Roadcars based on actual Rallycars

[Robin Plummer]

In the heady days of Group 4, A and B manufacturers had to build actual roadcar models of the rallycars

Roadcars
Group 4 = 400
Group B = 200 + 20 evolution
Group A = 5000 + 50 Evo then from 1993 2500 + 25 evo

With WRC cars they are just based on road car design's they don't have to make a road going model. Is this a good thing? What it means is unless you want a Mitsubishi Lancer or Subaru Imprezza you can forget it. In the 70's, 80's and early 90's you could by Sunbeam Lotus’s, Chevette HS's, RS200's, Metro 6R4's, Escort Cosworths, Lancia Delta Integrales etc. You had a real rallycar for the road. Today that is not the case. Should the reg's be changed to make manufacturers produce a limited run of say 500-1000 cars for the road?

DISCUSS

[JAG]

But with Group A the road car requirements were too great for most manufactuers, hence the lack of manufactuers before WRC regs.

Currently only Misubishi and Subaru build homologation specials, but Ford are making a 4wd Cosworth Focus soon, Skoda the RS and possible Fabia RS.

Manufactuers can now make 'proper' rally cars and high performance road cars if they wish, which they are doing in increasing numbers.

The RS200s etc. were hardly everday road cars like an Impreza, more like a Ferrari in terms of cost. Plus there production was limited due to lack of demand/cost etc. Now Ford etc. will continue making 4wd Focus' for as long as people want them.

[Lee Janotta]

Hey, here's a crazy idea! How about rally cars based on road cars!

Sorry Jag, but the Mitsubishi and Subaru "homologation specials" only see duty in Group N anymore, unfortunatly. Not a single WRC car is based on a road car.

Dave Richards claimed more manufacturers would be attracted by the WRC regs. Instead they've lost Lancia, Toyota, and now Mitsubishi. And Peugeot has reached an unprecendented level of dominance with the 206WRC... Certainly a fantastic car, but it's not healthy for the sport?

And has it saved money? I haven't seen any hard numbers, but it seems a pretty ridiculous claim considering that Hyundai, Mitsubishi and even FORD have been struggling for the funds to run their WRC efforts! And privateers have nearly dissapeared from the scene.

The performance benefits? Cars are getting scary fast, accidents are getting more frightening (especially for the co-drivers!), leading to more calls for the sanitizing of the sport.

We'd be better off with just two groups: Group A for the homologated, mildly modified rally cars (AWD, 2.0L turbo, but parts including bodywork and gearbox homologated, with mods to suspension and differentials), and Group N for showroom stock, 2-wheel drive, with classes for 6.0L, 3.0L, 2.0L, and 1.6L (corrected for forced induction, of course, with displacement multiplied by .35 if you're running a turbo or blower).

[GTV27]

I think theory behind WRC v's Group A was to channel the money that manufacturer's would have spent building, homologating and then selling (at a loss) road cars into the rally teams which could build them a competitive car despite the dross that they migh happen to be selling at that point.

Accidents are starting to approach the level that killed Group B and it won't take much for hysteria to develop and the WRC's could be similarly under threat. If that happens, Group N will take over as Group A did back in the eighties and we will be back to road car based rallying.

I'd like to see 2wd cars come back - they are exciting to watch and it would bring down the speed, helping to reduce the impact of accidents.

A 6.0L class for rally cars - YEAH BABY, BRING OUT THE BIG BANGERS

[racer69]

I'm totally in favour of making homologation of the road cars necessary and that the cars rallied should be identical to those in which are sold on the road.

Another thing that it helps is that it is cheaper for the privateers

[Robin Plummer]

Dont forget they've lost SEAT too!. As for the accidents all the drivers take the risk, £1m a year salary soften's the blow though doesnt it?

Speak to guy's like Juha Kankkunen they want at least 400bhp in WRC to make the car more "interesting" to drive. And 1230kg cars these's day's are a lot safer that the "plastic fantastic" Group B cars. If only they could get it!

[Lee Janotta]

The co-drivers don't get paid nearly as much, and they're far more likely to get hurt.

[JAG]

My point about scooby and mistsubishi homolagation specials is that if we had Group A they are the only manufactuers with suitable road cars at the present time. You would therefore lose Peugeot, Citroen, Skoda, maybe even Ford.

As for budgets, the 'rally' budget has udoutedly gone up but the overall budget has gone down considerably since the Group A days.

Firstly theres no huge 'production' car costs to build a suitan=ble car for rallying. Secondly central service areas mean there is no need to have dozens of service vehicles following the rally cars ever. The money spent by Lancia and Toyota in the early 90s could not be matched by anyone, not even Ford.

As for manufactuer interest Lancia, Nissan, Mazda all pulled ou in the early 90s at the height of Group A due to costs, particularly homologation costs in the race to keep up with the pace of development. At the end of group A there was Ford, Subaru and Mitsubishi left with Ford wondering what to do when the Escort Cosworth cam to the end of its competion life.

WRC regs have enable Skoda, Seat, Citroen, Peugeot, Hyundai to enter the World Rally Championship which they could not afford under Group A.

True Seat have left, as VW policy is now to not compete agaisnt sister brands, while Mitsubishi have taken a year out to sort there car out.

In the next 2-3 years both Opel and Suzuki will be entering new WRCs.

As for cars being road car based, they obviously are, being based on cars/engines with production runs of 25,000 or more. These base cars then have the 4wd, turbo and bodywork modifications added that are required for rallying.

In Group A the same happened but the 'rally' parts were built into the homologation special rather than just added to the rally car as with WRCs.

Rallying has gone back to its Group 2/4 roots were 'rally' modifications could be made to the base road car.

As for the speeds, they are undoutedly increasing but, if you can possibly have it, in a 'safe' way. The recent accidents have happened because the rallies are flat out sprints and sometimes the drivers get it wrong. The road car shell, roll cage and safety equipment mean drivers can now survive these crashes. The only poor area of safety is side protection, which is being dealt with, with new side protection methods such as air bags etc.

The problem with Group B was that the cars were built for ultimate acceleration combined with terrible engine response, brakes, transmission, tyres etc. Add in plastic bodies, no protection, fuels tanks under seats and even a minor off could result in a firey, potetially life threatening accident.

[Lee Janotta]

JAG, I don't like to argue with such a lengthy and obviously well-crafted post, but I can't let it go.

I think to say that Skoda and Hyundai are competing is wishful thinking.

Obviously, if there was a return to Group A, there'd have to be at least 3 years notice so the manufacturers could get the new cars designed and approved.

What I've really got to take issue with, though, is "The recent accidents have happened because the rallies are flat out sprints and sometimes the drivers get it wrong."

Just WHAT is your alternative to these "flat out sprints"? That's what rallying is, going flat out over timed sections of real roads!

You can't have increasing speeds _and_ safety in rallying. Simply put, the faster you're going, the less time between seeing the tree, and hitting it, in which to react. It's only milliseconds, but it all too often makes the difference between a near miss and a sickening impact.

At these speeds, drivers rely almost entirely on their pace notes, there's no time to react. It's just lucky that we didn't lose Tommi and Risto over that cliff, or Louis Moya against that tree.

You mention dangerous construction in the Group B cars? How about mounting the co-driver's seat to the damn floorpan! There's a huge threat of back injuries there!

And homologation _does_ have the knock-on benefit of encouraging manufacturers to offer all-wheel drive and turbocharging on their cars. How can you not be in favor of that? Cars are getting _boring_, all small-displacement front-drivers!

The chassis and engines, BTW, bear very little resemblance to anything on the road. Maybe just the engine block and the unit body, but even that's been seam-welded and _heavily_ reinforced.

Can we just take stock here? Where's the benefit in building vehicles so far removed from those on the street that a whole industry has grown up around building and preparing them for competition? What's so damn bad about showroom stock? You've got cars, you've got roads... Just shut up and race 'em!

I'd say if a manufacturer isn't willing to race or rally the cars they actually sell in the showrooms, that should immediatly send a signal to consumers!

And you're _never_ going to see airbags in a rally car! You could never make them smart enough to know the difference between a real crash in which they could help, or just sideswiping a tree, where the driver'd just continue as if nothing had happened.

And whether Mitsubishi comes back, Hyundai's effort survives, or Opel or Suzuki (both part of the GM family, BTW, so why both?!) enter, remains to be seen.

I think more than anything, the current cars are getting increasingly insulting to consumers. Especially the Peugeot 206. "Sure, we can build a car that cool, we just don't want you to have it!"

Oh, and I repeat on the budget side, Ford seems to be struggling to keep their effort afloat. They're, what, the 3rd biggest manufacturer? I'd say there's a problem there.

One of the problems with Group A regs was the low numbers for "evo" versions of the cars, basically huge steps up in performance which only required 25 copies! _That's_ why the pace of development got too fast for some manufacturers tastes. Of course, it seems incredibly slow compared to WRC cars, with paddle-shift gearboxes and huge performance disparities.

What's best for the damn beancounters is rarely what's best for the sport.

[JAG]

We'll agree to disagree once again.

I would point out that there were no 'evos' in Group A hence the need to build 5000 then 2500 new road cars each year (to keep up with Lancias Delta in particular).

As for the need for better road cars I totally agree. However I believe a manufactuer should be free to enter rallying without 'special' homologation cars. Once in rallying, hopefully, the manufactuer will try to capitalise on there rally programme by producing 'rally replicas' for the road as Ford are doing with the Focus RS and especially the Focus Cosworth 4WD. Hopefully will produce a 4wd car to add to the RS Ocatvia/Fabia.

As for the air bags, the new black boxes being fitted to the car are being used to see what kind of impact is required to set them off, hence the long time in development for them.

As for performance levels the Group A lancer was competing only 1 year ago and although no a front runner was not discernably slower than the best WRCs.

With regrds to increasing speeds and danger levels, a middle ground has to be found (which I belive are WRC cars). They are quick but not fundamentally 'dangeous' like a group b car. F1, sportscars etc. has shown that increasing speeds does not neccessarily mean more danger. In fact rallying, F1, Sportscars despite being quicker are safer than ever.

I do agree however that its about time that Peugeot stepped forward and produce an Impreza/evolution/Cosworth rival for the road or it will not gain the credibilty these road cars/manufactuers have.

Finally Skoda cannot match the best on budget but the new Fabia WRC has the potential to be a consistent top 6 finisher.

[Robin Plummer]

Can I just say that unless the rules changed that I am not aware of, you could build 500 examples of Evo Group A cars. A car which was made to those rules was the Ford Sierra RS500 Cosworth.

I personally would like to have three classes in the WRC.

Class A - Current WRC style/Group A 4WD but instead 2000 road cars must be built and 200 evos. Minimum weight limit 1130kg. 40mm Air restrictor fitted (Approx 400bhp).

Class B -(Prototype Technology Class) Current shape shiloute based cars. Mid engined 4wd/4ws, 2.0t 4/5 cyclinder turbos with 45mm resrictor or 2.5 V6 atmo's no restrictor 12,000rpm limit. (Approx 500-550bhp). 900kg minimum weight.

Class C - (2 Wheel drive class RWD). Front engined 3.5 V6/V8 atmo engines 8,000rpm limit, no restrictor. (Approx 400-450bhp), manual gearboxes. 1000kg minimum limit.

What do you think?

[Lee Janotta]

I think a lot of people'd die in that Class B.

[racer69]

Originally posted by JAG
My point about scooby and mistsubishi homolagation specials is that if we had Group A they are the only manufactuers with suitable road cars at the present time. You would therefore lose Peugeot, Citroen, Skoda, maybe even Ford.

Simple Answer to that, ban 4WD

Originally posted by Lee Janotta
[B]Just WHAT is your alternative to these "flat out sprints"? That's what rallying is, going flat out over timed sections of real roads!
B]

I think JAG means that rallying nowadays is a 3 day 400km sprint, as opposed to the past when rallies would be 4 or 5 days long, and maybe 1200km long, meaning the pace wasn't so hectic the whole time

I'm just a great fan of racing and rallying what you sell. At the moment none of the manufacturers rallying (except Subaru and Mitsubishi) are advertising the car, just the manufacturers name, as the cars rallied are nothing like those sold.

[imull]

Keep 4WD lose teh electronics! Can you honestly say that FWD **** going down the stage would be exciting. It would just be a big budget version of the JWRC which is also ****...

The rallies of today are short balls out stages as opposed to teh 100 mile tactical stages as seen on the Safari.

The plastic cars can be remarkably strong. Just look at the speedsthat F1 can hit barriers without serious deflection. An article showing strength of 'plastic' cars

By increasing the turbo size to 40mm the cross sectional area goes up by roughly a third which at a guess would take the peak power to well over 400bhp. Its not a simple case of allowing more air in, there is the effects of eddy currents around teh resticor edge...

The WRC idea was great but they let it get out of hand.

[JAG]

I think WRCs are perfect for the World Championship, as it is the peak of the sport and they need to be quick and exciting to watch. The problem with Group B rallying was spectzator control firstly and unrestricted, basic(in terms of safety, handling etc.) cars. Put them together and your asking for trouble.

The modern world champion with far better spectator control (improving every year) added to the fact that eventually spectators will be limited to special viewing areas, sad but nesscesary, mean the modern WRC is safer than ever.
However WRCs ar etoo expensive for regional/national championships and so the WRC2 'basic' cars are an ideal solution in my opinion.

[Lee Janotta]

We definitly are going to have to just agree to disagree, JAG... I think there's a fundamental difference in our definitions of just what the World Rally Championship is. To me, yours sounds sanitized and wasteful, while mine probably sounds ameturish and slow-paced to you.

[JAG]

Originally posted by Lee Janotta
We definitly are going to have to just agree to disagree, JAG... I think there's a fundamental difference in our definitions of just what the World Rally Championship is. To me, yours sounds sanitized and wasteful, while mine probably sounds ameturish and slow-paced to you.

[racer69]

Originally posted by imull
Keep 4WD lose teh electronics! Can you honestly say that FWD **** going down the stage would be exciting. It would just be a big budget version of the JWRC which is also ****...

I was meaning more towards ban 4WD and make RWD mandatory, that would be much more exciting to watch.

It is also necessary that the rules are exactly the same for national championships as in the WRC. It is easier for the manufacturers to sell the cars, and gives drivers experience of world championship machinery in local rallies and makes it easier to step up.

[GTV27]

I like AWD (I own an Outback), but RWD is sooo much more exciting to watch.

I hear that the "aussie car class" in the ARC is getting new rules to allow more cars (back to 86?) - hopefully this will lead to more big bangers getting out there.