View Full Version : Ford, doing it right.
MK1_Ben
02-02-11, 10:58 PM
2011 WRC Fiesta, one of the best designed WRC cars ever if you ask me. The pictures can do the rest of the talking.
http://www.cafi.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/ford-fiesta-wrc-live-630.jpg
http://volvoc.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/2011-Ford-Fiesta-RS-WRC-Sport.jpg
How long til "replicas" start turning up at McDonalds then lol
MK1_Ben
02-02-11, 11:06 PM
5 Door R reg Fiesta with some WRC graphics. WUD LUK SIK MAN!!1
(As that's the sort of thing you would see at my local McDonalds :( )
calibra-keith
02-02-11, 11:24 PM
Not really a ford fan, but id have one.
kevster
02-02-11, 11:28 PM
i used to hate new fords ,till i got my st BUT i must say i do miss my vxr burg !!!!!! all that popping and banging .
Think you mean:
http://www.wikinoticia.com/images/motorfull-es/cdn.motorfull.com.files.2011.01.Ford-Fiesta-WRC-12.jpg
One you pictured is a bit earlier from development I believe, as it's born of the previous S2000 design. Main aesthetic change seems to be the front splitter, but I'd imagine the changes underneath are immense :)
little edit: Supposed to be 9 ready for Sweden, which is pretty immense considering the Mini's join us sometime in May and Citreon only have 3/4 DS3's atm! They've had to 'accept a generous offer' from one of their customers for Petter Solberg to run his at Sweden. AKA they asked him nicely to hand over his car if he wants all the bolts done up imo lol
Rallying died when Group B died, such a shame it didnt carry on...
MK1_Ben
02-02-11, 11:39 PM
Same car isn't it. That ones just in Abu Dhabi livery?
Rallying died when Group B died, such a shame it didnt carry on...
Heavily agree with this, particularly seeing the advancement of car safety since then they could easily bring it back. And think about how popular rallying would become if 500BHP monsters were allowed to be screaming around woods again :) The MSA is anal about it all though, even small-time drivers such as Andy Burton with his home-built Peugeot (with a touring car engine restricted to 300BHP) are now becoming against regulations, yet I know so many people who only go to local rallies just to watch him. (to show how good his home built car is, recently in Wales he was only a couple seconds behind the majority of the WRC drivers, actually being faster than some, and he's a potato farmer for a living :) ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YApoZjJEIP0
Same car isn't it. That ones just in Abu Dhabi livery?
Lot of development over the last month apparently, the design isn't yet finalised for approval/homologation even. It's the same fiesta for the same year though, yes.
Same car isn't it. That ones just in Abu Dhabi livery?
Heavily agree with this, particularly seeing the advancement of car safety since then they could easily bring it back. And think about how popular rallying would become if 500BHP monsters were allowed to be screaming around woods again :)
Was more to do with the spectators though I think?
MK1_Ben
02-02-11, 11:49 PM
True, but you don't really get hundreds of people standing on the actual stage anymore either :)
There would be very few manufacturers jumping in to join a Group B style formula, whole point of the 1.6 turbo engines is to lower costs, it's also something you can sell in a road car quite easily. Even currently there's a lot of privateers and customer cars making up the top 10/20 drivers.
As a manufacturer to go group B style again you have to develop a car capable of producing 500BHP and handling, which means limited run special editions, then sell it into an economy concerned with fuel usage and prices. Then you have to fund a team to develop them into racing machines with the technology and materials etc to match the power and potential of the cars.
I agree the cars were absolute beasts, and seeing the videos etc of them is an awesome thing to watch, but going 1.6T with the new regulations is the best thing to come to WRC in the past 5 years imo.
True, but you don't really get hundreds of people standing on the actual stage anymore either :)
You would do if the 600bhp + monsters were back out!
Same car isn't it. That ones just in Abu Dhabi livery?
Pretty sure its the exact same car, just the first one has the livery from when it was launched and the second pic is the new Ford - Abu dhabi WRC livery both are just show cars, don't even think either have an engine.
Pretty sure its the exact same car, just the first one has the livery from when it was launched and the second pic is the new Ford - Abu dhabi WRC livery both are just show cars, don't even think either have an engine.
That could be true actually, it's definitely gained a front splitter though unless it's my monitor playing up on the dark bits again lol
MK1_Ben
03-02-11, 12:10 AM
Definitely has the splitter in the first Image, it's black in it though :)
Definitely has the splitter in the first Image, it's black in it though :)
Be my monitor playing up then :( I did look for aesthetic differences before I posted it and thought the splitter/bumper extension had been added lol
MK1_Ben
03-02-11, 12:15 AM
I don't get what's with the rear of the arches not going down the the full line of the bumper/bodywork.
My assumption would be so that mudflaps can be attached there instead of a complete rear arch which could be be destroyed by stones?
It wasn't just the spectators being idiots, although it was a big part of it. There were some horrific crashes in group b as well, resulting in a few drivers burning to death in their cars which didn't help.
And yeah, the homologation budgets killed it off as well, Ford made a stupendous loss on the RS200 Same fate as the Supertourers :(
Does make you wonder though, what are the costs of of producing formula one cars? Why will no privateer teams set up a proper top fuel touring car event anymore? I mean, there are no factory teams in BTCC anymore, only two in WRC, but F1 has Merc, Ferarri, Renault, Lotus etc, not to mention the privateers, surely the cost of developing a Supertourer is nowhere near the cost of a bloody F1 car?
Are sponsors just not interested in anything but open wheel anymore?
Are sponsors just not interested in anything but open wheel anymore?
You need to advertise a product, you have a choice of getting a share of 4.5 hours every 3 weeks, in a field of 20+ front runners in which generally the only footage seen involves a car covered in dust/snow/dirt, on a £12/month subscription channel. Or you can get about 10-12 hours every 2 weeks on BBC1 in a field of ~22 (I think? ;p) runners only, with a nice shiny car sat on the start line/in pits/your product on the chest of the guy they stand interviewing for a few minutes.
Easy choice really, especially when the purse strings get tighter! F1 simply has a far wider audience unfortunately. How many people have you heard that aren't generally into cars, discussing F1 results, and how many of those come back next week discussing WRC results?
This 'product' also applies both to the manufacturers funding the teams and their sponsors. There's probably plenty of people in monaco that are swayed between a Ferrari and a Merc based on the ethos surrounding F1 results and their resulting image. Unfortunately at the moment they have a tough choice between their usual champagne or a Red Bull lol
paddy quinn
03-02-11, 01:56 AM
bag of crap
I don't like fiestas, too slow.
SR-Rally
03-02-11, 09:35 AM
harry hockly did/doing all the welding and cages in these wrc fiesta's just down the road from me. i was down there yesterday and they have another 9 lol lots of late nights for them.
mk1nova_rich
03-02-11, 05:41 PM
bag of crap
wow, aren't you clever :wtf: would you care to expand on why they are a "bag of crap"?
RIGHT FOLKS...group b cars, until the rs200 were very quick tractors. they weren't cars... they had massive power, crap electronics. i'd put good money on a focus or c4 wrc whalloping any of the group b stuff over any surface.. the suspension & transmission technology has moved on so far...
mk1nova_rich
03-02-11, 05:50 PM
RIGHT FOLKS...group b cars, until the rs200 were very quick tractors. they weren't cars... they had massive power, crap electronics. i'd put good money on a focus or c4 wrc whalloping any of the group b stuff over any surface.. the suspension & transmission technology has moved on so far...
+1
I just didn't think it really needed pointing out lol
SR-Rally
03-02-11, 06:25 PM
RIGHT FOLKS...group b cars, until the rs200 were very quick tractors. they weren't cars... they had massive power, crap electronics. i'd put good money on a focus or c4 wrc whalloping any of the group b stuff over any surface.. the suspension & transmission technology has moved on so far...
Exactly, you needed real balls to drive grp B cars fast. Don't have fancy electrics and gadgets helping you out.
harry hockly did/doing all the welding and cages in these wrc fiesta's just down the road from me. i was down there yesterday and they have another 9 lol lots of late nights for them.
Those are the Fiesta R2 shells to be used in the WRC Academy, all that Hockleys are doing is fitting the cage / seam welding ect, all the Fiesta RS WRC shells are built in house at M-Sport.
SR-Rally
03-02-11, 06:33 PM
Ah, my mistake. I just saw ford wrc wagon dropping them all off so assumed. And told me he'd been going back and forth to malcom Wilson pricing it up etc. :)
You need to advertise a product, you have a choice of getting a share of 4.5 hours every 3 weeks, in a field of 20+ front runners in which generally the only footage seen involves a car covered in dust/snow/dirt, on a £12/month subscription channel. Or you can get about 10-12 hours every 2 weeks on BBC1 in a field of ~22 (I think? ;p) runners only, with a nice shiny car sat on the start line/in pits/your product on the chest of the guy they stand interviewing for a few minutes.
Easy choice really, especially when the purse strings get tighter! F1 simply has a far wider audience unfortunately. How many people have you heard that aren't generally into cars, discussing F1 results, and how many of those come back next week discussing WRC results?
This 'product' also applies both to the manufacturers funding the teams and their sponsors. There's probably plenty of people in monaco that are swayed between a Ferrari and a Merc based on the ethos surrounding F1 results and their resulting image. Unfortunately at the moment they have a tough choice between their usual champagne or a Red Bull lol
True, but i was talking more about Supertourers llol
doesn't sturge have something to do with fabricating them????
the drivers were brave in the group b days, and the cars were slightly safer than the old group 4 ones, but they were absolute death traps with pretty much no fire protection, when they recovered henri toivonen's lancia s4, they found the cage, some of the engine & gearbox and 2 bags of partially cremated bodies... the group A & wrc stuff are way safer.
but as a spectacle, a short quattro was hard to beat.. the 'fires of hell' noise, the massive flames out the exhaust, the bangs & thumps, it was awesome, but not as fast as the peugeot
True, but i was talking more about Supertourers llol
That'll be the 2nd time today I've written out something 10 times as long for no reason then lol
4000 word project, 350 word limit ftw!
Sturge works on the shells/cages yes.
And yes modern WRC cars thump the crap out of group B, but I think we all realised that tbh lol
doesn't sturge have something to do with fabricating them????
the drivers were brave in the group b days, and the cars were slightly safer than the old group 4 ones, but they were absolute death traps with pretty much no fire protection, when they recovered henri toivonen's lancia s4, they found the cage, some of the engine & gearbox and 2 bags of partially cremated bodies... the group A & wrc stuff are way safer.
but as a spectacle, a short quattro was hard to beat.. the 'fires of hell' noise, the massive flames out the exhaust, the bangs & thumps, it was awesome, but not as fast as the peugeot
You called??? :d
Yes, I do indeed have something to do with it. I head up one of the teams that build the WRC and S2000 shells, from scratch, in house at M-Sport. Of the 9 cars off to Sweden, I built 3, did quite a bit of the work on another 2 and did some of the last minute modifications to them all. As Rich already said, Harry Hockly's only doing the R2 cages, nothing at all to do with the WRC stuff.
As far as Group B is concerned, Jari Matti reckons the Fiesta is the most similar thing he's driven to a GpB car due to it's shorter wheelbase and mechanical diffs. A lot of the electronic aids and fancy bits have gone this year to cut costs. Back to a mechanical gear shift too, so expect a return to a bit more spectacle (anybody watched the IRC coverage??) And what most people don't realise is that the WRC cars are effectively GpB for the modern day, silhouette racers built from the ground up to be devastatingly effective rally cars. At the end of the day, 500bhp is too much for the forests, lives come first.
Oh, and both cars pictured are exactly the same! nothing to do with stages of development. It's a modified S2000 shell with WRC bodywork that hasn't changed. The cutouts in the bumpers are for mudflaps and to avoid the bodywork being ripped to bits by gravel.
And the cars are fully homologated and signed off, but development will continue all year
sturge, fess up.. those wrc '300hp' engines.... are more like 300hp diesels aren't they?? as in enough torque to pull a tree over
sturge, fess up.. those wrc '300hp' engines.... are more like 300hp diesels aren't they?? as in enough torque to pull a tree over
Specs can be easily found on the net if you go looking :p Torque is immense! something around 500Nm iirc.
sturge, fess up.. those wrc '300hp' engines.... are more like 300hp diesels aren't they?? as in enough torque to pull a tree over
Yep, mental amounts of torque! Rallying doesn't need the ability to overcome wind resistance (power) it needs acceleration (torque), hence, topically, the airbox on a Nova Sport :d
mmm. intake restrictions ftw... its probably why my homemade 1400 pulled so well on a single choke carb...
and why an sri will hassle a gsi all day long :d
i thought it was more to do with all the extra weight a gsi has to drag
not much in it, sri has all the electric crap and sound deadening too, or mine did at least. I always put it down to the inlet design
Yep, mental amounts of torque! Rallying doesn't need the ability to overcome wind resistance (power) it needs acceleration (torque), hence, topically, the airbox on a Nova Sport :d
Hmmmm... :p Oh I do love me an engineers debate lol
It would be the torque that overcomes the resistances though, including wind, granted it's generally high power cars that are capable of higher speeds, because they rev and can apply a decent torque higher up (which would result in the higher power as a by product!) but should they suffer too little torque they stop dead against the wind surely? F1 must achieve ridiculously high speeds despite their massive CoD's purely from a lack of other resistances like weight, friction etc.
Agreed that rally requires the torque though, revvy powerful lower torque engines would be horrid once they started to lose traction (i.e always lol) as they'd just smash their way to the limiter straight off, as well as the need to be climbing inclines at low atmospheric pressures etc! Was surprised at the over square engine geometry for that reason though, I guess it's to compensate for the tiny restrictor limiting airflow and raising the torque at a sacrifice to the power/revs.
you only need 150hp to get a 1 ton car to 140mph.... but way more power to get it there fast... the aero drag on a wrc is negligable compared to an f1 car. i remember reading back in the 80's that the f1 team trucks had lower drag than the cars. but then imagine what 750hp & a 600kg weight with neutral downforce would do to the acceleration & top straightline speed of a car, apart from needing some serious mechanical grip
Hmmmm... :p Oh I do love me an engineers debate lol
It would be the torque that overcomes the resistances though, including wind, granted it's generally high power cars that are capable of higher speeds, because they rev and can apply a decent torque higher up (which would result in the higher power as a by product!) but should they suffer too little torque they stop dead against the wind surely? F1 must achieve ridiculously high speeds despite their massive CoD's purely from a lack of other resistances like weight, friction etc.
Agreed that rally requires the torque though, revvy powerful lower torque engines would be horrid once they started to lose traction (i.e always lol) as they'd just smash their way to the limiter straight off, as well as the need to be climbing inclines at low atmospheric pressures etc! Was surprised at the over square engine geometry for that reason though, I guess it's to compensate for the tiny restrictor limiting airflow and raising the torque at a sacrifice to the power/revs.
Torque is a force, an accelerating force, it provides acceleration. Power is a measure of the energy used to overcome resistance, hence the difference between horsepower and brake horsepower, the latter allowing for the internal resistances within the engine, or if you use an at the wheels figure, the entire driveline.
Formula one cars achieve very high speeds from very high power outputs, their fast acceleration is down to the low weight.
Here endeth the lesson
i thought they'd banned the clever diffs a couple of years ago.....i will miss the proper wrc cars, i guess i'll be watching the irish tarmac rallying again.....even though the mk2 escort class is by far the most entertaining....
you only need 150hp to get a 1 ton car to 140mph.... but way more power to get it there fast... the aero drag on a wrc is negligable compared to an f1 car. i remember reading back in the 80's that the f1 team trucks had lower drag than the cars. but then imagine what 750hp & a 600kg weight with neutral downforce would do to the acceleration & top straightline speed of a car, apart from needing some serious mechanical grip
Modern F1 cars as of 2-3 years ago had a CoD of about 1.3, compared to about 0.3 of an average passenger car, not sure on a truck lol
Confusing myself thinking it through now tbh, an F1 car like you say would have a huge top speed despite only having about 250Nm or so of torque, but then an F1 car applies it at an absolutely immense rate which skews the whole idea really lol
Torque is a force, an accelerating force, it provides acceleration. Power is a measure of the energy used to overcome resistance, hence the difference between horsepower and brake horsepower, the latter allowing for the internal resistances within the engine, or if you use an at the wheels figure, the entire driveline.
Formula one cars achieve very high speeds from very high power outputs, their fast acceleration is down to the low weight.
Here endeth the lesson
Indeed, Nm, or how many newtons you can fire how many meters! Power, watts if you like being the 'work done' against resistance.
But the way I have been lead to understand it is power is just the rate at which the force is applied (even by definition, power=torque*rpm) So it would in fact be the torque that pushes through the resistance and the power that defines how fast, i.e a 500Nm 250 BHP car would beat a 600BHP 300Nm car up a very steep incline (in fact at those figures I might even be talking steeper than vertical? Divide by 10 if so lol) but the 600BHP would win all day on flat given no other resistance.
Taking the same theory, with gearboxes to suit (purely to allow for the difference in revs at the quoted figures) the 500Nm 250BHP car would be more capable of overcoming wind resistance and achieve a higher top speed. I guess the question is how long it takes to get there.
Probably something that works in theory but in practice roads just aren't long enough lol
edit: also the difference in BHP could be down to a loss of torque from the resistance, as you say it is a force, like resistance is a force, and the resultant force (Torque) would be lower, assuming the same revs, Power=Torque x RPM and your bhp does not equal your HP for that reason.
mk. you should see how fast our big scania tractor unit accelerates 0-56... it is 480hp, and weighs 8 tonnes. so it should be about as fast as a 1.2 corsa b.... its awesome... but we have to turn the traction control off & the diff lock on...
mk. you should see how fast our big scania tractor unit accelerates 0-56... it is 480hp, and weighs 8 tonnes. so it should be about as fast as a 1.2 corsa b.... its awesome... but we have to turn the traction control off & the diff lock on...
And probably over 1000++Nm? Which is what shifts the weight, the inertia of that is a resistance. Obviously if you could produce that same torque at higher revs it'd be even faster, but the same horsepower at higher revs would be slower (I think lol )
Modern F1 cars as of 2-3 years ago had a CoD of about 1.3, compared to about 0.3 of an average passenger car, not sure on a truck lol
Confusing myself thinking it through now tbh, an F1 car like you say would have a huge top speed despite only having about 250Nm or so of torque, but then an F1 car applies it at an absolutely immense rate which skews the whole idea really lol
Indeed, Nm, or how many newtons you can fire how many meters! Power, watts if you like being the 'work done' against resistance.
But the way I have been lead to understand it is power is just the rate at which the force is applied (even by definition, power=torque*rpm) So it would in fact be the torque that pushes through the resistance and the power that defines how fast, i.e a 500Nm 250 BHP car would beat a 600BHP 300Nm car up a very steep incline (in fact at those figures I might even be talking steeper than vertical? Divide by 10 if so lol) but the 600BHP would win all day on flat given no other resistance.
Taking the same theory, with gearboxes to suit (purely to allow for the difference in revs at the quoted figures) the 500Nm 250BHP car would be more capable of overcoming wind resistance and achieve a higher top speed. I guess the question is how long it takes to get there.
Probably something that works in theory but in practice roads just aren't long enough lol
edit: also the difference in BHP could be down to a loss of torque from the resistance, as you say it is a force, like resistance is a force, and the resultant force (Torque) would be lower, assuming the same revs, Power=Torque x RPM and your bhp does not equal your HP for that reason.
F1 cars can apply it at an immense rate due to their very low weight (not much inertia to overcome) and relatively low drag at low speeds. At higher speeds where the resistance is a bigger factor the power becomes more important.
Torque is the force you have available to push, power is the energy you can use applying that force in simple terms
Think of it as trying to push a board of wood through liquid, resistance is proportional to the square of speed so double the speed the resistance quadruples, so say water is equivalent to driving at 30 mph, oil is 60 mph, treacle is 120mph. If you apply a given forward force to the wood in any situation for long enough it will accelerate forward, so regardless of the size of that force it will keep accelerating indefinately if you can keep applying that same force. However if that force is you walking behind the wood pushing it, you'll manage through the water and custard but tire out very quickly in the treacle (run out of power). If you had more power, you could continue accelerating through thicker and thicker liquids with the same applied force before tiring out.
As for the race uphill, going uphill at a constant rate is actually requires constant acceleration in 2 axis rather than 1 so torque becomes doubly as important. So it would deend upon a lot of factors, but simply, the car with more torque will accelerate better so will win. Really you're proving my point lol
And the inertia's only important at low speeds, air resistance is far greater than any other resisting force by a long way once moving
Pistol Pete
03-02-11, 09:31 PM
New Fiesta is nice. Citroen DS3 is a looker aswell IMO.
http://pictures.topspeed.com/IMG/crop/201010/citroen-ds3-wrc_460x0w.jpg
Will be interesting to see how the 1600's fare.
who remembers when the focus wrc was launched, and it looked just like the road car, but the 206wrc looked like it was doing a ton when parked up.. then colin mcRae managed to win several rallies in the focus....
Surely your treacle metaphor has power and torque switched? Regardless of the power (work) you can do against it, if you had 2000Nm of torque at 5RPM, it would go through it... as he's just about to say 'as long as it's not peaked already' i.e there's more power available...
Because although torque is the force behind it the power is the rate at which you can do the work, and thus defines where you stop accelerating, but not how fast you can accelerate.
Enlightenment! Never considered that aspect before, so when you said power to overcome the wind resistance, you meant to achieve top speeds, and I'm thinking to accelerate the car at an already high speed which WOULD be defined by the torque, I.e if you had a million Nm of torque but a peak power of 300 it would bosh it's way to 145 from 90 for example in the blink of an eye overcoming all resistance and then stick there like it hit treacle with a phat bit of board lol
And I was assuming this scania wasn't doing 180 :d
The immense rate I refer to is their RPM (can consider this as static, I.e clutching it in at 16000 with unlimited grip) btw, which results in the immense rate of acceleration you seem to be referring to which is obviously more to do with torque vs restrictions than RPM.
Southie
03-02-11, 09:37 PM
The mini on the otherhand looks gash.
http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Mini_WRX_480x280.jpg
Anyways, as per petes post, back on topic :d the DS3's look nice but they're not building many very fast atm! Think Ford are well in with a chance this year, love to see someone beat loeb on tarmac finally!
and as per southie it's nice to see mini's back in rallying, but they really could have made a comeback under better terms, the BMW Maxi is an abomination imo, and the 4x4 thing the WRC is based on is even worse! However I'd rather them, than only 2 manufacturers.
Pistol Pete
03-02-11, 09:40 PM
Aye, Southie minging cars. IIRC it is a Dave Richards/Prodrive effort. Not sure who the drivers will be.
Lets not forget that with sod all torque you can fix a lot of problems with a manic gearbox which is the torque multiplier ;)
I'd have thought with modern electronic control being pish cheap compared to hardcore mechanical items, it would have been a nobrainer to keep the electronics in. Then again I have seen the bosch motorsport price list and my word they want a lot for sod all
Southie
03-02-11, 09:48 PM
Aye, Southie minging cars. IIRC it is a Dave Richards/Prodrive effort. Not sure who the drivers will be.
See here for info Pete >LINK (http://www.crash.net/World+Rally/news/166377/1/sordo_excited_by_new_challenge.html)<
kris meeke is one.... so as usual, prodrive will be hiring an old hand too....
Frankly I couldn't give a toss what the cars look like. From what I have been reading Prodrive designed what they derived to be the perfect rally car for the current regs and then worked back to the Mini as opposed to the other way round.
So I hope the Mini is a dark horse this year
Lets not forget that with sod all torque you can fix a lot of problems with a manic gearbox which is the torque multiplier ;)
Dont confuse me! But yeah that'd be the reason for F1's 7 speed lol
Less electronics is a crowd pleaser too, more watcher more advertisers more manufacturers more watchers more....:)
Frankly I couldn't give a toss what the cars look like. From what I have been reading Prodrive designed what they derived to be the perfect rally car for the current regs and then worked back to the Mini as opposed to the other way round.
So I hope the Mini is a dark horse this year
so its going to have a lot of stuff in common with the short lived new imprezza wrc then.....back in the day, prodrive used to be shaking down cars all day, every day at MIRA, recently, there has been something loud thrashing round their test track.
Dont confuse me! But yeah that'd be the reason for F1's 7 speed lol
Less electronics is a crowd pleaser too, more watcher more advertisers more manufacturers more watchers more....:)
a gearbox is simply a torque multiplier, a 1:1 setup will output what you put in (less a touch of power in friction of course), then start moving towards real gearbox numbers and you can see how you'd make it pull. Same as fitting a large numbered Final drive, gives great pull but caps off the top speed (so you have a 6th/7th/8th gear)
a gearbox is simply a torque multiplier, a 1:1 setup will output what you put in (less a touch of power in friction of course), then start moving towards real gearbox numbers and you can see how you'd make it pull. Same as fitting a large numbered Final drive, gives great pull but caps off the top speed (so you have a 6th/7th/8th gear)
The don't confuse me bit was a joke, but obviously won't come across in text... been up for 36h now lol
tart :p
Then add in the fun of electric drive where you get nearly max torque at 0.000000000001rpm and a 1:1 ratio lol
tart :p
Then add in the fun of electric drive where you get nearly max torque at 0.000000000001rpm and a 1:1 ratio lol
Depends on how the motor is wound! Brushless is fun though :d
playing with a pair of these at the moment
http://www.oxfordyasamotors.com/
Don't start adding gearboxes into the equation, you'll fry his brain lol
Mike, the latter Impreza WRC's were more to do with STI than Prodrive, which is where it went wrong and why the relationship broke down. I'm expecting the Mini to surprise a lot of people this year
You need to advertise a product, you have a choice of getting a share of 4.5 hours every 3 weeks, in a field of 20+ front runners in which generally the only footage seen involves a car covered in dust/snow/dirt, on a £12/month subscription channel. Or you can get about 10-12 hours every 2 weeks on BBC1 in a field of ~22 (I think? ;p) runners only, with a nice shiny car sat on the start line/in pits/your product on the chest of the guy they stand interviewing for a few minutes.
Easy choice really, especially when the purse strings get tighter! F1 simply has a far wider audience unfortunately. How many people have you heard that aren't generally into cars, discussing F1 results, and how many of those come back next week discussing WRC results?
This 'product' also applies both to the manufacturers funding the teams and their sponsors. There's probably plenty of people in monaco that are swayed between a Ferrari and a Merc based on the ethos surrounding F1 results and their resulting image. Unfortunately at the moment they have a tough choice between their usual champagne or a Red Bull lol
Exactly that.
WRC: if it gets too successful it fails. Stages have been cancelled due to "overcrowding" ffs lol Whats so glamourous about standing in a soaking wet Welsh field whilst a bunch of Fords and Citroens throw mud at you?
Touring cars: There's potential, but lets be honest it'll never attract big money as you're essentially racing a rep mobile that Mr Smith next door owns (yes I know they're not the same but still)
F1: Lots of money, exclusive cars, big power, glamour, etc. You won't find barry down the Tesco car park in an F1 car.
Another problem I think with WRC was that Group A requirements had the homologation guff, i.e. you could own the Impreza that McRae is driving; and that was part of the appeal (especially with the Imprezas!). WRC spec was only vaguely based on the particular model, no road-going variants were required. I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that the 2009ish Focus WRC only shared something like 40-odd components with the road car, including the "Ford" badges lol Dunno how true that is though!
And another thing with WRC/Touring Cars is if the manufacturer's lose, then thats their main marketable car (Fiesta, Focus, C4, Impreza, whatever) thats losing. Who wants to buy a car that loses?!? Where as with F1, not only can you not relate a loss directly to a particular model of showroom car, but its also a case of "oh, well we might have lost, but heck we still built us an all-singing, all-dancing superfast F1 car".
[/yak]
Don't start adding gearboxes into the equation, you'll fry his brain lol
Mike, the latter Impreza WRC's were more to do with STI than Prodrive, which is where it went wrong and why the relationship broke down. I'm expecting the Mini to surprise a lot of people this year
i was watching petter on eurosport having huge rows with them over suspension & they wouldn't change the car, saying it was down to the driver, the car was fine......
SR-Rally
04-02-11, 08:32 AM
Frankly I couldn't give a toss what the cars look like. From what I have been reading Prodrive designed what they derived to be the perfect rally car for the current regs and then worked back to the Mini as opposed to the other way round.
So I hope the Mini is a dark horse this year
I've spoken to people who have worked on the car. They didn't seem to think it will get any results this year. I hope it does well as itsnice to see new manufactures entering the championship and a kris Meeke should be good to watch.
the mini simply doesn't look much, the others look incredible
LEWI007
04-02-11, 08:45 AM
Good old days :)
http://1.2.3.13/bmi/www.avoclub.com/avosite/images/rs2000/rs2000_4a.jpg
i was watching petter on eurosport having huge rows with them over suspension & they wouldn't change the car, saying it was down to the driver, the car was fine......
That's pretty common actually, just WRC doesn't have pits they can hide in to have a row... if a driver is having a **** day it's always the cars fault, and it will feel like the car too, if you know you can do a stage in such and such way and get time X when you try and do that and it doesn't come off because you're having a bad day it feels like it's what's under you causing the problem.
I'm not sure how much telemetry data etc they would have to be able to say it's definitely not the car though, and to a certain degree the best way to set the car up is the way the driver wants, whether it's at an optimum already or not.
TeddyThom
04-02-11, 05:28 PM
2011 WRC Fiesta, one of the best designed WRC cars ever if you ask me. The pictures can do the rest of the talking.
http://www.cafi.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/ford-fiesta-wrc-live-630.jpg
http://volvoc.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/2011-Ford-Fiesta-RS-WRC-Sport.jpg
OM NOM NOM.
Not bad for a ford.
I like Ken Blocks one from his Gymkhana (sp?) episode where he is running round the track with that fecking huge bank (51 degrees iirc)
OM NOM NOM.
Not bad for a ford.
I like Ken Blocks one from his Gymkhana (sp?) episode where he is running round the track with that fecking huge bank (51 degrees iirc)
same car pretty much :p Built outside of WRC regulations though
That's pretty common actually, just WRC doesn't have pits they can hide in to have a row... if a driver is having a **** day it's always the cars fault, and it will feel like the car too, if you know you can do a stage in such and such way and get time X when you try and do that and it doesn't come off because you're having a bad day it feels like it's what's under you causing the problem.
I'm not sure how much telemetry data etc they would have to be able to say it's definitely not the car though, and to a certain degree the best way to set the car up is the way the driver wants, whether it's at an optimum already or not.
most cars are well tele'd up thesedays. A friend of mine is the data engineer for Radicals race team and gets to tell the driver if hes crap or if the car is being crap lol
most cars are well tele'd up thesedays. A friend of mine is the data engineer for Radicals race team and gets to tell the driver if hes crap or if the car is being crap lol
Exactly, Petter Solberg, prodrive? Few years ago lol
Exactly, Petter Solberg, prodrive? Few years ago lol
the thing was, that the privateer teams had changed dampers and were faster than petter, and petter knows his way around a car, he was building championship winning rallycross cars long before he made it in rallying.......
engineers are not the be all & end all of how to make a car go fast, if a driver is not happy with how it is set up, he will not go fast. simple as that....
back in 1990, thierry boutsen was the williams renault lead driver... the car managed to win one, maybe 2 races... they simply couldn't work out how t omake it go quicker.... over the winter, mansell joined the team. at the first test, he softened the suspension massively, and found something like 5 seconds a lap..... the engineers hadn't noticed... but then patrick head is infamous for reckoning he knows better than the driver.....
i was watching petter on eurosport having huge rows with them over suspension & they wouldn't change the car, saying it was down to the driver, the car was fine......
Petter was not a happy bunny at all, and Prodrive did eventually admit he was right and the car was a nail, just after Subaru pulled the plug coincidentally (well technically they just had crap dampers but were tied into using them by Subaru). They were in a very awkward position at the time and had to try and keep faith in the car. But like you say, if someone like Petter is saying it's wrong for a whole season, it's the car not the driver! Look at Mikko last year, off year, didn't try blaming the car, just said he couldn't get it set up how he wanted it, wasn't happy so wasn't fast. Rallying tends not to have the same excuses F1 does, but engineers still have far too high an opinion of themselves :roll:
At least this year the WRC will be a bit more open with the new regs.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.