Ral­ly­ing’s so­lu­tion

Motor Sport News - - Have Your Say -

In re­ply to Jeremy Re­seigh-watts ( Mo­tor­sport News, April 27), I have sym­pa­thy and, in gen­eral agree, with some of his sen­ti­ments around the WRC and about the spec­ta­cle be­ing lost on mod­ern cars, with the ef­fi­ciency with which their en­gines and driv­e­trains work. But I feel he has over­looked a cou­ple of points:

Ban­ning the use of tur­bocharged cars alien­ates man­u­fac­tur­ers as there is no plat­form to de­velop this very pop­u­lar type of power unit now com­monly found in many new cars.

Ban­ning four-wheel-drive may be less of a prob­lem to man­u­fac­tur­ers, but this hardly worked for the BRC prior to its forced sab­bat­i­cal year in 2015, ow­ing to lack of man­u­fac­turer, com­peti­tor and spec­ta­tor in­ter­est.

Tak­ing the lat­ter point, above, and ad­ding to the first, you re­place the present WRC sit­u­a­tion with a pre2015 BRC, but with the ab­sence of tur­bocharg­ing. If that is not a ret­ro­grade step, I don’t know what is.

The R5 class (tur­bos and four-wheeldrive) for the all-new BRC has proved an over­whelm­ing hit with ev­ery­one con­cerned and gen­er­ated packed en­try lists with top class R5 cars.

The no­tion that two-wheel-drive (let’s face it, front-wheel-drive) cars will im­prove the spec­ta­cle given the flop of re­cent BRC years in this for­mat, is ev­i­dence that such a move is doomed to fail­ure. If the old spec­ta­cle of 30 plus years ago is what Jeremy re­quires, then his­toric ral­ly­ing is where it is for him. Leave the WRC to get on with it, the past has al­ready been recre­ated for you.

Richard Weaver Via email

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.