Citroen DS3 Racing past March 11, 2010
Posted by richard in : History, Minutiae of cars, Motorsport , add a commentWHY only 1000 Citroen DS3 Racings, I asked the Citroen man at the Geneva Motor Show.
Surely you could make it a permanent addition to the range, underlining its MINI John Cooper Works-challenging status?
The reason why, he revealed, was a blast from the past. It’s a mainstream maker’s homologation special. Like the Ford Escort RS 1600i, like the Alfa Romeo 155 Silverstone, like the Mercedes 190 Evolution. And thus, for me, cool.
It’s even diverted off the production line for final finishing: Citroen Racing (for it is they) send the instructions to the production line men, who add on a ‘parts kit’ of bits that turn a standard DSport into a DS3 Racing.
Changes include:
• Stiffer springs, lowered by 15mm
• New-spec front and rear dampers
• 30mm wider track front and rear
• 4-piston brake calipers
• Drilled rear brake discs
• 18-inch alloys
• Wing extensions
• Carbon-fibre air diffuser
• Remapping software for EPAS and ESP (including ‘off’ button)
Chuck in an interior makeover and STRICT limitations to 1000 units, and you have something that won’t be cheap but will be exceedingly collectable.
It’s quick, too. The 1.6 THP turbo has, at 200hp, 30 percent more power, plus 15 percent more torque. Thank uprated components, tuned turbo and remapped ECU for this. Rortiness is provided by a special exhaust back box.
But what is it homologation for? Next year’s new WRC rules, that’s what. These stipulate more real world cars with front-drive chassis. Kimi Raikkonen will be driving one of these next year. We’ll be able to buy one before that.
Citroen, you’ve sold me: add my name to the press fleet booking list now, please..!
Save BBC 6Music and the Ford Zephyr
Renaultsport past to inspire turbo future?
Why RenaultSports don’t have rear spoilers
Save BBC 6Music and the Ford Zephyr March 7, 2010
Posted by richard in : History, Technology , 1 comment so farINSPIRATION comes in many forms. Today, for instance, down at the brilliant Goodwood Breakfast Club, a gorgeous Ford Zephyr was spotted.
That’s Ford Zephyr of Z-Cars fame – and, even cooler than that, was the sticker in the back… advertising Radio Caroline!
Music Radio fans of the 60s were proper tenacious in support for the pirate radio station that so riled the institution. It played great music, boasted emboldened DJs and was the real music industry’s never-miss must-listen.
Sound fami… well, indeed it does. But it was the fact this sticker was so proudly displayed that inspired.
Here, see, was public support for an under-threat radio station that music lovers loved.
What can it teach those who want to see 6Music saved? Well, to use yesterday’s car stickers like today’s Twitter and Facebook Twibbons.
By its very nature, DAB is a rarity in cars, but far more popular than many think in homes. Not to mention, of course, computers, via BBC iPlayer. Both are potential 6Music hubs.
Radio Caroline parallels and tips for 6Music campaigners ahoy, p’raps..?
How Ford would have made a Rover January 8, 2010
Posted by richard in : History , 2commentsFORD finally won ownership to the Rover brand name in 2006. But it was providing aid for the brand even before then.
Secret talks in the late 90s were conducted, to sidestep then-chief Bernd Pischetreider’s plans to invest £1.7bn in Rover. Instead of spending so much to develop two new platforms, a future mid-range Rover would have been developed with Ford.
The plan was to take the Focus and develop it into a Rover. BMW engineers, said Car magazine’s Hilton Holloway back in 1999, went so far as to evaluate the Ford Focus.
Their verdict? The VW Golf, which was initially to have formed the base of the Rover, is a fine car… ‘but the Focus is better – almost as good as we envisage the next Golf being.’
And how would they have turned it into a Rover? Easy: ‘new rubber mountings, springs and dampers.’
This has to rank up among the biggest opportunities missed in the entire history of Rover. Despite an insider telling Holloway ‘on a 1-to-10 provability scale, we’ve reached 8 with Ford’. The Mk1 Focus is brilliant. It could have made a superb Rover 200 replacement.
Volvo proved as much by taking the Mk2 Focus platform and creating the Volvo C30. Which is brilliant. Looks nothing like a Focus, neither outside nor in. Indeed, the more I think about it, the more it pains me: seems the ‘unforeseen’, which would have scuppered the deal our insider expected by March 2000, did indeed happen.
Groan…
Land Rover’s ride quality secret
Mat point December 3, 2009
Posted by richard in : History , add a commentVAUXHALL, in 1963, used to offer 512 different types of carpet to its Victor model. Blimey.
512! Imagine the logistics, the waste, the need for systems management, the storage demands, sheer difficulty of co-coordinating and perfecting this in the days way before computers and JIT. To a production manager today, it plain doesn’t bear thinking about.
But, know what? Direct comparisons can be drawn with today, believe it or not. Yes, I am using carpet as an example of modern lean car production.
Modern cars, you see, usually have but one basic type of carpet. None of that multi-colour, multi-grade stuff nowadays: you may have gotten posh plush shag in a 1979 Ford Fiesta Ghia, but in today’s Titanium Individual, it’s exactly the same bum-fluff stuff (© Russell Bulgin) that’s in the boggo Studio.
This is why price-list spotters now note something very significant on the official car manufacturers list: carpet mats. Yes, really. Car makers have made them a factory-fit option, or a factory-fit upgrade on the posher variants.
Why? To simplify production, cut costs, ease the supplier chain, yet still ensure there’s sufficient margin to trade up on posher trims. Genius.
Particularly as this is a fitment that’s entirely flexible. You could even do it at dealer level, as part of the PDI, rather than needing a specific process on the production line. Brings a dose more uniformity to the production process, that probably saves £millions.
Clues like this abound in price lists. Cars are more tech-packed than ever, yet the fact they are still priced relative to models in the past is only partly through the cost of tech coming down.
Car makers have worked out how to make cars more cheaply, without you noticing. Bet you 512-to-1 that this carpety thought had never crossed your mind…
How to do motor industry PR brilliance
Advice from Ford’s Walter Hayes
The more things change… November 21, 2009
Posted by richard in : History , add a commentTWO decades ago, the car industry was in a recession, too. 1991 was a year of depression, sales shrinkages and dealer drama.
Sound familiar? Well, looking at the news of the day, the parallels extend far further than that. Yearly sales were around 1.8 million, well down on the all-time record of 2.3 million in 1989. Rather similar to this year’s prediction, too.
This led, explained Autocar & Motor’s David Sutherland, to ‘plant idling’ – shutting plants down for weeks and months on end. Honda, Nissan and MINI will be familiar with this.
He also looked at a few individual brands, rating their performance over the year.
Ford used to claim 30 percent, but the maker was suffering, mainly because of the rubbish Escort. 25 percent was the total experts said it would have to put up with (today, Ford commands 17.5 percent. There’s a difference).
Rover (remember them?) was still doing well – the Brit-built Metro was brilliant, as were the 200 and 400. Even the archaic Maestro and Montego were finding homes in large lease and daily rental fleets, albeit with massive discounts.
Citroen was on the up, with the ZX bringing market share up to around 3.5-4 percent. Again, oddly similar to what it holds today. Funnily, expert Garel Rhys noted the firm’s pricing throughout the ‘80s was competitive, ‘and it will have to beep up the aggressive marketing strategy’…
BMW was pleased: here is where the 3 Series really started its shift to the mainstream, with the launch of the E36. Sutherland reckoned the biggest problem would be getting enough right-hookers.
‘It’s a good time to launch a small car because in this recession a lot of people are considering down-sizing,’ said a BMW GB chief.
Lest we forget, Japanese makers were still selling under quotas, meaning they were cushioned against the recession. Nissan was the largest: it could sell 6 percent of the UK market total. Interesting, and not long to last.
But, today and quota-free, is there really that much difference in volumes? Toyota has 5 percent, Nissan has 3.2 percent, Mazda has 2.3 percent…
There were differences, though. In 2009, it’s been scrappage-boosted private buyers who have kept the market up. Company car drivers did that in 1991 – retail sales were knocked by price rises and high interest rates. The latter isn’t a factor now, and scrappage has reduced the impact of the latter.
18 years ago seems like only yesterday, yet you’d still think there would be huge changes in the UK market. And, with no Rover and more makers eating into Ford’s share, there have indeed been.
Still, though, the framework remains intriguingly familiar…
If Ford played chess, don’t take it on
Why scrappage is now inevitable
Ford gloom hides people carrier revolution?
Walter Hayes feedback from Richard Hayes October 31, 2009
Posted by richard in : History , add a commentWell, I’ll be. My piece on Ford’s Walter Hayes? It’s only gone and got a response.
From, no less, than his son, Richard Hayes. Honoured, me? You betcha!
Luckily, Richard says he read and enjoyed my piece on his dad, ‘which catches him well.’ However, he’s got a couple of points to add. First: Walter Hayes was never actually honoured.
It seems I’ve knighted him, in error. Well, that’s just wrong, in my book. It seems the Queen somehow missed Walter’s name on her annual list: but it’s no more than an oversight, I’m sure.
There’s more. It turns out Walter Hayes ‘was a great motorsport fan and loved it, contrary to what you wrote,’ said Richard.
‘He took me to races all over the UK and the world, and enjoyed every formula – touring cars, FF, sportscars, F1, rallying, historic, etc…’ Which is great news! One of Ford’s top men is a motorsport nut, after all. And so, all is good in the world.
Even better, Richard has promised to speak some more with me – I said I’d like to bring out more of his dad’s remarkable career, to which he said ‘I would be happy for you to do some follow up pieces on my father – and will offer as much help as I can.’
This is great news! Readers, we’re going to learn some crackers, I just know it. Richard’s already tempted me, with a story about Max Mosely, Lord March and the Goodwood Festival of Speed…
Advice from Ford’s Walter Hayes
How Ford put the boot into the Sierra
Marina and the Escort October 24, 2009
Posted by richard in : History , add a commentCARS famous for being bad are not hard to find, worryingly.
Take the might of British Leyland, back in the 1970s. It foisted the Morris Marina upon us. Then had the cheek to call this one-time-intended Ford Escort competitor a Ford Cortina rival.
Ford itself wasn’t immune, mind. 20 years later, the blue oval imposed the MkIV Escort onto an unsuspecting public, who… well, bought it in sufficiently-reduced droves to get Richard Parry-Jones’ revolution signed off.
(In this respect, it’s actually one of the biggest hero cars of the past century, but that’s faint praise indeed.)
Ther similarities between these two bad cars are uncanny. Both were anonymous design-by-committee jobs. Both treated the public’s demands in a lowest-common-denominator kinda way. Both were launched with major handling flaws that demanded fast action.
In the Marina’s case, it’s part of folklore. Big Jeff Daniels attended the European launch, and nearly wiped himself out in a terminally-understeering 1800. His colleague at Autocar, separately, almost did the same.
They thus did the unthinkable, and paired up to put their case to Longbridge. Ah, dear boys, was the response. We know. They’re pre-pros. Rest assured, it’ll be fixed. And, fair play, it was. Albeit using subterfuge I’ll detail later.
History repeated itself with the Escort. Lo, came the press launch reports. How it rolls! And leans! And…well, I’ll let the picture I took of Autocar’s road test do the talking. That’s a terrifying level of roll for a car said to be for the ‘90s.
Ford’s solution? Take a leaf out of BL’s book. Blame the fact pre-pro cars were used. And rush through the standard-fitment of a front anti-roll bar for production 1.4-litre models.
As with the Marina, it didn’t make a bad car into a good one. But it did turn a liability into a mere chronic underperformer.
For Ford, there was even a bright side. The Escort’s hideousness led directly to the MkI Focus: very good CAN come from very very bad.
This car, coincidentally, has another BL link. One chassis bigwig I spoke to recently called it the ‘best handling front-driver since the Mini.’ Funny how things turn out…
The most depressing engines in existence
Advice from Ford’s Walter Hayes
Schizophrenic Ford learns how to handle a note October 11, 2009
Posted by richard in : History , 3commentsFORD’S Fiesta was the turning point. Before that, explained Ford’s handling God, Richard Parry-Jones, the blue oval had a schizophrenic approach to good handling.
‘We had good handling RS products, and no more than average handling on our everyday products.’
In his book, that was bad. ‘I felt very strongly that customer satisfaction and the image of the vehicles were very closely tied to the handling experience.’
Praise the Lord, for this protestation by Welshman RP-J, back in 1997. Indeed, as the Fiesta was already so good by 1996, so Parry-Jones wanted to take things a step further.
But not, alas, by recreating the XR2i and making it decent. No, back then, the hot hatch was dead. Murdered by thieves nicking ‘em and making the motors virtually uninsurable. Enter instead a hastily-conceived small coupe, designed entirely on computer in double-quick time. The Ford Puma.
70 percent of the parts were Fiesta. The biggest difference was the launch 1.7-litre Yamaha engine, with 125bhp and a delightfully high rev limit. An engine whose noise RP-J knew before it was even designed. See, he employed a musician, to record the exact sound he wanted for it…
Why? To pass the 50-metre test he invented. ‘It’s what customers notice straight away. They can’t explain it in engineering terms, but they know if a car feels right as soon as they get in it.’
This is why, he said, he corners slowly – probably no more than 25mph. ‘When you’re cornering hard, most cars can communicate a bit, but the most difficult time is at almost no speed.’
Forcing engineers, he says, to get rid of all the noise and vibration, while enhancing what signals ARE there.
What’s crucial here?
• Steering
• Throttle response
• Engine soundtrack
Hence his recruitment of a musician. Schizophrenic, RP-J? Not at all. It’s because of him that Fords no longer are, either. The man deserves a Knighthood.
How Ford put the boot into the Sierra
We like vans because they’re stiff October 4, 2009
Posted by richard in : Minutiae of cars , add a commentGIVE a motoring journalist a van and he’ll be your best friend.
Particularly if you are Ford’s Bob Wright, who controls the press fleet, and distributes said vans to house-moving journos who just so happen to also have a pressing need to get a van out on test.
But, why? Just why is it we love driving them? Is it their simplicity, their great visibility, their excuse for you to drive like an arse, the fact they’re just plain different, the fact they’re always so surprisingly good? Well, probably all of that.
There’s another to add in too, though. They’re stiffly sprung, to help manage those heavy house-move loads. And, thus, handle like big GTIs. Yes, really. The latest Ford Transit is an absolute riot through the lanes; a Mercedes Sprinter is an utter class act.
They’re chuckable, accurate, precise, lithe and fun. And why is this set-up such a welcome surprise, when GTIs and sports cars are so commonplace? Because, reckons a chassis pal of mine, car makers are getting scared of sticking stiff springs on.
Particularly the Japanese, he reckons. Car makers don’t want to offend with the initial thudder of a ride, so will go down on the spring rate to give response frequencies to bumps that are, well, pleasant. Trouble is, they forget to perfect the damping to deal with the after-effects of this – meaning as soon as surfaces worsen, so does the ride.
None of this worries van drivers. They need a set-up that will compensate for their gregariousness both on the way to and from picking up those 12 200kg generators – so, spring rates go up, handling benefits accordingly, and chassis engineers are forced to carefully consider the damping rates to deal with this huge variation.
Vans are stiff. But, because vans are stiff, vans are actually far more intricately engineered than you first may think. Making them a blimmin’ riot of a test car.
If only I could shift my house…
How Ford put the boot into the Sierra
Why Ford Econetics break the rules
Ford Escort XR3i v RS 1600i October 3, 2009
Posted by richard in : Technology , 5commentsI really fancy an Escort XR3i MkIII. You know, the one with the upside down rev counter.
But why, reckon Fast Ford hardcorists, when I could also have an RS 1600i?
History lesson time. The original Ford Escort XR3 was much maligned, despite my dad owning one. Intolerable ride, edgy handling and just 96bhp from its 1.6-litre CVH carb. Ford knew something had to be done, so set the British Dunton experts onto a hasty rejig.
While also, bizarrely, sending more funds to Germany, to develop a homologation-special Escort for Group A competition regulations. Thus, 5000 Escort RS 1600is came to be built.
I’ll detail in the future just what gave the Escort XR3 its ‘i’. But the diverging path chosen by the Germans is no less fascinating.
Injection for the CVH was similar to the forthcoming 3i but beneath this, the RS 1600i had a hot cam plus solid valve lifters. These, along with a higher compression ratio, allowed more manic revs. It also had electronic ignition; you can spot this engine from its finned cam cover.
There were big changes in the suspension, too. The XR3i was to have an anti-roll bar to locate the front struts, for example. The RS 1600i had, instead, trailing links, located at the front by an aluminium crossmember.
Why? Well, this was easily changeable – ideal for racing. It also restricted wheel movement, compared to an anti-roll bar; just what’s needed when using racing rubber.
Elsewhere, Koni dampers replaced the XR3i’s Girlings. These were adjustable, and mated to lowered springs that slammed the Escort by 2 inches. The front wheels also retained 1.5deg of positive camber; the better, ‘upright’ stance of the XR3i was not possible.
Tyres themselves were 195/50 15”s, as opposed to the XR3i’s 185/60 15”s. Car Magazine said all this together had several results. Compared to the XR3i, the RS 1600i:
• Had a stiffer ride
• More nervous handling
• Flatter cornering
• Heavy steering
• Intrusive tyre noise
Sounds to me like the better car is already clear: I’d even trade the RS 1600i’s RS-style steering wheel and seats for the (back then) cheaper XR3i.
No worries there. Limited production means it’s an even rarer sight today, with prices changing accordingly. As for me, well, I think it’s about time I got my 3i eye out.
Advice from Ford’s Walter Hayes
How Ford put the boot into the Sierra
