FIA rally commission proposed changes

[DonJippo]

FIA rally commission has proposed few changes to the WRC rules:
Leader of the event will be first on the road except on first day when leader of the championship will be first on the road[/*:m:26ylrv4z]
max stage mileage raised to 400km instead of current 360km[/*:m:26ylrv4z]
2009 onwards mixed surface events allowed[/*:m:26ylrv4z]These among several other proposed changes.

About cars current WRC in use till end of 2009, 2010 still possible to use "old" WRC but with reduced power, changed aerodynamics and more weight to ensure the competitiveness of new WRC, 2011 onwards only with new WRC.

All this subject of approval of FIA in their meeting next week.

[N]

Interesting, sounds good. I guess time will tell if this idea of reducing power on old WRC cars will work in order to compete with the new ones. Does this mean that new cars will have less power?

[Brother John]

FIA rally commission has proposed few changes to the WRC rules:

Leader of the event will be first on the road except on first day when leader of the championship will be first on the road[/*:m:r84bhb0u]
max stage mileage raised to 400km instead of current 360km[/*:m:r84bhb0u]
2009 onwards mixed surface events allowed[/*:m:r84bhb0u]These among several other proposed changes.

About cars current WRC in use till end of 2009, 2010 still possible to use "old" WRC but with reduced power, changed aerodynamics and more weight to ensure the competitiveness of new WRC, 2011 onwards only with new WRC.

All this subject of approval of FIA in their meeting next week.

We will see what happens before 2011!
Point 1. Do they mean Leader first on the road Friday and Saturday? I like It.
Point 2. Verry good
Point 3. Back to real rally. :up:

[alleskids]

Point 1 is back to history when the fastest man has to sweep the raod for the slower ones.
Point 3 sounds good. A bit like we have/had in Rally Deutschland, with every day real difference in tarmac, so every day a different kind of set up and drivinng style.

[bennizw]

Yes, if they are going to open up point 1 again, we're going to get the former tactic driving as in New Zealand and Australia, where nobody wants to be first.

[Roy]

Yes, if they are going to open up point 1 again, we're going to get the former tactic driving as in New Zealand and Australia, where nobody wants to be first.

I am afraid too. When I read it, I thought: "Oh no... Some drivers don't want be fast and slow down." Plan 2 is ok. I don't know how I must think about plan 3.

[Brother John]

Source: http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2007/10/23/neue-startreihenfolge-geplant/index.html

Alta vista translation:

The debuetants of this year Portugal and Ireland are not intended in the coming season, best karts to have are Jordan and Cyprus . The Rallye Poland is not considered any longer favorit. On the one hand the infrastructure (too few hotels) is the Observern a thorn in the eye, to second gave it 2007 two dead ones.
Detail: The supervisor from the rally is calculated the son of the FIA Securety Jacek Bartos.

[Brother John]

Source and altavista translation again:
http://www.rallye-magazin.de/r/wm/d/n/d/2007/10/23/fia-idee-super-2000-statt-wrc/index.html

The Super2000 with turbo could replace the "this in the future to WRC wRC-Cars is stressed a very important world council meeting", FIA technology specialist Jacques Berger. According to FIA set of rules the sport authority must inform the manufacturers with serious changes of technique 15 months in advance. Thus the World Council is on 24 October the last chance to decide starting from 2009 a new regulation. If it goes according to Berger and the highest Rallye functionary Morrie Chandler, under the work title "super the set of rules created steps 2000 pluses" into the first phase starting from the season after the next. A medium-term goal is the creation of clearly more inexpensive and less complicated technology, in order to lure new manufacturers into the WM. As basis the current Super-2000-Autos is to serve, which is to receive small turbocharger for the moderate increase from torque and achievement. Whether aufwaendige components are to be further permitted like electronics and anti-lying systems for the improvement of the responsing mode is decided only later. Berger does not count on the fact that already 2009 a car of the new category participate to the complete WM. Like that the debut year is only for test-in-corrodes with individual Rallyes intended. 2010 and 2011 are to be continuously in-braked then the WRC, in order to let it start in a transitional phase with the super 2000 plus cars in a class. 2012 are then only a category intended. Berger speaks reluctantly of an abolishment of the WRC regulation, it calls it a fusion. Possibly also the term World Rally Car remains existing further. With the comprehensive measures the FIA wants new manufacturers into the WM pilots. Allegedly Fiat already stands for rifle with foot. Also with Mitsubishi one liebaeugelt with a return, if the FIA permits to equip the future group n Lancer Evo X with larger liberties. Jacques Berger considers this variant quite conceivable. Whether the "agenda becomes 2012" reality, depends on this important 24 October however on the good will of the FIA president max Mosley. "you never know, what happens. Perhaps max decides that at the end all with 1,6 litre August engines and two-wheeler drive have to begin ", corrode the FIA a close standing engineer.

[PuddleJumper]

Point 1. Do they mean Leader first on the road Friday and Saturday?
It means that on Friday, the cars will run in championship order, then on Saturday the cars will run in the order they finished leg 1 and on Sunday in the order they finished leg 2.

Yes, if they are going to open up point 1 again, we're going to get the former tactic driving as in New Zealand and Australia, where nobody wants to be first.
The only place where drivers faced a huge disadvantage was Australia, when the rally was held in Perth. Now it's gone, I don't think there's anywhere where the drivers are penalised to any great extent. Look at the first day in Mexico, Finland or New Zealand this year.

[L5->R5/CR]

I like it. Bringing back some real rallyness to the WRC



I do wonder why the FIA are doing it though, it will be good for the nature of the sport and it won't make costs go down at all...

[DonJippo]

I do wonder why the FIA are doing it though, it will be good for the nature of the sport and it won't make costs go down at all...

For mixed surface they asked manufacture's opinion and the respond was that there is no significant cost impact in doing it.

Number of mechanics will be reduced down to 8 from the current 12 in the service so that will make cost go down a bit.

[Josti]

1. Sounds fair to me.

2. Increasing is good, but I still think 400 km of competitive distance ain't enough. It's a start though.

3. Now this I like. I wonder which kind of rallies come to mind then (old Sanremo perhaps?).

Also, losing some mechanics is good. Not only for costs, but also makes things a bit more difficult.

[MJW]

I guess the "new for 08" single asphalt tyre will help reduce costs of a mixed event. It would be very expensive if a full "old style" range of slicks, inters and wets had to be brought as well as gravel tyres. Mixed rallies would be good in my opinion, showing my age but old Portugal and San Remo were great events. However its the technical changes to the cars I am looking forward to or is that fear!

[Donney]

I won't believe it until I see it but this looks good.

[jonkka]

My first reaction is "one step ahead and two back". All three rules on post one are going back in time, as posters have noted.

As to technical regs, I agree with Donney - better wait until those come reality.

[A.F.F.]

It all sounds pretty good, especially technical rules but unfortunately two years is a looooooong time in the scale FIA use to wait :mark:

However, fingers and toes crossed :)

[N.O.T]

point 1 is retarded

point 2-3 are good....but they will raise the costs

2 out of 3 proposals made by the FIA are good...i am impressed

[AndyRAC]

It's not April Fools Day is it?
2 out of the 3 are good, but why should the Championship leader be punished running first on the road on the first day? Think they should rethink that one, as for the other two, YEAH, Bring it on, somebody has at least seen sense over the mileage, good news. And as for the Mixed surface, even better news, maybe San Remo will be back??
Will take these proposals with a pinch of salt, we've seen proposals before then disappear, hopefully not these.

[duff]

Aaaahhh not a return to the tactics of trying not to be first car on the road please!!!!

I had the misfortune of going to see rally Oz in 2000. It was 2 days of drivers going slow and 1 day of actual rallying. On three occasions we saw cars stop on the stage to avoid being first on the road the next day. Not good spectating!!!

The reverse start order on days 2 & 3 was the best rule change the FIA has come up with in years!

[jonkka]

Obviously, they want to stop the driving-to-the-splits mentality that rally leader can resort to nowadays. The intention is good but going back to normal running order (as opposed to reversed top-15 currently in use) has it's own downsides too. Either way, the system is not perfect.

For those who want San Remo back bear in mind that it was dropped because spectators were too numerous and stage cancellations were more of a norm than an exception. Funny that success of the event killed it, isn't it? They could have policed stages better but I think that Italians might be a bit too crazy for that. Or would "enthusiastic" be the more polically correct word... :)

[AndyRAC]

Maybe this 'Back to the Future' will mean some Rallies returning to mid week?
Though I doubt it, it may cut down on spectator numbers, i;e San Remo.

[Daniel]

point 1 is retarded

point 2-3 are good....but they will raise the costs

2 out of 3 proposals made by the FIA are good...i am impressed
Agreed.

[Langdale Forest]

Having longer and mixed surface events would be good.

[jonkka]

Maybe this 'Back to the Future' will mean some Rallies returning to mid week?


Hopefully not, it's difficult enough to get 16 Fridays off to concentrate on rallying, let alone more.

[COD]

Maybe this 'Back to the Future' will mean some Rallies returning to mid week?
Though I doubt it, it may cut down on spectator numbers, i;e San Remo.


In some rallies, where too many spectators are a problem, it would be good.

But it is bad for TV, so probably not

[Livewireshock]

Of more concern for me is the rotational system. How will it work & which events?

It looks like Rally Australia for 2008 is already a casualty, finding financial backers willing to accept a rally every second year would have been impossible.

[Roy]

FIA rally commission has proposed few changes to the WRC rules:
Leader of the event will be first on the road except on first day when leader of the championship will be first on the road[/*:m:1hk98zjj]
max stage mileage raised to 400km instead of current 360km[/*:m:1hk98zjj]
2009 onwards mixed surface events allowed[/*:m:1hk98zjj]These among several other proposed changes.

About cars current WRC in use till end of 2009, 2010 still possible to use "old" WRC but with reduced power, changed aerodynamics and more weight to ensure the competitiveness of new WRC, 2011 onwards only with new WRC.

All this subject of approval of FIA in their meeting next week.

Decisions where make:

A number of regulation changes will be incorporated into the 2008 and 2009 World Rally Championships.

From 1 January 2008:
- To provide for more equal competition, the running order for each Day will be based on the event classification.
- To aid public understanding, the term “Leg” will be replaced by “Day”.
- The regulations will provide for a 10 minute final service prior to the finish podium. It is intended to create the opportunity for the Service Park to be an attraction until the finish of the event.

From 1 January 2009:
- To increase the challenge of the events and to increase media opportunities, events will be allowed to run mixed surfaces, on the condition that a surface will be used on two consecutive days.
- To create more flexibility, the total length of the special stages will be increased from 360km to 400km.

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2007/October/241007-01.html

2008 FIA World Rally Championship
24 - 27/1 MC 76e Rallye Automobile Monte-Carlo
8 - 1/2 S Uddeholm Swedish Rally
28/2 - 2/3 MEX Rally Mexico
27 - 3/3 RA Rally Argentina
24 - 27/4 HKJ Jordan Rally WRC
16 - 18/5 I Rallye d'Italia-Sardegna
29/5 - 1/6 GR BP Ultimate Acropolis Rally
13 - 15/6 TR Rally of Turkey
31/7 - 3/8 FIN Neste Oil Rally Finland
15 - 17/8 D ADAC Rallye Deutschland
28 - 31/8 NZ Rally of New Zealand
2 - 5/10 E Rallye de España
10 - 12/10 F Rallye de France Tour de Corse
24 - 26/10 J Rally Japan
28 - 30/11 GB Wales Rally GB

2008 FIA Production Car World Rally Championship
8 - 10/2 S Uddeholm Swedish Rally
27 - 30/3 RA Rally Argentina
29/5 - 1/6 GR BP Ultimate Acropolis Rally
28 - 31/8 NZ Rally of New Zealand
19 - 21/9 AUS Rally Australia
24 - 26/10 J Rally Japan
28 - 30/11 GB Wales Rally GB

2008 FIA Junior Rally Championship
24 - 27/4 HKJ Jordan Rally WRC
16 - 18/5 I Rallye d'Italia-Sardegna
13 - 15/6 TR Rally of Turkey
31/7 - 3/8 FIN Neste Oil Rally Finland
15 - 17/8 D ADAC Rallye Deutschland
2 - 5/10 E Rally de España

[koko0703]

1. Maybe not the best idea but I can live with it. About Friday, the championship leader should be the first on the road since it doesn't seem to be that big of a deal when you see likes of Macus or Loeb.

2. With 12 events calender, the longer competitive distance is always welcome. Rallying needs some emphasis on endurance part since it is heading toward becoming a short sprint.

3. If manufacturers and teams are O.K., I personally welcome the idea.

[Livewireshock]

Decisions where make:

A number of regulation changes will be incorporated into the 2008 and 2009 World Rally Championships.

From 1 January 2008:
- To provide for more equal competition, the running order for each Day will be based on the event classification.
- To aid public understanding, the term “Leg” will be replaced by “Day”.
- The regulations will provide for a 10 minute final service prior to the finish podium. It is intended to create the opportunity for the Service Park to be an attraction until the finish of the event.

From 1 January 2009:
- To increase the challenge of the events and to increase media opportunities, events will be allowed to run mixed surfaces, on the condition that a surface will be used on two consecutive days.
- To create more flexibility, the total length of the special stages will be increased from 360km to 400km.


So will this mean that a Thursday night superspecial, as what commonly occurs, be counted as "Day 1", separate to Friday's stages? Or will the two day's stages be counted as a "Day 1" (hmmm, much easier for the public to fathom NOT).

That would mean that the Championship leader could only be sweeping the stage at the head of the field for possibly a single stage on some rallies. Come Friday morning, the Super Special winner then gets to sweep the stages.

Ergo: Expect odd results & performances for any such super specials next year.

[Daniel]

Day 1 has always been the first proper day of competition. IE the Friday.

[Livewireshock]

2008 FIA Production Car World Rally Championship
8 - 10/2 S Uddeholm Swedish Rally
27 - 30/3 RA Rally Argentina
29/5 - 1/6 GR BP Ultimate Acropolis Rally
28 - 31/8 NZ Rally of New Zealand
19 - 21/9 AUS Rally Australia
24 - 26/10 J Rally Japan
28 - 30/11 GB Wales Rally GB

Rally Australia is still included on the PCWRC calendar??????

Despite not being on the WRC list?????

[Livewireshock]

Day 1 has always been the first proper day of competition. IE the Friday.

I realise that, but literally reading the press release, you can see my viewpoint.

So changing the wording from Leg to Day makes things simpler, then explain to the general public why the Day 2 is actually Day 1 after having a Thursday stage.

[Daniel]

I realise that, but literally reading the press release, you can see my viewpoint.

So changing the wording from Leg to Day makes things simpler, then explain to the general public why the Day 2 is actually Day 1 after having a Thursday stage.
I guess you could argue that. But on every bit of documentation I've seen they always state the Friday as Day 1 even though this is technically incorrect :) Non-issue :) I prefer the time when the championship leader chose his position for day 1 and then the rally leader then chose for the next day and so on.

[jonkka]

I prefer the time when the championship leader chose his position for day 1 and then the rally leader then chose for the next day and so on.

And when was this?

[Daniel]

2001 at Rally Australia for starters. I think it was just a pilot scheme on a few events (or perhaps just Rally Oz ;) )

[L5->R5/CR]

I say let them race to not be the first loser. There were some teams in the US trying that at one rally and the other challenger just went for it and built enough of a lead that neither of the other teams were able to recover.


Take out the splits and make the drivers figure it out.

[euskalteam]

Great news, I hope that Catalunya Rallye become mixed one :bounce: because I didn't see it from 1996, and will be nice with 2 days in gravel and one in tarmac. I hate tarmac rallyes (like Marcus :) ).

I'm agree with you L5->R5/CR the splits have to be banned!!!

[Daniel]

I say let them race to not be the first loser. There were some teams in the US trying that at one rally and the other challenger just went for it and built enough of a lead that neither of the other teams were able to recover.


Take out the splits and make the drivers figure it out.
Or not give stage times till the end of the rally :p

[J4MIE]

Fantastic date for Corsica! :cheese: :up:

[J4MIE]

Great news, I hope that Catalunya Rallye become mixed one :bounce: because I didn't see it from 1996, and will be nice with 2 days in gravel and one in tarmac. I hate tarmac rallyes (like Marcus :) ).

But if you read above any surface has to be used for two days - though I think they could get around that with a tarmac superspecial on the thursday evening...

I think though with Sanremo that a lot of the gravel roads around there have been replaced with tarmac roads? Can you confirm Pino? :p :

[Tomi]

I prefer the time when the championship leader chose his position for day 1 and then the rally leader then chose for the next day and so on.
me too, this was a good system, now they only should make sure before the season that all co-drivers understand the clock, also the small bigheaded ones. :)

[L5->R5/CR]

Or not give stage times till the end of the rally :p



Let the teams share the times as they see fit. Make it more of a strategy and mental game between the teams.

[alleskids]

I also noticed only 15 events on the first calendre, so I guess Australia fits in it between New Zealand and Catalunya.

[tmx]

I also noticed only 15 events on the first calendre, so I guess Australia fits in it between New Zealand and Catalunya.

"Rally Australia is missing from the 2008 World Rally Championship calendar after CAMS, the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport, submitted a formal request to the FIA to delay its return to the WRC schedule until 2009."

"CAMS has worked on the sporting aspects of the event while i-METT worked on both promoting the rally and developing the area around the proposed base in South East Queensland. However, the plans were dependent on various government approvals being granted – which hasn't yet occurred." crashnet

[Finni]

The first proposition is unbelievably retarded and stupid. It would be few races where top-guys will cruise few days playing stupid time games then I think most people would cry. It was one of the best move to get rid that kind of childis playing. Imagine marathon where it would be advantage to sit on the road and wait..rallying once was like that..hopefully not again.

[euskalteam]

But if you read above any surface has to be used for two days - though I think they could get around that with a tarmac superspecial on the thursday evening...

I think though with Sanremo that a lot of the gravel roads around there have been replaced with tarmac roads? Can you confirm Pino? :p :

Yes but I think that's for example, Friday and Saturday on gravel and Sunday on Tarmac... 2 Days of one surface and only one of the other.

Will no be able to start the rallye on gravel (friday), continue on tarmac (saturday) and returnt to gravel. I think the two days rule is to make only one change in the car.

[MJW]

So what about the technical changes to the cars? was anything announced today about WRCars from 2010, the so called S2000+(turbo) and Group N derived WRCars?

[Addicted]

In which rallies the road position makes big difference? On tarmac, maybe Catalonia, on gravel Australia (not in Calendar). Wintertime small advance for later starters.

So, two events where it really matters.

[ttiirika]

In which rallies the road position makes big difference? On tarmac, maybe Catalonia, on gravel Australia (not in Calendar). Wintertime small advance for later starters.

So, two events where it really matters.

I agree. And one should also remember that if you lose time, you must gain it back. And nowadays, when there are not that much kilometers, it can be quite difficult. And if it rains, it doesn't make any sense to lose time and start behind (gravel rallies). Actually I think that maybe this will make rallies more interesting.

Anyway, I don't see starting order as a big issue. The most important is to get more teams and more drivers to the WRC. I just hope that besides Loeb there will be also other drivers to win rallies next year.

[JAM]

FIA rally commission has proposed few changes to the WRC rules:
Leader of the event will be first on the road except on first day when leader of the championship will be first on the road[/*:m:7nqt76fx]
max stage mileage raised to 400km instead of current 360km[/*:m:7nqt76fx]
2009 onwards mixed surface events allowed[/*:m:7nqt76fx]These among several other proposed changes.

I agree with all. This shows a return to the past wich means that all the last year's changes failled :dozey:


About cars current WRC in use till end of 2009, 2010 still possible to use "old" WRC but with reduced power, changed aerodynamics and more weight to ensure the competitiveness of new WRC, 2011 onwards only with new WRC.


I would know how a car with less power and more weight is able to be more interesting... :rolleyes:

[euskalteam]

Anyway, I don't see starting order as a big issue. The most important is to get more teams and more drivers to the WRC. I just hope that besides Loeb there will be also other drivers to win rallies next year.

That's the point man!! Loeb next year can win all rallyes if nobody stops him, I only can see Mikko wining at Finland and maybe Sordo in tarmac if the team let's him.

[Vilkavainen]

That's the point man!! Loeb next year can win all rallyes if nobody stops him, I only can see Mikko wining at Finland and maybe Sordo in tarmac if the team let's him.

Let´s hope Subaru also will have something to say next year. Will be great having Petter fighting for the victory once again.

[HaCo]

I wonder if they will change rules concerning the building of a WRC.

Normally, a WRC should do full championship.

Nowadays, importers can develop an S2000, so the full brand doesn't need to support it (VW, Ford, Toyota). If these brands are allowed to add a turbo and homologate it an S2WRC than maybe more cars will be build, when they do not need to compete in WRC.

[jonkka]

I think that still only official manufacturer may submit homologation papers, no matter who designs the car. Correct me if I am wrong.

[DonJippo]

I think that still only official manufacturer may submit homologation papers, no matter who designs the car.

AFAIK yes you are right.

[Addicted]

I think that still only official manufacturer may submit homologation papers, no matter who designs the car. Correct me if I am wrong.

Didn`t Wevers sport homologate some parts to Corolla`s?

Maybe some Dutch members know more details of this.

[bf1_IRL]

As far as I know Weavers bought the development rights from Toyota but then again I could be wrong..

[Addicted]

That is possible. I only heard that he got new homologation for some parts one or two years ago.

[jso1985]

but he didn't homologate a whole new car.

point 1 seems silly to me, stupid time tricks from teh rally leader can't any good to the image of the sport
while poitns 2 and 3 are just great news!

[ShiftingGears]

2 and 3 are good changes...I think the maximum total stage length should still be longer though.

[Halvard]

[quote="jonkka"]Obviously, they want to stop the driving-to-the-splits mentality that rally leader can resort to nowadays. The intention is good but going back to normal running order (as opposed to reversed top-15 currently in use) has it's own downsides too. Either way, the system is not perfect.

QUOTE]

I may be an idiot, but why couldn`t they make a rule that the drivers can`t drive on the other drivers splits?? ...if this is the point

[BDunnell]

What is wrong with having separate seeding for individual rallies, as used to be the case, and worked perfectly well?

[jonkka]

What is wrong with having separate seeding for individual rallies, as used to be the case, and worked perfectly well?

Not a bad idea as a such. Originally, that seeding meant that drivers did not have fixed competition numbers for the whole season. But even with those, seeding based on performance on previous edition of the rally instead of championship order might be worth a second glance.

[jonkka]

I may be an idiot, but why couldn`t they make a rule that the drivers can`t drive on the other drivers splits?? ...if this is the point

And how do you propose to police that? Technically it's impossible to deny team's access to split times because splits would still be available for public at large. Forbidding them to transmit splits into cars would be hard to make waterproof with modern communication technology offering millions of ways to do it covertly. Bear in mind that some years ago teams had people on the stages showing splits on pit-boards for the crews so if they were willing to make that big effort, they'll come up with a workaround, unfortunately.

It's the same as with team orders. Cannot be banned because such rule would be impossible to police.

[Magnus]

Good argument Jonkka; you have changed my mind in this matter!

[OldF]

One solution for point 1 is to give points to the fastest drivers each day and split the length of the stages for every day evenly, about 130 km per day (or almost evenly). Points for the fastest drivers of the days could be 8,7,6 etc. plus points for the eight fastest that finished the rally (all three days) as nowadays. If a driver retires one of the days = no points for that day.

[A.F.F.]

One solution for point 1 is to give points to the fastest drivers each day and split the length of the stages for every day evenly, about 130 km per day (or almost evenly). Points for the fastest drivers of the days could be 8,7,6 etc. plus points for the eight fastest that finished the rally (all three days) as nowadays. If a driver retires one of the days = no points for that day.

I find it very hard to believe that this solutions would attract fans, not to mention get new ones :mark: Seems a bit complicated.

But... what do you know. As soon as Mr. Ecclestone decides it would be cool if drivers get points from qualification in F1, FIA does what it's best known. OBEY !!!!!!

And whoopsie daizie, next we have a similar point scoring in WRC.

[Tomi]

my solution for the pointsystem would be simple, 5 points more for the winner, then maybe there still would be a fight for the win on saturday afternoons and sundays.

[cut the b.s.]

my solution for the pointsystem would be simple, 5 points more for the winner, then maybe there still would be a fight for the win on saturday afternoons and sundays.

Totally agree, current system doesn't reward victory enough

[COD]

my solution for the pointsystem would be simple, 5 points more for the winner, then maybe there still would be a fight for the win on saturday afternoons and sundays.

5 may be too many, but the idea of giving more points to the winner sounds really good.

[BDunnell]

I'd also award points down to 10th place again.

[alleskids]

Until 1997 the points were
1e-20, 2e-15, 3e-12, 4e-10e, 5e-8
6e-6, 7e-4, 8e-3, 9e-2, 10e-1 point.
So a win gave you 5 points advantage.
With this point system drivers like Tommi Makinen, Marcus Gronholm and especially Sebastien Loeb would be much higher on the all points scoring list. And a win

[xavier]

Until 1997 the points were
1e-20, 2e-15, 3e-12, 4e-10e, 5e-8
6e-6, 7e-4, 8e-3, 9e-2, 10e-1 point.
So a win gave you 5 points advantage.
With this point system drivers like Tommi Makinen, Marcus Gronholm and especially Sebastien Loeb would be much higher on the all points scoring list. And a win

you cannot compare the absolute values.
Until 1997 a second place was 75% of a 1st place, now it is 80%.
Presenting it another way: the old point system is equivalent to 10, 7.5, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2,1.5, 1 and 0.5. So it was very similar to the current one

I think a system 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 would work well.

[jonkka]

you cannot compare the absolute values.
Until 1997 a second place was 75% of a 1st place, now it is 80%.
Presenting it another way: the old point system is equivalent to 10, 7.5, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2,1.5, 1 and 0.5. So it was very similar to the current one

Looks that way but the half of a point is important and you see it if you look at it the other way around. Settling for second place sacrifices much less in 10-8 system than in 20-15 system. Going for a win which nets five extra points is 33,3% more points in 20-15 system than the 25% more that two points give in 10-8. Admittedly, I don't think that drivers are into that much mathematics but bigger gap between 1st and 2nd could be extra incentive to fight harder.

As a curiosity, the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system used 1997-2002 gave whopping 66,7% more points if driver was able to climb from 2nd to 1st. No wonder Makinen and McRae fought so furiously. :)

[Tomi]

5 may be too many

Why, no point to do only cosmetic changes, if the win is enough rewarded I belive the teams would let also the second drivers to go for it, instead of only secure some points.

[BDunnell]

I think a five-point gap between first and second places would be fair, but only if points were awarded down to 10th again.

[jparker]

Problem is not point system, problem is the luck of real competition in WRC. Domination of only 2 drivers makes WRC more like a showcase, not competition. As one dear friend of mine likes to say, point system is not the big picture. If we have 10-15 equally competitive drivers with equally competitive cars, point system will not matter. Are Loeb and Gronholm currently the best rally drivers? Well, put them in IRC with S2000 cars and we will see how good they are. Driving a lot superior machinery doesn't show the whole picture.

[grugsticles]

Problem is not point system, problem is the luck of real competition in WRC. Domination of only 2 drivers makes WRC more like a showcase, not competition. As one dear friend of mine likes to say, point system is not the big picture. If we have 10-15 equally competitive drivers with equally competitive cars, point system will not matter. Are Loeb and Gronholm currently the best rally drivers? Well, put them in IRC with S2000 cars and we will see how good they are. Driving a lot superior machinery doesn't show the whole picture.

Agreed.
The IRC 2000 formula has it about right IMO.
Near same equiptment, smaller budgets, and cars that attract attention (though their noise).
Putting Seb/Marcus/Petter or any WRC driver in S2000 machinery would show that most of the drivers out there are pretty much on par in thier surface of choice.

My opinion anyway.

[jonkka]

The IRC 2000 formula has it about right IMO.
(snip) and cars that attract attention (though their noise).

You must love screeching sound of fingernails on a blacboard?

[Tomi]

Putting Seb/Marcus/Petter or any WRC driver in S2000 machinery would show that most of the drivers out there are pretty much on par in thier surface of choice.
My opinion anyway.

Some of the top s2000 drivers has been driving WRC cars too, but has not been able to match the top WRC guys in any way, changing cars I dont think would make any difference, the fact is that there is drivers that are better than other, no matter what type of car they drive.
What comes to world level motorsport, i belive in rally the drivers makes the biggest difference.

[BDunnell]

Holding teams back from having the best equipment by way of the restrictions on what cars M2 teams can use is something that surely doesn't improve the level of competition, though there are bigger problems. I would always argue in favour of slower cars with more variety of configurations being possible while being potentially competitive. We had this once — it was called Group A.

[Daniel]

Holding teams back from having the best equipment by way of the restrictions on what cars M2 teams can use is something that surely doesn't improve the level of competition, though there are bigger problems. I would always argue in favour of slower cars with more variety of configurations being possible while being potentially competitive. We had this once — it was called Group A.
Perhaps they need to lower the homologation levels for group A. I don't know. I think the problems are a bit bigger than just the cars themselves. I think rallies need an overhaul, the tyre rules need to change and the WRC needs the right coverage and promotion.

[BDunnell]

Perhaps they need to lower the homologation levels for group A. I don't know. I think the problems are a bit bigger than just the cars themselves. I think rallies need an overhaul, the tyre rules need to change and the WRC needs the right coverage and promotion.

Oh yes, all of that too.

[jonkka]

We had this once — it was called Group A.

We still have Group A. It's just not cost-effective to make A8 car without going World Rally Car route.

[Goldeye355]

Holding teams back from having the best equipment by way of the restrictions on what cars M2 teams can use is something that surely doesn't improve the level of competition'

there we go.

a lot of drivers complained about the new rules. markko martin even said rallying is not what it used to be and he doesn't want any part of it.

i don't like the FIA or their rule changes from 2001. rallying is definitely not how it used to be and no wonder speedvision isn't showing jack anymore. i liked 90's rallying as it was until the new FIA president stepped in and began cost reduction.

[BDunnell]

We still have Group A. It's just not cost-effective to make A8 car without going World Rally Car route.

The rules could be altered to change that.

[Roy]

1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

The FIA organises the FIA World Rally Championship (the Championship) which is the property of the FIA and
which comprises two three World Champion titles, one for the drivers, one for co-drivers and one for the
manufacturers. It is made up of a maximum of 15 events.
The Championship is governed by the FIA International Sporting Code and its appendices (the Code), the Rally
General Prescriptions (the Prescriptions) and the present Sporting Regulations specific to the Championship.

New regulations can find here: Some must be discussed in few days.

http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/rallyregs.html

[AndyRAC]

'One for Co-Drivers' - so why isn't the Co-drivers name on the window? The crew work as a team, c'mon - sort it out.
I've had a look at 2008 regulations, the final stage of a day should be finished by 17:30 - get real, we want night stages. The WRC needs a shake up.

[Roy]

'One for Co-Drivers' - so why isn't the Co-drivers name on the window? The crew work as a team, c'mon - sort it out.
I've had a look at 2008 regulations, the final stage of a day should be finished by 17:30 - get real, we want night stages. The WRC needs a shake up.

Why you are so bitter?

Maybe the co driver is back on the rear window. They skipped the rule of numbering and names.

Night stages: Why? Spectators don't see much and its even difficult for TV coverage.

Head up. Time changed, we live not yesterday, but today.

[Mirek]

I realy miss night stages too. They are the real challenge...

[AndyRAC]

Why you are so bitter?

Maybe the co driver is back on the rear window. They skipped the rule of numbering and names.

Night stages: Why? Spectators don't see much and its even difficult for TV coverage.

Head up. Time changed, we live not yesterday, but today.

Stop thinking about TV coverage, it's rubbish. It's TV that whats got the WRC in the mess it is, I seem to remember being promised a new dawn for WRC with TV coverage. It hasn't happened, organisers should stop bending over backwards for them, for what, lousy coverage of the top 6 cars if you're lucky. What was wrong with the WRC 10 years ago. All the messing around has ruined it.