General Forum (Archived)

Thread: wrc drivers future. Go to Top of This Forum

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Chris B

17-Feb-09 07:13 AM 

Hehe, my petition is to support the IRC and hope the WRC will die. LOL. Well, not LOL, sadly its not funny, but I have lost trust in the WRC with their pointless rule changes and many U-turns even after confirmation, equals uncertainty and mistrust even with the manufacturers. The IRC shows how it is done. Except they miss the World Champion status and the top cars, I cant think of a single issue wheere the IRC is not better than the WRC.

How can I let these lines stick out and sink in Its strange a rally fan wishes the World Championship to die, but I honestly believe in the point I just made!

Other posts are great too!


"Matt Wilsons entry to rally seems no different than the start of other drivers supported by family. Henri Toivonen, Colin McRae and Anton Alen all have had a definite leg up in the sport their fathers. The big difference for Matt is results the others were quick to shine in their own right. So nepotism isnt quite the problem as much as the lack of results. And that problem is shared by the majority of M2 drivers.

Of course for every Colin McRae there are a dozen Richard Burnses, François Delecours, and even Sebastian Loebs who would struggle to get the WRC today even with a good record of wins at other levels. I suppose thats another reason to follow IRC at the moment and hope more jilted WRC drivers find a home there."

Great points. And you hit the nail on the head mentioning Francois Delecour. Richard Burns, and indeed Sébastien Loeb, who had no money, no connections, they had to work their way to the top the hard way! Maybe this is what makes Loeb so good, he is there for his raw talent.

Richard Burns compared to Colin McRae was always a discussion when both were still alive. Of course Colin was absolutely ace and deserved everything he got in WRC, if not even more, i.e. more World titles. But the way he got in it was to some degree a luxury Richard Burns did not have. When Colin crashed a car, he had a dad with a name - also for the right reasons - and connections and next day there was a new car to entertain us. It seems unbelievable seeing he became a WRChampion, but I knew Richard and his envirenment very well. When Richard started the Peugeot Cup, he had the budget for 2 rounds. The entire season was start by start financed through the price money the previous round! Had Richard had one single crash in that season, he would have had no money to repair the car and his career would have been finished! In his later days, especially in the 206, I was often saddened that fans complained about him not being spectacular and not winning rallies. For the nature of his career start, he simply was not a Colin McRae, first of all he was always looking after his car and the championship points, his favourite event was the Safari, he simply was not the guy taking risks for single victories.

Although half mentioned by you, I think there is a great big difference between Matt Wilson and the other examples. If Matt is a nice guy and has this dad who did a lot for Ford, let him have this drive. But maybe he and his fans should acept that this is for fun and the M2 rules and press and whoever should not take the glory away the Hänninens and Rantanens because of Matt.

All the other drivers mentioned had unbelievable talent. In the Colin example I dont doubt the name of his dad helped, but so be it. Alister in comparison did never get the chances Matt gets, because he was not as good as Colin, although he was never bad. Similar fate maybe Harri Toivonen. Henri Toivonen in return, yes, he had the dad, but his career got on track with a Talbot contract not because of his dad, but because aged 20 he finished 5th overall on the 1000 Lakes Rally in a group1 aka groupN RWD Avenger! This car had half the power of the opposition, it was his 2nd WRC start, yet Matt Wilson has not got a better result until today!

My favourite example is Anton Alen. I honestly believe Marrku had a master plan. This plan is spoiled now by the success of the IRC, so Anton would be stupid to leave IRC. Markku helped Anton, but I find it obvious and important that he did not help him in a silly way. First do national events, then some groupN starts in Sweden and Finland WRC rounds. Only when Anton showed talent in these tries Markku let his old Fiat connections play. And what many people did not realise, Anton started in the Abarth works team in IRC 2007 without a contract, but on an event by event deal. He was good in Turkey, then got his drive in Russia and won that! It was the Rally Russia victory, and nothing else, why Anton got his permanent Abarth contract! He had an unlucky 2008 season, while IRC is going strength to strength. This maybe was not part of the plan.

I honestly believe Anton was meant to go through a school of groupN, earn his first contract, learn a championship and team environment, do this for a couple of years, and then 2009 or 2010 start Rally Finland in a WRCar and surprise everyone! This is distinctively different to the modern norm, a norm I find totally wrong and forgot to mention in the article. Not wishing to be nasty, but I have a problem with drivers like say Andreas Mikkelsen being put the nappies straight a WRCar. They have no experience of a team, of a championship environment, nothing. Hence if they get near the top10 first try, it is actually mega! But they have to learn too much at once, they probably need 20 WRC starts in a WRCar before getting half way sorted, and by then team managers and fans see a guy who needed 20 WRC starts for driving in around 7th or 8th places, there is not much more potential. Maybe we need WRCars at national level, maybe the Alen approach is the way to go, but I find it much more interesting and much more convincing if on one event suddenly it makes "Bang, here am I!" And if someone delivers this sensation, I dont care much if he is 20, 22 or 25!


Thanks for the praise. More RAC analogy to follow in an article, probably on the weekend, as I get time. It is a slightly different point. But I agree with you. It may seem interesting to have split seconds fights. But seeing that Ari Vatanen Monte 85 scenario, this is something missing today. Monte with the tyre strategies, the long Safari adventure, they are classics for a reason. Souprally only confuses people and they do not offer the chance of anyone fighting back through cleverness and attack. Not even the Loeb Monte case. Loeb only got a 5min penalty and still was like 4th after that, had he had this crash in an earlier stage he would have never got back the top10. Its just confusing, deluting results, and has nothing to do with speed and cleverness.


"In trying to make the WRC sexy for TVMedia -theyve completely ruined the spectacle and endurance side of the sport. If they wish to regain its popularity - this aspect needs to come back. Because every event is virtually the same - an idea F1 - It is just boring."

Very extremely important sentence!

For a start I would say the landscape and the differences of the countries and locations is a major aspect of rallying. I dont in fact quite see the merit of F1. Lets do an F1 race in Monaco and one in Kenya, they are on sterile tracks and dont display anything of Monte carlo and safari, the track could be any, it is wasted travel expenses.

Not so rallying, and that point must be transported! I see the WRC media problem two-folded. For one we need a good promoter. But what does this promoter do if the show is no good. There are enough sports that dont have an adventure aspect, if soccer or F1. But the TV managers and their audience is dying for adventure! Why is the Tour de France and the Dakar Raid such a hit on TV Because they stop at the same location every 40km of competition, so the VIPs and TV crews dont have to move Tour de France and Dakar prove that VIPs and TV dont have a problem travelling round the country, in contrary it is a major asset for them! To stop WRC events doing just that, totally against intention did not make the event easier for TV, but pointless for TV!

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Spindle

17-Feb-09 10:15 AM 

I hope the IRC goes from strength to strength so eventually the WRC will have to merge with with it and adopt the IRC's philosophy in order to save itself!

Watch this space..........

 Re: wrc drivers future. by m4d-mike

17-Feb-09 01:43 PM 

if the irc was really smart they would allow the manufacturers just stick a turbo on the cars as it is now and be done with it. only problem i see with the irc is the cars cannot get out of shape very easily. add the aspect of a torquey car to the mix and it would be perfect. then the wrc can go and die safe in the knoledge that it forced the creation of a better series.

to top it off we then get rid of the behemoths that crush privateers like rantanen and atkinson(well he is now) meeke and the like.
ie m-sport, prodrive and ph sport. let them off to play in f1 with thier money and give us our sport back

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Radiv

17-Feb-09 05:12 PM 

Is there any smart way to limit the cost spiral in WRCars, to avoid the S2000 will be at the same cost level as WRC today ?

 Re: wrc drivers future. by m4d-mike

19-Feb-09 11:50 AM 

group a was it.
i should be a show room class with a powertorque limit.
15 inch wheels regardless of surface
free tire choice
h pattern gear box
and im sure manufacturers can engineer a 4x4 solution without breakin the bank.
and finally no bloody electronic traction, differential, turbo, suspension, launch, control. maybe an extra window de-mister. he he.

build cars like this that have to last an average of 1000 km competitively.

not exactly a tall order in fact i could knock up a prototype for ya for about 50k

sorry i think i nodded off there looks like i was dreamin.

 Re: wrc drivers future. by bringbackrealrallying

19-Feb-09 12:36 AM 

I'll add to this what I put in the thread I started called "the state of the wrc"

At the minute we essentially have two teams and a few drivers that take part in all the events, with no variety and seemingly only ever one winner! To go along with the lack of cars drivers, the events have been butchered watered down shadows of their former selves that are about half as long as they used to be and cover about 5 actual stages 3 times each. As an example, the RAC used to cover forest stages in Wales, Cumbria, the Scottish borders and Yorkshire plus the tricky stately homes tests. Now Rally GB comes across as nothing more than an advertising vehicle for the welsh tourist board, with the classic stages in Grizedale, Kielder & Dalby long gone. Its a formula thats been repeated pretty much every. It says a lot that, even with Loeb and Citroen winning everything, the WRC is even increasingly unpopular in France. I have taken a few years off following closely, but memory it seems the rot really set in when David Richards took up post as Rallyings Bernie Ecclestone equivalent and decided that Rallying could be the new Formula 1 so long as it had a TV following. The shortened routes and repeat stages have been as a consequence of attempting to fit a sport that isnt suited to the small screen on there. This seems to be spectacularly missing the point, up until then rallies were often the highest attended sporting events in the countries they were in, I know the RAC certainly was in Britain, with upwards of 2million viewing the action live. The shortened routes have totally taken that aspect of rallying away and probably vastly reduced the exposure that car makers and sponsors got on rallies.
It appears that the IRC is trying to right some of these wrongs, such as returning to classic routes etc, but front wheel drive 2 litre cars with modern suspension, tyres and traction control just arent really what we want to see. In my opinion this round rotation needs to go, get the classics back, scrap all these rallies in places were people dont know rallying and dont own cars, get proper routes back and reformulate rules regarding cars. I think a sort of Group AGroup N middle ground is required, so that manufacturers can just enter what they have without much need to spend a great deal of money and specialise if they wish, and hopefully it would encourage the re entry of some proper sports cars in rallies. Specially designed rally cars are just too good now to be interesting, they are seemingly glued to the road. Just imagine if anyone could rock up to the Monte with a Porsche 911 GT3 just like you can in sports car racing and get on the podium, a la the late 70s early 80s. Surely the Audi S4 wouldnt take much fettling to be a decent rally car, obviously Mitsubishi and Subaru could compete, and what if Renault decided to add a new shape Clio Sport V6 to their range, that would be ace on tarmac. Basically I think the current cars are just to techno, bare no resemblance to their road car cousins, sound awful and aren't exciting. Also, allow the teams to pick specialists and more than just 2 cars for tarmac rallies and in Britain, Sweden and Finland and then maybe Loeb will have something to worry about and we'll see some young talent emerging.

I think almost as important as the routes and driver opportunities is the cars. I read somewhere that if rules were changed to S2000 in the wrc Ford would enter a Fiesta. A Fiesta!! Who cares about Ford Fiesta's? Indeed, who gets turned on by Fiat Punto's, Peugeot 207's, Citroen C4's and Skoda Fabia's. Not me! Rallying, as well as being about the ultimate driving test is about iconic cars. Alpine A110, Lancia Stratos, Opel Manta, Lancia 037, Mitsubishi Lancer, Subaru Imprezza, Escort Cozzy, Porsche 911, Renault 5 Turbo, Audi Quattro - to name but a few. Mainly sports cars, all powerful, all noisy and all spending a great deal of time sideways. This is what we need to get back to, recognisable cars that young boys hang pictures of on their walls and are exciting to watch. Thats the big downfall of WRC and S2000 rules, their just normal everyday cars appearance wize. 14 year old boys don't need posters of them because thir mam probably has one parked outside the house!

 Re: wrc drivers future. by teamanager

19-Feb-09 07:40 PM 

I think you have hit the main point here - the importance of the cars. Actually, I would have no problem with seeing Ford Fiestas in International Championship events. The problem is when you have ONLY Ford Fiestas or otherwise almost identical cars.

What we need is a large number of different cars, and matching that, a large number of different rallies, so that if one car dominated one type of event, it is likely that a different car might shine in the next. I have no problem with specialist drivers, or specialist cars - the diversity s interest, and also much of the challenge.

Perhaps the one rule that we havent discussed is the one that says a team must commit to the entire series for it to be able to figure in the results. And with only one type of car. Without that rule, manufacturers could pick and choose events that would suit their cars, and save a lot of money by not entering others - or support a local driver to keep their presence alive etc.

I realise that the rule was put in place to ensure a good turnout at all events....but I wonder now if that is having the opposite effect, and discouraging some otherwise interesting entries

I might add that the IRC uses this rule too, which to my mind made a mockery of the TV coverage of the Safari a few years ago, we KNEW a gp N Subaru had won the rally, yet the TV coverage gave absolutely no acknowledgement to it, and showed the "win" going to another car - I cant even remember what it was now, yet I remember that the Subaru actually won ! Few and far between, those happy moments !

Lastly... a comment that rallying is not a good sport for TV. I suppose that depends on what you want. If you want coverage of the stages as they happen, and lots of filming areas, then its difficult to do. But "Speed TV" in the US used to do a summary show on the Sunday evening after each WRC event, hosted by Nicky Grist. I thought it was excellent coverage, with a lot of really good camera footage, and intelligent commentary. It was a "must see". I thought it was a tragedy that they stopped doing it.

A similar approach is taken towards the TV coverage of the Canadian and "Rally America" series, although they show weeks after the actual events, and at definitely "non-prime" time showings, which is a shame. Its hard to remember to turn on the TV at odd times of the day....

Heres hoping that we see some great performances this season Petter Solberg and Chris Atkinson. The only sad thing my point of view is that they will be in Citroens. At least the Xsara is a really nice looking car - unlike the C4 or the WRC Focus, which I dont like at all. But then, thats just me...

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Chris B

19-Feb-09 09:50 PM 

Absolutely great posts! I think you already have seen my posts here before.

On the cars, I do actually love the Abarth Grande Punto and the 207, but I get your point and think we are not that far off. I also have problems seeing the Ford Fiesta as a sporty dream car, but the same would apply to the Renault R5, which you listed as a good car, obviously meaning the groupB R5 Turbo. I dont think these base cars as Grande Punto are wrong, it just is what you do with them by tech rules. I think we should have more of a road car relation, which would automatically help cost control. But the main point really is rally cars should have spectacular looks, spectacular handling, spectacular sound!!!! This certainly is not the case with the modern cars, if WRCar or S2000. The only thing that is spectacular about them is the price, which would probably buy 3 Audi Sport Quattro S1!

Only problem I see with your list including i.e. Porsche 911 GT3, is that as long as we allow 4x4, with few exceptions 2WD would never stand a chance for results. But other than that, that certainly is also an aspect I am missing. IRC is S2000 cars which are actually 4x4, and in contrast to WRC the IRC does not demand the same car used on all events. But still, which other concept you want to compete them with. My favourite example, told on this forum several times, is that I always loved the Tour de Corse being 3 weeks after the Safari in the traditional 1980s calendars. Because on the Safari we had the Mercedes 450SLC, on Corsica the BMW M1.

I should add I never had a problem with specialist drivers and specialist cars. I was always flaming back when people complained of Gilles Panizzi taking points away the regulars on asphalt. Well, if you want to be the best driver in the World, you should be able to give best to Panizzi too. Besides Panizzi would have never become WRChamp as a specialist driver, because it is - sorry, was - a championship of diversity and only who could deliver results on all challenges could win the title.

Besides I dont agree that rallying is no TV sport, see IRC Monte Carlo.

"I realise that the rule was put in place to ensure a good turnout at all events....but I wonder now if that is having the opposite effect, and discouraging some otherwise interesting entries"

Exactly my point, see also the Rules for Records article linked in the state of WRC thread. It is fact that for 2006 Skoda and Mitsubishi withdrew the WRC because - typical FIA - they were promised not to have to do all 16 rounds, the rule was confirmed and after confirmation u-turned. For sure some events had a poor turnout, not that it is that much better these days, as the M2 teams would be missing on the fly-away rallies. But we have rallies in no-name locations, as Cyprus, expensive car breaker rally with no market, or Japan, wheere since the import embargo Skoda never was in the market. In the 16 rounds calendar, and still today, we had 4-5 rallies each year that for most teams meant huge cost for zero marketing return. I am not surprised teams like Skoda and Mitsubishi then say "If it is all or nothing, then for us it is rather nothing". I am absolutely convinced, if we had events that deliver huge marketing in itself, as i.e. Safari, Monte, and cancelled the minimum number of starts, we would have 3 or 4 manufacturers more. Well, cheaper cars maybe needed then too. But that is 3 times as many makes as we have now.

Hmm, most things I have said elsewheere already. Rallies need to stick out more so Joe Public can see their significance, understand their unique challenge, and then the media would be interested to deliver too. See also some of my comments on the Acores thread in the IRC forum. We need long rallies that have something unique to offer.

So let me finish this post off picking up bringbackrealrallying mention of the RAC Sunday Park stages. One trend I find weird is that when we had the park stages, drivers were describing them as Mickey Mouse. I understand them to some degree, but.... Today everybody is full of praise for that Cardiff indoor show or side by side rallycross promotion - or whatever it is, these superspecials look like rallycross to me but certainly is no promotion for real rallying. Apparently these superspecials are good for spectators and TV.
- to explain the dilemma of WRC, one good thing about superspecials is that you can save a lot of money. Because if you do an East African Safari Rally consisting of indoor superspecials, we can re-construct this track outside Dovenby Hall and save M-Sport a lot of ligistics budget. Because if we see nothing of landscape, animals, weather, road surface and conditions, what is the point travelling this country - but then again, what is the point showing and watching it at all!
Plainly, superspecials are NOT telling the public what rallying is about and they are NOT interesting! If you want to bring rally to the public, give us back the stately homes park stages!!!!
- It is , it was a lot of travelling and road sections for little competitive mileage. But here the rally was coming to the public!
- It is drivers called them Mickey Mouse, but I am unsure if they hated them. Fact is - and quite likely their point - in such short mileage you could not win the rally, but you could lose it! And that was because these were slippy start finish stages, very, very difficult, treacherous! And THIS IS RALLYING!!!!
- When I started being a rally fan, the park stages were the RAC for me! Sure the real rally, or the bulk of the rally was in the forests. But the park stages delivered the unique pictures for TV and the papers! To the day I still know what Chatsworth House looks like, wheere it is located, and that Shell was usually the sponsor of this stage! THINK ABOUT IT THAT IS MARKETING!!!! I have never seen Cardiff indoor on the front page of a magazin. In fact I cant remember when I last saw any Rally GB motive on the front page of a magazin!

And that is the point. On Rally GB, even if it is only 5 percent of the stages, the park stages are marketing for rallying and its products. A WRC without RAC park stages, without Safari adventure wildlife, without Col de Turini at night, is a series I as a rally fan do not understand what single events are about, so how do you suppose Joe Public shall understand that.

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Chris B

19-Feb-09 10:03 PM 

In my points about the RAC park stages, the forum security software kept swallowing the word "it is TRUUE that..."

"The only thing that is spectacular about them is the price, which would probably buy 3 Audi Sport Quattro S1! "

Now I have found the solution for the FIA: We already drooped co-driver names. I suggest we should replace driver names for the price tags of the cars!

 Re: wrc drivers future. by bringbackrealrallying

20-Feb-09 03:54 AM 

My point about Porsche GT3s is not that they would win the world championship but that a private team could buy one relatively cheaply, sign up some good french driver like say Ogier or even an old hand like Panizzi or Auriol and, as long as they got good dry conditions, get on the podium. They could maybe do the same in Germany and Corsica too. This is what used to happen, I believe Jean Luc Therier crashed on the last leg of the Monte while leading and won Corsica in a private Porsche 911, I know this was before 4wd but it could still be relevant. This is variety and interest, this is not knowing who could win given certain conditions and adds excitement. Imagine if the 1st leg of Monte was dry and someone in a powerful 2 wheel drive car built up a big lead and then had it whittled down by a 4x4 crew over the remainder. That would be great fun! Also you could then get manufacturers with similarly powerful cars entering tarmac rallies. I bet watching a young Finn with something to prove driving a 400bhp rear wheel drive Porsche in Finland would be something to remember, he might not win but it would be entertaining! I think if the regs were changed so that Group N was the top tier it would cut the advantage of 4wd. They would still win the rough gravelly stuff but it would bring them back the range of 2wd cars on certain events. It would encoruage more teams to enter hopefully too if they changed the rules about not entering all events.

Also, why did they change all the rally names, whats wrong with 1000 Lakes, RAC, San Remo etc, not stupid, we know which countries they are in, we didnt need them renamed so we would remember!

The thing that riles me most about what has happened to rallying is that it seems that it has been ruined in order to chase new fans. Shortening events and sticking them on TV isnt gonna get someone who doesnt like rallying to suddenly love it! What would get a young child interested would be if you could take him along to a live stage, now you can only do that if you live in Builth Wells or Rhayadaer.They should try to please the people who already loved, I suppose they got complacent and thought we would still love it regardless. I suppose thats what happens when business men are put in charge of anything, thy always want new markets and mo money

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Spindle

20-Feb-09 08:48 AM 

Hey I live by Rhayader, you're right, we made it to the stage easy enough, but it was cancelled..... TOO SLIPPERY!

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Chris B

21-Feb-09 09:27 AM 

I just tumbled over a photo an thought I use it here as an example, even in two threads....

Wheere is this

And where is this

Or another rally, the Safari, if you don't rekognise the event by the car details as roo-bar, lights, snorkels

You rekognise it on the vegetation,

or the wildlife

First 2 photos, it was the first one which made me say this here. OK, you have to look close to realise it is a Peugeot 205 T16, and you probably would have to follow this event particular to learn the blue dot on the roof identified Timo Salonen's car, but I bet every slightly more historic rally fan here realised in an instant this is Rally NZ!!!!

2nd photo of modern WRC days, even me die hard fan since decades would have had a hard time deciding if this is Cyprus, Turkey, Sardinia or Acropolis. As it turns out looking at the tiny door number, all my guesses would have been wrong, it is Japan.

But if we want to sell cars and sponsor products, through media, we first need Joe Public to see something special they can identify, hence unique locations, landscape and helicopter footage should at least be part of the mix.

 Re: wrc drivers future. by Chris B

21-Feb-09 09:53 AM 

In reply to bringbackrealrallying, I couldn't agree more and am happy I am not alone with these sentiments.

I understand what you say with the Porsche GT3 and is kind of what I meant with the Mercedes 450SLC in Safari and the BMW M1 on Corsica 3 weeks later. In 1978 Jean-Pierre Nicolas managed the feat of winning Monte Carlo with a private Porsche 911, then in Safari he won beating the Porsche works team with a Peugeot 504! Ace!!!!

That is how history and memorable stories are made! Ace driver, that Nicolas guy, winning the most outstanding classics. At the same time he would never have been able to win Monte in the heavy duty 504, while the Porsche was surely the less suitable car for Safari. That the Porsche works team still tried to win Safari shows the immense marketing potential of this event alone!

And you are right with the names too. I may not realise on that Japan photo example above and on them ground cameras wheere that is and why I should get excited about this rally, but I am not stupid. I know that the Safari is in Kenya, only the Rally Kenya is a bit sterile, but winning THE SAFARI, now that is a number! And for some reason the RAC is still more glamour to me ear than Rally GB, despite the RAC deserving the name Rally GB more than that Rally of Cardiff we have now! Or is it Swansea these days, I don't even know!

And all that you say in your last chapter, this is exactly why I went in detail musing about the stately homes park stages of the RAC. For a start, what annoys me most is that in my feeling the sport has been ruined for rule changes even amateurs could see would never fulfill their intended target. Just one of many examples, souprally to make the last day more exciting. Souprally was never to give us unlucky drivers with a chance to catch up - the rally days are way too short for this! Plus souprally was only an alibi to camouflage the weak entries these days. The only thing souprally succeeded in is to confuse the potential new fan, who surely is not to tune in a 2nd time if he doesn't understand what is going on and finds the rules silly.

And if one of the targets of new rules was to find new fans, it is exactly as you say. The best way I can think of getting a youngster - living outside of Rhayader LOL - interested in this show is to spread the event round the country. The house and land of Duke and Duchess Cavendish - the landlords of Chatsworth Manor - would have been impressive enough of its own. But seeing monster versions of dads cars mud wrestling in his garden with the manor in the background is a moment not only this kid will never forget for the rest of his-her life!!!!

 Re: wrc drivers future. by AndyRAC

21-Feb-09 10:41 AM 

Good posts, we all feel the same, the way this once great sport has been raped and pillaged, all in the name of making it popular and trendy.
In fact, it has had the opposite effect - nobody gives a toss about the sport anymore.
Just look what is happening on Rally Cyprus - the first day is on Tarmac - Good!! But they have to use Gravel tyres.....Yes Gravel tyres!!! What is wrong with these people
If the FIAISC want the sport to be a success, then they need to make some big, brave decisions. Let the Monte do what they did this year, and have a large route - if Ford and Citroen dont like it TOUGH!!! Same with Rally GB - it has to leave Wales, at the moment it viewed as a Welsh event - and not a British event, like it used to be. You are both right about the Sunday Mickey Mouse stages - however they brought hundreds of thousands of people to Rallying, who wouldnt go a Forest - charged between £5-£10 a car - it was a money making winner - plus nearly all the stages were sponsored by big companies who wanted to be associated with the event
Chatsworth, Tatton, Carden, Weston, Sutton, Blenheim, Clumber, Knowsley Safari Park, Donington, Oulton, Aintree, Haigh Hall - just some of the places visited on the Sunday of the RAC.
Since the demise of these, weve had the introduction of the World Rally Pass in 2000 - which then cost about £50 for all stages. This is now £90 how do they justify this - it is just a money making excercise - and not a very subtle one.
Finally a point about the cars - a GroupN car should be a car driven out of a showroom, a safety cage and fire extinguisher fitted - and ready to Rally - nothing else. Whereas the GroupA should be able to have the seats removed, brakes, suspension uprated, cage fitted, engine re-tuned - and ready to Rally. You use what you sell. Also, if somebody wants to use a Porsche 911 GT3 they can - in a 12 round calendar, there should be at least 4 rounds on Tarmac - allowing them to challenge on many events.

 Re: wrc drivers future. by bringbackrealrallying

21-Feb-09 12:47 AM 

AndyRAC, your points are all spot on, I like what you say about the cars, if only we could have them regs! Young Finn's turning up to the 1000 Lakes in some under powered near enough road car and scareing the life out of the works drivers used to be a season highlight!

 Page 2 of 5 - Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next Page