WTCC rules from 2009 - what do we think ?

the interpreter · 8 Sep 2007, 14:01 (Ref:2006851)

Autosport says that WTCC will go RWD for all models in 2009. What does everyone think of this?
Should WTCC go FWD instead - and then only BMW and (Lexus?) would have to change.
Will the change to RWD be the end of the spectacular FWD specialists - i.e. Yvan Muller?

Ellmau · 8 Sep 2007, 14:34 (Ref:2006869)

Why should all models have to be RWD or FWD? Why can't there be a mix, like there is now? Won't setting it all to the one or the other make it less interesting for car manufacturers and privateers to enter the WTCC?

**FIRE** · 8 Sep 2007, 16:02 (Ref:2006915)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ellmau

Why should all models have to be RWD or FWD? Why can't there be a mix, like there is now? Won't setting it all to the one or the other make it less interesting for car manufacturers and privateers to enter the WTCC?

If all cars have RWD (or FWD) there's no need for rule breaks (and we have no longer to listen to the whining of Mr Puig

).

At the forum of dtm.com I read currently 9 manufacturers are involved in forming the 2009 tech regulations. One of the hot items is to bring S2000 and rally S2000 closer so manufacturers can develop 1 car for both without major changes.

IMO it's a good idea to go for all-cars-RWD. An advantage is that it allows more powerful cars.

I would like to see in 2009:
- All cars RWD
- 2.5L 350 bhp engines
- saloons (hatchback allowed but no rule breaks)
- shape of cars more like super tourers but without the importance of aerodynamics like during the ST days.

PorscheFanNo1 · 8 Sep 2007, 17:07 (Ref:2006956)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

If all cars have RWD (or FWD) there's no need for rule breaks (and we have no longer to listen to the whining of Mr Puig

).

At the forum of dtm.com I read currently 9 manufacturers are involved in forming the 2009 tech regulations. One of the hot items is to bring S2000 and rally S2000 closer so manufacturers can develop 1 car for both without major changes.

IMO it's a good idea to go for all-cars-RWD. An advantage is that it allows more powerful cars.

I would like to see in 2009:
- All cars RWD
- 2.5L 350 bhp engines
- saloons (hatchback allowed but no rule breaks)
- shape of cars more like super tourers but without the importance of aerodynamics like during the ST days.

I stand by your side at 100% mate!!! Best I've heard in ages!

FIRE for president!

Ellmau · 8 Sep 2007, 17:44 (Ref:2006979)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

If all cars have RWD (or FWD) there's no need for rule breaks (and we have no longer to listen to the whining of Mr Puig

).

Rule breaks like? :S

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

I would like to see in 2009:
- All cars RWD
- 2.5L 350 bhp engines
- saloons (hatchback allowed but no rule breaks)
- shape of cars more like super tourers but without the importance of aerodynamics like during the ST days.

I like the look of that. Only I would leave the "Hatchback allowed" part out

racer69 · 8 Sep 2007, 18:36 (Ref:2006992)

Cracking idea if it comes off, though one hopes they might raise the engine size abit (or draw up some equalisation rules to allow differing capacities)

Quote:

Originally Posted by the interpreter

Will the change to RWD be the end of the spectacular FWD specialists - i.e. Yvan Muller?

Yvan didn't seem to have too much trouble with RWD at Sandown in 2005 in the Triple 8 Falcon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ellmau

Rule breaks like? :S

rule breaks like allowing Seat to run a flat bottom last year, and letting them run a higher compression ratio engine this year than the rules actually allow for....

The rule breaks given to Chevrolet back in 2005/6...

**ScotsBrutesFan** · 8 Sep 2007, 20:01 (Ref:2007043)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

I would like to see in 2009:
- All cars RWD
- 2.5L 350 bhp engines
- saloons (hatchback allowed but no rule breaks)
- shape of cars more like super tourers but without the importance of aerodynamics like during the ST days.

And how many of the current manufacturers produce a car to that Spec, or are likely to do so by 2009?
BMW, Lexus (private cars in the BTCC)

Of the rest, I can't see them building a new model from scratch just to go racing.

**FIRE** · 8 Sep 2007, 20:23 (Ref:2007057)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

And how many of the current manufacturers produce a car to that Spec, or are likely to do so by 2009?
BMW, Lexus (private cars in the BTCC)

Of the rest, I can't see them building a new model from scratch just to go racing.

Manufacturers who have no RWD cars can rebuild FWD car to RWD. In rally S2000 they rebuild FWD cars to AWD. Why can't they do this in S2000?

Most manufacturers have 2.3L or 2.5L engines so I don't see a problem to switch to 2.5L.

duke_toaster · 8 Sep 2007, 20:28 (Ref:2007058)

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

There's a difference between rebuilding cars to 4WD for rallying - 4WD is necessary for rally, RWD isn't for paved surfaces.

Keep S2000 how it is.

PorscheFanNo1 · 8 Sep 2007, 20:44 (Ref:2007068)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

Most manufacturers have 2.3L or 2.5L engines so I don't see a problem to switch to 2.5L.

Isnt the Chevy engine based on a 1.8 litre block? The model they use does not need to be 2.0 litre (or 2.5 in this case), they can use a smaller engine as the base and still make it 2.0 (2.5) litres. I dont even think the engine needs to come from the same model, it can come from a compleatly different car, as long as its from the same manufacturer. So anything from 2.0 up to 2.5 litre engines from any model would make the cut and then placed in a suitable chassie, what manufacter does NOT have that?

So a FWD Alfa 159 would be converted to RWD and increased to 2.5 litre. It would give a much more sporty image, and they dont need to build a totally new car, I cant see why any manufacturer would NOT want to join on that ship!

So ScotsBrutesFan and duke_toaster, your posts makes absolutely no sense at all to me!

JAG · 23 Sep 2007, 17:24 (Ref:2021117)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIRE

I would like to see in 2009:
- All cars RWD
- 2.5L 350 bhp engines
- saloons (hatchback allowed but no rule breaks)
- shape of cars more like super tourers but without the importance of aerodynamics like during the ST days.

That would be perfect, but will it happen?

duke_toaster · 23 Sep 2007, 17:59 (Ref:2021149)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAG

That would be perfect, but will it happen?

No, because the costs would be silly. I don't want to see silhouettes at all - there's no reason to change the cars from their original drive type.

Keep S2000 how it is. It's nowhere near broke so it doesn't need fixing.

Speed-King · 8 Sep 2007, 14:53 (Ref:2006882)

Really stupid if they do it.

(Unless Seat, Chevy and Alfa have RWD production models lined-up anyway.)

mini1400 · 12 Sep 2007, 08:42 (Ref:2009960)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Really stupid if they do it.

(Unless Seat, Chevy and Alfa have RWD production models lined-up anyway.)

Alfa have RWD cars, BMW also have FWD (MINI), but they choose not to market it as a BMW...

Fechna · 12 Sep 2007, 11:27 (Ref:2010075)

I think it would be quite expensive, to have group-n cars rebuild to a completely opposite drivetrain and boost the engine in the described way.

My proposition:

If the drivetrain problem is really as hard as you think, let us use the same standart AWD system that uses the IRC with their S2000 cars. So every manufacturer has to do some ajustments, we don´t have strange FWD to RWD messups (if this should happen I don´t see any argument NOT to go to DTM or Argentinia TC2000 regulations because this cars would not be close to road spec) and every manufacturer can (if they want to) participateor at least sell cars for Touringcar and rally-racing.

M-Power · 8 Sep 2007, 16:15 (Ref:2006922)

I believe that BMW never change there concept for example. And also other manufacturers are on the same line. For the competitions a close regulations is better but for the fan it is also interesting the difference.. I am also sad that the awd is forbitten!

Ellmau · 8 Sep 2007, 21:14 (Ref:2007079)

I'm sorry, i'm not technical at all, but what has the amount of engine power to do with RWD or FWD? I can imagine it's harder to use the full power of an engine in corners with FWD cars, because the same axle/tyres have to do the steering as well. But is that it, or is there more to it?

JMeissner · 8 Sep 2007, 22:06 (Ref:2007104)

I think it sounds nice. RWD is the way to go if choosing only one.

It would sort out a lot of problems. And as for some of the manufacturers not having the models in RWD, just look at DTM where its working perfectly.

bil588 · 9 Sep 2007, 03:08 (Ref:2007259)

I'd prefer rwd. I'm glad Cadillac dumped fwd for rwd and awd.

Ellmau · 9 Sep 2007, 08:25 (Ref:2007337)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMeissner

I think it sounds nice. RWD is the way to go if choosing only one.

It would sort out a lot of problems. And as for some of the manufacturers not having the models in RWD, just look at DTM where its working perfectly.

Yes, but DTM is a completely different raceseries. That's not even remotely connected to the road car version.

broadrun96 · 8 Sep 2007, 22:24 (Ref:2007120)

Not able to watch WTCC here in the US other than some races late in te off-season sometimes, but this is kinda sounding like they are trying to ring NASCAR to the WTCC. Most NASCAR street cars are FWD with I4s and V6s and FWD but come race day magically RWD and monster V8s. I think any series should be run what you build, be it FWD, RWD or AWD, but then some balancing is needed to keep Audi from showing up and dominating. Sorry just a few thoughts from a wishful fan here.

Koulle · 8 Sep 2007, 23:13 (Ref:2007165)

The races are streamed live on WTCC's website so you don't have to wait until the off-season.

As for the planned rules for 2009, well I would like to see different variations in technology, including different drivelines, but if it compromises the racing then I can see why more equal rules might be needed.

It's going to come down to what the manufacturers want, do they want the racing performances to be more equal (more equal chance of winning) or do they want more variables (more technical freedom, marketing etc).

**GTRMagic** · 9 Sep 2007, 02:35 (Ref:2007248)

So... for any non-RWD cars... they will be like a silhouette sports sedan... with a fabricated floorpan to accomodate a rear drive gearbox/tailshaft/diff housing/suspension that have absolutely no relationship to the road going model

Sounds expensive... mega expensive... unless there are control parts or control specifications being introduced...

Now if only you could buy RWD versions on the road

JMeissner · 9 Sep 2007, 08:56 (Ref:2007354)

As for costs, just as GTRMagic says, it could be less expensive if they go control parts.

redshoes · 9 Sep 2007, 20:15 (Ref:2007901)

Not in as much detail.
- freeing up suspension regs
- small capacity turbo engines
- 35mm intake / 29mm exhaust values

Last one on the list was likely to be a serious proposal for 2008, others were more longer-term

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cats from 2009	Tim Falce	Racing Technology	19	20 Sep 2007 20:06
Is it time to ban RWD from the WTCC?	the interpreter	Touring Car Racing	42	28 Mar 2007 10:37
Minus 15 kilos for RWD cars in WTCC	JMeissner	Touring Car Racing	4	10 Mar 2007 10:30
RWD Challenge	flying flynn	Rallying & Rallycross	1	17 Sep 2004 21:49
4WD or RWD ?	vitamin	Sportscar & GT Racing	12	5 Sep 2003 12:03