hueman

iTrader: (17)

wait, when was the last time subaru won the manufacturer's crown?

oh that's right, before mitsu won.

mitsu's not going to do extremely well this year... hopefully a podium finish... but there was a thread a while back concerning mitsu's goals in the WRC... finish this year, and aim to compete for a podium finish... next year aim to compete for top dog.... looks like they're on track (so far )

CRVdrftR05

I already missed Monte Carlo....dang... Haha yeah I think Mitsu's got a good thing going for them this time. I stopped watching at around August cus of school so I didn't know what happened.

Haha yeah the weirdest argument I've seen in this thread is the Lancer WRC name thing. Lancer is a Lancer. But specifics say it's using an Evolution chassis with a highly modded and tuned 4G63. Someone said already that the power classes are peaked at 300 and that's true so think about this. In the 2004 season BEFORE the MR FQ300 was even thought of, the 4G63 was already producing official 300hp. Early prototypes always stink and last year's model stunk the worst. I think the WRC04 only went through about half a year of testing because Mitsu waited til the last minute to put the car together.

Anyways! Good luck Mitsu! haha woohoo! This year'll be fun to watch.

urbnprsutvhicle

i watched it. just luckily caught it on the program guide about 15 minutes before it started. but it was GREAT that the boys did so well. hope this is a trend.

thestaton

iTrader: (2)

haha no way??? How could this be in the commericals Mitsu has little guys lining the roads to tighten my tire caps...The clutch died wow I'm calling BS Mitsu has the best clutch ever haha

Staton

plokivos

iTrader: (3)

saw that, not bad.

evo lost its clutch, it's 6 speed manual, not sequential.

NaranKPatel

how much torque does a Lancer WRC05 have? anyone know?

If hp is limited to 300 at the crank/flywheel and the boost is running super high...what's the torque output? Just curious...

GPTourer

So is a Lancer OZ Rally not really a Lancer like a Ralliart is because it has 4 lugs instead of 5?

How could something so trivial as the number of lugs determine whether a car is or isn't the model it was designated when it was built?

I don't think I've ever seen a team publish the actual output of racing engines - or slap a WRC car (or any race car) on a dyno and publish the numbers. As long as they are using the spec'd equipment for the rules and the restrictor plate, I don't think anyone but the team would know.

XRS

PLEASE, why are you surprised? People whine when someone with a Mirage does an Evo conversion. Lancer is a Lancer right? Sure you can argue that it has more spot welds and the body is more rigid, blah blah blah but in the end it's what both cars have in common that is more important since one is based off the other. Just think, without the Lancer, there would be no Mirage, no Wira, no Charisma, no EVO.

astondg

I never said it wasn't a Lancer. Any Lancer from the early 70's LA (or maybe before?), that I own, to the Latest Evolution IX is a Lancer in my opinion.

What I was saying was that when the WRC04 car was released some people where discussing why it was not based on a Lancer Evolution but on a regular Lancer and one of the reasons that came up was that the Evolution had 5 stud hubs but the WRC04 had 4 like the regular Lancer. That could mean that it is not just different hubs but also other parts that are connected to the hubs, like the brake discs and driveshafts and other things, from the regular Lancer and not the Evolution. Obviously since the car is not really much like any road car anyway the hub and other parts could all be completely new. Anyway since it was mentioned before and then I saw the 5 stud on the WRC05 and I couldn't remember what the other differences were supposed to be, I just thought I would ask. I only expected a simple yes or no at the most, I really expected the question to be ignored and it wasn't supposed to be a big deal because the topic was actually the Monte-Carlo rally.

Sorry again,

Aston

wrcevo

Yup, the boost number is correct. The lancer WRC05 does boost at ard 50 psi. Which is And, although it's a lancer by name and shape, the engine is of an Evo. 3 i think. But it is of course a 4G63

osunick

iTrader: (8)

The FIA requires dyno testing of the cars, and Toyota was excluded from the WRC for an entire season since they used a moving restrictor that increased the power over 300 when the car was actually moving but not when on a dyno. The reason the dyno figures are confidential for the WRC is not because of peak power but because the power curves are trade secrets. Peugeot tried to get away with a 4 speed tranny last year (with disastrous results) because their power band was so flat that they didn't feel they needed the extra gears. But rest assured the FIA makes sure that no car makes over 300 HP. Peak power is somewhat irrelevant anyway as the top speeds of the cars are not meant to be that high anyway.

eclipsegs2k1

this is really exciting, i'm so glad for Mitsu that they are doing well... I really hope that they can keep this going on through the season!

GPTourer

Thanks for the information. I figured the FIA would know and the team would know, but we are more likely to find out what today's agenda within the FBI or CIA then we are to see a dyno graph of a WRC car.

No need to apologize. Its just that whoever brought that up as a "reason" is a moron. Just like you said, the whole WRC car is a purpose built million dollar machine so not much really has to be shared at all. But if the engineers and the company who built it call it a Lancer, who are we to argue?

NaranKPatel

Out of curiosity, anyone have a clue about the 0-60, 0-100, 1/8 or 1/4 for WRC05?

Or in general terms typically any WRC car? These peaky torque monsters must have some incredible pulling power to 100...

Grog

iTrader: (9)

I think Panizzi will only be running the tarmac events. He'll be trading out seat time with Galli for the second team car. Galli is a better driver on slick/rough surfaces. It looks like Mitsu is mainly competing for manufacturer's points.

I also think they're keeping Panizzi on as a "thank you" for being so helpful to the team during their rebuilding season last year, not as much on driver merit. Just my opinion.

Overall, it was great to see BOTH cars finish, scoring points no less, in the first event of the season.