Vodafone Rali of Portugal

[animrallye]

Official communication :

Following a report by the FIA Technical Delegate, cars Nos 3, 4, 9, 10, 16, 23 and 70
are under investigation by the Stewards for a possible breach of technical regulations.

[MHjerpe]

Aprils Joke... ? or is it true ?

[MadCat]

I hope it is an April Joke! Although looking at the cars in animrallye's post all of them bar one are Focus 06's :s

[MHjerpe]

Seems to be true... there is an investigateion of those cars... strange... my bad april joke erlier today... seems to be true after all... not excluded but +5mins to them...

[Curryhead]

should be an announcment soon, I think its something to do with the cars weight?

[White Sauron]

Seems to be true... there is an investigateion of those cars... strange... my bad april joke erlier today... seems to be true after all... not excluded but +5mins to them...

what????? +5 minutes???? what's the crap????

[MHjerpe]

heard something about the windcreens... dunno what though...

[N.O.T]

In the official WRC.com results page they have Gronholm 5th ....prbably they mixed up the names ???

http://www.wrc.com/page/LegTimes/0,,10111~2007153,00.html

[N.O.T]

now they added 5 mins to almost all focus cars...if this is an april 1st joke its stupid.
http://www.wrc.com/page/LegTimes/0,,10111~2007153,00.html

[A.F.F.]

The rearwindows are half of millimeter too thin in every Ford.

[White Sauron]

The rearwindows are half of millimeter too thin in every Ford.

damn, how was it possibl;e those fbcking stewards had found out this????

[N.O.T]

If thats an April fools joke its ridiculous and stupid and i want my money back.....

[White Sauron]

At least they haven't changed the standings yet... Still some hope...

[MadCat]

How is this possible? This is absolutely f***ing ridiculous!

AFF, is that true about the rear windows?

[Zamppa]

At least they haven't changed the standings yet... Still some hope...

If you refer to the results you get from "Stage times" in WRC.com those won't show the penalty anyway since it was given after SS18.

[MHjerpe]

http://www.wrc.com/page/Penalties/0,,10111~200715,00.html

It's here to..

[White Sauron]

If you refer to the results you get from "Stage times" in WRC.com those won't show the penalty anyway since it was given after SS18.

I mean championship standings. Gro is still 2 points ahead, not 1 behind...

[SubaruNorway]

Norwegian broadcaster NRK has spoken to Henning and he says it's true

[Daniel]

Now people..... wait for confirmation of what is wrong before going off on long anti-FIA rants.

[MadCat]

My lips are sealed .. for now ;) :p :

[White Sauron]

I just can't understand how it was possible to find this out, even though if it's true. I mean the windows are attached, so you can get it's wide, length, and only... But how come they found out it's too thin???

[N.O.T]

In WRC.com the results are changed....all focus 06 cars have +5 mins and also the names are added in the penalties section

[A.F.F.]

How is this possible? This is absolutely f***ing ridiculous!

AFF, is that true about the rear windows?

According to MTV3 it is. FIA meets Ford people right now. The result board is about to change :dozey:

[White Sauron]

Well... According to MTV3.fi, they only say that IF they get this penalty...

[A.F.F.]

What do you expect Frodo ? They let Ford slip through their fingers once already. Rules are rules for Ford too. FIA has to maintain it's face. I do believe Ford get the penalty.

[White Sauron]

Ok... Now even MTV3 confirms this...(((

[MHjerpe]

Why must the screen be at a specific thinkness ? must be some saftey thing.. (talking o my self here) :)

[White Sauron]

What do you expect Frodo ? They let Ford slip through their fingers once already. Rules are rules for Ford too. FIA has to maintain it's face. I do believe Ford get the penalty.

Who's Frodo???

[TMorel]

Did you see the post rally interview with Loeb?
There was what looked like a mechanic working on the rear screen and right behind Seb another mechanic was re-installing the drivers side rear window.

At the time I wondered why they had been taken out... maybe now it makes sense.

[MadCat]

I also wondered this TMorel. In which case, as said earlier by AFF i think it was, rules are rules and Ford must accept the penalty. Rules are there to be abided by and those who dont get punished, contrary to whatever anyone says!

[COD]

When I saw it on Crash.net I thought it was an April fools joke, but it seems it was not. S**t. When do they sack that weight-crazed Loriaux?

[jidoka]

Could it be possible that they were checking them? Or am I being naive?

[MHjerpe]

But what who decides the penalty ?? whould they be exlcuded... get penalty ? I bird said to me that they where going to be excluded.. But Ford said if that happens we quit the 2007 season here and now.. and after that they get +5min insted... :(

[A.F.F.]

But what who decides the penalty ?? whould they be exlcuded... get penalty ? I bird said to me that they where going to be excluded.. But Ford said if that happens we quit the 2007 season here and now.. and after that they get +5min insted... :(


Might be true. I also heard they would be exluded. 5 min seem like a reasonable compromize for both parties. Ford had to pay an expensive prize.

[COD]

Did you see the post rally interview with Loeb?
There was what looked like a mechanic working on the rear screen and right behind Seb another mechanic was re-installing the drivers side rear window.

At the time I wondered why they had been taken out... maybe now it makes sense.


Allready in the Xsara some service could not be carried out without removing the rear side window. there is nothing wrong there.

But why did the stewards let Sordo drive with window open and door hanging open? Is that safer than eg. what Gardemeister did???

[MHjerpe]

COD: yes that is strange.. is't it rules against that to...

[alleskids]

The FIA also let Subaru slip true their fingers in Greece, with a heavy amount of underweight. I can't remeber clearly when Ford had a incident with the FIA. When and for what reason was it ?

[TMorel]

This threatening to quit... Who do they think they are making those kinds of threats... Ferrari?

COD
I didn't realise that they had the same issue with the C4

[MHjerpe]

Hmm why is there no other sites confirming or writing about it... bad joke after all...

[A.F.F.]

The FIA also let Subaru slip true their fingers in Greece, with a heavy amount of underweight. I can't remeber clearly when Ford had a incident with the FIA. When and for what reason was it ?


Yesterday with underweight in Marcus car. Maybe that's why Ford didn't blame Sordo's car too much ;)

[Erki]

Can anyone lead my way to that rule that states that window rule?

[Daniel]

It's in the homologation documents for the car. It's probably not so much the thickness but the weight (or lack thereof) of the glass that's the issue.

[MHjerpe]

I thought the total of the cars must be at som weight.. not a specific part... hmm strange.. i still think it som saftey stuff..

[A.F.F.]

They specificly on MTV3 said the rear windows were to thin, not too light.

[Daniel]

I thought the total of the cars must be at som weight.. not a specific part... hmm strange.. i still think it som saftey stuff..
If a part is on the car it must be identical in weight and dimensions to the part that was submitted for homologation. Peugeot was exluded (quite rightly so) from Cyprus one year just because their water pump was made out of a different material to what it should have been....

Them's the rules. April fools or not if you break the rules you know the consequences.

[Daniel]

They specificly on MTV3 said the rear windows were to thin, not too light.
Ok fair enough :)

[TMorel]

I only have a subset of the yellowbook handy, but that lists how thick the tinted film on the window has to be (to nearest micron) so I'm guessing the previous chapter would also have stated the thickness of the actual screen

[Micke_VOC]

Petter Solberg have confirmed on http://www.nrk.no that he move up from fourth to second in the rally now because of the penalty for the fords

[RS]

From Citroen:

Further to the penalties inflicted to several competitors after the technical
scrutineering, please find hereunder the amended positions.
Amended positions / Classement général final à l'issue du 41e Rally de Portugal*
1. S. Loeb/D. Elena (Citroën C4) 3 h 53 min 33,1 s
2. P. Solberg/P. Mills (Subaru Impreza) + 3 min 13,9 s
3. D. Sordo/M. Martí (Citroën C4) + 5 min 05,3 s
4. M. Grönholm/T. Rautiainen (Ford Focus) + 5 min 37,1 s
5 M. Hirvonen/J. Lehtinen (Ford Focus) + 2 min 08,1 s
6. D. Carlsson/D. Giraudet (Citroën Xsara) + 8 min 13,2 s
7. G. Galli/G. Bernacchini (Citroën Xsara) + 9 min 39,6 s
8. JM. Latvala/M. Antilla (Ford Focus) +10 min 44,9 s
9. M. Stohl/I. Minor (Citroën Xsara) + 12 min 46 s
10. A. Mikkelsen/O. Floene (Ford Focus) + 13 min 51,6 s

[Tomi]

Lol quite a mess whole this, btw who is petter solberg?

[White Sauron]

Respect to Mikko... He's even able to "joke"... "All must be thinking that this makes the car more competitive, if the glass is 0.5 mill thinner"...

[TMorel]

White Sauron,
I'm guessing it's a case of either laugh or cry.

Of course we must all remember that Ford are innocent until proven guilty, would never have done anything deliberate, look after orphaned puppies and help old ladies cross the road, so we shouldn't judge them harshly.
(and this has nothing to do with me being a Ford employee - honest)

[Tom206wrc]

Damn all that for a rear windscreen !! :s

[MJW]

I wonder if the 0.5mm glass was for "hot events" where the reflective screen id added. What rally are these Potuguese cars paired with? a "hot one" like Acroplolis perhaps?

[White Sauron]

I wonder if the 0.5mm glass was for "hot events" where the reflective screen id added. What rally are these Potuguese cars paired with? a "hot one" like Acroplolis perhaps?

It's already with the reflective screen on it, you can see it on photos, so that's not the problem. Just the mistake of a manufacturer...

[N.O.T]

Hmmm I still don't understand why a 5min penalty and not 3 ? or 10 or 1? or why not exclusion.....

I think the FIA must adopt a standard linking infractions with penalties...for example Burns was excluded for having a 30gram lighter flying wheel in the past....while Solberg once got a 30 sec penalty for leaving servce withpout mudflaps on and on another occasion just a fine for the car being underweight. I think its unfair and the FIA must do something rather than rely on how harsh or not are the FIA and rally officials at any given rally.

[Curryhead]

what a bummer :(

[J4MIE]

Hmmm I still don't understand why a 5min penalty and not 3 ? or 10 or 1? or why not exclusion.....

I think the FIA must adopt a standard linking infractions with penalties...for example Burns was excluded for having a 30gram lighter flying wheel in the past....while Solberg once got a 30 sec penalty for leaving servce withpout mudflaps on and on another occasion just a fine for the car being underweight. I think its unfair and the FIA must do something rather than rely on how harsh or not are the FIA and rally officials at any given rally.

Agree totally :up:

[FrankenSchwinn]

Hmmm I still don't understand why a 5min penalty and not 3 ? or 10 or 1? or why not exclusion.....

I think the FIA must adopt a standard linking infractions with penalties...for example Burns was excluded for having a 30gram lighter flying wheel in the past....while Solberg once got a 30 sec penalty for leaving servce withpout mudflaps on and on another occasion just a fine for the car being underweight. I think its unfair and the FIA must do something rather than rely on how harsh or not are the FIA and rally officials at any given rally.

i have been finding myself agreeing with you more and more.... what happened to the old NOT?????

i know the glass is 0.5mm too thin, and i know that's nothing, but i guess it's only fair after the pug/cyprus thing and tires in MC. in all cases there were no, absolutly no, performance gain but damn kids, 5min?

[Micke_VOC]

Here is the official statement:
http://www.rallydeportugal.pt/suporte/documentos/%7B1096744262-20070401-220423%7D_Comunicado5ENUpdate.pdf

Also Rui Madeira was excluded , becuase of wrong turbo restrictor.

[Woodeye]

Absolutely stupid decicion and totally too hard. Again, it just shows how FIA is trying to do all the possible to ruin this sport.

If there was an illegal turbo in the car, I would understand, but 0,5mm too thin glas... For crying out loud!! :mad:

[Brother John]

WRC is a terrible nice sport. :s mokin:

Thanks to the F.I.A. to make wrc rally this way captivating! :rolleyes:

[DonJippo]

WRC is a terrible nice sport. :s mokin:

Thanks to the F.I.A. to make wrc rally this way captivating! :rolleyes:

It was Ford that used wrong windows not FIA.

[janneppi]

It was Ford that used wrong windows not FIA.
Exactly, if the performance gain is so minescule, why not opt for a thicker glass and not fiddle with such tight tolerances?

[sxis]

Sorry just logged on after 12hr nightshift this is a late April fools joke right! cos if it isn't the FIA and WRC are the joke & no wonder tv companys are'nt falling all over themselve's to promote wrc

[Brother John]

It was Ford that used wrong windows not FIA.
What I mean is the following!
Rules are rules that is correctly but there are too much rules and for this reason iblame the F.I.A!

[Daniel]

What I mean is the following!
Rules are rules that is correctly but there are too much rules and for this reason iblame the F.I.A!
If there weren't enough rules to follow then the teams would easily find some way of getting around the rules and cheating.

Think of how many rallies have been run and how many cars have run with the CORRECT windows and then you realise the only jokers here are Ford.

[Ranger]

There needs to be a rulebook on what infractions dignify what penalty.

Five minutes for each damn car seems a rather harsh penalty when you factor in the performance advantage 0.5mm of rear window thickness will give a driver.

Or lack of it.

[Erki]

I guess they just wanted to lower the CoG. What's wrong with that? :confused: ;)

[AndyRAC]

Sorry just logged on after 12hr nightshift this is a late April fools joke right! cos if it isn't the FIA and WRC are the joke & no wonder tv companys are'nt falling all over themselve's to promote wrc

While I agree rules are rules and Ford broke them I agree with the above. The WRC seems to be disappearing into the ether. Why was the Rally held the same weekend as the Portuguese Open Golf, that was bound to get more coverage, well I heard updates of the Golf on radio, nothing about the Rally, GREAT!!! I'm beginning to wonder if the F1A are trying to kill WRC off.

[Tom206wrc]

Absolutely stupid decicion and totally too hard. Again, it just shows how FIA is trying to do all the possible to ruin this sport.

If there was an illegal turbo in the car, I would understand, but 0,5mm too thin glas... For crying out loud!! :mad:



If there was an illegal turbo in the Focus, the penalty for Ford would be an exclusion not a "simple" 5 minutes... :p :

[JAM]

I would love to hear the opinion about the return of Portugal to the WRC. Was positive or not? The drivers made compliments to the work done and even Gronholm after loose the rally said that was a fantastic rally.

An off from Armindo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzGQxFBQbnc

[Brother John]

If there weren't enough rules to follow then the teams would easily find some way of getting around the rules and cheating.

Think of how many rallies have been run and how many cars have run with the CORRECT windows and then you realise the only jokers here are Ford.

If it concerns the F.I.A the only joker her seems to be you! :laugh:

Let rally be rally and not HI-technical thinks on wheels likeF1! :rolleyes:

[vilamoura2007]

World Rally Championship 2007 last news on 2nd April

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8WQFlcjG-M

[MHjerpe]

Wounder what happens if some of the others teams... fills a protest and says they should be excluded.. "as they are cheating and not following the rules.. hmm..

[vilamoura2007]

Inside Sebastian Loeb's car on leg 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt4S8MDN-58

[Addicted]

Actually Ford did get out of this stupid cheating with very small penalty. There were six (6) illegal cars, so it wasn`t accident by window
maker. All drivers could have been excluded(this time no), and Fords manufacturer points could have taken off as penalty.

[JAM]

Actually Ford did get out of this stupid cheating with very small penalty. There were six (6) illegal cars, so it wasn`t accident by window
maker. All drivers could have been excluded(this time no), and Fords manufacturer points could have taken off as penalty.

And since when the Fords have these ilegal windows? A good question.... another good question is how did FIA discovered that?

[I am evil Homer]

Fact is they did. M-Sport need to figure out how it happened and fast.

[greencroft]

And since when the Fords have these ilegal windows? A good question.... another good question is how did FIA discovered that?

I doubt that they all could have been new build cars for this event and while major mechanical components may get changed between rallies, I can't see them fitting new windows in the meantime. Hence, Jam is likely to be correct in assuming that this is not the first time that they have run with these windows.

How on earth FIA cottoned onto it is bizarre though. It's not the sort of thing you would think a scrutineer would choose to check on the off chance. It must have been a tip off but by who?

[Jaanus]

I am looking for an action photo of Guy Wilks Focus WRC from Portugal. If anyone has seen a photo of this car in the net or has taken a nice photo that I might use in my website as a tiny thumbnail, please let me know. Thank you.

[Daniel]

I would love to hear the opinion about the return of Portugal to the WRC. Was positive or not? The drivers made compliments to the work done and even Gronholm after loose the rally said that was a fantastic rally.

An off from Armindo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzGQxFBQbnc
Looked positive to me :up:

[L5->R5/CR]

I doubt that they all could have been new build cars for this event and while major mechanical components may get changed between rallies, I can't see them fitting new windows in the meantime. Hence, Jam is likely to be correct in assuming that this is not the first time that they have run with these windows.

How on earth FIA cottoned onto it is bizarre though. It's not the sort of thing you would think a scrutineer would choose to check on the off chance. It must have been a tip off but by who?



Why not file an evolution to the homolgulation at that point?

McHales car was a customer car that was prepped and operated by a different entity than M-Sport so that car had to have either been supplied with the parts or simply been delivered with the wrong parts.

I think this is an issue of M-Sport not checking the specs of the parts they are installing when it comes to these windows. Probably ever single WRC06 has and quite possibly had, rear windows that don't meet the homolgulation specifications. So is the vendor incapable of producing the parts to spec, or did M-Sport order parts that weren't to the correct spec? If it is in the vendor and they don't find a new supplier will we now see windwos that are too thick pop up at some point?

[COD]

An off from Armindo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzGQxFBQbnc


He looks like he is going to fall asleep on the wheel at any moment :D

Back to the Ford case:

usually these things come to light when someone from the inside (often someone fired etc.) has hinted the fault.

Or, has there been an visible advantage of these thinner windows? Like some aerodynamic advantage when windows bend etc???

[Tom206wrc]

How can you call what Ford made "cheating" ??? :s

Since when something on the windscreen glass allows performance of the car increasing ??? :rolleyes:

This is only a mistake regarding FIA rules, but ABSOLUTELY not cheating !! :mark:

[Roy]

I am looking for an action photo of Guy Wilks Focus WRC from Portugal. If anyone has seen a photo of this car in the net or has taken a nice photo that I might use in my website as a tiny thumbnail, please let me know. Thank you.


Here you go

http://www.ewrc-media.com/images/2007/wrc/pt/mf_a_3_wilks_1.jpg

[FAL]

At scrutineering for the 1988(?) RAC Rally all the works GpA Vauxhall Astra GTEs were failed for side windows being too thin. One of the drivers was a certain M. Wilson...
They were able to change them and present the cars again.
Having been through RAC Rally scrutineering many times and seen how little was checked pre-event, I was surprised they even checked them and it suggests a tip off - as does the current problem...

[sxis]

These cars are taking a hamering every stage how the hell is 1/2ml on glass gonna make any difference . Wake up fat cats in the FIA you are ruining our sport

[COD]

These cars are taking a hamering every stage how the hell is 1/2ml on glass gonna make any difference


If it doesn't, why haven't Ford played it safe and made the glasses 0,5mm thicker than homologated???

[L5->R5/CR]

If it doesn't, why haven't Ford played it safe and made the glasses 0,5mm thicker than homologated???



Individually alone it doesn't matter, the drivers and co-drivers could probably relieve themselves before every stage and make more of a difference than the windows.

Designers and engineers get so obsessed with weight reduction that they go after every little miniscule thing in an effort to get a total that will be meaningful.

At some point though, reducing 5 pounds can only do so much where as getting caught outside of the rules will do a lot more...

[White Sauron]

The only good thing in this situation for all Ford' fans is that on his favorite Argentina surface (Gronholm led there 2002 (won on the road), 2003 (won), 2004, 2006) Bosse will have an advantage in road position.