i was watching rally of italy and i heard that next year they are going to be mandating 2.0 NA engines so more manufacturers can jump on the rally bandwagon, personally i think it is a great idea. but i was just curious what everyone else thinks about this
btw first post in the forum
new rally rules
Moderator: Moderators
- WANGAN_X
- DCAWD Groupie
- Posts: 786
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
- GVR4-308
- I walk to work
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Capitol Hill
Mandating 2.0 NA engines? As in the are required to use these? Is this like a new class then? I just don't know, I mean I love some of those 1.8-2.4 liter NA honda engines, but I can't image that it would make for a very good rally. I think a lot of the fun of the rally is that the power levels allow them to be very much on the edge. How on the edge are you going to be getting with a 2.0 liter NA engine?
Jack
- ElZorro
- DCAWD Founding Member
- Posts: 5958
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: USA! USA!
There are a couple big threads on NASIOC about this, in OT, Mid-A and Motorsports. The bigger part of the issue is not smaller engines or NA, it's the fact that they won't be allowing Boxster-style engines in the future. They are doing this to reduce the cost of participating in WRC. How making several manufacturers throw away their entire engine development program saves money, I don't know. In essence they are trying to level the playing field so smaller teams can keep up with the big boys.
Jason "El Zorro" Fox
'17 Subaru Forester 2.0XT
DCAWD - old coots in fast scoots.
'17 Subaru Forester 2.0XT
DCAWD - old coots in fast scoots.
- GVR4-308
- I walk to work
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Capitol Hill
- WRXWagon2112
- DCAWD Founding Member
- Posts: 3314
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Livin' the dream
They are also going to mandate a standard gearbox - hence the rule of a standard engine layout. Frankly, I think this kills the whole reason for manufacturer participation in motorsports - real-world / dual-use research. For the cost of a research budget, the manufacturer gets to test their new designs and gets world exposure and advertising. Why not allow each company to pursue the best results by letting them choose their own technological direction?elzorro wrote:There are a couple big threads on NASIOC about this, in OT, Mid-A and Motorsports. The bigger part of the issue is not smaller engines or NA, it's the fact that they won't be allowing Boxster-style engines in the future. They are doing this to reduce the cost of participating in WRC. How making several manufacturers throw away their entire engine development program saves money, I don't know. In essence they are trying to level the playing field so smaller teams can keep up with the big boys.
I understand the mindset of trying to lower costs for the rally teams - a standard gearbox means shared production costs and a mandated inline-4, N/A engine means a wider selection of engines available to the teams - but there has to be some leeway to allow innovation. That's the big knock against NASCAR - a real lack of innovation due to strict rules that standardize the technology.
F1 is trying to cut back on innovation and reliance on technology. Now WRC is doing the same. It's the slippery slope all over again.
--Alan