How to actually fix WRC

"Fred (FreddsterExprs)" (freddsterexprs) 05/12/2014 at 08:55 • Filed to: WRC, Save WRC, Rally

7

59

Last week I read an article on the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! by !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and how to save it. And what I gathered there was only point: better planning of where the WRC stages are placed. But the problems lay way deeper and need solving. Consider what's coming an open letter to Todt.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Problem 1: High costs and exclusively developed parts.

What holds back manufacturers to join the series? High costs or if you avoid them, a lack of competitiveness. And once you developed the car, transferring parts and knowledge to other areas, may it be motorsports or serial car production, is pretty difficult.

So proposal #1 : A budget cap. It saves money for the manufacturers, could keep M-Sport Ford and Citroen alive and get more brands to join. I am thinking of something like 70 Million Euros. Sounds like a lot, but VW is said to spend more then 100, and Hyundai will have to get on the same level for 2015. In detail, the budget cap should include all costs for development, transport, employees and testing, while exclude the driver's salary. An enforced budget cap would also allow open and less restrictive rules on the long run.

Proposal #2 : fixated car and replacement part costs. We need more private WRC cars. Continuing the trend set in Proposal #1, a set maximum price for a fully functional WRC vehicle would keep the costs down and encourage private teams to join. 400.000€ would be enough to differentiate between the cheaper R5 cars. I also would like to see leasing made available for privateers. 200.000€ per annum for a WRC including testing with the works team and some spare parts. And speaking of spare parts, we don't want manufacturers to make their money there (Indycar and LMP2, I'm looking at you!), so a catalogue with reasonable pricing helps making the beautiful offroad sport affordable.

And finally, proposal #3 : Sharing technology. Citroen could use their WRC engine for designing a dominant WTCC car. Take it even further. The junior formula classes like Formula 3 and GP3 are designed to introduce youngsters to F1 like racing. With turbo engines being the future, the smaller classes should assimilate. Why not homologate the 1.6L turbo 4s for all the Formula 3 cars? If this would happen right now, not less than 8 manufacturers (WRC: VW, Hyundai, Ford, Citroen, WTCC: BMW, Lada, Chevrolet/RML, Honda) would have a drivetrain ready. And don't worry, currently the cars are powered by 230hp NA 4 cylinders, while the Turbo 1.6 could make more than 300hp easily. Tuned down engines would also be more reliable and require less maintenance which saves money again. Great for small teams. And in the long run, a new GP2 car will come sooner or later where a version of the same engine with more power output could be used.

Problem 2: The WRC format and events

Rally is one of the most traditional racing types. Any changes should be thought through thoroughly. What the championship doesn't need right now is watered down competition.

Proposal #4: Make it a World and not an altered European championship. Of the thirteen rounds this year, three are outside of the European main land. Three! One should not be able to call it a World Championship. What is missing? At least events in the US, Russia and China. So that's what I suggest to include these three countries, and I already know where exactly for two countries. Russia should be held as winter rally, possibly directly after Sweden, with the Rally's center being St. Petersburg. As for the US, let's take it to California and run some Baja style stages. Fast routes with big jumps (admittedly, not those super sick SCORE Truck jumps), a Finland Rally on sandy US soil.

This measures would give the calendar a more appropriate worldwide ambience and target emerging markets where there are many hatchbacks to be sold.

Proposal #5: Keep the stages closely together. One Day should cover one particular area. TV production becomes easier, and so does the access for fans.

Proposal #6: Unlimited amount of tires. You want more spectacular racing? Give the drivers as many tires as they want to carry and let them go ape. More attack, more action, more watch worthy content.

Problem 3: Media coverage

Here we go. The one problem not solved for years, and not making progress until now despite a change of promoters that now includes media giant Red Bull. There is a championship with 4 mainstream brands, recognizable cars, drifting and crashing and everything, but the public doesn't notice.

Proposal #7: New onboard cameras and drones. Every car should carry a camera on top of the roof, one in the bumper, two in the cabin. But that's not enough for a good TV production, so here is my thought: equip every car with a signal box and get one of those automatic drones to follow it. I mean come on, how hard can it be? It would be rather cheap after initial investment costs, fully automatic and produce tons of great footage. Paired with stationary cams the quality would go through the roof compared to what is being shown now.

Proposal #8: Make it accessible online. The WRC website should feature a central live subsite where an English HD stream, Live timing and live Social Media board can be viewed comfortably by any fan. Don't make full access so hard and an insider job when F1 news can be had from literally every sports/car site.

Proposal #9: Give the TV rights away for nearly free if the broadcasters in return promise at least hour long summaries in the evening for all three rally days. The WRC promoters would make the first cut of the action, and the local station can either just accept it and do some voice over commentary, or add their own content. The profitable charging for TV rights can only come when the people paying for it and the viewers can be convinced of the products quality. Then nobody will want to miss out, and the prices will rise.

All these steps would lay down a solid base for the World Rally Championship. Of course, success can't be granted, and the effects might take some time to become noticeable, but is there another choice? I don't see one.

If you have idea about how to improve the WRC package, leave a comment. Keep in mind that the numbers like car leasing or buying rates are variable – I couldn't find numbers about how much a current WRC car would actually cost.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Picture credit (in order): !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Also check out my !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! for some SFW car porn.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Hoccy > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/12/2014 at 09:13

4

I think they'll have to improve the media coverage before doing anything else. Longer seasons will require a larger budget, and become less attractive for manufacturers with the current coverage. Things are improving slowly, and I hope that an internet stream using excisting cameras (for premium users) will be the next thing we see from the WRC.

dinobot666 > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/12/2014 at 09:16

1

So a spec class racing series with a budget cap? I'm a bit skeptical about that part of your proposed plan, but I do like the idea of real time on board cameras and drones around the stages.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > dinobot666 05/12/2014 at 10:16

0

It would be as much of a "spec" racing series as it is now. Totally reasonable standards, even today.

In the long run though a bud cap will reduce the need to regulate the series and allow more open development.

Dusty Ventures > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/12/2014 at 19:25

4

I like where your head's at here, you've got some good ideas. Here's my commentary:

Proposal 1: Budget caps are tricky, but I agree something needs to be done to level things out, the financial/developmental gap VW has over the other teams is definitely taking the fun out of the Championship. Hell, since they entered the series only three rallies have been won by a car that wasn't a VW, and two of those wins were at the hands of Loeb. This season they've gone 1-2 at three of the five rallies, and if not for Latvala having Latvala-esque issues at Monte and Portugal that would almost certainly be 5-of-5. Those are ridiculous numbers.

Proposal 2: The bit about maximum car cost is actually the cornerstone of the R5 program. There is a price cap on the R5's (I believe it's 300,000€), and I'd say the number of R5 Fiestas M-Sport has sold (about 70 as of mid-March) is a testament to the success of the program.

Proposal 3: I like the shared engine idea. There's a lot of multi-discipline potential in the WRC 1.6 motor. They're at 300+ horsepower with the mandatory restrictor, pull that and they're in the ballpark of 450. De-tune them and they're good for mid-high 200s, as seen in the R5. And so on.

Proposal 4: More events in more countries is definitely necessary. The problem with your stated countries/locations, though, is that the WRC doesn't just create rallies, they find existing rallies and see if the infrastructure is/could be there to support a WRC-level event. Even when a rally is added to the WRC calendar it's the event's local organizers that have to do the work to get roads, permits, service areas, event sponsors, emergency personnel, course workers, etc. WRC is pretty much entirely hands off on that part of the event. I don't know much about existing rallies in China and Russia, but I question if either nation has any events the WRC might consider ready for the main stage (though on the other hand Subaru has been shipping David Higgins to China to compete in their championship the last few years, so they must have some good events. As for in the states, none of the California events are anywhere near WRC-ready and with the difficulty to get land permits in that state I doubt they can grow large enough to get WRC approval. Also one could argue a Cali rally is too close to WRC Mexico. If/when the States gets a WRC event I'd wager it will be Oregon, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, or Missouri. The other option is adding a Canadian event, in which case Baie des Chaleurs in Quebec or Tall Pines in Ontario are solid bets for a calendar berth.

Proposal 5: The WRC/events would love to do this, but it's pretty much entirely out of their hands. They're at the mercy of the road owners, be them private, local, or federal, and while organizers can request road permissions in a way that localizes stages and allows for shorter transits it's ultimately those road owners who have the final say, and organizers have to either accept the owners' terms/schedule or give up on using the road entirely. I've actually been at rallies where issues caused the event to fall behind schedule and stages had to ultimately be cancelled because road use permits would expire before all stages could be run.

Proposal 6: Drivers can carry as many tires as they want, and sometimes will stuff as many as three in a car at once. There is a tire cap for the event as a whole, which I believe is 22 tires, and that's to keep the big budget teams that can afford more tires from having an advantage (those tires are expensive, yo). If they activated the overall cap from proposal 1 though I could see losing the tire cap.

Proposal 7: This has been attempted. All the cars do currently carry multiple cameras onboard, along with a transmitter for live video. The problem is due to terrain and lack of ground-based relay the only way to get the video out is through a relay helicopter flying at 1,000-2,000 meters. And this is why it's so expensive and why there isn't more live coverage. Those helicopters cost about 2,000-4,000€ per hour to run. And in the particularly remote or hilly terrains they need a second relay helicopter or a higher altitude relay plane to assist in signal transmission. The plane is about 3,500-7,000€ per hour. As for the drones, not only can they not transmit the signal due to the issues I already mentioned, they're not even close to being able to keep up with the rally cars. The fastest quadrotors out there top out at about 80 kph, and I don't need to tell you that's not going to cut it. And even if they did have the speed the battery only has enough juice to keep them aloft for 20-30 minutes, then it takes hours of charging (or, of course, a battery swap) to get them back up and running. As for stationary cameras, those are expensive too. Each video crew member (there's usually 2-4 per camera) is making at least 50€ per hour, with the top guys earning twice that much. Plus there's the cost of providing food, travel, and lodging for each of those members. And the cameras themselves ain't cheap either. Here's an example of camera rental costs (and from what I've seen these numbers are low). TL;DR: Ain't no such thing as cheap video.

Proposal 8: YES. Hell, make it a subscription service for all I care. I'd pay for this.

Proposal 9: This would be awesome, but unfortunately the costs I mentioned for 7 mean it will probably never happen.

dollarsushi > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/17/2014 at 18:26

2

I would do two events in the US, and maybe rotate them every so often. Every year would have one in the East and one in the West. You could do one in Canada occasionally as well.

But you have to have one somewhere in Appalachia; that's where your racing fans are. Pennsylvania and West Virginia, as you mentioned, would be great, as would anywhere through the hills in Kentucky/Tennessee/the Carolinas.

Rally is closer to the original bootlegging heritage of NASCAR than NASCAR itself. If you make that your pitch, and you put it within shouting distance of a bunch of Southerners, you could potentially reel in who knows how many race fans. It's not like you would have to convert them all.

alfonsoldc > Hoccy 05/17/2014 at 19:42

4

Media coverage is definitely the handicap for this sport, at least in the US. The lack of visibility and popularity for this sport, I think, is directly attributed to the void in easy viewing access to even event summaries.

Menebrio > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/17/2014 at 21:13

1

I wrote this back in 2010 and I'm just so disappointed how slow motorsports have adapted to technology overall.

Motorsport's in general have to begin exploiting the internet more. F1 should do the same as should rally. I found it interesting the Red Bull media has acquired the rights for WRC yet has done nothing to improve coverage other than the occasional drone video. It's something I've emailed them about before, and so did to several F1 sites even the oficial one about. I'd pay a subscription if it can give me dedicated feeds (like red button that is only available in the UK) on certain drivers. I could follow it on my pc, phone, or tablet while watching the general broadcast. Great for fans, and a great new way to inform the casual viewers as well.

In order to allow better TV coverage WRC should shorten stages (their would be more to not lose the distance); and do them around more coverable areas. The great traditional stages could be kept for the eager fans that migrate to them year after year. Given telecom's investment I'd focus on 3g/4g video codecs that could be beamed by cell phone signal to viewers and fans a like (at first concentrating on speed rather than HD). It's great to attend a rally, and it would be great if you could also follow the entire stage rather than just the segment you are on. A few trucks from local telecom companies (those with the antenna's and signal boosting equipment) could be easily dispatch to cover the stages.

OxygenStarvation > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/17/2014 at 21:16

3

Here are some ideas.

1. The commentary should be done by people who are from the sport - drivers, co-pilots, team managers, both past and present. It will be more interesting to hear the opinion of the professional, not some reporter. Imagine for instance, rally Sweden being commentated by Peter Solberg!

2. With respect to the transmission issues, couldn't they use a hot air balloon? I am no expert but inflate the balloon( or maybe use a blimp), attach communication equipment, secure with cables to the ground. How hard can it be?

3. The drones are amazing and are a definite must. Now, they can't follow the cars for long periods but if strategically positioned at some corners will make for sick footage.

4. Bring back homologation specials, even if we are talking about few hundred cars a year. Here is the thing: rally is a motorsport, motorsports are loved by petrolheads and petrolheads are an extreme of the car community (the other one being people who drive complete POS and don't care about their vehicles). As an extremists ( I mean this in the best and most positive way imaginable), we know all about the specs of the rally cars and the production models. We realize that there is no real connection! Sure they look kind of similar but the engines are tilted, the drivers are moved backwards, there is 4WD, sequential 'boxes, etc. It might fool an average person, thing is an average person won't sit in the forest for 4-5 hours, under the pouring rain, getting his bones chilled by gusts of wind. However, a petrolhead will! An we need to know that what we see on the rally stage could at least be attainable on the public roads, no matter how small the chance. That, and the fact that the homologation models traditionally are awesome ( Lancia Delta Integrale in yellow, mmmmm) .

5. Decide what kind of format are you going to pursue - short compact rallies, or long, arduous routes like in the olden days ( for reference read this article: http://www.pistonheads.com/doc.asp?c=52&i… ). Or maybe you do some rallies long and other short; or in 1 rally you have 1 day short and 1 day long?

Stuttgart Shuffle > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/17/2014 at 21:50

4

Homologation, homologation, homologation. Like Group A in the late 80's into the 90's, use cars that closer to the street version. This will also reduce overall costs and encourage privateers.

kschang > dinobot666 05/17/2014 at 23:52

0

I was thinking two additional tiers... a pro-am class of drivers who's already expert drivers, but just not in rallying, and a true amateur class (where if you get more than X podium finishes you're no longer qualified as amateur), and mandatory spending caps WAY lower than the full spec WRC vehicles.

I was thinking maybe 2WD rally cars for ameteur, and a low-power jWRC AWD cars for pro-am. In other words, make the more "local" events better WRC. Truth is most of WRC looks rather boring to noobs, just as NASCAR looks boring to Europeans (they only make left turns!) or how WTCC looks slow to us Yanks. :D

I used to really like that Race of Champions (not IROC) where they do superspecial stages but with randomly chosen vehicles. That would be kinda interesting, huh?

LionZoo > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 02:43

0

I love some of the ideas, especially the drone idea. However, if you're going to stage a rally in California, you'll probably make it as an asphalt event. Some of the best mountain roads are in California!

Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 03:07

2

Budget cap and sharing technology are great but both fell through in recent years.

WRC already cut costs on the cars. Previous iteration of WRC cost about $1 million to buy, current one half of it. Moreover, current WRC cars are based on S2000 ones, which are being phased out at the moment, being replaced by the various "R" categories, another budget-happy iteration. It is likely that WRC cars will have a third iteration soon, based on Rx. If you dumb it down too much, you'll lose works teams.

Budget cap is great, but no one managed to pull it off yet. As long as a works team is competing, they won't agree passing it. If e.g. VW was downvoted, they would pack up and just go to WRX.

(so far the solution seems to be chasing away works teams, but their presence is one of the reasons people actually follow the events)

FIA already tried sharing technology, that's what the Global Racing Engine was all about. Ferrari in F1 said 'no' (remember the l4-turbos from 2013 in F1 that was originally the plan?), and the idea sort of collapsed, being only present in WRC and WTCC basically, where they were already using the formula (I believe the Chevys did it at least). They won't be able to share the technology to GP2 and GP3, it's Bernie's and Flavio's business. GP3 stepped up to V6 N/A engines recently. That is why Formula Two was recreated, but that died, too. But I think it sort of goes on in F3.

Unlimited amount of tires and talking about a budget cap at the same time? And 'truly' WORLD Rally Championship? That sounds great, but 1. costs helluva money 2. actually, 2/3rd of the rallies have always been run in Europe. Same percentage as F1 for many-many years (now it's about 50-50).

And the coverage, what I was talking about. No matter how close you put the stages together, the problem is that it goes all day long, four days long, starting on Thursday or Friday. You can air it for free, yet not too many people will tune in when they are sitting at work. So what is the benefit of the sponsors then? And the rest of the weekend? Only enthusiasts would sit through a full coverage.

It is like the Le Mans 24 Hours, except LM is special because it's a one-off event, whereas all rallies are basically like that (and much more) as time-span is concerned.

To sum it up: if they were actually able to sell their product (which is impossible without substantial TV-coverage, due to the format), they would do well.

It is much easier and profitable to shorten the rallies to a one-stage-a-day-back-and-forth format with all the broadcasting tools they already have and make _comprehensible_ live TV where the audience can watch ALL happenings in a compact format and would thus attract more sponsors and manufacturers.

The argument that it would hurt rallying's reputation is not viable at all, because which rallying does one talk about? When amateurs were driving production saloon cars and hatchbacks all over the continent in a TSD format or when professional drivers were driving purpose-built racing machines on special stages for 250kms? In fact, both of them are rallying.

Hoccy > alfonsoldc 05/18/2014 at 04:16

5

Media coverage is rubbish in every country. You can follow the WRC as closely as I do in any place with an open internet with decent speed. But finding daily and event highlights is harder now than ten years ago. WRC coverage hasn't evolved as much as all the other sports coverage has, despite the huge potential.

TBR2014 > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 04:30

0

I'm not sure that 'saving costs' and having rallies in 'USA, Russia and China' go hand in hand. And unlimited tyres? Your proposals for Problem-1 contradict your proposals for Problem-2!

deanmachine14 > kschang 05/18/2014 at 06:34

0

They already have WRC-2 and WRC-3 which are the junior series!

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > TBR2014 05/18/2014 at 11:22

0

Cost saving, especially the budget cap, would be much more than the added expense of 3 overseas trips. And paired with better publicity and more chances to introduce the public to the sport/the cars it would be of use for the championship.

About the tires: they are delivered to the teams by Michelin for free if I recall correctly, but the rule book limits it to 28 tires. No extra costs for the teams would appear if that paragraph wouldn't exist.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > kschang 05/18/2014 at 11:24

0

WRC2 and WRC3 classes are the junior classes and are well participated in, so everything is fine there.

They also tried to introduce bigger RWD GT cars again, but the R-GT class never caught on, despite Lotus preparing a works entry. Too bad, in the national series the Porsche GT3s are taking overal wins.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) 05/18/2014 at 11:28

0

I personally think that 300-400km per event are enough.

About the cost gap: Everyone is saying that it would be impossible to enforce it, meanwhile Franz Tost of Torro Rosso F1 said that it would be not a problem at all if the FIA would send an accountant to every team to control spending.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > dollarsushi 05/18/2014 at 11:30

0

The idea of connecting WRC with early NASCAR bootlegging is brilliant! And with Ford there is a manufacturer present that also sells the same vehicle in the US. If they could get their NASCAR starts to promote the possible US WRC event, it might draw a crowd. Imagine Brad Keselowski taking a ride with Hirvonen and commenting how crazy these guys are - attention would be granted.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > LionZoo 05/18/2014 at 11:32

0

I have never been to the US, so my local knowledge might be limited there; I always picture Baja style events in California, trucks racing on fast sandy stages.

Although a tarmac rally would have its charm too. Mulholland Special Stage anyone?

Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 11:35

0

You can't really tell Mercedes to keep their costs at e.g. $100 million tops when they are - reportedly - spending around $750 million in F1.

kschang > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 11:38

0

The problem I think is lack of media coverage for those junior series. I know they exist, but they never seem to be on TV.

speedstar328in > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 11:42

1

do something along the lines like how Subaru has "launch control" with its us rally and rally cross team, make a film highlighting more behinds the scene and driver things and turn it into a series format

Turbo-Brick > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 11:46

0

What are the current homologation rules? Is it possible that by loosening them, we could attract more manufacturers back to the sport (for example, those that don't manufacture a 1.6L engine for their mainstream cars)?

It just seems odd to me that they're able to change so many other things about the car (drivetrain configration, transmission, brakes, suspension, etc), but must use the 1.6L engine from a production car, because rules.

-Tom- > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 12:01

0

I would like to add that homologation should be brought back as well. There arent AWD Fiestas roaming around. I think that would lower costs as well, reducing the number of one-off parts these cars use.

idontgetburneratkinja > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 13:19

0

Rally can't be televised live, for a reasonable cost. Arm 50 reliable fans with GoPros and collect the data after the stages.

XC mountain biking and motorcycling have the same issues, and when you do find coverage of it, it stinks, with the same 2 camera positions every lap.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) 05/18/2014 at 13:22

0

That number is total bullshit.

One should always view the chassis department (Mercedes GP) and the engine branch (Mercedes HPE) separately, which obviously hasn't been done here.

Mercedes GP isn't spending more than RB or Ferrari, they have equal amounts of employees. It's safe to say that the number is something below 300 Million Dollars, considering that they were spending 190-210 two years ago.

Mercedes HPE employs around 400 people and also does DTM engines plus EV work for Mercedes Benz. They would be spending less than 300 Million, probably 200 in the first years of the V6 turbo generation. Plus they get money from 3 teams for engines.

So spending 750 Million dollars is just not true, in fact the number isn't even calculated right.

The cost cap could work if enforced severely, but Todt sold himself to FOM and therefore keeps being the weak president he is.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > kschang 05/18/2014 at 13:23

0

Totally true, but what to expect if even the king class, WRC, isn't on TV ever? So much potential, so few usage.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Turbo-Brick 05/18/2014 at 13:26

0

Homologation is pretty weak. Engine wise stock engines aren't required. Of the 5 current gen WRC cars ever constructed, M-Sport Ford and Prodrive Mini used stock engine blocks, while Citroen, Hyundai and VW use purpose built engines that have literally nothing in common with any regular engine.

The same goes for AWD configuration, only VW produces an 4WD Polo. Pretty much the only part that is said to be stock is the main chassis, the rest is built to the regulations.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > -Tom- 05/18/2014 at 13:30

0

Homologation would be cool, but in order to reduce costs by producing semi WRC cars, the cars sold would have to be super close to the competition cars. We would end up with super fast at least 100k $ Fiestas and Polos. While I would totally consider one instead of a similar sports car, I wonder how many could be sold to the public.

Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 13:32

0

Whatever, the point is cost cap is enemy of works teams. If the FIA pushes hard enough on the cost cap, works team will make sure it's high enough to keep up the status quo.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > idontgetburneratkinja 05/18/2014 at 13:33

0

I truly believe that it can be done. Technology has come so far, both in mobile data transfer and in drones, that there must be some way. Or to put it in another way: if Bernie Eclestone would own the right to WRC TV, we would by now have 4k live coverage from every stage, accessible online for cash.

But I like the idea of "fan cams". Maybe an upload feature for fan captured WRC clips that will end up in the TV coverage, with some prices (caps, shirts, model cars,...) for the fans?

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Gabor Vajda (@Gabor_V) 05/18/2014 at 13:35

0

Yes, that is true. And the problem is that the current F1 structure rewards the 4 big teams with a lot of power. With spending more cash being the most effective way to keep away the midfield from becoming proper rivals, a budget cap could only happen if someone like Todt would poker high enough and push it through, against the teams will.

kschang > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 16:16

0

Part of the problem is WRC uses cars that no yanks ever saw. (slight exaggeration)

You think if the junior classes use more American cars the viewership will pick up a wee bit?

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > kschang 05/18/2014 at 16:50

0

Well, there is the Fiesta.

I think if Rally America and WRC would be televised as one comprehensive, high quality package people would take notice. And for the US WRC round, a Ken Block entry would be a must - an american guy in an american car, that's the dream.

kschang > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/18/2014 at 18:13

0

I think we need more RallyCross and Superspecial stages. WRC by ITSELF looks boring, like time trials / qualifying for the races.

sirnicolai > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/19/2014 at 00:52

1

My 2c.

Proposal #5: Keep the stages closely together.
Yes and no. I understand the benefit but I really do feel like the WRC has lost something with these short compact routes on repeating stages. Here in NZ, events used to go for up to 12 stages per day and not one of them repeated. Despite this it actually made it better to follow as there were more options and stages to go to. eg. Go to stage 2, skip 3 and 4, go to 5, go to service 1, go to stage 7, skip 8, go to 9, skip 2nd service and go to stage 10 etc etc.

Proposal #8: Make it accessible online.
Yes yes yes. This is a problem for all motorsport !! WRC is actually easy to see in NZ, its always on the main (pay per view) broadcaster. But I have this problem with other motorsports id like to watch eg. FIA WEC, GRC, World Rally Cross, DTM.

All international motorsports need to make themselves available online and I really dont understand why they dont.

In addition : I miss the endurance factor of WRC. Routes are too short, 400km is the max we ever see, bring back the 600km routes ! Bring back the Africa rally !
This process of repeating stages is boring, sure the loose gravel gets in the way on new stages, but let the drivers deal with this, it actually made the events closer as no one driver could get too far ahead. The Loeb's and Ogiers are robots, they need handicaps to give the other drivers a chance :)

Also I definitely agree with all the other comments about Homologation.

LionZoo > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/19/2014 at 02:09

0

We've got more than just Mulholland. Malibu is nice, but it's a bit of a mini-golf ground compared to the truly great regions. The Angeles National Forest area has the world renowned Angeles Crest Highway plus some other roads that I believe are better than ACH. We also have the Sierra foothills with its share of incredible driving roads plus the area north of San Francisco. It just keeps getting better and better. Last year my friends and I did a five day trip where all we did was drive mountain roads, and we probably hit only a small fraction of the good roads in the state.

jayed_coins > Hoccy 05/19/2014 at 09:38

0

Agreed. I am a huge fan of WRC, but after the first few rallies of last season, it just became too hard to follow along with actual video coverage in the US, so I've pretty much just taken to peeking at the WRC site every month or two to see just how far ahead in the standings Ogier is, haha.

Even just two seasons ago it used to be you would regularly be able to find full uploads of the EuroSport or Motors coverage on YouTube for each rally day, and you'd only have to wait maybe 48 hours for it to show up. Often times, people would upload HD as well. Then, it seems a crackdown started, and it has been very hard to find that since. Even so, this isn't a great way to watch a sport... it's okay given smart TVs and Chromecasts, and Rokus, etc., but I'd really love to be able to simply pull these up on Velocity or a Fox Sports network. Heck, I don't care if it's 2am broadcasts, DVR solves that issue.

The funny thing is, I've noticed that the last season or two I can easily find quality and fairly comprehensive TV coverage of the European championship. So the lesser product is much easier to watch. Makes no sense.

hypnotiza > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/19/2014 at 18:35

0

I like all these points. Points 7&8 make me think about all the go-pros I saw mounted on almost all the cars at the Oregon Trail Rally. I think both Higgins and Pastrana had at least 6 cameras on the outside of their cars.

Eddie Brannan > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/20/2014 at 16:48

2

I'd rather see a forested North East Coast US stage with a mixture of tarmac and gravel than a Baja-type stage with gnarly jumps bro. There are already plenty of Baja/desert races, and the future of world rally is not to water it down by making it "fit in" wherever it goes. We have superb rally-suited terrain in this country, so there's no need to bastardize the sport bringing it here.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Eddie Brannan 05/20/2014 at 16:53

0

Rally is the art of conquering many different, varying types of roads. Why not a sandy round? We are searching for the best all round rally drivers, so another form of surface/track layout would just fit in.

Also, more action would help making the championship more popular in the US. There is strong competition, and there needs to be attraction to watch hatchbacks with unknown drivers instead of 4 hours of artificial, yellow flagged V8 action.

Eddie Brannan > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 05/20/2014 at 17:01

1

Because once you start talking about desert racing with big jumps and a million GoPros in the car it stops sounding like rallying and starts sounding like something dumbed down for the energy drink crowd and little kids. Then the pressure comes to get rid of the "less-exciting" stuff like racing on wet, icy terrain in dull grey weather that isn't as ad-friendly. Tell me when you last saw real point-to-point motocross racing on TV. It's all Supercross in stadiums. That's my fear.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Eddie Brannan 05/20/2014 at 17:16

0

I never watched motorcross or Supercross at all. No idea how the situation on two wheels is like now.

Dumb down is a danger, but not considerably enhanced by an event of that format. What is far worse is the idea of deciding the rally's final standings in a shootout in the last day, practically dumbing down the value of the first days.

To be precise about the idea I had: I was thinking about "classic" rally stages in the LA area, only on sandy ground with a few modest jumps included. You know, like Colins Crest in Sweden.

Eddie Brannan > dollarsushi 05/20/2014 at 18:17

0

Excellent point re stock car racing's dirt-road heritage. Never thought of it that way, but I do remember Tom Wolfe writing about Junior Johnson riding the NC ridges and it sure does sound like a rally car when you put it that way!

ILovePickeldEggs > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 09/30/2014 at 10:38

0

I stopped watching when the media coverage was 4, 1 hour long epdisodes where most of iot was recap. The best was when it was 2 hours long. You could watch it in one sitting and there was no recap bull crap form prior showings.

WillyJimmy > Stuttgart Shuffle 09/30/2014 at 13:07

0

Even though I will disagree with the word homologation, I agree with the premise of making the teams run production based machines. I wouldn't force the manufacturers to build special versions of cars for an event with so little popularity at the moment, but I would force the teams to use production based drivetrain and suspension components, with some wiggle room. Limit displacement, boost and intake size, limit modifications to production trannies, diffs, maybe a mandatory percentage of stock components. I think manufacturers will find a way of providing those special bits when they see a demand from a real customer based on Rally performance and viewership.

This is where production vehicles can benefit is when real components and systems are field tested, and where potential buyers can get excited about owning the same car that won last years WRC Championship. Custom one-off parts on custom built racing rigs neither help the production equivalents or mean anything when we look in the driveway.

For the US market, the format on TV has to evolve. We like NASCAR for a reason, and it's not because they only turn left. You get to see door to door racing from the green flag to the checkers. Rally is one car at a time, no fans besides a few dopey drunks trying to get mud splashed in their faces, the announcers are like golf announcers, as in no excitement. It's not enough to have a couple hundred jalop roadies follow you from forest to forest, rally has to draw crowds.

I say take a page from Red Bull rallycross arena sprints. It's heat races, which don't play as well on TV as a longer main, but the basics are solid. Put a couple dozen cars in an arena with jumps and dirt and noise, and let them battle it out for the win. Either way, you have to put people in seats for an event. You can't expect people to travel an hour, sit on a hillside to watch 15 cars go blasting bye once. Then have to take their drunk asses up the road 30 miles to sit on another hillside to watch the drive by one more time. Then drive another 20 miles to see another drive by, another couple beers and another trip for another quick look. Not happening.

work jockey > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 09/30/2014 at 13:56

0

A few comments after working in the industry.

1. Some teams are perfectly OK with funding an effort to finish mid pack as long as the advertising (TV or other) is meeting a metric for them. You may want to make the sport less expensive for a team to enter so they can be competitive, however some manufactures look at the investment as part of their advertising and not the only advertising or R&D base.

2. Capping costs only works to a point. The best teams will always have the best people. Good engineers tent to work for the best teams. The best (smartest and most experienced) will get more out of less. For example if you limit testing to one day a year for each surface (sealed, loose, snow) the best teams will always be farther ahead then the mid to low pack teams.

3. the argument to make parts less expensive is a very thin line. Cheap parts, like used in Group N or other production variants were never designed for the type of abuse rally cars expose them to. Bespoke parts have a specific design criteria that differs in many was compared to a production part.

My thought was always to bring the interest back to the sport first. Then there will be a reason for manufactures to join. If you make is too cheap, you will loose some interest. Besides, if you want less expensive look at production variations (N4 etc.)

Dar > kschang 09/30/2014 at 16:01

0

Rallycross is boring as hell. Therein lies part of the problem. Lots of people in the U.S. (mostly new to rally in general) seem to like Rallycross whereas those that have been following the WRC for some time (me) want more expansive coverage of the stage rallying that is already hugely popular worldwide.

Dar > dollarsushi 09/30/2014 at 16:09

0

The only problem with this is that rallying does not take place in a stadium where you can sit on your ass for hours upon hours swilling beer (not that there's anything wrong with that last part, as rally spectators know). Getting Americans out into the woods/outdoors to watch rallying live seems to be a difficult problem to overcome.

Dar > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 09/30/2014 at 16:15

0

The now defunct Rim of the World Rally might've been a nice choice. Hell, Subaru of America even brought Petter Solberg out there in '02 or '03 to sign autographs and whatnot.

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > Dar 09/30/2014 at 16:44

0

What is the"Rim of the World Rally"? Never heard of it.

Dar > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 09/30/2014 at 18:02

0

Not much information listed, but it appears they are attempting to put together a historical page for the rally:

http://www.rimoftheworldrally.com/

Dar > ILovePickeldEggs 09/30/2014 at 18:15

0

Well it's been 2 hours of coverage for the past three or four years now so...

kschang > Dar 09/30/2014 at 18:20

0

Maybe it's the coverage. Any possibility of making the drone fly the EXACT same route each and every time and put up side by side, or even overlays of runs? WRC is more about technique than pit strategies or race tactics (when to pass and such). And you have to show off the techniques visually for TV audiences. I know they do somestimes the "virtual" but it just doesn't look that good. I'd rather see drones retracing the same route with locking cameras or fixed cameras (or both).

DoglegFirst > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 10/01/2014 at 02:43

0

Homologatehomologatehomologatehomologatehomologate

Henry Beal > Fred (FreddsterExprs) 10/01/2014 at 09:56

0

In terms of the formatting of WRC, despite being a traditionalist and cringing at the compromise, I accept that the best solution is the one outlined here : http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/wrc-likely-on-… . What with the cars, there should be one class with a minimum and maximum budget cap (like 35 million euros to 50 million euros) with few restrictions besides safety and possibly certain electronic aids (the emphasis should be on the speed of the car and the ability of the driver, like Group B). Another class, focusing less on big manufacturers, and more on privateers, could have a similar (but much, much, much smaller) budget cap system along with the cars having to be HEAVILY based on road cars (ie. same chassis, lightly tuned engines, same drivetrain). You would have a WRC Drivers' and Maufacturers' championship and a PWRC Drivers', Teams' and Manufacturers' (through team represantation) championship.

At the end of the day, series are successful when they have high manufacturer participation; this means cars being at the forefront of technology so manufacturers can claim that this demonstrates their engineering prowess and that technology will trickle down (F1 throughout the ages, Group B, Group C and WEC and 90's BPR/FIA GT, ITC and 90's Supertouring, PPG Indycars), OR cars have to be close to their road-going counterparts so that 'win on Sunday, sell on Monday' actually means something (old NASCAR, Group A from the mid-90's to the early 2000's and early WR cars). Half the problem with modern WRC is that the cars are neither speed machines or very close to road cars.

Finally, PLEASE give us back the Tour de Corse, Sanremo, old Rally Australia, Rally New Zealand, Acropolis and Safari; they are all mainstays of WRC, and without them, the WRC is so much less appealing (I mean Rally Poland WTF!).

ILovePickeldEggs > Dar 10/01/2014 at 15:59

0

From where? I've just started seeing it get put on ESPN or something like that in the last few months. Like I said, I haven't consistently watched it since they did that which was easily 8 years ago. So...

Dar > ILovePickeldEggs 10/06/2014 at 11:36

1

There may or may not be a torrent site that has the (typically british) coverage of the WRC. The coverage that you have been seeing in the US is the MavTV coverage. That has been sporadic at best (the events typically aren't shown for a week or more after the event. Even worse is that a lot of what they cover is the live Power Stage which is essentially pointless to watch if you haven't been able to watch any of the rally yet.