No Mitsubishi works enrty in 2003!!!!!!!!!

Here's the news (http://www.wrc.com/en_GB/News/2002/014/Mitsubishi+in+shock+WRC+pull-out.htm)

Quite a shocker, really! :eek:

Guess they decided that after their less than stellar performance this year....

They'll be back in '04 though...

Wow! I knew the Lancer VII was bad, but not THAT bad!

So I guess this perhaps means a 2004 Mitusibishi Colt works car? :D

well, good. Better come back champions again in 04 then to try again in 03 and do what they did this year.

do they still make colts??

Originally posted by daggerlee
So I guess this perhaps means a 2004 Mitusibishi Colt works car? :D

Bingo! ;) (my personal feeling, of course)


Originally posted by the little kid
do they still make colts??

Yes, they do. (http://www.mitsubishi-cars.co.uk/colt/)

shit,save all pics of the 2003 livery,it will be rare:D

:( :(
No Lancers for a whole year:eek: :(

I’m Shocked!

I guess Mitsubishi are now paying the price for their decision not to implement a full World Rally Car earlier. Sticking with the Group A machine gave them an advantage while the rest sorted out the new rules. Now Peugeot, Ford, Subaru and the rest have perfected their World Rally Cars leaving Ralliart and Mitsubishi to play catch-up.

Feel sorry for the drivers, especially Delecour, he can't have many years left in him at the top. Although after his performances in Australia and Britain recently he may have trouble finding somebody game enough to read his pace notes! :p

OMG :( :(

:eek: wow thats all i have

-GTi-VR6_A3

omg i must have a colt i must

-GTi-VR6_A3

So that's one less kit to buy from Tamiya next year :(

Buidling a WRC is a difficult thing. Seat has gone down on it in the past with their Cordoba and now Mitsu. Citroen however is showing the way. First with the XsaraT4 then a half season WRC the build experience and next year the full round you Colin and youngster Sebastien Loeb.

That's the way to go. If recession keeps going on, it might be for longer then 2004 before we see Mitsu back on the forefront.

Cheers,
Guido

so the evo 7 sucks!?!?!?!?! OMG!!!

Wow..that's tough...
The colt looks kind of like the 5th gen Honda Civic Hatchback:)
Nice little thing.

Here's the best case scenario I see:
In 2004, Mitsubishi returns with the Lancer Evolution VIII! That's not all....they have Mika Hakkinen as their driver!!!

MUHAHAHAA:D

Comments? Flames?:p

Well, if Mika does well and enjoys it (the rally he's entering soon), I can see that happening! (wishful thinking, I know).

As for Evo VIII - nah! I like the Colt idea, considering how much @ss Pug are kicking with their small car :D

Are Mitsubishi bringing out a new version of the Colt soon? The current one(called Mirage in Australia) has been out for five years or more. Might make more sense to develop a newer model.

Then again, I guess the problem with the Lancer Evo VII (and to a lesser extent the latest Impreza) is the heavier weight, which I seem to recall is due to new Japanese regulations. If that is the case developing an older car that doesn't have the weight penalty may be a good thing.

How can japanese regulations influence WRC cars? :confused: As far as I know, the WRC and WRC2 Lancers (that are somewhat erroneoulsy refered to as just Evo VII-s) have not too much to do with the Evo VII (road car) ...

My guess is that it's the size that matters :lol2:

True Alex the Evo VII WRC is not based upon the Street Evo VII at all but rather the regular garden variety Lancer

You see every Mitsubishi Evo up to the VI was based upon Group A rules. The Evo VII rally car uses the WRC rules - very different. WRC rules allow for much more modifications to the basic car but must be based upon a car with a much bigger production run than the old Group A. That means having Homolgation specials like the Evos, STI WRXs and GR4 Celicas isn't viable anymore.

WRC rules have caused the the Lancer WRC to be based upon a mass production model with a heavier chasis to meet Japanese design regulations. So the domestic politics of a particular Pacific rim nation can very much influence WRC stage times!

Ahh, I see now. I just thought that even if the roadcar chassis is very heavy, they could make it significantly lighter for the WRC-spec cars as I'm sure there is a very wide variety of structural changes that are allowed. Look at your favourite littel 206 bugger - none of the street cars have AWD, yet it hasn't stopped the team modifying the chassis to that extent (probably only has door handles from the road-oing 206, if even that.)

Yeah I want a turbocharged, AWD 206! But there is no such animal!

Yes the WRC rules allow for many changes to be made to the base car but if you start with a heavy chasis you are at a disadvantage. Look at the Focus - as much as they have tried to shave weight off the car to get it to the minumum it is still badly nose heavy. The 206, being so small allows the engineers to play around with with balast much more, so it is almost perfectly balanced.

In fact by the letter of the law the 206 is too small for the WRC. The minimum length is ment to be 4 meters which the 206 is just under. Only by special waiver to fit big bumpers does the 206 reach 4 meters. However I think you'll find all the Wold Rally Cars have special waivers from the FIA in some areas. Look what Mitsubishi were alowed to do with the Evo6.5 - it didn't follow either rulebook to the letter!

Originally posted by RallyRaider
Look what Mitsubishi were alowed to do with the Evo6.5 - it didn't follow either rulebook to the letter!

I'm afraid I have no idea about that. care to enlighten me? ;)

And I have no proble with the 206. I love the car!

Basicaly the Evo VI was a Group A car. But with special dispensation from the FIA (and with agreement from the rest of the teams) Mitsubishi were allowed to incorporate changes within the WRC rules, partucularly in the suspension area.

This made the car much more competitive in early 2001 after it was falling behind in 2000. Only sting in the tail of the deal was that Mitsubish had to agree to introduce the full spec WRC by the end of 2001. And that probably cost Tommi the title :(

Thanks for the info.

But if they bring in the colt, what are they going to do with the Lancer?

They can't just ditch it; the Lancer Evolution series [IMO] is what Mitsubishi is known for...

Why not?? Toyota ditched the Celica for the Corolla, if I remember correct...

I think that the road Evos will be well and truely continued. ;)

hmm..still.

I hope the re-enter rally w/ a new Lancer, but if not, it would be amazing if they entered some GT series.

A Lancer racecar:)

There are some in the Australian championship (was it a class in the GT championship or something like that?), although pesonally I see the LanEvo only as a rally car. This is what it was meant to be. But, like all great cars, it seems to have reached the point wher there is no further potential under current regulations.

To me, Mitsubishi is the Lancer Evolution and vice versa. I shudder at the thought of a non-WRC based Lancer Evo. Here's to the hope that they'll bring the Lancer back! :crosses fingers and prays:

Here's a link to the newest version of the Colt (but this is the 4 door version). This thing is UGLY!!!

Click here (http://www.mitsubishi-motors.co.jp/PRODUCTSS/colt.html)!

I just read in Rally XS magazine, that Mitsubishi will run on a couple of events this year, just to "stay sharp" and keep on being concentrated for 2004.

I wonder how the Colt based WRC is going to look like.

Probably it will have huge fenders like the 206 WRC, because it is even smaller then the 206, and a length of 4 M is neccesary to homologate a car in WRC.
But in the meantime, we should still see the lancer for a couple generations, because it will probably still be used for group N racing.

ciao
Olivier

ok all you sobs.

there is nothing wrong with the Evo. it is one of the greatest rallye cars of all time.
what happened with the VII type 2 was this. Mitsu. made everything smaller. ie, diff. cage, tras-axle... by doing this, the components were not able to properly handle the stresses of the torque. rendering the car nearly un-drivable.
basically, mitsu. made the jump from Gr. A-8 to WRC spec much too quickly. they thought it would be easy... do this, change that, get rid of that, and add this. not the case, that is why they did poorly.
all the rubbish you hear 'bout the colt... not true. yes they pondered the thought, but it will not happen... it has terrible handling, and would not be able to cope with the rigors of rallye.
when they did poorly in '02 they stepped back, said what happened, then said.... well perhaps we need a new car.
when in reality they just had a daft design.
at this very moment, they are "fixing" the Evo, and will return in '04, and they will win. the whole point of their "break" is so they are able to dominate in '04.

peugeot is moving to the 307 which has a longer wheelbase than the skoda octivia (which is the longest in the WRC)
fact is, the 206 has very scary handling. that is why is does not do as well on the "fast" events.

the FIA is putting a minimum weight on body shells.

the FIA is putting in a minimum wheelbase.

the minimum wight remains 1230 kilos...
the Evo VII weighed in at 1230... the 206 weighs in at 1230... the Subaru weighs in at 1230... the Citroen weighs in at 1230...
the only one over 1230 is Skodas Octivia, and that will be solved with their new Fabia.

so stop with the crap of the 206 weighs less... 'cause it doesn't... they just have development, and skilled personel for pilotes.

the Mitsu. engine has also been the most powerful of the lot, nearly since Mitsu. debut.

also, the Evo has a 3in longer wheelbase than the Subaru... but! the Subaru is some 3in more in overall length. the Evo isn't that big, it just looks as if it is due to the body curves, and the fairing flares.... which are there to accomodate the massive suspension travel.

also, four door chassis are more stiff than two doors... why, you have two more door frames... by the time you stiffen up a two door to be comparable to the four door.... you have more weight. and weight is never good.

hmmm.... Subaru moved BACK to their four door. Peugeot is moving the 307. The new Fabia is four door. come on guys. don't be silly.

Mitsu. new Evolution is fantastic... they will win. just like they are killing the competition in the north american SCCA series.


Cheers


Tso


www.thecheckeredflag.com :smoker2:

Originally posted by Tso
ok all you sobs.

there is nothing wrong with the Evo. it is one of the greatest rallye cars of all time.
what happened with the VII type 2 was this. Mitsu. made everything smaller. ie, diff. cage, tras-axle... by doing this, the components were not able to properly handle the stresses of the torque. rendering the car nearly un-drivable.
basically, mitsu. made the jump from Gr. A-8 to WRC spec much too quickly. they thought it would be easy... do this, change that, get rid of that, and add this. not the case, that is why they did poorly.
all the rubbish you hear 'bout the colt... not true. yes they pondered the thought, but it will not happen... it has terrible handling, and would not be able to cope with the rigors of rallye.
when they did poorly in '02 they stepped back, said what happened, then said.... well perhaps we need a new car.
when in reality they just had a daft design.
at this very moment, they are "fixing" the Evo, and will return in '04, and they will win. the whole point of their "break" is so they are able to dominate in '04.

peugeot is moving to the 307 which has a longer wheelbase than the skoda octivia (which is the longest in the WRC)
fact is, the 206 has very scary handling. that is why is does not do as well on the "fast" events.

the FIA is putting a minimum weight on body shells.

the FIA is putting in a minimum wheelbase.

the minimum wight remains 1230 kilos...
the Evo VII weighed in at 1230... the 206 weighs in at 1230... the Subaru weighs in at 1230... the Citroen weighs in at 1230...
the only one over 1230 is Skodas Octivia, and that will be solved with their new Fabia.

so stop with the crap of the 206 weighs less... 'cause it doesn't... they just have development, and skilled personel for pilotes.

the Mitsu. engine has also been the most powerful of the lot, nearly since Mitsu. debut.

also, the Evo has a 3in longer wheelbase than the Subaru... but! the Subaru is some 3in more in overall length. the Evo isn't that big, it just looks as if it is due to the body curves, and the fairing flares.... which are there to accomodate the massive suspension travel.

also, four door chassis are more stiff than two doors... why, you have two more door frames... by the time you stiffen up a two door to be comparable to the four door.... you have more weight. and weight is never good.

hmmm.... Subaru moved BACK to their four door. Peugeot is moving the 307. The new Fabia is four door. come on guys. don't be silly.

Mitsu. new Evolution is fantastic... they will win. just like they killing the competition in the north american SCCA series.


Cheers


Tso


www.thecheckeredflag.com :smoker2:

Pretty aggresive for your first post.....

I have no doubt that Mitsu will come back with a car that will be able to deliver better, but the question is whether their drivers will be able to deliver?

Where your theory on 2-door/4-door is based, only you know.
The Impreza Coupe was stiffer than the 4 door of the same generation, which is why it was developed, with the 2001 Impreza Subaru sorted out frame stiffness in the 4-door so that is was actually stiffer than the coupe which was why the switched.
Your theory of more pillars making the car stronger is codswollop to be polite, since the coupe has more solid material in the frame and shell which increases the stiffness.
Also, how does a 4 door equate to less weight? You have additional stiffeners around the doors, the additional material in the door to maintain it's stiffness, this is stuff a coupe doesn't have.
Having spent several years working in the automotive industry and around some race drivers, I have a good understanding of this stuff.

Believe me, the 4 doors in the WRC are more about meeting WRC specs than anything, if it was about stiffness, then touring cars and all the rest would be racing 4-door salloons instead of 2-door coupes.

Welcome and thanks for the information.

G'Day Tso, nice first post :rolleyes: If you want to come in all aggressive like and attempt to give us a lesson on Evos then you'd be well advised to get your facts right. Sorry to give it to you with both barrels but you asked for it :flipa:

For starters the car we are discussing isn't even an Evo. Rather it is the Lancer WRC. If you are not aware of the difference between a Group A car and a WRC then feel free to ask.

Who thinks there is something wrong with the Lancer? Try Mitsubishi and Ralliart. Why else do you think they have withdrawn for the year? Hey?

You are correct that the Lancer WRC was rushed, they needed to introduce it before the end of 2001 in order to be allowed to update the Evo VI. I'm sure they didn't expect making the change from Group A to WRC would be easy but not the disaster it became.

Dominate? What sort of talk is that? While I hope that Mitsubishi can return to the front end and even win a rally or two, there is precisely zero chance they will 'dominate'. You're dreaming.

Peugeot 206 doesn't do well on fast events hey? Funny I thought Marcus Gronholm had won the Finland Rally for the last three years straight. Also did well on other pure speed rallies like New Zealand. Preposterous mate, how can people take you seriously when you spread blatant misinformation like that?

And what ever are you on about regards minimum weights? Do you have any understanding of the concept of building a racing or rally car? One of the ideas is to reduce the weight as much as possible then use ballast to balance it while bringing it up to weight. Fact is, the new Japanese cars both suffer from heavier body shell than previous models. That is a major factor in the reduction of competitiveness of Subaru and Mitsubishi.

Why did Subaru move to a 4 door body shell? Because there was no 2 door available, same as Mitsubishi. Any generalisation about the relative stiffness of two and four door chassis is pointless. It all depends on the individual design, effectiveness of the roll cage. If it was as simple as you say then all the cars would have the same number of doors.

That will do for now. Although your link between SCCA and WRC is worthy of note. I guess you also thought Reynard (BAR) and Christiano da Matta would be 'killing the competition' in F1 when they moved from CART? Perhaps you right - BAR was almost killing us with laughter in the first year!

the two door was not available 'cause subaru had to put too much metal in the frame to meet crash test standards that the car would have nearly been useless.

four door frames are stiffer than the two.

weight bias in no bother... after all, they do move the engine back 20mm, and rotate it some 25 degrees back.

yes, i know 'bout auto/rallye cars. i am always building gr. n, and fr. a cars. the most recent is an Evo VIII, although she cannot be raced 'till the full homogulation goes through but i've managed to get my hands on the preliminary papers (which are nearly identical to the VII's).

yes, i am very aware of the vast differences in Gr. A and WRC. have you got your fact right mate?

and yes, Mitsubishi's who intent in to WIN in '04.

anyways, i've to be off. enjoy.


Cheers


Tso

by the way....


F-1, fucking fantastic. Cart, i've got no fancy for in any way.

Grunholm's winnings... No shit, he's a wonderful pilote. he'd better be winning, after all that's what he's paid for. He's also the only one who's really taken control of the lil' 206.


Tso

Oh, so Panizzi, Rovanpera, and Burns (he is leading the championship, isn't he?) are not good enough and haven't shown enough that the 206 is the class of the field car in most if not every respect? :sly:

eh... what in the bloody hell are you saying?

and no, Burns, Rovenpara, and Panizzi have NOT taken control.

get off the hype mate.

Panizzi is great... on tarmac! which is terrible considering he is a fucking RALLYE pilote. Rovenpara is a GRAVEL "expert", which is better than being a tar. expert, but still, the fact is he's a rallye driver. do you not recall his shant in New Zealand. he has yet to deliver.

Panizzi and Rovenpara get alternated in the works ride... used as "specialty" pilotes... why? they are not the best on every surface.

Burns... the man is just plain smart. He's used the new points system and exploited it. that is why after Greece he has extended his championship lead. Burns is certainly one of the most thinking pilotes out there.

no one looks quite as comfortable as Gronholm in the 206. so yes, he is the only one who has taken full control of it.

www.autoexpress.co.uk info. on the 307 here

206-it is an unstable car. less than 99in wheel base. that is why peugeot is moving to the 307. not the only reason... they've many of them. however, peugeot may keep the 206, just like mitsubishi may keep the lancer... "we will be back in 2004 with our mitsubishi lancer to win..." that's from mitsu. themselves.
mitsubishi-103.3in
ford/cossie(focus)-103in
cossie escort-100in
subaru-100in
skoda-somewhere 'round 105
(fabia-100-103 i believe)
get the idea?

i fancy small performance cars. but, if it works, and it works well... why fight it...

FYI what determines how sound a rallye car is, is how it fairs in the hands of the priviteers not how it does in the hands of a maximum works team... anything can do well in a works team.

cheers
:dogpile:


Tso

www.thecheckeredflag.com

Originally posted by Tso
eh... what in the bloody hell are you saying?

and no, Burns, Rovenpara, and Panizzi have NOT taken control.

get off the hype mate.

Panizzi is great... on tarmac! which is terrible considering he is a fucking RALLYE pilote. Rovenpara is a GRAVEL "expert", which is better than being a tar. expert, but still, the fact is he's a rallye driver. do you not recall his shant in New Zealand. he has yet to deliver.

Panizzi and Rovenpara get alternated in the works ride... used as "specialty" pilotes... why? they are not the best on every surface.

Burns... the man is just plain smart. He's used the new points system and exploited it. that is why after Greece he has extended his championship lead. Burns is certainly one of the most thinking pilotes out there.

no one looks quite as comfortable as Gronholm in the 206. so yes, he is the only one who has taken full control of it.

www.autoexpress.co.uk info. on the 307 here

206-it is an unstable car. less than 99in wheel base. that is why peugeot is moving to the 307. not the only reason... they've many of them. however, peugeot may keep the 206, just like mitsubishi may keep the lancer... "we will be back in 2004 with our mitsubishi lancer to win..." that's from mitsu. themselves.
mitsubishi-103.3in
ford/cossie(focus)-103in
cossie escort-100in
subaru-100in
skoda-somewhere 'round 105
(fabia-100-103 i believe)
get the idea?

i fancy small performance cars. but, if it works, and it works well... why fight it...

FYI what determines how sound a rallye car is, is how it fairs in the hands of the priviteers not how it does in the hands of a maximum works team... anything can do well in a works team.

cheers
:dogpile:


Tso


For starters, for a n00b you need to be a lot less offensive in your posts, you have not earned the right to insult the mods here, let alone anyone else, and your knowledge/opinion is still subject to many questions.

Gronholm and Panizzi have been with Peugeot the longest now, and so are more familiar with the car, who's to say Gronholm wouldn't have the same success with any other car?
Gronholm certainly didn't perform terribly in the Celica when he was driving that.
As for Panizzi, he may not be stellar on gravel, but he certainly isn't slow, if he was, how would you explain his performance in Greece?
Burns has certainly not been slow in the Pug, but considering the strengths of his team mates, they are his competition, he lacks their experience with the car, but he is still quick and consistant.
Rovanpera has had bad luck, I will definitely vouch for his speed and given enough time on the hard surfaces I am sure he could be quicker there too.

And your comment about "anything can do well in a works team" is completely unfounded. If anything can do well, the Accent and Octavia should be tearing up the courses, but they aren't.
You can't blame the drivers, since all the drivers you see in the WRC have met with successes in some arena and that is what got them there.

Have you ever thought that cost may come into the factor determining what the privateers are driving?

sorry mate.. my knowledge is very good. i've reliable inside sources.

as far as Gronholm in another car. yeah, he would do just fine. if you've got talent and your fast, then you will go fast no matter what the surface or machine.

Panizzi, Rovenpara. no dought they are good. just not good enough. Panizzi is still not able to deliver on gravel, and Rovenpara is still not able to deliver on tar.
for pilotes that have been with a team for their amount of time, they should be rivaling Gronholm. is that happening? no, not even close.

you said it 'bout Burns... lacks their experience. yet, he is the championship leader. you trying to say that he's got more talent than the other two? i believe he does. therefore, i am deeming your point as a daft point. besides, even Burns is not liking his time at peugeot. he's said it himself. for some one who is not having a jolly time, he sure is making some brilliant drives.

accent and octivia... they do not do well due to lack of budget. plain and simple. the potential is there, but not the means to do it.
i think Skoda will have a bit to show with their fabia. the Hyundia is getting better and better all the time. problem is, Freddy spends most of his time off the bloody road. i don't think it's the car for him.

privateers and cost. i've built many rallye cars, most all Gr. N, and Gr. A, whether you know this or not... most of the prices work out to be about the same. whether you build a Mitsu., Subaru, Ford, or Hyundai. the price for the homogulated parts is comparable for a reason.
only time it would be hard is if you have a complete lack of funds.

you ever think of why the privateers choose the cars they do?

you even rallye mate?

what part of my knowledge you challenging? the facts? lol come on. don't make me question your knowledge.

stop pasting what i've written. i know what i've written. good god man.

good day to you.


Cheers


Tso

www.thecheckeredflag.com

Tso,

You seriously need to spend some time to learn how the forums work, instead of trying to be as offensive as possible.

We are here to discuss things, not sling mud and insult people.

I have only driven some very amateur rallies in a FWD on gravel, nothing exciting or to brag about, and I am certainly not going to get arrogant about it, I did it for fun.

I would be tempted to respect your opinion, but since you obviously don't respect anyone else's opinion what makes you think yours deserves respecting?

Your knowledge may be good, but your attitude is, unfortunately, very wrong.

I do believe freakray is correct.

You come in, write very offensively to people who -may- not know as much as you do about it, being very critic to other people's thoughts and opinions and using aggressive language.

You may be smart, or know a lot about rallying, but you sure show a complete lack of communication skills.
I respect what you say, but not how you say it .

Try to inform people, don't try to be arrogant and aggressive, because maybe in (your?) the "real" world the ones with the biggest mouth always win arguments, but here everybody's opinion is the same and using that "tone" won't make you respected , will only make you look like an utter fool.

:rolleyes:
Olivier

i do not intend to be offensive, but i will admit that i am a bit of a rogue.

the language is not geared at anyone... it's just there. i will try to "comply" but you must understand that i am not yelling or shouting. just chatting, and the odd word slips out ever now and again. perhaps even often the tongue slips. no bother though.

i see you have piloted some rallies, and that is a start (which is a good thing). we've all to start some how. it has been years since i've done a competitive outing in a FWD. fun thing 'bout these cars is you can get them REALLY REALLY side ways and not have to worry too much 'bout it.
how did you do? what sort of car?

i have much "know-how"... i've a aerospace and mechanical engineering degree as well as a language (translation) degree. they sit in me closet most of the time though... lol

anyways, i can help with tunning rallye cars... i've some tricks up my sleeve.

eh... respect... i was not aware i was in search of that. your opinion is your opinion.
i gather as much info. as i can and then base my opinions from that. i go with as much fact as possible.

g'day


Tso
www.thecheckeredflag.com


ps... i do believe the version VIII subaru (RA) is a contender. they are finally really getting their shit together. the car is making comprable power to the others, but is still a wee bit shy on torque. as well as durability. the rear suspension is much inproved though.

if you hadn't gathered by now, the two door colt photos that are circulating on the net. are not real. they are images from Gran Turismo.

you see, Mitsubishi never actually produced a rallye version of the car... it was all just chatter and some schemes on paper and computer.

i suspect if Mitsu. actually did do the colt it would look a lot more wild (stranger perhaps?). it wouldn't look like a transformer.:bloated:


Cheers


Tso

subaru competed in a rallye in canada just last holiday.

lol, it didn't work out for them.

first, they broke the gearbox... then replaced it at service.

next, the turbo caught fire. neadless to say, the little subaru burnt up.

this was the version VIII. the one that is suppose to be a contender.

didn't contend to well on its latest drive.

details... just ask.


Cheers


Tso

Was this the Subaru USA team or the SWRT?

Version VIII? You mean STI8?

BTW, wandering a bit off topic here aren't you, since this thread is about Mitsu pulling out of the WRC and we normally try to keep the threads to one topic.

hey mate.

yes, it's a bit off topic, but i thought it was funny so i had to let you guys know. i've heard good things 'bout the version VIII, and subaru praises it. that is why i thought it was a laugh.

it wans't the SWRT, it was a canadian team.

yes, the STI8. it is called the version VIII.

guess what make of car won.............................
.....................
....................

Mitsubishi

however i do expect the version VIII to do pretty well once the teething problems have be resolved.

Mitsu. is still king.

nothing beats their ACD.


Cheers



Tso

Subaru has hired away Alfa's design engineer.

right now, there are plans for a new subaru brewing.

at this moment in time, i do not know if it will be two or four door chassis, but they are appoaching rallye as Mitsubishi does.

The Evo is a rallye car, and is designed for rallye. there just happens to be a street version for "normal" people to consume.

Subaru makes family cars. they take a street car, and use that for rallye.
with their Alfa engineer, they are designing a rallye car which will just "happen" to have a street version for the people to consume.

which is not a bad thing really, it just means they are learning from a more expierienced company. (Mitsu.)

expect Subarus new car to make it's first outing in approx. 12-18 months.

i will keep you up-dated.


Cheers


Tso
www.thecheckeredflag.com


just thought all you rallye people might have a wee bit of interest in this.

Tso,

I don't really understand what you're arguing with here. Let me sum up some facts (that have already been posted in this thread) and you can try to disagree with them:

1) There is no works Mitsubishi entry in WRC this year. This is what the thread was about. It's not about bringing down Mitsu or any other manufacturer, it was opsted by me after I read the official announcement of Mitsu withdrawing from WRC on the works level or 2003. Can you argue with that?

2) For the last several years their car was not as good as some other cars, or even most other cars.

Let me be more specific year by year:

2000: Tommi finished 5th in the championship with 1 win to, let's say Burns's 4, and Mitsu finished 4th with less than half the points of the 3rd place Subaru.

2001: Was closer with Tommi finishing a very close 3rd, but that year was marked by appauling Pug finishing record (with 8 retirements for Marcus). Still Pug won the manufacturers' itle with Mitsu coming in 3rd.

2002: Alister McRae finished 14th with 2 points and Delecour 21 and last, the only driver with 0 points by the end of the season. Gronholm had 77 and second placed Solberg - 37. Mitsubishi finished the year 5th with 9 points, one point behind Hyndai and on par with Skoda also on 9 points. Peugeot had 165 and Subaru 67.

So again, what exactly are you trying to argue about here?

i wasn't arguing with anyone.

i know what happened year by year. Mitsu. just needs to get their shit together, and they'll be fine.

i just got a laugh when the version VIII torched itself. that's all.

what are you arguing 'bout?

don't forget Puegeots budget. which is just -slightly- large.
a bit like comparing ferrari and BAR etc. no shit they will win.



Cheers


Tso

Tso,

For somebody that claims to know so much about rally, you seem to be confused about the homologation rules....

Every WRC manufacturer has to have a road counterpart of their rally car, you make it sound like the manufacturers are doing the consumer a favor by producing a road car.

May I also point out that the cars the Canadian Subaru team are running are only remotely related to the SWRT cars....I don't think you can quite compare the performance of them.

BTW, I got a laugh last year when McRae's Focus torched itself on Rally Finland and again this year when his Xsara torched itself, it doesn't mean the car is not a competitor.

Originally posted by freakray

BTW, I got a laugh last year when McRae's Focus torched itself on Rally Finland and again this year when his Xsara torched itself, it doesn't mean the car is not a competitor.

Hey, it's all clear to me now. :D
Colin McRae is the only constant factor in those 2 fires. You can't blame Nicky, Derek or the car for that. :biggrin:

i too got a laugh when McRae's car(s) went up. he's got just 'bout the worst luck of any rallye driver. snapping TCA's, stuck throttle, fire. if it can go wrong, it will... for him anyways.

i never said the version VIII wasn't a contender. i think it is. it just had a bit of teething problems. just like every other new car.

who was comparing performance of the SWRT to the canadian team? i was just talking 'bout the version VIII.

the manufactures are doing us a favour.
for example, the evo... "is produced with the Gr. N and Gr. A competitor in mind." they do not have to make so many of these types of cars. not that there is a lot, but even what consumers get is -a lot-

and no, every WRC manufacturer does not really have to have a road going counterpart. homogulation states for a manufacturer to produce a WRC car, they have to produce some 25 or 50 examples of the car.
is there a REAL cosworth focii? yes, and it is called the YB. undoughtably it is 4-wheel drive with a pretty trick turbine. it produces 310bhp, and some 330lbs of torque (factory rated anyways). it will cost you $80,000.00 USD (last time i checked) to have this car. why? there is only 25 of them. why? that is all that is needed for Ford/Cosworth to produce.

last bit here...
for a bloke that seems to fancy "attacking" nearly everything that i say... i suggest that you get what i say right 'for you type off a daft retort. at least keep the shit in context. come on mate. i'm sure you can do better.


anyways


Cheers


Tso

Ok, now you know eachother we can continue without flamewars, please.

Combine the information you 2 acquired and we could have a pretty high quality forum.

i'm game

I do not see how disputing somebody's point is a flame, I do believe on the other hand that responding with insults and swearing is simply juvenile.

If you can't post your argument in an adult manner, rather don't post it.

From an overview of the regulations:

Production numbers can be kept below 50 units. The typical WRC class car is based upon a large volume production model to which a manufacturer can modify or add the following:

Modified front and rear suspension layout and attachment points

Add-on turbocharger even if the production car does not have one

Modified transmission and additional transmission tunnels in order to fit a 4x4 transmission even if the production car is 2 wheel drive. Consequently differentials and gear box are free.

Modified engine intake and exhaust systems

Modified engine position (the engine can be relocated by a maximum of 20mm as compared to its original position and can be tilted by 20° around the crankshaft axis)

Modified wheelbase (±20mm) and track widths (1550mm max)

The maximum car width allowed is 1770 mm

Minimum length of 4000mm



That seems to back up my statement that manufacturers are required to have a standard road counterpart of their car.
Nothing stops any manufacturer in the WRC from producing an AWD turbo-charged road car like Subaru and Mitsubishi do.

I don't know why you consider anyone that disputes some of your points as attacking you after all, from your first post in this forum you have been attacking the regular long-term members and evidently getting very upset at those that choose to disagree with you.

The Focus YB = Focus RS.....

BTW, I am sure you can do better than spouting off with some swearing and name calling, place some realistic facts on the table.

PS, in response to your e-mail, those aren't R/C cars in my sig.....:redface: