New WRC regulations?

[RobbieNelson]

While watching the WRC race I heard something about switching to naturally aspirated 2.0L transverse engines. Uh... I'm not sure how to take this? Subaru is in for a change. Do they even have a transverse engine?

[swallace]

What??????? Mews to me.

[Davis Silver Sti]

2 edge sword. WE want to see the fastest and wildest WRC cars, but its not feasible if they cost too much for the Mfg.'s. Cheaper cars =more Mfg's...think NASCAR. (I know its bad to have nascar and WRC in the same few sentences)

Subaru= in for the long haul but those changes are drastic. Subaru doesn't have another series that it competes on in a global level so it will probably stay, but will have to configure car to something new.

Ford= out from what it looks like. Of intereting note, the F1 program was canned, and so is the WRC program..I was thinking they were going to keep F1 but didn't see both series getting canned. ugh, not good

Mitisubishi- in serious cash flow problems. Might have a limited run next year in WRC.

Hyundai- Out

Skoda- in

Suzuki- New comer to WRC but haven't heard anything new.

Citronen-in

Pug- in


FIA is going to do the same cost cutting measure in F1 next year. Look at the next few races in F1, cause we won't see these kind of cars for some time. (aero dynamics, tires, tranmissions? etc..)

Here's the news:

"FIA president Max Mosley has sent out his starkest warning yet to manufacturers in the World Rally Championship that the series will not survive unless drastic action is taken to cut costs.

In a move that mirrors his bid to cut spiraling costs in Formula 1, Mosley has contacted all the current and possible future manufacturers in the WRC outlining rule changes he plans to introduce in 2006.

The proposed regulations – known as Super 2000 – would be a dramatic move away from the sport’s current rules, but Mosley believes they constitute the only hope of keeping the WRC alive.

He told Autosport magazine, "On the basis of the information available at present, the only sure way of keeping the World Rally Championship alive and prosperous is to make the changes which are currently under discussion."

Under Mosley's proposed new system, two-liter engines would replace the existing turbocharged power plants, while the sophisticated electronic and transmission systems would be canned in favor of a simpler and cheaper alternative that would be made available to all the manufacturers through a single supplier.

The WRC currently has five manufacturers competing in the series. But Mitsubishi suspended its 2004 program following Rally Deutschland after a disastrous time with the Lancer, while Ford has yet to decide whether it will even take part in the championship next year.

"The way things are right now, it's almost certain one manufacturer is going to walk away," admitted a senior source within the FIA. "If that happens then we will lose one of the French teams. If that happens, then it is highly unlikely one French team will stay to fight Subaru, so they will also go – then the world championship will collapse.

"There is a high level of interest in Super 2000. These cars would cost about a quarter of what current WRC cars cost and, if we are draconian in the way we govern the sport in the coming years, then we can avoid that collapse. The case for Super 2000 is overwhelming. The alternative is nothing. The alternative is no WRC."

[ShortysTRM]

:thumbdown: :cry: I hate regulations. And money.

[RallyEX]

Forgive me for the long post, but here goes nothin'...

These proposed changes have me worried that we are going a little backwards with WRC. Some posts that I've read have suggested less electronics and special gearboxes/diffs, and I agree that removing those could be considered an "acceptable loss". Although I admit, part of the appeal is the cars and how sophisticated and technologically advanced they are. And the fact that the less technology are in these cars pushes the WRC nearly back to NASCAR standards where no computers are on board.

However, banning turbos and only allowing transverse mounted N/A engines is a mistake. The playing field is just about as level as it can get already in this form of racing... setting ristrictions to 2litre N/A transverse is a waste. The FIA is "pulling in the reigns" so to speak, and taking some of the fun away from the sport, IMHO.

Admittedly, since Tommi Makinen retired and Speed changed their coverage of WRC (including their on-air commentary talent), I've had little time or motivation to watch. I still catch about every other rally, and try to watch highlights when possible.

I agree with FIA President Mosley that the WRC is giong downhill, but I don't think the changes he has proposed are the correct way to fix it. I disagree that the FIA must be governed in a "Draconian" way to survive. Mosley is making threats that are highly unlikely to materialize (in regards to the WRC collapsing).

A part of the allure of owning a Subaru WRX, STI and Mitsu Evo is knowing that your car's heritage is rooted in a form of racing that has proven it to be a worthy platform. Coming from a marketing standpoint, if these new rules are put into place, it could have a serious affect on the future sales of WRC-heritage cars in america... and furthermore could affect future decisions to bring them here.

Just my .02, and I'm sure I forgot to say something.
Hopefully this will all come out in the wash.

[narfdanarf]

A part of the allure of owning a Subaru WRX, STI and Mitsu Evo is knowing that your car's heritage is rooted in a form of racing that has proven it to be a worthy platform. Coming from a marketing standpoint, if these new rules are put into place, it could have a serious affect on the future sales of WRC-heritage cars in america... and furthermore could affect future decisions to bring them here.

I agree, butt who knows. This change might bring us even cooler cars. (although it's tough to get cooler than turboed) It could send Subaru and other manufacturers to a whole new level of thinking, where we as consumers might see cool, high hp, N/A cars coming to our shores sometime in the future? I highly doubt it, butt you never know.

[daveb91]

If this does make for newer high hp N/A cars we will not get them here.

[Davis Silver Sti]

If this does make for newer high hp N/A cars we will not get them here.

Unfortunately, that is very true. hi-HP, hi-reving 2.0L cars just won't make emissions very well.
Nissan has barely been able to pass the emission testing on their SE-r engines. The Mfg.s (most if not all of the Jap ones) have to play games with the emission testing to get the cars to pass.

While I'd love to have a 10,000 rpm screaming engine, I'm afraid it just won't happen due to regulations.

(of note...Alfa Romeo had a 10,000 rpm 4-cycl. in one of their cars from the 1970's..alfetta GT I think...it was pure opera!)

[ShortysTRM]

start checking around the WRC site and stuff, there may be a way to petition this. Also, they could cut costs to manufacturers in so many other ways than just engine regulations. They should make regulations like using only stock engines with intake, exhaust, and boost settings...or something besides aiming for NASACAR heights. That's like Michael Schimacher shooting to catch up to Ralf. Talk about regression. The reason I don't watch NASACAR is the low-tech engines with wayyy too many regulations. What's next? Oval rally circuits?

Oh, and though high-revvers sound like fun, I believe that the S2000 proved that it's not very good for daily driving. Now it has a lower redline and more displacement because people were tired of 6000 RPM traffic jams. Test after test has said the same thing, but no one ever complains about it on the track. If you could build a car that you could drive like a racecar and still get 200,000 miles out of it, then I'd be for it. Call me a redneck, but I like my torque, and the only way to get it out of something that small is to add some boost. My car has more torque than an S2000. That's pitiful.