Is reverse engineering the key to the next WRC generation?

David Evans ponders whether Group B should act as inspiration for WRC's 2027 regulations

Rallye Montecarlo Monte Carlo (MC) 18-24 1 1986

Behind closed doors in Vernier, Switzerland, decisions are being made. The future of the World Rally Championship shaped. Some say the deal’s done, 2027 is already set. Maybe. Maybe not. But if the ink’s not quite dry, Secto Rally Finland offered detail for the debate.

I stood, not for the first time, utterly transfixed by the sheer speed of the Rally1 cars from Thursday morning’s shakedown all the way to Sunday afternoon’s powerstage. They were, once again, on another level in terms of pace between the trees. Yes, Kris Meeke’s record for the fastest WRC round ever still stands from eight years ago, but that’s becoming more disingenuous by the year as more chicanes – virtual and physical – are added to slow these supercars of the stages down.

It’s impossible to deny the pace of the things, nobody could or would ever challenge the fact that they’re quicker than anything that’s gone before them. Not for the first time, I’m going to ask if enough’s enough? Since the top of 2022, I’ve heard concerned voices – experienced, sensible voices – calling on the powers that be to curb development and potentially bring speeds back down to more sensible levels.

09_WRC_FINLAND_2024_LM_606Fouurmaux

Rally1 cars have proved to be the fastest in WRC history

Then we talk to the drivers and the drivers talk about the need for a little bit more power or just a touch more torque. Talk to them about restricting or reducing power and you might as well have asked them to eat their own shoes.

There’s no doubt, the FIA has done a magnificent job in producing the safest premium class rally cars in the history of the sport. The tubular chassis which sits beneath Toyota’s GR Yaris Rally1 and the concurrent cars from Hyundai and M-Sport Ford must – and will – live on beyond the end of 2026. That spaceframe is essential (but it must be made as a one-size-fits-all solution to save money, as a brief aside).

This story is, however, more about the spectacle than the speed or the safety of current cars.

Having talked of the mind-bending velocity achieved in Finland earlier this month, calls to make the sport more spectacular might seem odd. Bear with me here, I’ve done some research.

As you’d have seen last month, we produced a film in conjunction with Secto Automotive to trace the 1000 Lakes Rally through the Group B years. I sent my 18-year-old daughter and 16-year-old son a link to that piece, along with some other clips from early 1990s Group A. I also sent them our action review from Finland, launched last week. On the promise of a financially rejuvinated bank card, they spread them liberally among their mates and delivered feedback.

It was fascinating. Today’s speed was a major talking point, but so was the fact the cars looked ‘like Scalextric.’ Watching Timo Salonen wrestle a Peugeot 205 T16 or Tommi Mäkinen riding rodeo aboard an early evo was, for them, just as – if not more – engaging.

Now, I’m not going to name names here, but I raised this point with somebody who knows all about winning world championship events. And he said exactly the same. His children were happier winding the coverage back a decade or two.

Is reverse engineering the key to the next generation?

I have no doubt Christian Loriaux, Chris Williams and Tom Fowler will be throwing their arms up at such a suggestion, but maybe there are lessons to be learned.

Granted, I’m oversimplifying hideously here, but what do we think about keeping the wild wings we have, but making the aero inefficient? It looks awesome, but offers little in the way of downforce. In an instant, that cuts corner speed. Let’s detune the dampers too.

And Hankook, welcome to the WRC, how about one compound of gravel tire per event? Make it hard and make it bulletproof. Restrict the teams to 12 covers per event, it’ll save money and, fundamentally, what does it matter? It’s the same for everybody.

The combination of all of the above will bring the speed down and the hustle up. Undoubtedly, the best drivers in the world are now joining the best engineers in the world reading this with their arms in the air and their chins on the floor. Talking privately with technicians and team folk who know far more than me, there’s an acceptance that such changes would undoubtedly have the drivers working harder and, most likely, deliver more movement from the cars.

Was it just me who got bored with Scalextric after a while? Was it just me who dabbed a splash of washing up liquid on some of the corners to make the exit of a hairpin left or a fast right just that bit more tasty? Why did I do that? Because I was born and brought up on sideways.

And sideways, whether you like it or not my friend, is where the spectacle sits.

Now, that’s the first bit of my thinking. The second bit? Let’s go back to Group B. Sensibly.

Juha Kankkunen Story

Group B enabled manufacturers to innovate

As discussed, the mid ’80s were a halcyon period for the sport, no doubt. But what was it that made the world take notice? Yes, of course, it was heroes like Henri Toivonen and Markku Alén and yes, it was the speed, the spectacle and, undoubtedly, the danger transfixed folk as well.

But above all of that, it was innovation. It was Audi’s total traction quattro; Peugeot’s decision to have the engine leap-frog the crew from front to middle, Austin Rover’s belief there remained no replacement for displacement while Lancia’s concluded supercharging and turbocharging the more sensible alternative.

What brought them to this great sport of ours? The clean sheet of paper. The chance to make their premium World Rally Championship charger fit with their own marketing strategy. The ability to go their own way.

Isn’t that what’s needed right now? Surely the way forward for 2027 is to go down the road the WRC’s own working group suggested and offer hybrid, internal combustion and electric as alternatives. Limit the power, the weight, the torque and the budget and let them get on with it.

Yes, of course, we’d see EVs dropping their ICE rivals on tight, twisty asphalt, while they struggle on some of the leggier stages through Finland, but it doesn’t matter. We’d have manufacturers understanding and exploiting the absolute value of the most relevant motorsport championship on planet earth.

And that’s got to be a good thing, right?

Words:David Evans

Comments