Quote from ajp71 :

EDIT - Just found this, talk about local knowledge he gives his co-driver a running commentary of the stage whilst giving his sponsors a plug travelling at warp speed down a narrow lane

Vtec kicks in yo! Amazing really!

the problem of actual PWRC is that they are like old gr A (impreza, mitsubishi <6.5, escort)...

Quote from ajp71 :

Sorry that post shows you don't really have a clue what your talking about. The Group N cars have no real relation apart from the engine and some of the drivetrain to the production cars. Any 4WD road car could equally easily be converted for similar costs. What makes the Subaru/Mitsubishi different are that they have had factory backing meaning there is a wide range of racing components made especially for them.

That is part of my point actually. When you get say an EVO XI, there are already factory backed homologation parts (i.e. you can't just get whatever tiny increments in ratios you want) available for racing use, so the stock car forms the basis. The car is based on a completely stock chassis that is mounted with a roll cage and strengthened to an extent for racing. The drivetrain systems are still mostly stock and there are severe limits to what you can do to suspension geometry, etc. Of course, dampers and springs are pretty free, but there are limits to what you can do when stuck with close to stock geometry.

This is NOTHING like say a Citroen Xsara, which does NOT have a production 4WD version currently on sale. And when was the last time they sell Xsaras with the same engine blocks as they race? Back in the final years of Mitsubishi's winning streak (EVO 6.5 at the time), Mitsubishi was the last manufacturer that held more closely to group A rules that didn't allow the same level of modification from stock than WRC rules.

Just a bit of history. What I'm saying is that with a "reasonable" budget say U$100,000, you can build yourself a Group N contender with an EVO without doing things such as trying to transform FWD to 4WD, using an engine absolutely unrelated to any production block, etc. The drivetrain is actually remarkably close to stock. Of course, things such as oil coolers would be upgraded, but that's actually quite common with quite a lot of street EVOs that have been properly modified. Not as if you've just banged in a transfer case and a gearbox case that's completely alien. Oh, the Group N cars are still run off the stock gear casings BTW, with homologated (aka STANDARDIZED) gears as previously mentioned.

BTW, Group N turbo casings are still made from cast iron, not inconol or any exotic and ridiculously expensive materials.

Quote from Jamexing :

The car is based on a completely stock chassis that is mounted with a roll cage and strengthened to an extent for racing.

No modern stage rally cars have a stressed bodyshell, it's just a skin, the rollcage conveniently provides all the strength and is mounted to the suspension points, the actual production car on the outside is pretty irrelevant, the bodyshell itself is not reinforced because it has no structural use, the exception being the odd bits, mainly the engine bay that are still used in their original intention.

Quote :

Just a bit of history. What I'm saying is that with a "reasonable" budget say U$100,000, you can build yourself a Group N contender with an EVO without doing things such as trying to transform FWD to 4WD, using an engine absolutely unrelated to any production block, etc.

Add another zero onto that and you have a realistic budget for a competitive Group N car, actually building the car may not cost that much, maintaining one does. A guy I know used to run Peugeot 106s and Ford Kas and budgeted £100,000 a season to run one (less the cost of the car and any accident damage), the thing is even if it nothing costs very much on its own you just keep going through parts, not down to drivers fault simply the nature of rallying. The way to go stage rallying relatively cheaply is either to stick to tarmac events or just have a car that literally uses standard parts and a barn full of donor cars.

Quote :

The drivetrain is actually remarkably close to stock.

I very much doubt standard Impreza or Evo drivetrain is strong enough to be used for stage rallying, regardless of whether you use standard or any other drivetrain you'll be replacing it on a routine basis in a rally car. Circuit racing has completely different requirements and the BMW GT cars I worked did use largely production drivetrain components, but they aren't exposed to the shock of huge bumps, lots of lock ups, slamming on the power, violent downshifts and the fact that most rally engine mapping doesn't worry about smoothness and looking after the components.

I really fail to see any reason other than wheelbase and marketing why any other 4WD car could not be taken and turned into just as effective Group N machine as the Evo and Impreza.

Quote :

Of course, things such as oil coolers would be upgraded, but that's actually quite common with quite a lot of street EVOs that have been properly modified. Not as if you've just banged in a transfer case and a gearbox case that's completely alien. Oh, the Group N cars are still run off the stock gear casings BTW, with homologated (aka STANDARDIZED) gears as previously mentioned.

Few street cars will be dry sumped, but that's not a big deal when your building a new car inside a production bodyshell. Most production rally classes now run sequential 'boxes, which have no relation to the production car. When H-gates are used now the 'boxes are completely standard, because if they're free there is no point in putting an H-gate racing gearbox in, often with a changed final drive ratio, not really anything that the Evo and Impreza offer over anything else there.

As I said, QUITE CLOSE, not SAME. Of course strengthened parts might be used where production parts don't suffice.

And yes I am fully aware that WRC cars are nothing more than dedicated rally cars with production car like skin. I'm too clear on that, with inconol turbos, etc.

And of course I was never trying to say that its the body shell that provides all the strength. As I've said you start off from a stock body, THEN add a roll cage and the attached suspension and other structural mounts which in itself would be most of the cars ULTIMATE strength and rigidity. Seam welding, strut braces, etc. BTW, extra bracing is actually quite common in well tuned performance street cars too. It's a steel cage reinforced monocoque, not tube frame chassis or space frame.

Of course, I meant that BUILDING the car is quite "cheap". And with brutal features as ALS, turbos and exhaust have tough (and short) lives. And of course those bumps, jumps, etc are expensive...

As is well known in engineering, development cost >>> Conceptual and research cost.Testing is EXPENSIVE. And with very tight rules, testing is the ONLY way to guarantee top level performance.

The gearbox casing in the Group N EVOs are actually quite stock. Of course, the internals are a different story. I'm not denying that at all. BTW, it is quite easy to do sequential shifting with a conventional dog box, which is standard group N practice. I remembered checking out a 5-speed race gear-set for the EVO XI only a few months ago. A straight cut gear-set, well built, but nothing like a WRC system.

Some references for your won interest:

http://www.hewland.com/svga/ralliart.htm

http://www.ralliart.com/05topics/05news/rai-05dogtme.html

http://www.umsrally.com/E7groupnkit.html

Not exactly WRC style space tech.

Quote from Jamexing :

As I said, QUITE CLOSE, not SAME. Of course strengthened parts might be used where production parts don't suffice.

If you're using non-production parts then any advantage a particular car may have in production form goes out the window.

Quote :

BTW, extra bracing is actually quite common in well tuned performance street cars too. It's a steel cage reinforced monocoque, not tube frame chassis or space frame.

No. All successful modern rally, touring and GT cars are built with the rollcage taking all the structural load and the body panels themselves doing nothing structural, bracing them is a complete waste of time and adds weight.

Quote :

The gearbox casing in the Group N EVOs are actually quite stock. Of course, the internals are a different story. I'm not denying that at all. BTW, it is quite easy to do sequential shifting with a conventional dog box, which is standard group N practice. I remembered checking out a 5-speed race gear-set for the EVO XI only a few months ago. A straight cut gear-set, well built, but nothing like a WRC system.

Hewland have made 1000s of racing gearboxes on the Beetle
gearbox casing. That doesn't mean any component inside is the same or that the cost to produce one isn't astronomical compared to the original contents. You could build a sequential gearbox inside your toaster, the casing really doesn't matter. Without reading into detail on the system you linked to it would seem far simpler and cheaper to just put a conventional sequential 'box in than convert an H pattern production 'box, but that's the nature of production competition. I really can't see any reason why a Mitsubishi or Subaru gearbox is easier to convert than any other manufacturers, they didn't build them to make them easy to convert, Mitsubishi simply paid Hewland to do the development work because its marketing department decided it would like to make the Evo an attractive proposition to go rallying in.

Quote :

original quote ajp71: Yes I was actually having a discussion about this the other day, why WRC has become boring to watch over the last few years when the cars in reality are exactly the same as they were ten years ago

hmm... nup :-)
The whole philosophy of rallying has changed over the past decade.
rallying is no longer about sliding. sliding slows the cars down.
its about sliding as little as possible and this has hugely effected the cars. its why we had a massive generational change at the start of the 2000's in both the cars that were dominating and the drivers that were dominating.
and yeah i think its made the WRC alot less interesting. I still obsess over it but i think its suffered.
in regards to the original thread tho, yeah i can see what PWRC would be more interesting cos the traction and setup of the car is alot more rudimentary so there would be more sliding hence more proper rallying.
imho