I aim to please. If questions are easy, I wish you would answer some of them. It might help some of us. I disagree on your traction point. You're quite right to point out that there are advantages and disadvantages for different drive types but, while improvements in technology have undoubtedly reduced the "deficit" that some FWD cars would suffer in some conditions, it would be foolish to generalise in the way that you have. Audi's "heavy" 4WD Super Touring car did ok so there must be some benefit... As you say, cheating happens everywhere where motorsport is concerned. Without definitive proof, I think it would be silly to take any published lap times too seriously. While Honda were less polished in the way they approached the PR element, there is simply no evidence to suggest that anyone else was more honest in what they published. There are simply too many variables for it to ever be proven incorrect. I don't dispute that VW may have chosen the 2WD GTI partly for engineering reasons. However, my point was simply that PR could have played just as big a part as engineering as, with the 40th anniversary of the GTI occurring, what sense would it have made to choose a Golf R? The lines in the automotive business are rarely as clear as what makes engineering sense. They could have thrown a 400bhp, lightweight Golf R out there and this whole conversation could be very different for all we know. Did Ford know the RS wouldn't do well? They never actually marketed the car as being a Nurburgring specialist, but as a car made for fun and excitement. I think the problem is that you have gone into this assuming (we all know you like an assumption) that the RS has done a bad job of it's Nurburgring lap. That is, in my view, an inaccurate assertion. The RS is bang on the money with it's main 4WD rivals. The fact that some specialised 2WD cars have gone faster is almost irrelevant. The Focus, which never played on it's Nurburgring credentials, has proven it is every bit as fast as its main rivals. Surely that's job done? Ford not bothering to advertise the car's lap time certainly doesn't seem to have hurt sales... As for your question; if Renault choose to release a time, I will likely pay a passing interest, as I would for any other hot hatch. It's interesting and, in some cases, impressive when a car posts a particular time but I tend to make judgments on cars based on driving them. There's intelligence to my argument? Bugger, must try harder lol.
I've a gut feeling you're right. It will be competitive but not a stormer. When the Renaultsport chaps were handed the bulky Megane GT as the donor car they must have thought 'poisoned chalice'. If they have been given a decent budget to play with and can get some fat out of it with some lightweight components, then it might be a serious contender. Power, weight, bit of aero and some decent chassis work and some decent tweaking of the 4WS, which gets mixed reviews on the GT, and it could be a player.
I know 2WD isn't always the best solution but it does offer a significant weight advantage and just as importantly a more linear and connected driving experience. More of a drivers choice. I think the issue recently with 4WD, particularly for the masses, is they consider it a notch up in capability with no downsides. More technology, more complexity, more driven wheels, more to talk about in a sales brochure and more expensive.....so it must be better. No downsides. Regarding 4WD in racing, it can be difficult to transpose that experience directly to the road going equivalents. A BTCC car with the existing Tech Regs make the cars so far removed from the production model they are only a silhouette of the original donor cars and any perceived 4WD advantages/disadvantages would be controlled within the Regs to make what the players really want - a sort of level playing field. I agree though, we are yet to see a stripped out more mainstream 4WD hot hatch doing the 275 Trophy R thing. Maybe they know the market isn't really there. Regarding Ring lap times, I take them seriously as they do represent a comparison benchmark, BUT I do look at them with a broad viewpoint on how, who, and where and when they achieved to give a more balanced feeling for an overall capability. Manufacturers are using then Ring extensively for proving and development, that's why it was built, so anything honed there has a decent capability in the real world and its not going to be a 'race hard' suspension spec product as the Ring demands a degree of suppleness and finesse. The Focus RS? A fantastic price and performance package, although residuals will now suffer as too many are up for sale and bought only as speculative punt, and Ford made a bold move with 4WD but the car was hyped far too much with a false perception its latest generation 4WD, torque vectoring systems would offer something a bit more revolutionary. Transpires it's just another heavyweight 4WD hot hatch in a market with similar performing rivals and has its own set of issues. Ford didn't manage to break the 4WD mould or hide the mass. That's why I was interested in its Ring time. Regarding the MK4 Megane Ring time, I think a lot of people will be very interested. Renault has set the pace in the past, likes the chase, likes the kudos, so if it drops the ball then it will get a fair amount of comment.
How many people actually buy a car purely based on how fast it will go around some random track in Germany? Not many at all. It wont make any difference to sales if the new Megane is slightly slower than one of its competitors around that track.
