If a manufacturer really committed to it, could RWD win the WRC again?

Tarmac rally is all about the grip. Skids are just for publicity or U-turns

not strictly but there is a rule your car has to be road going shit-box
then every maker sends there car to pro drive for 4wd refit

The only two manufacturers that I think might do this are Renault and Lancia. I know Lancia is pretty much dead now, but Fiat may decide to revive Lancia some day. Renault has a history of making crazy RWD versions of shitboxes like the V6 Clio and the Renault 5 turbo.

The new twongi is rr.

...

No, the advantage of RWD was that it was light, now they have strict weight rules and the reason Lancia was able to win, was because of the atrocious weight distribution of the Audi.

*mr

*RR

*MR

*Rear-Engine, Rear-Wheel-Drive
Just like the Smart ForFour it is based on.

Prove it, faggot

A FWD is more likely to win WRC.

are you actually this stupid?

No. I am actually this smart to know that car is rear engined when engine is behind the rear axle.
Renault marketing team and uneducated journalist won't change it.
Go ahead. Change my mind if you can.

No, a car is rear engined when the engine is rear of the driver. Front engined means the engine is in front of the driver. So:
>Front engined: all cars with the engine in front of the driver (e.g. Miata)
>Front mid-engined: cars with the engine in front of the driver but entirely between the axles (e.g. S2000)
>Rear engined: all cars with the engine behind the driver (e.g. 911)
>Rear mid-engined: cars with the engine behind the driver but completely between the axles (e.g. new Twingo)
Note that the Twingo is both (R)MR and RR, because RMR is a subset of RR.

So you confess you were wrong here here
and here
by not posting "(R)MR" and worse, denying that twingo is MR

Well, here's homework for ya:
Call MR2, Mclaren, Ferraris, Lamborghinis,NSX, Fieros, 4C and Lotuses a rear-engined car and see how it goes.
Also you didn't tell in what subset 911 belongs. Should we all call it RRR to be precise and avoid misunderstandings?

OR
there are just 4 SETS FR,FMR,RMR and RR. In this case we were both wrong. I suggested set tha doesn't exist (MR) and you sugested wrong one (RR)

Nop, I didn't post any of those, is my first post ITT.

Strictly speaking, those cars you mention are all rear engined because they have the engine rear of the driver, they're just all RMR. A Tesla P100D is both front and rear engined (motored?), which further complicates matters.

RR is fine for the 911, since it lacks the M designation it's obviously not mid-engined.

FMR is a subset of FR, RMR is a subset of RR. MR stills exists - but it could be both FMR and RMR. The Twingo is RMR and therefore also RR - but not the traditional (for Renault) RR where the engine is behind the rear axle of course. Think of it this way: the Cayman and 911 both have the engine behind the driver, and are therefore rear engined. However, the Cayman is the only model with the engine positioned correctly (between the axles).

Ah and by the way, you were both kinda right. The Twingo is RMR, and therefore both MR and RR.

Wrong

Attached: artikel21687-bild00.jpg (484x331, 50K)

It even has a pedigree indeed. Sadly, it's to upmarket for rally.
Even toyota ditched celica for corolla wrc. Rallying has been a stage for pimped up shitboxes. Even if they were godmachines they were disguised as affordable peoples' cars (like 205 T16 or R5turbo)
Lancia stratos is an exeption, true...

Attached: renaultalpineformidablemag03.jpg (586x382, 184K)

It has everything it needs to win. Now Renault just have to give it a chance. Hell maybe a v6 version would be needed but they own Nissan so they got that covered.

I want to believe

I'm not super into rally, but does FWD ever beat AWD in these kinds of events?

Yes. On tarmac.

Why FWD tho?

>Lighter
If there is no minimum weight restriction fwd would be obviously lighter. If there is one, they'll still make it lighter and in the end to top the mass to minimum, put balasts where they want it. I.e. fuckhuge heavy skidplate in the rear which will effect in perfect balance for the purpose of handling and brake bias in this exact rally. And low center of gravity also.
>smaller power losses
Obvious, especially when there is maximum power restriction. One who wastes less wins.

no fwd is awd without rwd
its literally worse in every way other than weight.
If you buy a fwd that is more than 1100kg you wasted your money and shouldve gotten awd or rwd.

how about instead of making an rally fwd you take the entire front part of the engine with half shafts and shit and put it in the middle leaving front wheels only to steer and break instead of also handle the power.
It also gives you better weight distribution so there is literally no point for fwd to exist anymore other than normie cuck shit like practicality

RWD loses too much speed oversteering through the corners, while FWD can accelerate while oversteering. RWD will never beat FWD in rally again, except maybe on tarmac.

The glorious truth

nice meme retard

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_2-Litre_World_Rally_Cup
>With more engine freedoms and lighter weights they could match, even beat the turbo 4WD Group A and WRC cars. In particular the kit cars built by the French manufacturers Peugeot and Citroën would prove real threats on theTour de Corseeach year as increasingly they become more like circuit racing cars and less like all-terrain rally cars.
>Their ability to snatch wins away from WRC teams became a launching pad into World championship careers, led byGilles Panizzi andPhilippe Bugalskiand later emerging French talentSébastien Loeb

okay but that is an fwd with less engine restriction and less weight than awd which is giving it an advantage.
They are winning despite the drivedrain not thanks to it.
The drivedrain is considered such an disadvantage they let you change other things about the car.

Its like you only read a few words and actually dont fucking think

Yes maybe about the engine restrictions. ( still it's NA 2liter engines vs tarbo 2liter engines and there was no signifucant powergap between them)
>it is unfair that fwd are lighter than awd
Alright now you've went full retard. I mean my tier of feels vs facts feminism. It's like "healthy at every size" transferred to automotive world

Aaaaaand just like with feminism, it all ended up by fia axing kitcars so they couldn't embarrass wrc anymore.

very rarely

Are you retarded, or are you just pretending?

>this is what happens when retards come here and take memes seriously

FWD is inherently lighter, you dork.

>descending into unintelligable babble because you got called out on retardation
gg
yes, its the only advantage it has, and it has shitload of disadvantages for goin fast.
Its racing not your retarded benchracing where you compare a fucking fucking citroen 2cv to a fucking 787b.

>wanting car where front wheels steer, corner, brake and accelarate and rear wheels are just along for the ride
>thinking this is good thing
>thinking hes not the one whos fallen for busrider memes

This thread is about rallying subaruboi. Rally is actually going from A to B fastest. Not your feels. You have your awd but you managed to derail it anyway.

Why GT cars in competitions are much closer to their market version than the WRC ones?

You´ll have to ask the FIA, why they make the rules as they are.

It was floating away from reality since group B. Anyway, even in late 90's only road cars remotely connected to wrc machines were imprezas and lanevos.