Stig was tackling British rallies in the Talbot, but by mid-season Audi Germany was offering him more Quattro work. On the 1000 Lakes he was a close second to Mikkola, winning 21 of the stages: “I had a deal with Michelin and could use their latest TRXs, but Hannu was stuck with the Klebers the works team was contracted to. We both got so far ahead that the engineers detuned the cars on the last day. I had a suspension problem, Hannu took the lead and they decided we should stay that way.”

To outside observers, Blomqvist’s style with the Quattro was reminiscent of how he’d driven his Saabs: very committed, with lots of left-foot braking. “Sure, I used left-foot braking, but early Quattros were quite difficult: the power came in suddenly and it was easy to brake too much with the left foot, kill the speed and the engine, or not enough and get caught by understeer.”

It was something that he – and the sport – was going to have to get the hang of.

The Group 4 homologation rules had become subverted by manufacturers building just 400 of a ‘rally special’, such as the Sunbeam Lotus and Stratos, and it was clear that the distinction between saloon and GT was permanently blurred. FISA, the new regulatory body, decided that simplification was needed and sat down with the manufacturers in the early 1980s to draw up new groups and tuning rules. With rallying in mind, it was quickly agreed there should be two groups: Group A for cars produced in numbers greater than 5000 per annum, and Group B for cars produced in ‘small’ quantities. The Germans – Audi, Porsche and BMW – thought ‘small’ should mean 2000 per annum; the Latins, plus a smattering of Brits and Opel (run by a Brit), thought 20 would be about right. Eventually, after more meetings in corridors than in committee rooms, the number chosen was 200. The consensus was that everyone could now build a run of specialist cars and that entry lists would be full…

And it almost happened according to the script. Lots of manufacturers went to extraordinary lengths to produce runs of 200 special cars, and for a brief period there were nine teams contesting the world series. But two things arrived at the same time as GpB: four-wheel drive and turbos.

Audi was not the force that created GpB. But it certainly helped guide its development. Before Ingolstadt arrived on the world scene at the start of 1981, rallying had had exotic cars. It had had turbochargers, too. But low-slung sports cars or engines with lots of power were next to useless if the visibility got bad and the road slippery; Escorts, Fiat 131s and Asconas were approaching the limit of ‘useable’ power.

Audi’s four-wheel drive reset the boundaries. Early Quattros were a bit basic but they showed the rest what the combination of lots more power and 4WD could do. On its debut at Monte Carlo, Mikkola was leading by almost 6min — after six stages. If he’d carried on at that rate, he would have won by more than half an hour!

A well-known Fiat rally engineer dismissed the Quattro as being “too complicated”. But it was not long before it was winning, and if it was a bit “complicated”, the challenge was there for the engineers to make a simpler, more reliable car. GpB was ideal for this process. Engineers could take the shape of a current production car and create inside it a sophisticated 4WD rally car. The companies got the benefits of rallying a car that looked identical to, and had the same name as, the cars they sold, while the teams got a winner and the spectators got a show of unequalled excitement.

Audi Quattro A2

44 CMN is the actual car, the Audi UK car, that Blomqvist drove to victory on the 1983 RAC, his first win that year and his first in a GpB.

The original long-wheelbase Audi Quattro was homologated in Gp4 on the first day of 1981 in time for the Monte Carlo. It had a capacity of 2144cc which, when multiplied by the 1.4 turbo coefficient meant that it was considered to be 3001cc. This meant its minimum weight was 1005kg. This did not matter to start with as the car was heavier than that, but when it had to be transferred into GpB for January ’83, the opportunity was taken to homologate an alloy block. This variant was known as the A1 (A for alloy). But it was now worse off since that extra cc meant its new minimum weight was 1100kg. So when it came to the A2, a new homologation for Corsica on May 1, its capacity was corrected to 2109cc: an equivalence of 2952cc, and a new minimum of 960kg. Audi never got down to that with a fully equipped rally car, but it certainly dipped below the magic tonne.

The twin air scoops in front of the rear wheels most easily distinguish the A2 externally. Internally, the adoption of Bosch Motronic in the place of Pierburg gave a useful increase in power at lower revs.

It was by far the most successful GpB Quattro, winning 10 WRC events and taking the manufacturers’ title in 1984 and drivers’ titles in ’83-84 via Mikkola and Blomqvist.

Blomqvist’s view: Ah! My favourite Audi, the A2 with the long wheelbase. I don’t know why, because the A1 was almost the same, but for some reason it was the one I liked most. On those fast rallies like Sweden, 1000 Lakes and Argentina, it was more stable, easier to handle. And more comfortable as well! The A2 on the RAC was a great car. You know, it’s always slippery at RAC-time, and the Audi made it so much easier: you didn’t lose traction so easily and you could have a go without such big risk. It was day and night when you compared it to other cars. Even the braking, with the four wheels joined together, was less of a problem, less likely to lock up.

But it was always a bit of an understeery machine, with the engine hung out over the front wheels. But I was used to that from Saab – the left-foot braking came in useful to control it.

Lancia 037 Rallye

Not every manufacturer went the turbo route: Lancia’s first GpB offering was supercharged.

037 made its WRC debut in Corsica in May 1982. It was inauspicious: Markku Alén could not get his to handle predictably and was ninth, while Attilio Bettega was wrestling his along in third place when he had a massive accident and was airlifted to hospital. If it failed to make an impression in 82, 037 made up for it in ’83 by winning five rounds to capture the manufacturers’ title.

The car was loosely based on the Beta Monte Carlo and had a 1995cc four-valve Fiat engine fitted with an Abarth supercharger. This initially gave just over 260bhp. With an ‘evolved’ system of water injection into the compressor this was soon lifted to over 300bhp. Rear-engined and two-wheel drive like the Stratos, 037 was fitted with a longitudinal engine, which meant that driver space was limited. Why Lancia then employed two of the tallest drivers is a puzzle. Both Röhrl and Alén had to have special helmets made and a relieved area in the roof above them.

037 was first used in basic production form, but by August 1982 Lancia had produced 20 lightweight evolution cars weighing 960kg, and these were used from then on. A second evolution appeared for January 1, 1984. This had an extra 116cc so that, with the 1.4 coefficient, they came up exactly to the class limit of 3000cc. This E2 also featured new slides for the Bosch fuel injection and revised rear bodywork exposing the ‘box in real racing style.

The car tested here won the 1983 New Zealand (Röhrl) and San Remo rallies (Alén).

Blomqvist’s view: It must have been a nice car for some events: I think you have to be Markku Alén to love this car. He was probably the best all-round driver for it and could certainly get the best out of it. But it is not a car that I enjoy so much.

Its engine is good, almost like a normally aspirated engine, with the response from the supercharger giving you what you need quite quickly. But for me the handling is a bit different and difficult. Its a sports car and it needs just the right conditions for the way it is set up. We don’t have that here today, with the puddles and bits of gravel, so I can’t get a real feeling for it.

It is easy to control: I am not using left-foot braking, though you might do if you were used to the car and the conditions needed it, muddy Tarmac or something. That technique could be useful to keep its nose going in the direction you want it to go – very different to the Audi, where you always wanted to keep its back end out.

Quattro S1 & E2

The first appearance of the Sport Quattro was in Corsica, May 1984. Audi felt the initiative was slipping away from it. It was. That event was also the debut for the Peugeot 205 T16, which had been homologated one month earlier and, until Ari Vatanen retired it, was the quickest thing around.

The Sport Quattro was Audi’s answer to the upstart newcomers. The majority of its technology was, in true Audi tradition, in the motor: a twin-overhead cam, four-valves-per-cylinder, fire-breathing monster that was conservatively said to give 400bhp and probably gave at least 100 more.

The wheelbase of the Sport was 320mm less – just over a foot – than the A2, and its front and rear track were identical. Losing that length while upping the horsepower and heat generated meant that all the subsidiary elements had to be bigger and fit into a smaller space. This bred unreliability, while the good handling of the A2 was lost to some degree with the shorter wheelbase: on a stage it gave the impression of being a rocking horse.

The next evolution of the Sport Quattro, the E2, is probably the best-known image of the GpB era. To keep engine and turbocharger at a reasonable temperature it was over-fuelled and the excess burnt off in long flames to the accompaniment of loud mortar bangs from the wastegate. Even static, it grabbed your attention with its enormous arches, airdams and aero strakes.

Open its light boot and there was even more of a surprise. In it were the oil, water and gearbox coolers, together with their associated fans. This shift of weight was to try to correct the S1’s 60:40 distribution front to rear. For the E2 it was back to almost 50:50 — but with its extra cooling systems the car was heavier than the A2. With 500bhp to call upon, it took a brave man to drive it, but it did go better than its baby brother. And there has rarely been a more charismatic rally car, even if it’s not a very pretty one.

Blomqvist’s view: I kept out of the Sport Quattro until my world championship was secure! Ah no, that is not quite correct because I drove it in San Remo when the engine went bang and Walter [Rörl] left the road. But the title was almost certain then. I drove Sport Quattro on the Ivory Coast Rally and won from Hannu’s A2.

The Sport Quattro had some strong points. To start with it had a lot more power and that helped – a bit! And when they introduced that hydraulic clutch operating from the gear lever, that was good for me because I like to brake with my left foot and now I didn’t have to keep going back to the clutch pedal. But you did have to be careful on road sections that you didn’t have your foot under the clutch pedal when you changed gear because it was still connected and would break your foot if it hit it!

And we also had the first proper centre diffs, which made the car more effective but not much easier to drive. The problem was one of balance, which they got better with the E2. But it was never as nice to drive as the A2.

MG Metro 6R4

The only major unblown GpB contender, 6R4 was homologated in November 1985, complete with its first evolution comprising lighter body panels and a full six-point Lucas Micos fuel injection system. And that engine was just one of its unique features.

A 2991cc V6 generating 420bhp, this unit was designed and built in-house by Austin Rover. The theory was that FISA had promised to control the exotic fuels being used in rallying and thus the turbos and blowers would have to run on pump fuel, which would dramatically cut back their outputs.

But GpB died before FISA acted and so this ugly little winged beast never got to spread its wings. It took third behind two of the new Lancia S4s on its debut, the 1985 RAC, but then ran into a string of problems affecting the camshaft drive belts and valve seats before reliability was established late in ’86.

The 6R4 used by Blomqvist here was the works car David Llewellin drove to ninth on the ’86 RAC.

Blomqvist’s view: I did try a 6R4 many years ago. We were recceing the Swedish Rally and ‘Pekka’ [Per Eklund] turned up with one and let me take it for a run.

I like the normally aspirated engine, completely different to all those other engines. You don’t have to think about keeping the turbo fired up, you just ask the throttle and it responds. You can let it drop down to almost nothing and it will just pull away. When you find that, you can understand why they were so quick on certain Tarmac stages: such quick response, no waiting, no problem to get the back end out. But you have to be quick on the steering or it can spin with that short wheelbase.

You can see very well to place the car, and braking is good – it must be helped by its wings.

Sadly, it was grounded by its lack of a turbocharger. And almost 20 years on the turbo still rules rallying’s roost. There are moves afoot to get rid of it, but those in the know say that its days at the centre of the stages are far from numbered.

Ford RS200

Some say that any car built in the Reliant factory at Tamworth must have an in-built Trotter complex. Certainly, Ford’s contribution to the GpB party looked the part and promised to steal the show, but its results were those that you’d expect from one of Del Boy‘s special offers.

One of the last arrivals — it was homologated on February 1, 1986 after production delays — it made its debut on the Swedish. Blomqvist retired with a seized engine after a water leak and it was left to ex-fighter pilot Kalle Grundel to secure a promising third place behind a Peugeot 205T16 and a Lancia Delta S4. In Portugal, a works RS200 driven by Joaquim Santos hit spectators, killing 10 and, as a consequence, all the works cars withdrew, including the two Fords. The next event was the Acropolis where both cars retired.

Ford then decided on a rest period and released Blomqvist to drive two events for Peugeot (see panel opposite) before returning at the season’s end, with Group B already banned for 1987. Once again it was Grundel who saved face by finishing fifth overall on the RAC.

The RS200 was an optimal design: a mid-engined, longitudinal layout with the gearbox ahead of the engine. As a consequence there were two propshafts, but the weight distribution was almost perfect and gave the car great balance and neutral handling. Its suspension comprised twin coil-and-damper units at each corner and was excellent over the rough. But the downsides were too many: the engine layout meant it was prone to catch fire, the engine was a mere 1803cc thus giving away too much power to its main rivals, and it was devoid of significant aerodynamics. It needed an evolution, for which there was first no time, and then, after Henri Toivonen’s death in Corsica, no motivation.

The car here was used by Stig on the Acropolis and RAC.

Blomqvist’s view: After driving Audi and Peugeot, the RS200 was a step forward, a bit more modern. But that car, it never wound up fantastic. If conditions were consistent, all dry or all wet, then it was okay. But if they were changing, then the handling was very funny, unpredictable.

The engine was not more powerful than the others, but the Ford engine has always been a bit different to the others, feeling and sounding different. It’s more crisp and revs higher, a bit like a race engine: even with the turbo, you were pulling all the way up to 9000rpm. It was a nice engine with good power, but you felt the others were somehow stronger.

The suspension was fantastic with those twin dampers. In somewhere like Greece you could go like hell with it and the car just took it.

Peugeot 205 T16

When Talbot clinched the WRC manufacturers’ title in 1981 with Toivonen and Guy Fréquelin in Sunbeam Lotuses, it provided the impetus for the parent company in France to design, build and develop a revolutionary 4WD for rallying.

The 205 T16 was homologated in April 1984 and made its WRC debut on the Tour of Corsica at the beginning of May: Vatanen led until crashing at two-thirds distance and Jean-Pierre Nicolas finished fourth. After that, Vatanen won five WRC rounds in a row and Peugeot took the manufacturers’ title and Timo Salonen the drivers’ in ’85.

The T16 on parade here was lent by Peugeot UK and was the car that Mikael Sundstrom drove in the 1986 British Championship, winning the Scottish Rally. Sadly, it was not driveable so Stig was unable to renew his acquaintance with this advanced machine.

Blomqvist drove twice for Peugeot in the WRC, taking a break from his Ford contract in 1986 to substitute for a ‘tired’ Salonen in the mid-season Argentina and 1000 Lakes: he finished third and fourth respectively. The car he drove was the second evolution 205 T16 E2. This was homologated exactly one year after its predecessor, April 1,1985. Internally, the engine underwent a series of mods, including a new cylinder head without siamesed ports, a Garrett turbo in place of the original KKK, a water-based intercooler and water injection. The rear chassis was now a spaceframe and the car sported a much larger front airdam and rear wing. A six-speed gearbox was also now available.

The E2 was equally successful in 1986, carrying Peugeot to its second crown and Kankkunen to his first drivers’ title.

Blomqvist’s view: The Peugeot was more specialised. The Audi was more of a converted road car: no central engine and, when we started, no centre differential or clever controls. The Peugeot had all those things. They were playing around with plate differentials and viscous couplings and others. And by the time I got to drive one it had a lot of sophisticated things.

It was lighter than the Audi. It was certainly quicker. But still I preferred the Audi for the 1000 Lakes: it did what I wanted so I could trust it. The Peugeot was a bit strange upon landing after a jump. All those cars with the engine in the back are bit funny like that. Today. I am sure, they could control that with better suspensions, but it was a problem back then. And it would have been better for the 205 if the [transverse, mid-mounted] engine had been rotating the other way – when you took off and lifted off the throttle, the gyroscopic effect made the car dip at the front. We tried adjusting the wing to make it better. but it always had that little dip.