Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
I don't understand the push some have to eliminate the Open Class. What would it cost to build a group N car or a Proto N car? I'm guessing a lot more than a Open Class car. Look at so many of the enterants like Randy Zimmer. In another post I mentioned that I didn't believe that one could rally for minimal amounts of money, Randy quickly corrected me on that.

Will people be able to build a $3000-$4000 dollar car and have fun running more events? Will the $25000-$40000 be the norm and only a few can run?

I live in Canada and work a couple of rallies a year, but one day I wouldn't mind being able to build a car and enter a rally or two in the US in addition to any Canadian events. The loss of the Open Class would end that idea as I will never be able to afford the high end car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I did not suggest in the above post to eliminate open class.


My first car was a normally aspriated audi 4000 quattro, talk about an uncompetitive package for open class (yet I was always happy with my results in that car...).

If there is a class limiting point it is that the group n restrictor applied as the 'top class' enhances competition.


Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
Here are a few quotes from the article, since worldrallynews.com now requires a (free) registration:

"But the 2004 result result belies the truth, for the Australian series has become one of the closest and most exciting rally championships in the world."

"While PRC-spec cars and a hybrid formula called Group N (P) - for prototype - are allowed, their performance is restricted to Group N levels."

"Before the final round, eight drivers were in realistic contention for the Globalstar-backed championship. Of the eight, six were Group N, four of them officially supported, and two were Group N (P) contenders."

"Luck, determination and consistency have been the decisive factors in this year?s championship. It has frequently taken tenths to separate drivers on stages. More often than not, the winner of any one heat has been decided on the final stage of the day."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
> What would it cost to build a group N car or a Proto N car? I'm guessing a lot more than a Open Class car.

That isn't the real question. I can build a beater open class car, doesn't mean it is competitive.

The real question: what is the cost to build a very competitive open class car.

That's why I favor a production based class (be it Grp N or PGT or Proto N), that by having restrictive and well understood prep rules, it caps spending and focuses on the driver.

Where Group N falls down is that it is based on the homologation forms, which relies on manufacturer participation.

If (as has been suggested by others) we came out with a "PGT+" class that allowed prep to Grp N levels (using a Subie as a yardstick) but didn't require homologation forms or what not then that might be a good way to go. By definition it would include all the existing Group N cars and I bet a lot of the open cars could be retrofitted without spending huge amounts of $.

Someone just needs to come up with a good formula to describe what it is, and what is allowed (rather than open which describes what isn't allowed).

Glenn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
I wanted to add that the Australian Group N(P) rules are kind of involved, so I don't think it would be practical at this time in the US, as currently written (too much bureocracy). It really is like an official, documented "local homologation".

Though it seems like the main concept is that they require the Group N restrictor and minimum weight. If those were the only requirements that were adopted for an american Open/Proto N class, it could be put in practice without too much work on the part of the sanctioning body or competitor, at least in terms of documentation/bureocracy hurdles.

Here are the actual rules, if you are interested:

http://www.cams.com.au/bulletins/B02-70%20Rally%20-%20Group%20N(P)%20Regulations.pdf

This would be an interesting and simple class structure:

Open (Proto N) - Open, PGT and Group N cars all combined into this.
Group 5
Group F

Maybe even combine Group 5 and Group F if it would be feasible to put Group N sized restrictors on the Group 5 cars. Two classes, easily understandable to the general public.

But, I don't think it would ever happen - too many people would be against it because of personal interests. So it's just a pipe dream.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
Easy, make an AWD Turbo equivalent of US Group F: use Group N sized restrictors, Group N minimum weights, and H pattern gearboxes only. Voila. Done. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
I hope you're being sarcastic. :)

Nowhere did I say 30 year old technology or old cars, did I? What part of what I said could even be interpreted that way?
 

·
400 flat to crest
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
RE: The Australian Model: all happiness and light?

Datsun Rally
Senior Member






(post #5)

If it is a RWD drive focus then i think it will be a half arsed effort from ford because all they want is to win in a class no other cars are in then they can but ads in the paper saying event winning car with a little (*) then in really fine print write in the 2wd group Np class and most people would have no idea that the ford was the only car in the class.

It will be disappointing if it is a 2WD because next year there is going to be a shortage of top level cars, Chris Atkinson will be in Europe most likely, Pedders are from what I believe are quitting ARC's because of money, and if they can no longer afforded it how are guys like Goldsbough and Thompson going to keep going. Hopefully Les Walkden will continue next year with a Privateer car for a good driver (Ordynski)


Report post to moderator
23rd September 04 11:50





Livewireshock
Senior Member






(post #6)

It has been a car breaking year for the Pedders. Reliabilty has not been with them at all. I would hate for them to withdraw. Maybe scaling back from three cars next year. I wonder if the budget woes are because the backing from Mitsubishi for the Pedders this year may be headed to Les Walkden instead after Ralliart's return.

The Atkinson are keen to continue their globe trotting ways by combining the ARC with any plans in Europe. If there was a rally on the moon, that pair would find a way to compete, I'm sure.


__________________
Happiness is using the side windows more than the windscreen

In reply to being asked what 240Kph on Watagans Road was like:-
"Wait till I check my pants, I didn't know whether to sh#t myself or orgasm!

***********
Seems some are having trouble meeting incresing costs.



John Vanlandingham
Seattle, WA. 98168

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat!
Vive Le Groupe F!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
So what do those that want to enter the sport on a budget do?

There are people running on a buget who are not running beaters, just low cost open cars that are well prepared.

Eliminate the open class and you eliminate one potential entry point for those that want to start in the sport.

And why does the fact that the car has to be a competitive car be factored into the discussion. The little guy will run to his budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
Strictly speaking of starting out on a budget, what's wrong with Production and Group 2 cars? 2WD normally aspirated cars are better for keeping a low budget anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
RE: The Australian Model: all happiness and light?

As far as I know the Group N Prototype class was created so that Toyota Team Racing could continue to compete in the Australian Rally Championship. They run Corollas with Celica GT4 running gear in them (2.0L AWD). Since the Celica is no longer made with these specs and neither is the Corolla, it was decided that the Corolla chassis with the GT4 goodies would be a perfect match. They seem to do ok over there too...



-Josh
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top