivers, is more important than technology we can not see !
Keep WRCars simple and "Affordable" so more manufacturers and teams would like to, and be able to participate !
If not, WRC will die - and IRC will take over !

FIA also must put effect and govern a cost limit for the new car class, ala the 168 000€ they first had for S2000, so cost will not get out of control !

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Gregor

4-Sep-08 10:00 AM 

Subaru may have trouble with tech but do they have an engine? Every performance Subaru I can think of has used a turbo and there has never been any performance development of normally aspirated motors.

Probably the closest anyone came was in North America before turbo Imprezas came along. There were a smattering of cams and intake/exhaust parts available for anyone who didn't want to pay for an engine switch or try bolting on their own turbo and hoping for the best.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

4-Sep-08 10:17 AM 

Good point, Gregor. In this I actually sympathise with Subaru. After all we are trying to sell performance cars through this show. Drooping electronics and active engineering is one thing, but I remain convinced that keeping full traction 4x4 and drooping torque turbo is the worst thing you can do if you want a spectacle in the long run.

On Subaru or Prodrive maybe they are some lost in a high tech djungle Interestingly I wonder if Subarus downfall to current performance wasnt exactly the slimming of electronic aid. More accurately the banning of active transmissions when things were split M1 and M2. As far as I remember Subaru had a very clever system with a lazer beam under the rear bumper reading the road in comparison to car movement and they were the only team going this extraordinary way.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Gregor

5-Sep-08 09:36 AM 

And as you have said before, many manufacturers use a turbo in some way on their performance models, which are the ones you would want to associated with rallying, Renault and Honda being the glaring exceptions.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

5-Sep-08 03:29 PM 

Even Renault is no exception. They have a huge tradition with turbos, first F1 turbo, the famous R5 Turbo, currently the top of the range Mégane is a 225BHP turbo!

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

6-Sep-08 07:37 AM 

The future for petrol engine is smaller engines, with breathing help.

The VW TSI engine, with both Kompressor and turbo is a good example of new engineering.

Maybe the WRC should lead from the front and introduce something like this, that manufacturers can use for something.

Maybe something btw 1,0 and 1-5 ltr with two blowers, one mechanical and one exhaust would be an option ?

But of course cost would jump, or would it ?

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

6-Sep-08 08:48 AM 

That is exactly one of my points.

The FIA said, when S2000 was d 1 the is no future road market for turbos and 2 the turbos are too quiet.

Both I challenge strongly.

To 1 Exactly like your example with VW TSI engines, every manufacturer goes to downsizing and then boost them up. That turbos are bad for economy can only be the word if people who dont know anything about cars big blame on the FIAs word in the context above then. You only have to look at the diesel engines. Diesel is known for being economic. I would have a hard time to name you a diesel car without turbo! Why shouldnt the same apply to petrol In fact I love the sound of big V6 and V8 engines, but I doubt I would buy one. Why use a heavy 4 litre V8 lump when you can get the same BHP and torque result a 2 litre 4-cylinder turbo weighing about half as much

to 2 simple listen to an old Quattro, old Impreza 555, even groupA Escort Cosworth, these quiet cars They were some of the loudest, most spectacular sounding cars we ever had! I dont know why modern rally cars have become that quiet. But it certainly is not because of the turbo! S2000 are not that loud. They rev higher, OK. S2000 are in fact very quiet compared to an F2 kit car or g4 Escort. And that they rev higher must not be a noise advantage. Remember the chirping and banging of Quattros and Cosys. What a concert. Imagine a TSI engine with compressor and turbo tuned up, it could sound exciting if you tried.

3rd point The cost would also be deba. That is why I keep complaining about the S2000 idea in its concept. For me drooping turbos is a radical move. If we are ready for a radical move, I would rather droop 4x4 than turbos. Surely the less grip the more spectacle we have, which was one of two points we wanted to achieve.
By-product Weight of a 4x4 system also plays part in this.
The other is cost reduction. What costs more Fitting 4x4 or turbo For 4x4 it is not only that I need 3 diffs instead of 1 and all those driveshafts, propshaft. I have to change the complete floorpan of the shell to accommodate 4x4. The rear axle and suspension and the rear floor pan also has to be completely changed. Why dont we just keep this more standard and save cost. On the engine side, what really costs money and reliability is high revs. Turbos dont need high compression because the boost takes care of that. The turbine and its acciliaries surely cost money, but do they really cost more than the fine tuning and balance a constantly high revving engine needs I doubt it!
By-product here With air restrictors and boost limits we can control power and a level play field. The IRC results 2008 prove that in S2000 we have already lost the level play field. You cant control and level out non-turbo engines like that, the budget of the manufacturer is the limit.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Chris B

6-Sep-08 09:12 AM 

Besides the VW FSI or TSI engines is one example, combining supercharger and turbo. The 207 RC is a 1.6 bi-turbo. Skoda uses FSITSI engines. The Abarth Grande Punto SS s 180BHP a 1.4 turbo. Others are to follow.

"Maybe the WRC should lead the front and introduce something like this, that manufacturers can use for something."

This is a very clever sentence. I would like to have more of a road relation in rally cars. I would also like rallying to be a development bed for road cars. Maybe WRCars compared to S2000 go way over board with electronics. On the other hand it is hard to sell a road car these days without ESP and women parking assistants. On the road cars lie Ford Focus ST, Ford Focus RS, Renault Mégane Turbo, Opel Astra OPC and the likes take on Impreza and Lancer with FWD and clever diffs and traction control and they do so very efficiently. Its a difficult subject since surely clever electronics is what rocketed the price sky high and made the action boring in WRCars. But do we really want the top rally cars be less cleverly engineered than their road equivalents This is also a reason why I keep musing if we shouldnt droop 4x4 and allow some degree of electronics and clever front diff instead.

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by Radiv

7-Sep-08 02:25 AM 

Or rear diff !
The new BMW 1 series coupe would be perfect !

 Re: WRC S2000Turbo future by RonSkoda

7-Sep-08 04:51 PM 

Really I have to agree that turbos are the future....

I have one Skoda Roomster 1.6 16v petrol, 1 years old, and one Skoda Octavia 1.8Turbo 8 years old and I know which has the better engine by far!

Still doesn't mean I find S2000 cars boring, but I would be quite happy to see S2000s maybe with 1.4 turbos?

But if you think that a front wheel drive car with traction control or any other electronic driving aids will be spectacular I think you would be sorely disappointed.

 Page 6 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