The WRC goes downhill: the tubular frame may be the solution

A year ago, shortly before the start of the 2023 WRC, we tried to take stock of how we had come to choose Rally1 cars as the pinnacle of the rally categories, making the World Championship less and less attractive for the manufacturers and attractive for the public. 12 months later, things have not changed. The WRC is always in the middle of the ford, unable (or perhaps perfectly capable, but lacking the will) to get out of it by making a clear decision and planning for the future, perhaps even to the detriment of the present just as the FIA ​​and ACO did to relaunch the WEC.

A perfect stagnation that hurts the WRC and, consequently, also for those who race in it, for those who follow it, for those who do everything to be present in the special stages and enjoy a spectacle which, year after year, becomes increasingly desolate for the choices made in the past. In this regard, the FIA ​​has tried to take action with a dedicated commission which has the task of rethinking the rallies and relaunching them. The Federation is working on a plan to replace the Rally1 as early as 2025 – until a few months ago, the Rally1 represented the basis for the next generation of cars in the highest class – examining various options.

Among these there seems to be a road that sees the current Rally2 as protagonists. These could be the future basis of the top category because they are less complex and less expensive than their older hybrid sisters. At this point, however, it is good to ask yourself a question that, we imagine, many of you will have asked yourself over the course of these months and, perhaps, for a couple of years already: are Rally2 really the panacea for all ills?

Because the current Rally2s are destined to disappear

To decide which type of cars to choose to relaunch, the WRC will not have to look to 2025, but well beyond. He will have to look to the future, beyond his own nose. It will be necessary to take into account various issues that will involve road cars: pollution regulations, car platforms, which are now increasingly shared between the manufacturers that are part of the same automotive groups. Last but not least, another fundamental element: the engines.

For some time now, manufacturers have been creating turbocharged engines of increasingly smaller displacement. Currently both Rally1 and Rally2 have engines that are reaching the end of their life on the market. Just think of what the Skoda Fabia RS Rally2 uses, a 1.6 turbo 4-cylinder with 289 horsepower (declared), while the road models are all equipped with 1.0 turbocharged engines with 80, 95 and 110 horsepower. Only one version remains that has a larger engine and it is the Monte-Carlo DSG with a 1.5 TSI with 150 horsepower.

We're talking about smaller engines, but also about a market that has seen SUVs, small SUVs and crossovers as increasingly undisputed queens for over a decade. If we think about Stellantis and Ford, they have stopped producing iconic cars such as the Punto and, above all from a rally perspective, the Fiesta. It is clear that the market requires cars that are different from those, but also from the same ones, that are used in the WRC, including the Rally2 class. It wouldn't be a surprise to see Skoda end production of the Fabia in the near future, or change its appearance to become a small SUV.

Hyundai, with the i20 N Rally2, finds itself in a very similar situation to that of Skoda. The engine of his car ended up being discontinued and the last batch from Korea was purchased just over two years ago specifically dedicated to Rally2 and cars dedicated to the TCR. The Korean manufacturer has also chosen to downsize the engines, following the path already traced and chosen by other manufacturers.

Therefore, market analysis cannot be ignored by those who have to make important decisions related to the future of the WRC. Are SUVs, mini SUVs and crossovers dominating the market? So why not think of a regulation that would allow manufacturers to race with these? Or, at least, with bodywork reminiscent of the SUVs available on the market?

The tubular frame may be the answer

M-Sport, directed by Ford Performance, has decided to face the Rally1 challenge with a car that looks like the Ford Puma, but has the dimensions – we are talking above all about the height – of a Ford Fiesta. The adaptation of the bodywork thus allows Ford to promote the car that the brand is interested in, without however losing out due to the dimensions which, if they had remained those of the road car, would have penalized the British team significantly in the challenge with Toyota Gazoo Racing and Hyundai Motorsports.

This was an interesting choice. A cut and sew of a body shop promoting a driving car for the American brand. Now, given the crazy costs that the manufacturers sustain for the Rally1s, real prototypes which have few and futile components of the series cars, the idea of ​​creating tailor-made bodywork was the right choice. But we need to do more.

At this point, to change things, it is necessary to work on what is under the skin. That is, on the frame. The idea of ​​a tubular chassis had already come out before the choice that led the WRC to replace the WRC Plus with the Rally1, but it was shelved. Now it could make a comeback, giving houses and engineering companies numerous advantages.

The first advantage, and it couldn't be otherwise, is linked to costs. Much less carbon, less complexity, less research and development would ensure that those who want to enter the WRC have a more sustainable program in the short and long term.

It would allow manufacturers and engineers to homologate cars with bodies made to resemble cars that are available in the automotive market.

It would allow structures such as, for example, Prodrive and Oreca to create cars that can be deployed, or sold to third parties and, why not, also to manufacturers interested in investing in a WRC program, but without exorbitant costs. (In fact, putting your own brand and a bodywork designed on your own model on the car already ready with the space frame).

It would allow the engineering companies we talked about above not only to build cars, homologate them and race them themselves, but also to create a customer racing department, therefore sell the cars, and survive on their sales by creating a business.

At a time when manufacturers care much more about sponsoring their products through influencers than doing so by entering some motorsport category, the tubular frame could be the basis for a very effective showcase. It would also serve to adapt the cars to the needs of enthusiasts, who are increasingly less interested in how a suspension arm is made or where such a component comes from compared to the spectacle offered in the special tests.

A question of survival, but also of chasing something that the WRC has lost year after year: attractiveness.

We need better promotion than the World Rally Championship

Different cars, of course, but this cannot be enough. The WRC+ All Live service, which later became Rally.tv, led spectators to follow the entire WRC, ERC and RallyCross rallies, but the impression is that much more could be done.

Formula 1, for example, has found more popularity not only with the uncertain 2021 season (then followed by a soporific year and a half from a sporting point of view due to the dominance signed by Red Bull Racing and Max Verstappen), but also thanks to the TV series (much loved by some, but also equally criticized by others) Drive to Survive.

Therefore, if you want to reach more people, attract more enthusiasts and have new ones, it is also necessary to propose a more spectacular product not only on stage, but also in the Service Park. More cameras, more behind the scenes, greater understanding of the race using audio in which the teams talk about tire choices, strategies and, perhaps a little spice, with meetings and discussions between people involved in the team.

In short, everything should be rethought. Some things distorted, others just fixed. But it is necessary for those responsible to make choices and make them for the future, not to patch up the flaws of the present which are now too large to even be plugged. We need to do it now, or it could really be too late.