WRC rule changes for next year

[4wheeldrift]

Whats up with the rule changes for WRC next year? I could see requiring a regular 5 speed non-sequential transmission to cut costs, but to REQUIRE a transverse I4 engine layout is the height of idiocy. They've basically given subaru 3 months to develop a completely new car, based off god only knows what since they don't even make a car that uses a inline 4. I'm all for keeping costs down but to screw over a manufacturer thats supported rallying since the death of group B doesn't sit well with me.

[three.eighteen.]

whoa, thats a pretty drastic change

[hjr]

i dont think that anything is finalized yet. they are just throwing out ideas.

but if thats what they need to do, then thats what will be done. i doubt that they will create a series where the likes of subaru have to develope a new motor. subaru is somewhat of a big player in the WRC. the top of the lower budget teams.

at this point its a waiting game to see what they finalize and come up with. if there are drastic rule changes, i think they will not come into effect until 2006.

[Xtrema]

And some of the other suggestion is keep the under 2L and no turbo/supercharger. That's ludicrus. It's almost like telling F1 to drive only with 6 cylinder or less.

[hyperwhite]

i liked it better when the rally cars look just like something you could pick up off the lot. it's not to the extent of NASCAR, but i just wanna see more turbo awd cars :D

:burnout: :burnout:
:burnout: :burnout:

[hjr]

homoligation almost killed rally in the early 90's. thats why they went to wrc class. now technological costs are almost killing the wrc class, so its time for a change again.

[4wheeldrift]

I think keeping costs down is a good thing, but I don't think forcing manufacturers to use one particular type of driveline or engine layout is necessarily a good thing. Where's the chance to innovate if you do that? So many developments in motorsports have come out of people doing something different, that hadn't been tried before or had been tried but didn't have enough development. Just dropping the fancy sequential gearboxes alone would save your average team close in the range of $200k american (2 cars * 2 gear boxes per car * $50k price difference between a sequential box and a really really beefy dog box). I think there's a variety of ways they could cut costs without going as far as the super 2000 class is proposing