PDA

View Full Version : 1st day of 2004 WRC year begins



Evil Ewok
01-23-2004, 02:54 PM
:D Wrc is back at it today, and from what I can already see it's going to be a good year. Mitsubishi is going to dominate in my personal opinion this year, they are already beginning to show their talents this year, and it's just going to get better. Everyone comment on how they view this year is going to be.

Pliz
01-23-2004, 04:41 PM
well may the best team win :)

DasModell
01-23-2004, 05:01 PM
so .. are you sure Citroen will win ... :) :) :) :) . well i am :)

SPN:DOC
01-25-2004, 05:54 AM
Go Peugeot!!! :D :D

henk4
01-25-2004, 06:41 AM
Citroen has just won, but Ford is in the lead for the constructors. Loeb took it quitely today, but still has more than one minuut advantage in the end.

DasModell
01-25-2004, 04:28 PM
well . i was expecting a win .. off course .. :) .. he won it for the last 3 years now :) hope he won't blow it again in France :)

Evil Ewok
01-25-2004, 04:38 PM
Last 2 years I think, he also won in germany but they disqualified him for something.

This is the man buddy! Mitsubishi is back and great!!! 6th place is a good start for this year, after being in 14th and working himself all the way to 6th!! YES :D

DasModell
01-25-2004, 10:09 PM
it was Monte to .. he "won" the race but for a mistake from Citroen he was penalised 1 minute so he finished second to tommi makkinen

NAZCA C2
01-26-2004, 03:35 PM
I was watching the Monte Carlo rally on Speed TV and they were talking about the new Peugeot 307's engine, they said the new engine produces more torque so they use a 4 spd gearbox instead of a 6 spd. How the hell do they get that much torque out that little motor? They must have way more than 400lb-ft of torque. Amazing! World Rally Rules!

Evil Ewok
01-26-2004, 03:38 PM
Of course it does!!! And yea they were thinking about it in the perspective of the fact that every shift loses a time, so they shortened the gear box to 4 gears and increased the power output so that they wouldn't have to worry about stalling or chugging out. Smart decision I think, but I still love gilles panizzi and mitsubishi :D.

Matra et Alpine
01-26-2004, 05:29 PM
Of course it does!!! And yea they were thinking about it in the perspective of the fact that every shift loses a time, so they shortened the gear box to 4 gears and increased the power output so that they wouldn't have to worry about stalling or chugging out. Smart decision I think, but I still love gilles panizzi and mitsubishi :D.
Well they didn't increase power as WRC limits them to 300bhp.
SO, being smart engineers, they decided to concentrate on the new engine to develop LOTS more torque and then run fewer gears.
There's talk that FIA will add a torque limit to the WRC formula to prevent it getting out of control again - remember Group B ??
Watching the Monte, I think they may NOT use the 4 speed again as there were a few sections where the engine was hitting the rev limiter for 10 seconds on the straighter sections. That was losing them top sepeed and lots of time.

Evil Ewok
01-26-2004, 05:31 PM
It's not that the officials increased it, im saying that they increased the power put compared to the 206. That is the reason that they could run the higher torque and fewer gears.

DasModell
01-28-2004, 04:22 PM
how on hell are they gonna restrict torque ??? .. i mean .. the restrictors they have now limits the power to around 300 BHP(i don;t think the FIA puts the engines on the dyno:) ) but the torque .. i have no ideea how they gonna restrict that

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 06:45 PM
It's not that the officials increased it, im saying that they increased the power put compared to the 206. That is the reason that they could run the higher torque and fewer gears.
NO, the WRC rules prevent them increasing POWER.
Power is limited to 300bhp.
What I was pointing out was that Peugeot have got around the spirit of the rule and have made a torquier engine which measures same bhp on dyno.
The talk is that the FIA are considering adding a torque limit to the engines to prevent this becoming a race which will make cars faster and as dangerous as the Group B days.

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 06:48 PM
how on hell are they gonna restrict torque ??? .. i mean .. the restrictors they have now limits the power to around 300 BHP(i don;t think the FIA puts the engines on the dyno:) ) but the torque .. i have no ideea how they gonna restrict that
The FIA does not add something to the car or engine which RESTRICTS power.
The engines ARE run on dynos and the power checked and documents provided to the FIA.
The FIA can at any time require a power check during scrutineering.
So in the same way they restrict power they could restrict torque.
By making it a part of the class rules !
If your car doesn't conform to the rules you will fail scrutineering.
If you are found to have broken the rule, you will lose points, possible fines and disqualificaton

Evil Ewok
01-28-2004, 06:56 PM
I would love to see the wrc go back to group b format. It would be alot more safer compared to then, with the technology jump in 10-15 years increasing, I wouldn't think that it would be as dangerous as it was. It's just as dangerous as it is now. Look at the wrecks that have happened in the last 2-4 years between mitsubishi, ford, and subaru. Just last season, francois duval ran his BP Ford rs off of a part cliff/hill in the middle of a curve, and the only thing that stopped him from rolling all the way down the hill were trees. 4 years ago I believe, Tommi Makinen (I can't remember where, but I think it was Monte Carlo) ran his Mitsubishi evo vi thru a stone barricade seperating himself from a fall to death basically. So many more have happened over the years im surprised that deaths havn't been more frequent than they already are. Here in america, last season, a subaru driver in the prorally died from a car crash. It is the racers choice to drive, and it should be that way. It shouldn't be entirely fia's decision. Group B (or a form of this) Should come back.

DasModell
01-28-2004, 07:08 PM
i admit i don;t know much about this . but i tought that the way to make the cars have 300BHP was by using the restrictor .. why would they use restrictors if they anyway test the engine on the dyno and if they have more then 300BHP they are eliminated .. it doesn;t make sense ...
i know that restrictors effect power much more then torque for example
a Judd GV5 V10 has 600+ BHP with restrictors and +800 without but the torque difference is only 20lb-ft .. from 445 restricted to 465 unrestricted
and that's why i think peugeot tried to exploit more efficiently the torque ...


my 2 cents :) :)

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 07:28 PM
I would love to see the wrc go back to group b format. It would be alot more safer compared to then, with the technology jump in 10-15 years increasing,
No technology will allow a passenger to survive coming off a stage at 100mph+ into trees and thousand foot drops.
It was the UNCONTROLLABILITY of the cars in the tight tracks that invitied the danger.
Things HAVE improved, so now cars could be FASTER than GrB and that makes them MORE deangersou !

I.....So many more have happened over the years im surprised that deaths havn't been more frequent than they already are.
There are few in the top ranks, but deaths and seriosu injury is still there.
If the cars you listed were all doing 10mph faster they may NOT have survived. Where woudl the FIA put the limit ?

Here in america, last season, a subaru driver in the prorally died from a car crash. It is the racers choice to drive, and it should be that way. It shouldn't be entirely fia's decision. Group B (or a form of this) Should come back.
I was lucky to see and get hands-on GrB cars.
They brought a different skill to rallying.
Rallying is about using the car to make best time over changing roads and tracks. It doesn't need more power to do that and make it enjoyable for spectators and competitors.
I rally now in a 1972 MGB GT. It's slower than the Excort TC we ran 25 years ago but it's as much fun for all involved.
You need to look back at the GrB drivers at the end of stages. They were ALWAYS seriously stressed and sweating profusely. It took too much out of them physically. Henri Toivonen dies in a Lancia with the suspicion that he was tired from 'flu. A competitor will try to compete even when they shouldn't.

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 07:35 PM
i admit i don;t know much about this . but i tought that the way to make the cars have 300BHP was by using the restrictor .. why would they use restrictors if they anyway test the engine on the dyno and if they have more then 300BHP they are eliminated .. it doesn;t make sense ...
i know that restrictors effect power much more then torque for example
a Judd GV5 V10 has 600+ BHP with restrictors and +800 without but the torque difference is only 20lb-ft .. from 445 restricted to 465 unrestricted
and that's why i think peugeot tried to exploit more efficiently the torque ...


my 2 cents :) :)

What is this 'restrictor' ?
Cart has a standard pop-off valve to limit power.
WSB bikes use throttle body restrictors for each engine size.
But how could any of these work with so many car and engine makes involved.
No, They leave it to the manufacturer to 'restrict' the power to 300bhp.
Engine and boost management do the task - developed by the MANUFACTURER. They submit the engine to FIA for type approval.

And sorry you ARE right. If they are tested over 300bhp they ARE eliminated.
AND as you said, restrictors wouldn't make sense :)


The Judd example is mistaken because you are using the SAME engine design. Crank angles, conrod length, piston size, swept volumne compressions ratio. Yep, that probably won't affect torque much. ( But without all the details of the engine configuration it's hard to confirm )

A corrrect comparison would be to use two engines of the SAME capcity but with different piston, conrod and compression figures. THEN you would see torque differences.

Sorry to let facts confuse opinions :)

Evil Ewok
01-28-2004, 07:38 PM
But if they want to do it and enjoy it then there is no reason to not let them? Look at soccer players, or any other sport. They are basically dead by the end of a match, but they enjoy doing that. They love to win. I just want the speed that was matched when these cars ran, and the adreniline you must feel from just watching them. Sure todays WRC is amazing in it's own right with what it is able to do, but it is no group b.

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 07:51 PM
But if they want to do it and enjoy it then there is no reason to not let them? Look at soccer players, or any other sport. They are basically dead by the end of a match, but they enjoy doing that. They love to win. I just want the speed that was matched when these cars ran, and the adreniline you must feel from just watching them. Sure todays WRC is amazing in it's own right with what it is able to do, but it is no group b.
Sorry to be blunt , but can you let us know your age and any experience in motorsport ?
Comparing the tiredness of a soccer player who can take a rest at any split second with a driver who if he/she isn't their sharpest going into a corner at 80mph with trees and drops to get them. There IS no point to 'rest' until the end of a stage. With the likes of Kielder where it was 30 miles of forest track then it was VERY dangerous.
If these guys get it wrong they CAN be REALLY dead, not just tired and revcovered in time for a piss-up in the pub !!!
It's as skillful, not just as fast. It's easy to confuse the two if you've not competed.

DasModell
01-28-2004, 08:01 PM
with restrictors .. limits the amount of air that gets into the engine . and so the power ..
restrictors are used in sportscars .. there are some specifications of the restrictors depending on the displacement and the number of valves and all engines produce around 600 BHP ..
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/mugenv8.html
the mugen can use 2 resctrictors of 33.4 mm or 1 of 46.8 mm
and the judd
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/juddgv510.html

and i found this
http://www.fia.com/Homologations/BRIDE_GroupeA-2003.pdf
wich is a list of cars that must be fitted with restrictors in group A under the 255 article of appendix J ..and in that list you get all WRC cars
in apendix J
http://www.fia.com/regle/REG_TEC/Annexes_J-textes/255.pdf

at the engine(5.1.8.3) it says that all supercharged cars must be fited with a restrictor fixed to the compressor housing (and it gives more details)

Evil Ewok
01-28-2004, 08:03 PM
For starters, I was not comparing them entirely, just the fact that each of them love to do what they do. I was never trying to compare the physical and mental harshness for either side. It was just an example and a statement that in my personal opinion we should let the drivers decide if they would want a section of rallying to have group b potential. Sure it was hard an dangerous, but that is no reason to not let them race that way if they were to agree and want to do it. Sure im young (16, 17 this year) and my motorsport is slightly young in the view of experience, but with intellect i'm pretty smart, and this is my opinion. I would love to be able to experience group b, and the sense of speed that was felt before my generation.

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 08:22 PM
For starters, I was not comparing them entirely, just the fact that each of them love to do what they do. I was never trying to compare the physical and mental harshness for either side. It was just an example and a statement that in my personal opinion we should let the drivers decide if they would want a section of rallying to have group b potential. Sure it was hard an dangerous, but that is no reason to not let them race that way if they were to agree and want to do it. Sure im young (16, 17 this year) and my motorsport is slightly young in the view of experience, but with intellect i'm pretty smart, and this is my opinion. I would love to be able to experience group b, and the sense of speed that was felt before my generation.
A better analogy.
Should you play American Football without helmets ?
It would let you get the sense of speed and power felt before your generation. Does that help comprehend my view ??

The drivers were pleased to see Group B go.
Yep, they'll reminisce now about what once was.
But on the day they knew they were taking too many risks.

You're right to wish to see GrB cars again, don't know about the US but over here we get 'events' where GrB cars will be driven hard - not 100% tho'. Mount Stuart classic last year had Audi, Renault, Nissan and Ford GrB cars :) There are excellent DVDs you can watch and experience insude.

Try to get a shot in a current WRC car and you'll be surprised at the speed and agility. Local rallies and car clubs may have a driver looking for a navigator. The best way to experience rallies is to compete. Navigating is a cheap and easy (!) start. Subaru and EVOs are not far of the pace of their WRX cousins.

Evil Ewok
01-28-2004, 08:26 PM
What about Rugby? lol

DasModell
01-28-2004, 08:28 PM
Group B is dead .. asa is ground effects in f1 it is too dangerous ..
BTW . i would like WRC to be once again RWD with high revving engines

Evil Ewok
01-28-2004, 08:35 PM
I would love to see more manufacturers get into the mix. Maybe a german company such as VW, or maybe an itallian company. Japanese manufacturers are dominating this. But the diversity in companies would bring the sport together as a whole across the world, because there would be a manufacturer for everybody.

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 08:38 PM
with restrictors .. limits the amount of air that gets into the engine . and so the power ..
restrictors are used in sportscars .. there are some specifications of the restrictors depending on the displacement and the number of valves and all engines produce around 600 BHP ..
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/mugenv8.html
the mugen can use 2 resctrictors of 33.4 mm or 1 of 46.8 mm
and the judd
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/juddgv510.html

and i found this
http://www.fia.com/Homologations/BRIDE_GroupeA-2003.pdf
wich is a list of cars that must be fitted with restrictors in group A under the 255 article of appendix J ..and in that list you get all WRC cars
in apendix J
http://www.fia.com/regle/REG_TEC/Annexes_J-textes/255.pdf

at the engine(5.1.8.3) it says that all supercharged cars must be fited with a restrictor fixed to the compressor housing (and it gives more details)
Thank you, DasModell, at least you've researched to support your comments.

I was trying to distinguish between a 'standard restrictor' as used in CART and the WRC controls.
The restricor sizes listed are determined by tesing the 'teyp approval' engine which has been designed with a restrictor in place within the range specified in the rules. If that meets the 300bhp figure then THAT restrictor size is added to the requirments.

The restrictor is NOT fitted by FIA in the way CART is.
The engine builder must manufacture the engine with the correct restricion to limit the engine to 300bhp.
If they don't then they will lose points.

Sorry I wasn't clearer earlier in the CART restrictor use.
It is different to the way WRC works.
If a manufacturer comes up with a new car/engine then they go through type approval and homologation which checks the POWER output and then documents the intake size via the restrictor.

To return to the point, if they chose to restrict torque they will have to work with the manufacturers and come up with a scheme that limits the torque in an engine - it could be reduction in piston size, or swept volume. Or maybe part of engine management ( I doubt the latter after the F1 debacels )

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 08:42 PM
What about Rugby? lol
Not the same, you only tackle the person WITH the ball, so you know where a hit is coming from and who is the intended victim :)
Even so, there have been significant rule changes to avoid the worst of the dangerous situations as a ruck or maul breaks down.

Matra et Alpine
01-28-2004, 08:55 PM
I would love to see more manufacturers get into the mix. Maybe a german company such as VW, or maybe an itallian company. Japanese manufacturers are dominating this. But the diversity in companies would bring the sport together as a whole across the world, because there would be a manufacturer for everybody.
WRC is an expensive undertaking and a long way from the showroom.
You find all the manufacturers present in Group A.
SKODA carries the VW-group WRC hopes. They have a long and well-respected heritage in world rallying.

Ford WRC is developed and run by M-Sport in the Lake District, England :)
Subaru WRC is developed and run by Pro-Drive near Oxford, England.
Mitsubishi WRC is developed and run by RALLIART - Oxford, England.
Skoda is Czech, Peugeot and Citroen are French developed.

henk4
01-29-2004, 12:20 AM
Look at soccer players, or any other sport. They are basically dead by the end of a match, but they enjoy doing that.

This you probably wrote unaware of the fact that last weekend a player of the Hungarian national team died on the field during a top division competition match in Portugal. It was broadcast live on a number of TV stations.

Falcon500
01-29-2004, 05:57 AM
Well one thing i can say about australian rally is we race mildly modifed road going versions duller to whatch debteble (im not a huge rally fan myself unless its tarmac) but we havent had a fateality as far as i can reckon in 30 years and we have been rallying for nearly 50.
American football is a strange game at best tackle anything that moves.go rugby and rugby leauge!
I likd group b much like our group c touring cars but theres a time and place for everything i guess and that seems the 80s for both of them.
And restrictorswe use them in our nations cup class much like your european FIA series i dont get why they restirc cars and they also have a sucsess ballist where they add in somthing like 10% of the cars total weight if it wins a race....strange catigory at times and seems to me to hobble winners rather then praise them.
Pro drive also mange our ford v8 super car team www.fpv.com.au in case your interested
And on the first day how did the fords go? just wondering seeing marko martin do welldone somthing to rekindle my intrest in rally.

Wouter Melissen
01-29-2004, 06:12 AM
Modern WRC are much faster than Group B cars as a result of a big step forward in suspension and brake technologies. Group B cars were great cars, but not as much because of the many manufacturers campaigning and not as much the the cars itself. If manufacturers like Lancia would return to rallying again, Group B might finally be left alone.

Matra et Alpine
01-29-2004, 07:37 AM
Modern WRC are much faster than Group B cars as a result of a big step forward in suspension and brake technologies. Group B cars were great cars, but not as much because of the many manufacturers campaigning and not as much the the cars itself. If manufacturers like Lancia would return to rallying again, Group B might finally be left alone.
What stages do you think GrB was slower than WRC ?
In all the stages that were comparable I think the GrB average speeds are still higher.
As an example, brother's RS200 was askeed to be car 00 ( course opening car ) on an international event. he was asked to slow down as the marshals were concerned about the speeds ( car 00 isn't meant to blast through :)
He recorded fastest time on at least one stage and that was against WRX and EVO6s !!
Suspension and brakeing has moved forward but todays cars are a LOT heavier than the T16 and RS200 and Audi S2s. These were spaceframe chassis. Less weight meant BETTER stopping and quicker direction changes.
I've not checked for a few years but I don't think WRC has gone THAT much faster. .... must do a search later ....

Evil Ewok
01-29-2004, 02:56 PM
I have found information that Renault is thinkinga bout entering back into the wrc. They have commented on this matter, but only to a certain degree. They said that they would love to get back into rally racing, and they might one day if it is possible for them to put together a car and such. They said with in the next 10 years or so, they just might do it.
Also, I agree with Alpina in where he stated that grb rally cars were faster than the newer heavier wrc cars. One reason, of course, would be the fact that they weigh more. Another would be the electronics that run the engine, drivetrain, and practically everything else in the newer cars. In the older cars it was simpler and the power most likely wouldn't lose as much lag as today, and also, the power. Example: Ford RS200 600bhp
332.4 BHP/Liter

Ford Focus WRC03 300bhp
150.7 BHP/Liter

Obviously, the older cars have more power, more horsepower per liter, and just all around superiority.

(thank you ultimatecarpage.com for these statistics :) )

Matra et Alpine
01-29-2004, 03:18 PM
I have found information that Renault is thinkinga bout entering back into the wrc.
There had been talk in the French forums last year about Renault resurrecting the Alpine name and producing a 'replacment' for the ultimate A110 rally cars.
Wonder if it's the same rumours or if some of it is becoming fact ???
Some of the design studies were beautiful :)

Evil Ewok
01-29-2004, 03:23 PM
I picked that small piece of information off of the wrc.com website. Probally still could find the article in the news archives. Not even a month old.

Evil Ewok
01-29-2004, 03:26 PM
"When we take our rally car on competitions, officials are always pleased to see the car and greet it with comments such as "Nice to see a proper rally car Mr Whalley". Why is this? I have come to appreciate that the Integrale is the last of the real "Driver cars", we do not depend on electronics to sort out driver short comings, as do the Subaru and Mitsubishi cars with their traction control, yaw control and intelligent differentials. It is for this reason that those cars are accused of lack of soul, the driver has become a navigator. The Integrale involves the driver in the total control and continually challenges the driver to move up to a higher level of skill." I love this paragraph from John Whalley of Whalley LTD (custom makes integrales, and sells them). Also for your viewing pleasure.

Wouter Melissen
01-29-2004, 05:46 PM
Example: Ford RS200 600bhp
332.4 BHP/Liter

Ford Focus WRC03 300bhp
150.7 BHP/Liter

Obviously, the older cars have more power, more horsepower per liter, and just all around superiority.

(thank you ultimatecarpage.com for these statistics :) )


Those figures mean jack shit. Peak horsepower says very little about an engine, especially considering the very small powerband this was available in the Group B cars. With the 300 bhp limit manufacturers have worked hard on getting a long flat powerband and incredible torque figures from these small engines. This effects the drivability of the cars immensely. Whereas the power used to come at a bang, it now comes quick but gradually. Low-end torque is what you need to get out of the corners quickly, horsepower is what you need when you want to go down Mulsanne at 400 km/h. This the main reason why the Delta S4 had both a turbocharger and a supercharger. Your comment about lag is way off as well, the new cars have 20 years extra turbo development behind them. When the Group B cars were around turbocharged racing engines were less than a decade old. A lot has been learned since then.
Furthermore the modern ultra quick gearboxes are a big step forward.

On stages with long straights the horsepower rich Group B cars might still beat the new cars but on twistier tracks the advanced 4WD systems, torqueier engines and ultra quick gearboxes will make up for the weight deficit.

Evil Ewok
01-29-2004, 06:06 PM
A flat powerband isn't seriously going to matter, if you have to work up to that speed and that power on tap then it isn't really going to matter compared to when you can dial in the power when you want it, say in a grb car. Sure, braking and handling are going to matter slightly in the curves, but not so much when you can make the curve in a longer faster sprint, slide into it and keep on the throttle thru out the curve while keeping on the gas. This is the benefit of having that power whenever you want it, not having to work up to the limit. I wasn't talking about the turbo either, I was talking about the electronics.

Matra et Alpine
01-29-2004, 07:00 PM
Those figures mean jack shit. Peak horsepower says very little about an engine, especially considering the very small powerband this was available in the Group B cars.
Sorry, Wouter, the AUDI engines had wide power bands.
Can't compare it with modern WRC as everyone today keeps it all secret :)


With the 300 bhp limit manufacturers have worked hard on getting a long flat powerband and incredible torque figures from these small engines. This effects the drivability of the cars immensely. Whereas the power used to come at a bang, it now comes quick but gradually.
The big advance has been inthe techniques to keep the turbo's spooled up. Back in GrB days the driver would swing the car sideways and keep the throttle ON to keep the Turbo spooling. Trying to get a Audi to turn was an art in timng a pendulum !!

Low-end torque is what you need to get out of the corners quickly, horsepower is what you need when you want to go down Mulsanne at 400 km/h. This the main reason why the Delta S4 had both a turbocharger and a supercharger. Your comment about lag is way off as well, the new cars have 20 years extra turbo development behind them. When the Group B cars were around turbocharged racing engines were less than a decade old. A lot has been learned since then.
The S4 was only a few HP and Nm more than the T16. The T16 was the pinnacle.
AND I'm going on figures produced by the cars before the arrival of the RS200.

Furthermore the modern ultra quick gearboxes are a big step forward. this is a definite advantage the modern car has, but note they're going to less gears again. And most of the big guys crashed the box on the way up - and some on the way down if left foot too busy keping the pendulum going :)



On stages with long straights the horsepower rich Group B cars might still beat the new cars but on twistier tracks the advanced 4WD systems, torqueier engines and ultra quick gearboxes will make up for the weight deficit.
Well comparing the T16 of 1985/6 with last years 206 WRC they stack up ...
..... power torque weight
........bhp......Nm.... Kg
T16...430.....490....910
206...300.....630...1230

So nearly 50% more power , 25% less torque BUT 25% less weight.
Weight is a MAJOR factor in acceleration, braking and changing direction.

The folliwing year the engine power and torque were significantly increased with NO major increase in weight - the Audi's did a HUGE weight reduction !!

I'll ask my brother about timings of his RS200 and T16 versus modern WRCs.
I've checked Mount Stuart and Killarney, both events last year I know ran GrB cars over the same stages as WRCs. Certainly the GrB LOOKED faster at Mount Stuart.

Matra et Alpine
01-29-2004, 07:51 PM
Copule of quote I dug up ....

"Henri Toivonen drove an S4 around Estoril, the Portuguese Grand Prix
circuit, so quickly that he would have qualified sixth for the 1986
Portuguese Grand Prix"

Doh................

"the Lancia Delta S4 could accelerate from 0 to 100 km/h in 2.3 seconds on a gravel road"

Also, I was pointed out to a rule I didn't know existed in WRC.
Event organisers must organise stages to have a maximu average speed of 120km/h on an event.

So if run on todays WRC events, I think a GrB would do badly as their ultimate top speed would be blocked by the stage choices.
If GrB and WRC were to run on say Kielder Forest with 30 miles of forest stage with no artificially designed stages to reduce average speeds it would be a different story, I'm sure.

Wouter Melissen
01-30-2004, 03:55 AM
Matra et Alpine you bring up good points. It might have little to do with the cars itself, but I think tire technology has made big leaps forward, perhaps even more so than any other aspect of the car. But that would be eliminated if you'd pitch a Focus against a RS200 on modern tires.

Matra et Alpine
01-30-2004, 04:58 AM
Matra et Alpine you bring up good points. It might have little to do with the cars itself, but I think tire technology has made big leaps forward, perhaps even more so than any other aspect of the car. But that would be eliminated if you'd pitch a Focus against a RS200 on modern tires.
The differences in servicing has made modern WRC cars run non-optimum tyres.
Back then, roadside service was OK and often tyres would be changed EVERY stage.
When we had the Escort, KLEBER tyres were THE best on forest. You could easily get 10 seconds a mile better times. But they cost $100 and lasted 20 miles 9 in 1978 !!!! )
But on balance, tyres ARE better on tarmac and mixed.

henk4
02-15-2004, 10:19 AM
It appears to have gone by unnoticed, but Loeb/Citroen also won the second WRC round in snowy Sweden. If they can repeat this result in sandy Mexico, the said combination is surely heading for both world titles