Jump to content


Photo

How could Ari Vatanen improve the WRC?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Kucki

Kucki
  • Member

  • 1,239 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 13 August 2009 - 22:53

I dont know much about this type of Motosport but I always wondered why the WRC is not very popular, or known to the general public. Could WRC ever be in the same public perception and following as Formula 1 is, and if so what would have to be change for Rally Racing to become more popular?

Advertisement

#2 mursuka80

mursuka80
  • Member

  • 5,106 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 13 August 2009 - 23:46

First FIA should give the rule making to someone who understands the sport.In the 80`s you can argue,that Rally was as popular as F1.I think we will see change when Todt is elected,because he knows something about Rally and isnt clueless like that halfwit Max.

#3 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 2,566 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 14 August 2009 - 00:37

First FIA should give the rule making to someone who understands the sport.In the 80`s you can argue,that Rally was as popular as F1.I think we will see change when Todt is elected,because he knows something about Rally and isnt clueless like that halfwit Max.

What made rallying in the 80s better?

#4 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 5,464 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 14 August 2009 - 02:26

I always wondered why the WRC is not very popular, or known to the general public.


It wasn't too bad when it had Makkinen, Sainz, McRae, Loeb, Solberg, Burns, Martin, Gronholm & Galli etc, plus tarmac specialist ring-ins, battling it out in Mitsus, Subarus, Skodas, Hyundais, Ford, Citreons and Peugeots... (and that was only a few seasons prior!)

It was quite well known then, Monte Carlo rally, in some countries, was at least 70-80% as famous as Monaco GP, Le Mans 24hr, Daytona 500 or Indy 500. Now FIA considers Monte Carlo, Safari etc rallies as best for being dropped from the calendar however...

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 14 August 2009 - 02:29.


#5 Muz Bee

Muz Bee
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 14 August 2009 - 03:05

What made rallying in the 80s better?

500 horsepower, fire-spitting Audi Quattros and Lancia Delta race cars, running night stages over 4 days by drivers who weren't boring pusssies. Seriously Loeb should have a shave....

To be honest WRC will never be the spectacle it used to be for one reason - you can't do that sort of stuff in the modern age because of "safety" and litigation and political correctness and people like Mosley who wants to run things he knows next to nothing about even though he hasn't talked to the drivers and entrants. With F1 the march of technological progress keeps going in spite of the sanitisation of things like the tracks. It remains vibrant because so much investment is thrown at it and is therefore the pinnacle of motorsport. You couldn't have the modern F1 thing at a circuit like the real Nurburgring or "Nordschlieff" because it doesn't fit the new mould. Too long, too expensive to "improve".

With rallying - people of certain errrr, cultures, used to want to play a game we could call "chicken" with the competitors. You would see them each day on the TV highlights from Rally Argentina etc getting the 2 seconds of fame and putting the sport into disrepute. IMHO that's what (for example) Spanish fans do at the MotoGPs when they used to invade the track when the winner was on the slowdown lap and the others were still trying to race. The fireworks and cloaks and inflatable toys that were a part of the Rossi school of "entertainment" continued to spiral MotoGP into juvenile entertainment until they saw it was having a negative side effect and stamped most of it out. With rallying you couldn't make the old style of things safe (excessive horspower, night stages etc) so they sanitised it and prevented the crowd from going anywhere interesting. Today it is crap and I won't watch a zillion Citroens doing battle with a couple of Fords and a Lada (or whatever) to prove that Loeb is the best in the world. They spend more money now than they did 25 years ago and the spectacle is 100 times worse. :( :down:


#6 pacwest

pacwest
  • Member

  • 1,407 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 14 August 2009 - 05:00

2 litres, no 34mm restrictor. Production cars of 5000 units. Have a race in North America and arrange a TV deal with Speedvision. Americans like racing on dirt.

Simple?

#7 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,795 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 14 August 2009 - 07:27

Make IRC the new WRC and open up development in certain areas, also open up the sporting regulations widely enough to make the events more interesting.


And stick a boot in the arse of the current WRC promoters and don't keep any of them for the IRC-WRC transition.

Edited by Victor_RO, 14 August 2009 - 07:27.


#8 pinnacle racing

pinnacle racing
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 14 August 2009 - 08:19

I'm not familiar with the IRC. What makes IRC better than WRC?

#9 V8 Fireworks

V8 Fireworks
  • Member

  • 5,464 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 14 August 2009 - 10:07

[quote name='pinnacle racing' date='Aug 14 2009, 08:19' post='3795681']
I'm not familiar with the IRC. What makes IRC better than WRC?
[/quote

The events are selected on fan and driver preferences: classics like Monte and Safari, are given automatic places on calendar with night stages, seperate services etc. Ticket prices are also much more reasonable. Also, even privateers can build and homologate their own S2000 cars... the Proton has minimal backing and it is a bit of a private effort, yet it is very competitive. (Compare to Suzuki's big $$$ WRC effort, that resulted in hardly a point...)

#10 alfista

alfista
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 14 August 2009 - 10:50

What made rallying in the 80s better?


B-group cars made it more spectacular but I doubt if competition was better in general. There were no nail-biting duels about tenths, in fact, times were taken in whole seconds only. In 1986 B-group cars were at their best but gap between 1st and 10th at Rally Finland was 23 minutes. This year it was 14 minutes. To be honest, the gap between first two was almost exactly the same on those occasions - 24 and 25 secs. But it's an exception: at RMC winning margin was 4 minutes, in Sweden 1:54, in Portugal and Corsica 13 minutes and so on.
What Vatanen (or Todt or who else) have to do is to lure more manufacturers into WRC and assure stability in rules. IMHO all other tiles in the puzzle will align themselves after that. Audi and Subaru became great in WRC. I see no reasons why other makes can't repeat their feats. WRC-cars look very similar to road-going ones and are thus easier to promote.
FIA is pushing 1,6-litre turbos now but IMHO it's not a good idea. Current S2000 engines are powerful enough to make cars spectacular and sound much better. Going turbo makes engines more expensive. On the other hand everybody have to start from the scratch and maybe that results in more manufacturers.

#11 alfista

alfista
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 14 August 2009 - 10:55

[quote name='pinnacle racing' date='Aug 14 2009, 08:19' post='3795681']
I'm not familiar with the IRC. What makes IRC better than WRC?
[/quote

While I basically like IRC concept I can't realize why they had to include Safari. OK, it's famous name but nobody seems to be interested in it bar local drivers. Safari could be a great rally-raid or historic rally but it's hard to see it as a part of modern rally series. You wouldn't include Indy 500 or Le Mans into F1 schedule, would you?

#12 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 14 August 2009 - 11:16

First of all (maybe it is), the re-entering of a rally a few stages after you've wrapped your car around a tree or the engine has blown up should stop. You either complete the full distance or you don't.

I also think the events need more flexibility. Rally GB to me, up here in Scotland, appears as if year after year it's driving around the same forest in Wales for 3 days. Didn't San Remo a few years back run the same stages day after day or something like that? The events I believe should be longer and the stages less repetitive.

I kind of feel like the mix events is there and we shouldn't hold it against newer countries getting promoted if the following is there.

It does feel like we're missing a generation of drivers. Burns is dead, Solberg has to scrape around for drives, Martin has never returned after the death of his co-driver and a few more from that generation that should be carrying the sport at the moment are not here at the moment and essentially has very little serious competitive manufacturers, it's essentially Ford vs Citreon. This one of the hardest to sort out, a vicious circle of poor product, little interest from the companies.

It seems it was sort of mini[packaged in the early-mid 00's to try and make it TV friendly, but what it's done is just take away a lot of what was good about it.

Edited by ryan86, 14 August 2009 - 11:17.


#13 FlatOverCrest

FlatOverCrest
  • Member

  • 2,823 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 18 August 2009 - 07:49

What could Ari or Todt for that matter do???????????

They say pictures can speak a 1000 words....

Watch and enjoy what Rallying USED to be like...... This is one of the best Rally vids I have seen on YouTube..


as to whether it will ever be as popular as F1....in the 1980's Rallying was the mot popular "Live" spectator sport in the world... There were years when The RAC/Network Q rally attracted 3.2 million "Live" spectators during the event... now, you will be lucky if you get 250,000!!

So much for progress huh!?!

Whoever comes into the FIA office...they have a LOT of work to do, to fix the WRC! and judging by the IDIOTIC comments of Neil Duncanson today on Autosport.... Ari and Todt could do with taking the contract away from ISC.....

Edited by FlatOverCrest, 18 August 2009 - 09:54.