Quote
NoCoast

Quote
Cosworth
You will never see an M3 or Volvo do well in England or worse, France or Portugal. Why is that?

Weight and wheelbase. Tighter and twistier the roads, the more these are a hindrance.

Dave's S50 powered Compact was a few pounds shy of 2700 pounds if I recall. We also did liquid nitrogen to remove 80 pounds or so of sound deadening. Nothing too crazy yet. He decided instead of worrying about another 100 pounds of weight to just add another 100 hp. Who am I kidding, he's still worrying about that weight. For comparison, my Merkur was 2650 before I removed around 100 pounds in sound deadening and unneccessary metal bracketry.

Quote
Cosworth
If I didnt have an already a nuclear powered Civic I would be building one of those.

I'd build a Compact if I didn't have this Bobcat powered Merkur. We did build a E36 325i Chumpcar and it's a riot. Other friend is now converting his E36 Chumpcar to rally duty for a hill climb this weekend and Idaho Rally in June. That seems like a smart way to start out, build a simple and nearly stock 325i that you can do a few rallies and few Chumpcar or WRL events in.

I know we're working on developing a plethora of bolt on rally specific parts for them right now. Did a NextEngine scan of uprights and stock rear towers for some suspension development stuff.

Grant, put down the crack-pipe. I've "death ray-ed" 4 Xratties.. There is not even 30lbs of sound deadening and brackets. I say there's not even 25 lbs...I've swept up the piles and put it in buckets...

Smart way to start out stock, but where you gonna go later... You have forgotten I think since you have been not in your nice turbo easy power, good torque car so anything feels like a riot..

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

To be clear, I think if you brought a top GrF driver and his car over that they would be close to the top of the pack. I just think an overall win is being more than a bit optimistic.

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
Morison
I thought I heard Jardevall was building another volvo, which would be awesome to see.

I saw a picture!

---

Grant Hughes

Quote
john vanlandingham
Grant, put down the crack-pipe. I've "death ray-ed" 4 Xratties.. There is not even 30lbs of sound deadening and brackets. I say there's not even 25 lbs...I've swept up the piles and put it in buckets...

I put the piles in a box and weighed it also.
Yeah, I may be rounding up a bit. There was some heavy pieces in there, like the spring seat things.

---

Grant Hughes

Quote
Morison

Quote
john vanlandingham
Factory driver is somebody who is paid a living wage and the Payee on the monthly check is like Yamaha Motors --Japan
or Fuji Heavy Industries--Japan or whatever...
Not somebody who buys their ride with trust fund money or the money of somebody they've sung some song to.

By the same token, would you have required Ford WRC drivers to have received cheques cut in the USA to be considered 'factory' drivers?
By those standards I'd suggest the day of the 'factory driver' is long gone and would have never existed in North American Rally with the possible exception of North American manufacturer teams.

Yeah yeah words mean nothing, everything is whatever sloppy speaking/sloppy speaking Millenials call things... Like whatever. TLTR dude ---5.45 final drive is "High" and 3.08 is "low", and somebody buying a ride is a "factory" driver..

Quote

Quote
john vanlandingham
Is somebody suggesting that a amateur driver who does 1-2 events now and then in a virtually stock car---with nice suspension and brakes---is the limit of what can be done?

No.
Is somebody suggesting that 9 seconds per mile is a trivial difference in pace?

9 sec/mile is light years away

Quote

If L'Estage were entered as well as Higgins and Pastrana, I'd think it would take one of them having a problem for a top GrF driver to stand a chance of getting their car onto the podium. An overall win would almost certainly mean all three of the top crews having a problem at one time or another.
A decade ago was probably a different story.

Of course, this is all speculation. It would be awesome to be proven wrong...

I thought I heard Jardevall was building another volvo, which would be awesome to see. Ramana was extolling the fun value of being in a RWD car, which is a good thing.

Nice to hear that somebody who has already wasted millions realises that they can have a lot of fun in a stock big BMW.....

What I am kind of taking issue with is that there is something worth replicating or suggesting to for others..

And questioning just how far overall a 2wd and or RWD could do...

Wonder what the sec/mile difference was between Reeves and whoever won when he was here in the little bitty 1600 Fiesta...

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Quote
NoCoast

Quote
john vanlandingham
Grant, put down the crack-pipe. I've "death ray-ed" 4 Xratties.. There is not even 30lbs of sound deadening and brackets. I say there's not even 25 lbs...I've swept up the piles and put it in buckets...

I put the piles in a box and weighed it also.
Yeah, I may be rounding up a bit. There was some heavy pieces in there, like the spring seat things.

Yeah... Grant you've been doing more of this "rounding up" kind of exaggerating things a lot as the time you have been out of events has gone..
You need to get back into a car on an event..

---

John Vanlandingham
Sleezattle, WA, USA

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

www.rallyrace.net/jvab
CALL +1 206 431-9696
Remember! Pacific Standard Time
is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

Quote
john vanlandingham
Wonder what the sec/mile difference was between Reeves and whoever won when he was here in the little bitty 1600 Fiesta...

6.87 sec/mile for OT 2013.
(11:59.1 diff over 104.6 miles)

---

KF7RWG
http://www.utahrallygroup.com

Quote
Cosworth

Quote
Fly-Half
All in all, I'm not going to anoint FWD but it is true that lesser men in terms of driving will have an easier time taming a FWD car.

Obviously you have no experience, but so you dont make arrogant and ignorant statements like this again and make yourself look like a fool, I'll let you know, from personal experience on both platforms, on low power applications, yes FWD is easier to drive, but on a higher power setup, like M3 power for example the FWD car becomes diabolical and very hard to drive. RWD no, the more power the easier it is to drive. See in rwd you get no torque steer.

As for why its the prefered platform in Finland, well maybe its nothing but a choice, just like £100k MK2 Escorts in Ireland, but I can tell you that it has to do with availability of the cars, and also the nature of the roads. You will never see an M3 or Volvo do well in England or worse, France or Portugal. Why is that? Stay tuned for the next edition.

Don't assume about me because you will make an ass out of u and me. I have plenty of racing experience moreso in the autocross and endurance theater (SCCA and LeMons using all sorts of drive platforms and power applications). I've driven on gravel and snow (not down here) but it wasn't a competitive race so I have plenty of personal experience. Before you claim that I'm making arrogant and ignorant statements the proof is in the pudding. FWD is the dominant platform here in a competition which is inferior by a long shot to Group F where RWD is the dominant choice over there.

Don't try to blame availability of cars. There are more FWD cars to choose from over there. RWD cars in general are a decreasing to almost non-existent type when it comes to mid-size and smaller classes. 240s for example are by far the preferred choice yet they are all over 20 years old. You're telling me that it is easier to use that than a more modern FWD car? Cheaper to run yes but easier to find? Nonsense. 240s aside these guys find AE86 Corollas to Starlets to Celicas (they stopped being RWD almost 30 years ago), 180SX (240SX here) and obviously BMW. Yet they can find just as cheap FWD crapshoots such as Civics, Focus, Saxos, Meganes, Corollas to Twingos. Europe pretty much invented FWD and to argue that RWD is more readily available to quite frankly hogwash. Especially plenty of those FWD cars have rally/rallycross experience and pedigree. Parts are readily available. You tell me who is being arrogant. FWD isn't the martyr of the rally world.

You are correct about FWD being easier to drive in low power applications. However in rally high power applications are very rare. The M3 is considered to be high power yet in reality it isn't. Modern day Camry V6 make more horsepower. That is the North American version that I'm talking about which does not hold a candle to the European version that the rest of the world received. The European version made 286 hp in 3.0 form and 321 in 3.2 form and these are what the Finnish are driving with.

Back to what you are saying about RWD is better. I don't disagree but that rule is less of a factor on a broken road where the car is struggling for grip. Of course on a road RWD is better in high power applications due to the lack of torque steer but in rally FWD cars don't make the power needed in order to fall victim to that (I'm talking about torque steer not understeer). I can't think of any active US rally driver using a FWD making similar power to the M3. You have Chris Greenhouse's Neon SRT-4 but I can't think of anything else. I also consider that at least in FWD the weight of the engine helps weigh down the drive wheels but increases the risk of it plowing.
A FWD is easier to drive with they weight of the engine over the front wheels as long as the weight distribution isn't totally out of whack. If RWD was truly easier than it would be more prevalent in the 2WD competition here. FWD cars have a natural advantage on rally so I love to see RWD cars do well.

The M3 is just a well balanced car. It is a superb chassis. The fact that it is RWD is not the reason why this particular car outperformed even as an ancient 19 year old car.

I've been to Sweden and Norway for example and the roads in Scandinavia aren't as wide as the highways we have here but they are faster and wider in comparison to the rest of Europe but that isn't a logical reason considering why are Americans not using RWD? I mean they are using Civics and Fiestas for pete's sake here. That means further examination is required. The Scandis are using predominantly RWD cars on these roads even though they are harder to come across than FWD let alone the fact that the RWD cars they are using are a lot older than FWD that are in the competition.

Quote
john vanlandingham
Yeah yeah words mean nothing, everything is whatever sloppy speaking/sloppy speaking Millenials call things... Like whatever. TLTR dude ---5.45 final drive is "High" and 3.08 is "low", and somebody buying a ride is a "factory" driver.

Language is dynamic, but more importantly business practices have changed. I'd imagine that there aren't any drivers today being paid by 'the factory.' Even WRC teams are operated by third party corporations - although they may be wholly owned by 'the factory.'
It is pretty clear that Higgins is a 'bought and paid for' driver who isn't bringing his own money into the program. Even then, I'd expect his 'paycheque' to be drawn on a bank in Vermont, not New Jersey.
Does 'Manufacturer supported' fit that situation better?

Quote
john vanlandingham
Wonder what the sec/mile difference was between Reeves and whoever won when he was here in the little bitty 1600 Fiesta...

At last year's OTR, he was 6.7 sec/mile behind the leader at the end of stage 9, which is where the battle for first overall ended and Higgins slowed down. At the end of the event he was 6.3 sec/mile behind Higgins. While he had a commanding lead in 2wd, Reeves was looking to see how far up the overall standings he could get.
BUT... at LSPR he was in a tight battle with ACP for the 2wd win, at was 7.6 sec/mile behind higgins at the end, while Higgins had a 3m41s lead on second place. He was roughly 8 sec/mile back when the battle for first ended and Higgins slowed down at about 3/4 total distance.

That's all 'quick, easy' math and without digging for 'bad' stages...

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
Morison

Quote
Fly-Half
I would imagine that they would be in serious contention for overall victory.

Then I'd say you have an overactive imagination.
Then again, if you mean 'overall win at Oregon Trail' as being the overall win in one of the Regional events, then you're probably right. (but who can honestly call that an overall win on the weekend?)
With a little bit of easy math, you'll see Laggemann was about 7.6 sec per mile slower than the winning car. BUT with a bit of extrapolation to take out the 'bad' stages, you'll see that he was actually about 9 seconds per mile slower over the whole event. That's a massive gap to close.

That is what I meant regionally. You really think a 2WD without any problems from those Open guys would win. They should win in those turbo AWD cars without question with those experienced drivers. I mean look at the advantage they have with those cars. Anything can happen in racing but an overall win is an overall win regardless of the spin used on it. Everything else is just stating the blatantly obvious.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2014 12:18PM by Fly-Half.

Quote
Fly-Half
FWD cars have a natural advantage on rally so I love to see RWD cars do well...

Ummm isnt this what we've been saying and you contradicting? So now you make a statement like this.

As for the availability of cars, dont you think that its a lot easier to find a 240 Volvo in Finland than for example a Clio Williams? Or a Saxo VTS? C'mon, you dont know what you're talking about, you cant just pick ANY FWD platform, meanwhile in RWD they have TONS of developed parts ready to go. But if I remember correct the FWD corollas do extremely well there.

Anyways, that M3 is a super build, and independently if it was rwd or fwd, Ramana would still do well, but if you payed attention you could see that Ramana started to lose serious time to ACP on Sunday when the stages became more slower and technical.

As for Greenhouse being the only with plenty of power... young puppy, there's lots more out there. Eric Burmeister has a very powerful turbo fwd, and I probably have the highest powered aspirated rallycar in the US.

There's no point in continue to beat this to death... its been proven that the pull vs push dynamics are superior in pull, so this blabering is just futile.

Roderick,

Here is the list of high power FWD cars that I can come up with off the top of my head.

Paul's Civic
Reily's Focus
Potts' Focus (I think, I have not seen it in person)
Bard's Lancer (Now with Evo Power)
Recon Rally MkI GTI (at least I think they are getting close)

Now lets not under estimate the effect that community(lots of people interesting a certain style / mark of car), and regulations have on car choice. I do not know the finish rule set but it is very possible that the older RWD cars are given an advantage. It could also be that lots car enthusiasts in Scandinavia are interested in rallying a Scandinavian car. Why did BMWs start to become more popular was it because Toni Gardemiester built one? Or did they just become cheap enough while the 240 became hard to come by thus worth more $$?

You come from an autox background, why was the '89 honda civic si become the dominate car in whatever class in took over a couple of years ago? It was not availability and drive wheels.

Quote
Cosworth

Quote
Fly-Half
FWD cars have a natural advantage on rally so I love to see RWD cars do well...

Ummm isnt this what we've been saying and you contradicting? So now you make a statement like this.

As for the availability of cars, dont you think that its a lot easier to find a 240 Volvo in Finland than for example a Clio Williams? Or a Saxo VTS? C'mon, you dont know what you're talking about, you cant just pick ANY FWD platform, meanwhile in RWD they have TONS of developed parts ready to go. But if I remember correct the FWD corollas do extremely well there.

Anyways, that M3 is a super build, and independently if it was rwd or fwd, Ramana would still do well, but if you payed attention you could see that Ramana started to lose serious time to ACP on Sunday when the stages became more slower and technical.

As for Greenhouse being the only with plenty of power... young puppy, there's lots more out there. Eric Burmeister has a very powerful turbo fwd, and I probably have the highest powered aspirated rallycar in the US.

There's no point in continue to beat this to death... its been proven that the pull vs push dynamics are superior in pull, so this blabering is just futile.

I have never contradicted myself. I was only speaking in terms of why the Finns perhaps are using RWD predominantly. If you can't follow me then that is a personal problem as I really focused on simplifying my point so you may understand me properly in order to prevent such confusion.

Yes it a lot easier to find a 240 than a Clio Williams or Saxo VTS. Obviously the Saxo VTS and the Clio Williams were the only Saxos and Clios ever made. You say that I don't know what I'm talking about yet you think it is perfectly legitimate to compare a regular car to a range topper and in the Williams case a special and limited edition. At the same time, you supported my point that they are plenty of resources rally wise for those cars as they competed in very high levels of rallying. As a result, parts were readily available for them (by them I mean regular Clios and Saxos). 240s are getting on and fast. It takes more and more to keep those older cars going. Hence the popularity of the E36s. FWD cars have TONS of developed parts as well. So that point is moot. You can't take any RWD platform stock and go out to win stages. Any platform can go out and win with the right development and driver skill of course.

Ramana did indeed lose ground when the stages were slower and technical. Wheelbase played a huge role in it. All in all, I was wondering why Finnish roads which by and in large are narrower and more technical than roads here yet they are still shying away from FWD as a whole. Finnish roads aren't clogged with nothing but RWD cars. RWD cars are the minority over there.

Don't call me a puppy. Don't pull out your internet wang in order to express superiority over me because that is irrelevant. I have never insulted you so I expect the same in return or is that too much to expect in terms of class? I don't know you as you don't know me. I don't care that you supposedly have the highest powered NA rally car in the history of mankind. That is irrelevant. So if you are stroking your ego and masturbating based on that then that is your prerogative but I couldn't recall off of the top of my head is all. Sure all of this blabbing is pointless but that is all because you flew off the handle first.

Quote
Andrew_Frick
Roderick,

Here is the list of high power FWD cars that I can come up with off the top of my head.

Paul's Civic
Reily's Focus
Potts' Focus (I think, I have not seen it in person)
Bard's Lancer (Now with Evo Power)
Recon Rally MkI GTI (at least I think they are getting close)

Now lets not under estimate the effect that community(lots of people interesting a certain style / mark of car), and regulations have on car choice. I do not know the finish rule set but it is very possible that the older RWD cars are given an advantage. It could also be that lots car enthusiasts in Scandinavia are interested in rallying a Scandinavian car. Why did BMWs start to become more popular was it because Toni Gardemiester built one? Or did they just become cheap enough while the 240 became hard to come by thus worth more $$?

You come from an autox background, why was the '89 honda civic si become the dominate car in whatever class in took over a couple of years ago? It was not availability and drive wheels.

I doubt that the rules are specifically giving older RWD advantages. Now in the build of any car I agree. Older cars (RWD or FWD) have an advantage as they are simpler usually and can be built easier, quicker and cheaper. It also can be just fashion. RWD cars areusually more expensive than a direct FWD equivalent in all things. I call it the "drift tax". It could also be them wanting to use a Scandinavian car yet Saabs aren't as common. 240s aside which are indeed common but other RWD cars are more sought after than a FWD hatchback or something they can find right around the corner like a Golf for example. I don't know the definitive answer and I know of others who clearly don't know. However some may have more of an idea than others.

As for the Civic Si, it didn't dominate when I was racing. The king is still the NA Mazda Miata.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2014 01:11PM by Fly-Half.

Quote
Fly-Half
That is what I meant regionally.

But it isn't what you said.

Quote
Fly-Half
You really think a 2WD without any problems from those Open guys would win.

No, that's not what I said.

Quote
Fly-Half
Anything can happen in racing but an overall win is an overall win regardless of the spin used on it.

Yah, sure, if you want to believe that.
Most of us would have trouble claiming 'an overall win' of the regional portion of a national event as anything more than 'winning the regional.'
Most of us, if we were being honest, would also recognize an overall win as not being 'earned' if the only way we got it was through other people's problems. (In other words, we wouldn't celebrate being handed an overall win)

---

First Rally: 2001
Driver (7), Co-Driver (44)
Drivers (16)
Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4)
Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0)
Last Updated, January 4, 2015

Quote
john vanlandingham
Blame is for idiots. losers.

Quote
Morison

Quote
Fly-Half
That is what I meant regionally.

But it isn't what you said.

Quote
Fly-Half
You really think a 2WD without any problems from those Open guys would win.

No, that's not what I said.

Quote
Fly-Half
Anything can happen in racing but an overall win is an overall win regardless of the spin used on it.

Yah, sure, if you want to believe that.
Most of us would have trouble claiming 'an overall win' of the regional portion of a national event as anything more than 'winning the regional.'
Most of us, if we were being honest, would also recognize an overall win as not being 'earned' if the only way we got it was through other people's problems. (In other words, we wouldn't celebrate being handed an overall win)

I didn't say nationally either. You assumed that. Unless I'm wrong in assuming a regional event and national event aren't two separate competitions then how is not winning a regional event by being faster than everyone else overall? If you were the fastest amongst every regional competitor then it is an overall victory.

If you built a car that was reliable throughout the competition than you shouldn't feel guilty to outlasting everyone else if that is the case. Stuff happens in racing. If that is the case then they might as well not even award victories to those once cars start breaking down because it wasn't earned anyway, right?