The 2018 Rallying thread..(WRC, ERC, etc)
Discussion
Was thinknig about this, this morning, if you think Sainz pushed Tommi hard for the title in 98, and in 96 or 97 cant remember, when the car died in the ford in Australia.
So Tommi was good, but he was also a little lucky, Colin had a lot of mechanicals, especially later on with Subaru.
So Tommi was good, but he was also a little lucky, Colin had a lot of mechanicals, especially later on with Subaru.
chunder27 said:
Was thinknig about this, this morning, if you think Sainz pushed Tommi hard for the title in 98, and in 96 or 97 cant remember, when the car died in the ford in Australia.
So Tommi was good, but he was also a little lucky, Colin had a lot of mechanicals, especially later on with Subaru.
1998 Network Q Rally of GB...So Tommi was good, but he was also a little lucky, Colin had a lot of mechanicals, especially later on with Subaru.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFxg1PCxzFg
The other thing to remember is that Super Rally / Rally 2 regulations allow significantly more works cars to record a finish, than before.
Even so, I think cars are more reliable now than in the 90s.
thepawbroon said:
1998 Network Q Rally of GB...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFxg1PCxzFg
The other thing to remember is that Super Rally / Rally 2 regulations allow significantly more works cars to record a finish, than before.
Even so, I think cars are more reliable now than in the 90s.
They probably are, I don't think there's a top tier motorsport where that's not the case now but the cars also don't do as big a distance on rallies now either. That's a big contributing factor on more finishers.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFxg1PCxzFg
The other thing to remember is that Super Rally / Rally 2 regulations allow significantly more works cars to record a finish, than before.
Even so, I think cars are more reliable now than in the 90s.
Colin had a lot of issues with gearbox and engine at Subaru, and not just him, team issues, the car was unreliable after 95, even the WRC was a bit.
And also at Ford, brand new car always going to have issues.
He was hard on the car yes, but so was Tommi, he rewrite how you attempt the Safari really, by treating it as a sprint event.
The Lancer was simpler, stronger certainly. But both were amazing to watch.
Ogier and Loeb had little opposition and were often in cars much better than anyone elses. If Hirvonen and Gronholm and Latvala could have driven half as well on asphalt as gravel they could have pushed them both more.
And also at Ford, brand new car always going to have issues.
He was hard on the car yes, but so was Tommi, he rewrite how you attempt the Safari really, by treating it as a sprint event.
The Lancer was simpler, stronger certainly. But both were amazing to watch.
Ogier and Loeb had little opposition and were often in cars much better than anyone elses. If Hirvonen and Gronholm and Latvala could have driven half as well on asphalt as gravel they could have pushed them both more.
chunder27 said:
Ogier and Loeb had little opposition and were often in cars much better than anyone elses. If Hirvonen and Gronholm and Latvala could have driven half as well on asphalt as gravel they could have pushed them both more.
Appart that it was really well known than the Ford Focus was the fastest car during the Loeb years, the C4 was just well driven. When you say Loeb had no competion, Are you saying that the driver who stand at 3rd position in term of rally wins behind Loeb and Ogier and who destroyed the likes of Mcrae, sainz, Makkinen wasn't very good? Who would have thought that Gronholm represented little opposition? As for Ogier, appart from Loeb, I don't think any drivers of the last 30years could even come close to him in the same car. It is actually mad to think that he is a title contender this year despite driving a very average Fiesta.
GravelBen said:
E34-3.2 said:
Not all retirement are due to crashes. Does it mentioned the reasons of each retirement?
Yes but only individually not as a proportion, and I can't be bothered going through 60-80 retirements for each driver to analyse the causes. So until someone does that I'll assume they both had a similar ratio of crashing to mechanical retirements.Tommi - 165 total rally starts - 23 retirements listed due to accident
Colin - 244 total rally starts - 28 retirements listed due to accident
I've no idea how to calculate the percentage, so wont even try. I haven't included the ones listed as suspension failure or lost wheel as not guaranteed they were caused by an accident and as such cant count imo.
GravelBen said:
Loeb went the other way taking full hards on the Sat morning and managed to get enough heat into them to make them work really well on a drying road, but nobody else thought there would be enough heat for them to work. Full credit Loeb.
I guess if you have road closures etc booked for your test you have to use it whatever the weather, hard to predict the rally weather weeks out and the amount of testing is limited.
I had the tyres the wrong way round I guess if you have road closures etc booked for your test you have to use it whatever the weather, hard to predict the rally weather weeks out and the amount of testing is limited.
Hyundai tried wetting roads/test stages on one event this year but it wasn't good enough come to rally weekend when the roads were much wetter than anything they could simulate. I forget which round now, but remember hearing it on the radio rally weekend.
RyanTank said:
GravelBen said:
E34-3.2 said:
Not all retirement are due to crashes. Does it mentioned the reasons of each retirement?
Yes but only individually not as a proportion, and I can't be bothered going through 60-80 retirements for each driver to analyse the causes. So until someone does that I'll assume they both had a similar ratio of crashing to mechanical retirements.Tommi - 165 total rally starts - 23 retirements listed due to accident
Colin - 244 total rally starts - 28 retirements listed due to accident
I've no idea how to calculate the percentage, so wont even try. I haven't included the ones listed as suspension failure or lost wheel as not guaranteed they were caused by an accident and as such cant count imo.
Tommi 23/165 = 13.9% accident rate
Colin 28/244 = 11.5% accident rate
Who says the Focus was the best car? Loeb? Citroen?
The Xsara was the car to beat almost as soon as it was released, as was the C4, the DS 3 maybe not so much. Puras, Bugalski were all instantly quick in it, and Loeb developed it to the point where it was briliant as he did with the C4
The Focus was a better gravel car perhaps, Loeb took a while, as do most guys from that sort of area to compete equally on gravel, but once he got it he was beatable only on specialist rallies like GB, Finland and Sweden, generic stuff like Turkey, Greece, SanRemo he was able to hold his advantage. And Amrcus was able to exploit it initially as he did with the 206 when he drive that, but he was nowhere near as good as Loeb, and like Latvala and Hirvonen was not in the same sport on asphalt, as were not Juha, Salonen and plenty of Finns before them. Tommi was the exception.
Ogier started beating Loeb at Citroen, and look what happened, for me Ogier wil always be better because of that, and because he won rallies in several types of car, something Seb Loeb has never done.
The Xsara was the car to beat almost as soon as it was released, as was the C4, the DS 3 maybe not so much. Puras, Bugalski were all instantly quick in it, and Loeb developed it to the point where it was briliant as he did with the C4
The Focus was a better gravel car perhaps, Loeb took a while, as do most guys from that sort of area to compete equally on gravel, but once he got it he was beatable only on specialist rallies like GB, Finland and Sweden, generic stuff like Turkey, Greece, SanRemo he was able to hold his advantage. And Amrcus was able to exploit it initially as he did with the 206 when he drive that, but he was nowhere near as good as Loeb, and like Latvala and Hirvonen was not in the same sport on asphalt, as were not Juha, Salonen and plenty of Finns before them. Tommi was the exception.
Ogier started beating Loeb at Citroen, and look what happened, for me Ogier wil always be better because of that, and because he won rallies in several types of car, something Seb Loeb has never done.
[quote=chunder27]Who says the Focus was the best car? Loeb? Citroen?
The Xsara was the car to beat almost as soon as it was released, as was the C4, the DS 3 maybe not so much. Puras, Bugalski were all instantly quick in it, and Loeb developed it to the point where it was briliant as he did with the C4
The Focus was a better gravel car perhaps, Loeb took a while, as do most guys from that sort of area to compete equally on gravel, but once he got it he was beatable only on specialist rallies like GB, Finland and Sweden, generic stuff like Turkey, Greece, SanRemo he was able to hold his advantage. And Amrcus was able to exploit it initially as he did with the 206 when he drive that, but he was nowhere near as good as Loeb, and like Latvala and Hirvonen was not in the same sport on asphalt, as were not Juha, Salonen and plenty of Finns before them. Tommi was the exception.
Ogier started beating Loeb at Citroen, and look what happened, for me Ogier wil always be better because of that, and because he won rallies in several types of car, something Seb Loeb has never done.
[/quote
Rallying has changed too much since the 90s , comparing drivers from different eras can't realistically be done . The events and their schedules , running orders , servicing points etc etc . Being a huge Vatinen fan then later Coco , their s
t or bust driving style was inspiring ,something we won't see much of again with the new sprint events , nearest we get from the mold is Kris Meeke, and his flambouyancy gets pilloried . Different times
The Xsara was the car to beat almost as soon as it was released, as was the C4, the DS 3 maybe not so much. Puras, Bugalski were all instantly quick in it, and Loeb developed it to the point where it was briliant as he did with the C4
The Focus was a better gravel car perhaps, Loeb took a while, as do most guys from that sort of area to compete equally on gravel, but once he got it he was beatable only on specialist rallies like GB, Finland and Sweden, generic stuff like Turkey, Greece, SanRemo he was able to hold his advantage. And Amrcus was able to exploit it initially as he did with the 206 when he drive that, but he was nowhere near as good as Loeb, and like Latvala and Hirvonen was not in the same sport on asphalt, as were not Juha, Salonen and plenty of Finns before them. Tommi was the exception.
Ogier started beating Loeb at Citroen, and look what happened, for me Ogier wil always be better because of that, and because he won rallies in several types of car, something Seb Loeb has never done.
[/quote
Rallying has changed too much since the 90s , comparing drivers from different eras can't realistically be done . The events and their schedules , running orders , servicing points etc etc . Being a huge Vatinen fan then later Coco , their s
t or bust driving style was inspiring ,something we won't see much of again with the new sprint events , nearest we get from the mold is Kris Meeke, and his flambouyancy gets pilloried . Different times Ogier went to Citroen as they are the only ones that cold probably afford him!
Good drivers lead teams yes, Panizzi was good on tarmac because that was speciality! Not because the 206 was amazing, he was always good on tar in the 306, one off Impreza drives, only car he was crap was the Lancer WRC and that wasn't hard. Same as Delecour and Auriol, Didier was often quicker on tar than dirt but he managed what Sainz and Miki did to be good on certain gravel rallies, indeed I have often though on his day Didier was the quickest of them all, but the car was never perfect enough for him to have that day. Southern Europeans good on certain rallies and tar, Scandinavians food on grael and snow, always was the way, not anymore so much. But Latvala shows it is still true as did Mikko and Marcus. WRC does not fit that line anymore with more mixed surface rallies, a good thing.
For me Ogier is best, simply because he has managed to win in several cars, I don't doubt Loeb could too, but he didn't do much in WTCC in a great car, or rallycross. So he is not that mercurial. I would love to see him drive something else, but maybe that day is passed.
Good drivers lead teams yes, Panizzi was good on tarmac because that was speciality! Not because the 206 was amazing, he was always good on tar in the 306, one off Impreza drives, only car he was crap was the Lancer WRC and that wasn't hard. Same as Delecour and Auriol, Didier was often quicker on tar than dirt but he managed what Sainz and Miki did to be good on certain gravel rallies, indeed I have often though on his day Didier was the quickest of them all, but the car was never perfect enough for him to have that day. Southern Europeans good on certain rallies and tar, Scandinavians food on grael and snow, always was the way, not anymore so much. But Latvala shows it is still true as did Mikko and Marcus. WRC does not fit that line anymore with more mixed surface rallies, a good thing.
For me Ogier is best, simply because he has managed to win in several cars, I don't doubt Loeb could too, but he didn't do much in WTCC in a great car, or rallycross. So he is not that mercurial. I would love to see him drive something else, but maybe that day is passed.
chunder27 said:
Ogier went to Citroen as they are the only ones that cold probably afford him!
Good drivers lead teams yes, Panizzi was good on tarmac because that was speciality! Not because the 206 was amazing, he was always good on tar in the 306, one off Impreza drives, only car he was crap was the Lancer WRC and that wasn't hard. Same as Delecour and Auriol, Didier was often quicker on tar than dirt but he managed what Sainz and Miki did to be good on certain gravel rallies, indeed I have often though on his day Didier was the quickest of them all, but the car was never perfect enough for him to have that day. Southern Europeans good on certain rallies and tar, Scandinavians food on grael and snow, always was the way, not anymore so much. But Latvala shows it is still true as did Mikko and Marcus. WRC does not fit that line anymore with more mixed surface rallies, a good thing.
For me Ogier is best, simply because he has managed to win in several cars, I don't doubt Loeb could too, but he didn't do much in WTCC in a great car, or rallycross. So he is not that mercurial. I would love to see him drive something else, but maybe that day is passed.
Ogier is going to Citroën as he knows to get recognition in France he has to get the title in a french car (as well as money). Loeb didn't need to drive for another team, what could they have offered to him? Sadly for Citroën, Ogier had to move on at the time due to the very poor management of O.Quesnel which was trying to impose is protégé (Ogier) to the team. G.Frequelin and Citroën did not like the situation which led Ogier to leave and Quesnel to be removed from the team management. Good drivers lead teams yes, Panizzi was good on tarmac because that was speciality! Not because the 206 was amazing, he was always good on tar in the 306, one off Impreza drives, only car he was crap was the Lancer WRC and that wasn't hard. Same as Delecour and Auriol, Didier was often quicker on tar than dirt but he managed what Sainz and Miki did to be good on certain gravel rallies, indeed I have often though on his day Didier was the quickest of them all, but the car was never perfect enough for him to have that day. Southern Europeans good on certain rallies and tar, Scandinavians food on grael and snow, always was the way, not anymore so much. But Latvala shows it is still true as did Mikko and Marcus. WRC does not fit that line anymore with more mixed surface rallies, a good thing.
For me Ogier is best, simply because he has managed to win in several cars, I don't doubt Loeb could too, but he didn't do much in WTCC in a great car, or rallycross. So he is not that mercurial. I would love to see him drive something else, but maybe that day is passed.
I doubt Ogier wants recognition in France really, he has said he wants to pack in after this contract and do other things.
Ford can't afford him, VW paid his wage initially as they cancelled their programme and Malcolm would ahve to find significant funding from someone like Red Bull to keep him, and I think he maybe overstretched this year in doing so, not sure if VW are still paying or not. And I think personally he has unfinished business with Citroen, and again, my opinion, if he sorts that car his reputation goes beyond Loeb's, as that car though not bad is not as good consistently as the Hyundai or Toyota right now in certain hands, that is fair comment I would think?
Ford is OK, but that is Ogier doing the work as it is Neuville at Hyundai. I think the Yaris is probably the best overall package right now.
Ford can't afford him, VW paid his wage initially as they cancelled their programme and Malcolm would ahve to find significant funding from someone like Red Bull to keep him, and I think he maybe overstretched this year in doing so, not sure if VW are still paying or not. And I think personally he has unfinished business with Citroen, and again, my opinion, if he sorts that car his reputation goes beyond Loeb's, as that car though not bad is not as good consistently as the Hyundai or Toyota right now in certain hands, that is fair comment I would think?
Ford is OK, but that is Ogier doing the work as it is Neuville at Hyundai. I think the Yaris is probably the best overall package right now.
Lol that hill he conquered that a guy walloped last year in an electric car! I agree the achievement was amazing, but that car was basically a LM car underneath, hardly surprising that with the testing they did he beat the record, no-one had even tried at that prep and budget level for years other than Tajima and he does it for fun!! And largely stopped when they tarmaced it and also went electric before ti was as big as it is now.
I am not saying what he did was not amazing, it was, but the challenge is very different to when Rohrl, Millen, Mouton and those guys were doing it. It's easier in some ways, harder in others.
Sorry, I think Ogier has gone to Citroen for differing reason, pride, a degree of proving himself and also proving he is the one that makes the difference, not the car, the money, him. Citroen are wayward, have been since Loeb left really, Meeke gave them hope, but binned it too much, and then moans now about their attitude, he wasn't paying the bills! Plus they can afford him, he is French and he knows, as you say they will give him what he wants, being the best demands that.
don't be shocked if that thing is Red Bull blue next year though
I am not saying what he did was not amazing, it was, but the challenge is very different to when Rohrl, Millen, Mouton and those guys were doing it. It's easier in some ways, harder in others.
Sorry, I think Ogier has gone to Citroen for differing reason, pride, a degree of proving himself and also proving he is the one that makes the difference, not the car, the money, him. Citroen are wayward, have been since Loeb left really, Meeke gave them hope, but binned it too much, and then moans now about their attitude, he wasn't paying the bills! Plus they can afford him, he is French and he knows, as you say they will give him what he wants, being the best demands that.
don't be shocked if that thing is Red Bull blue next year though
Edited by chunder27 on Friday 9th November 15:10
chunder27 said:
The Xsara was the car to beat almost as soon as it was released,
You mean the Xsara that spent 3 seasons or so in 2.0Kit Car form and putting valuable test and development miles in before those cars were converted to WRC Spec?If so then yes they should've been better than the Ford Focus, which won its first event straight out of the box before being excluded for technical reasons. the Xsara managed to win its 4th event in full WRC form.
chunder27 said:
if he sorts that car his reputation goes beyond Loeb's,
I think "that car" has been sorted during the mid season break as mr loeb has highlighted. Craig said he's finding the car easier to drive too. He and Kris were both very critical of the car last season and right up until Kris got let go. Even after you'd hear Craig occasionally complaining he couldn't get her turned in no matter what changes he made. The rear suspension/diff update it got earlier in the year cocked it up, and I as others thought at the time, that they had gotten the wrong end of the car fixed first.Seb moving from M-Sport was on the cards before the break. Malcolm never made it a secret he nearly bankrupted the business to sign Ogier, and was rewarded with the 2 championships, and stated he wouldn't be doing it again so Ford dangled the "investment" carrot to keep them in it. Seb and Malcolm have both openly admitted the backing hasn't turned out to be all that was promised, the hours spent in the tunnel on the aero in the US simply didn't pay off in Finland as expected. The delayed engine upgrade only arrived before GB and they chose not to run it as not tested enough.
I'll be honest I initially never liked either Sebs, but warmed to Loeb over time, and found great respect for Ogier with his M-Sport move as it showed his humanity and ability in a car that has always been 1/2 a step behind the factory efforts.
I think Chunder, your greatly mistaken if you think only Citroen could afford him! Meeke getting himself kicked out saved them having to either let him go at the end of the year or booting Craig out to have accommodated Seb and Kris. I'm very interested to see what Loeb will do with all his spare time next year now. We wont see a full season as he's stated he has no interest in it and spending so much time away from home. I don't think there'll be any issues should he drive select rounds and be threatening for the win Vs Ogier as it'll be title fighter vs driver in it for a crack.
Going back to earlier points regarding Meeke and the love/hate he garners. I for one think he is a great driver just in the wrong era. I feel the same for Jari-Matti somewhat too. Had JML & KM been 15 or so years younger I think we'd not even be talking about their crashes and being wild drivers.
Anyway! were a week away from the final round and 2 drivers are in it for the win, Ott's only chance is both SO & TN dnfing really, which could be likely as both drivers need to go hell for leather out of the gates. Neuville gains minimal advantage running 2nd on the road, but we know what Ogier is capable of and wouldn't be surprised to see him running slightly off line to not give away any advantage to Neuville (but probably unlikely as its risky). The powerstage will be where the championship is won for me, and what the team mates can do. Advantage Neuville with Paddon and Mikkelsen. Evans has not gone well in Australia previously, this'll be Teemu's first visit.
I fancy Tanak for the win.
How many times do you need to be reminded that VW paid for Ogier's first year at Ford.
They pulled out, Seb was under contract to VW, so they agreed to pay his wages for any team who signed him. Malc might have had to stump up for bonuses and contract extras and maybe the extra to get him there, but not the entire salary, plus Tanak, but the salary was paid by either Red Bull or VW, probably a combo of both, hence the paint on his car, not Tanak's.
Not sure about 2018, as not sure what Seb's contract was with VW and when it ended, I imagine the same, but I doubt Malc was paying the entire salary, because he would not have ever signed for Ford had VW not pulled out and broken their contract with Seb to supply him with a car, hence why he was paid by them.
As for other things, the kit car Xsara was nothing like the 4wd car, they tested the WRC car for a while, but who didn't do that, Peugeot, SEAT, Toyota all did half campaigns with their new cars before committing to a series, a good idea in my book. Loeb was groomed from years before but Bugalski, even Puras were frontrunners in that car at the time. It was a leap forward.
They pulled out, Seb was under contract to VW, so they agreed to pay his wages for any team who signed him. Malc might have had to stump up for bonuses and contract extras and maybe the extra to get him there, but not the entire salary, plus Tanak, but the salary was paid by either Red Bull or VW, probably a combo of both, hence the paint on his car, not Tanak's.
Not sure about 2018, as not sure what Seb's contract was with VW and when it ended, I imagine the same, but I doubt Malc was paying the entire salary, because he would not have ever signed for Ford had VW not pulled out and broken their contract with Seb to supply him with a car, hence why he was paid by them.
As for other things, the kit car Xsara was nothing like the 4wd car, they tested the WRC car for a while, but who didn't do that, Peugeot, SEAT, Toyota all did half campaigns with their new cars before committing to a series, a good idea in my book. Loeb was groomed from years before but Bugalski, even Puras were frontrunners in that car at the time. It was a leap forward.
We're all fully aware of VW funding Ogiers wages for 2017. But Malcolm running the business into the red comes from the development costs and everything else, something the manufacturer teams are absorbing with their vast budgets. M-Sport was/is running at that time as a lease car service and were only funding Ott's campaign.
Ford however built the focus and tested it only before the 1999 season. The first full season Citroen entered as a manufacturer was 2003. Entering select events up until then, with the majority of their wins and best finishes coming on Tarmac, in events dominated by their tarmac kings! The focus won straight out of the box.
All other manufacturers that ran Kit cars did so in different cars to what they ran in WRC category. other than tyres and maybe suspension little would've been transferable to those efforts compared to what Citroen had going from Kit to WRC.
Enough of this anyway.
Whats everyone Aus predictions?
Tanak for the win for me and Ogier takes the crown on powerstage points.
chunder27 said:
the kit car Xsara was nothing like the 4wd car, they tested the WRC car for a while, but who didn't do that, Peugeot, SEAT, Toyota all did half campaigns with their new cars before committing to a series, a good idea in my book. Loeb was groomed from years before but Bugalski, even Puras were frontrunners in that car at the time. It was a leap forward.
Except it was! bar the addition of the extra 2 driven wheels and the change in body shape it was 99% the cars they had run as kit cars. the first 4 chassis they built were upgraded to WRC Spec. The first wrc spec Xsara even had the pre facelift shell. these were then also updated into the large headlight spec.Ford however built the focus and tested it only before the 1999 season. The first full season Citroen entered as a manufacturer was 2003. Entering select events up until then, with the majority of their wins and best finishes coming on Tarmac, in events dominated by their tarmac kings! The focus won straight out of the box.
All other manufacturers that ran Kit cars did so in different cars to what they ran in WRC category. other than tyres and maybe suspension little would've been transferable to those efforts compared to what Citroen had going from Kit to WRC.
Enough of this anyway.
Whats everyone Aus predictions?
Tanak for the win for me and Ogier takes the crown on powerstage points.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff