Parity Review Has Been Called

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Ares

The cars or the teams and drivers running them? If they are not equal, by how much? does anyone have that answer?

Take Erebus out of the equation and you would say it's pretty much the same old same old. 888 and the rest close behind. Erebus doing a great job with two fast driver changes the picture this year. Erebus has been the benchmark this year. If they were struggling how different would this year look from the past? Not a lot.

The cars aren't equal, they're asking for more testing but that doesn't mean that there will be changes.

[Ares]

They need another hit out at another track to see where they stand. Do some more testing if they want, but they can't make a change for change sake. They need to find something that needs to be changed.

[Mixer]

888 hasn't changed since they delivered the ZB - same excellence.

DJR however is now without the TP bit vs the Gen2 Mustang and it really shows.

The team itself is a shambles and the car they developed isn't that good.

Not one Ford team has 2 really strong drivers without errors, strong strategy and race management, and excellent pit execution.

Without all of those things why do you think the tyre life might not be as good as another car?

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Mixer

888 hasn't changed since they delivered the ZB - same excellence.

DJR however is now without the TP bit vs the Gen2 Mustang and it really shows.

The team itself is a shambles and the car they developed isn't that good.

Not one Ford team has 2 really strong drivers without errors, strong strategy and race management, and excellent pit execution.

Without all of those things why do you think the tyre life might not be as good as another car?

Yes the aero isn't as good so supercars need to keep at it until they get it right.

[GTRMagic]

A free test day for each team wouldnt go astray either...

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Yes the aero isn't as good so supercars need to keep at it until they get it right.

If Ford has as many good drivers or team strategists as the have armchair aerodynamicists they would be fine....

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

A free test day for each team wouldnt go astray either...

Other than DJR, who hasn't been hoarding test days waiting for changes they were agitating for?

[bluesport]

[QUOTE=Mixer;4167338]If Ford has as many good drivers or team strategists as the have armchair aerodynamicists they would be fine....
You keep parroting on about the Ford teams but what about the teams that are now running camaros that didn't get much right in previous years that are now up the pointy end of the field, how did that miraculously happen, could it be that they now have better aero, at least better than the Mustangs?

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

You keep parroting on about the Ford teams but what about the teams that are now running camaros that didn't get much right in previous years that are now up the pointy end of the field, how did that miraculously happen, could it be that they now have better aero, at least better than the Mustangs?

I'm glad you asked.

You do realise for the first time in history, there's no difference in hardware between the haves and the have nots?

No fancy uprights or other magic things to make speed - all teams the same.

Not aero. Nothing to do with a Mustang.

Face it - all teams are equal. Lap times have never been closer.

Team performance matters more than ever.

Show me a Ford team with 2 drivers contributing to setups and taking points off rivals.

Show me a Ford team who's made an advantageous reading of the rules to their benefit this year.

Show me a Ford team who can make an alternate pit strategy work and gain positions with great pit work.

I'll wait.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

I'll wait.

Show me the evidence that Tickford and WAU wanted to not be allowed to design their own uprights, or indeed if they even wanted the original control items in COTF. Why not go back to the golden era of teams designing their own darn racing cars.

Who thought control everything was a good idea? It seems to be a factor that has contributed to the series jumping the shark.

Originally Posted by Ares

The cars or the teams and drivers running them? If they are not equal, by how much? does anyone have that answer?

Nobody knows because the proper full-scale wind tunnel program and AVL dyno program has not been done yet. Hopefully a couple of the spare cars are sent over the to the US for this ASAP, if organisers insist on the control car idea.

But the control everything idea is fundamentally a bad idea IMO. It's too much pandering to the smaller "boltie" teams that just bolt stuff on and off. Perkins Engeering were happy to sell stuff to privateer "boltie" teams but it doesn't mean they felt that this should be the model of the whole series, indeed Larry Perkins found the idea of a control exhaust in the 90's preposterous (his words, "any decent workshop can fabricate an exhaust"), yet now that's exactly what the series has one control exhaust for each "model" -- let alone teams being unable to design more performance-relevant stuff.

A Holden Racing Team Project Blueprint VE Commodore may have only been good at street circuits and Bathurst, but at least it was good at *something* and that was their choice to build and engineer their car like that.

Despite moving to Melbourne with two customer HRT COTF Commodores, Erebus were smart enough to get off the 888 or HRT/WAU upgrade treadmill and build their own front suspension under the COTF regulations with some success, for example.

[GTRMagic]

Perhaps V8Supercar has some kind of fundamental political edge..
Take away the ability for teams to build engines, chassis, parts and to do development on all of same.. makes for a more expensive version of Carrera Cup..
And a massive technical skill and experience base, that was once lauded as why team X is better than team Y, now sees those people rendered ineffective as they cant make anything..

I have no idea how the teams allowed this to happen…

In theory ‘plug n play’ should be cheaper.. doesn’t make it better…

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Mixer

I'm glad you asked.

You do realise for the first time in history, there's no difference in hardware between the haves and the have nots?

No fancy uprights or other magic things to make speed - all teams the same.

Not aero. Nothing to do with a Mustang.

Face it - all teams are equal. Lap times have never been closer.

Team performance matters more than ever.

Show me a Ford team with 2 drivers contributing to setups and taking points off rivals.

Show me a Ford team who's made an advantageous reading of the rules to their benefit this year.

Show me a Ford team who can make an alternate pit strategy work and gain positions with great pit work.

I'll wait.

I don't know what's in your head but you are really hard to get through to, there were enough mustangs in the top ten shootout yesterday so speed is not a problem, what is a problem is rear tyre degradation over a race distance.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Mixer

I'm glad you asked.

Show me a Ford team who's made an advantageous reading of the rules to their benefit this year.

Show me a Ford team who can make an alternate pit strategy work and gain positions with great pit work.

I'll wait.

Shell V-Power and Anton DePasquale race #17 yesterday.

[bluesport]

Parity testing to resume post Townsville.

https://www.v8sleuth.com.au/parity-t...st-townsville/

[Ares]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Show me the evidence that Tickford and WAU wanted to not be allowed to design their own uprights, or indeed if they even wanted the original control items in COTF. Why not go back to the golden era of teams designing their own darn racing cars.

Who thought control everything was a good idea? It seems to be a factor that has contributed to the series jumping the shark.




Nobody knows because the proper full-scale wind tunnel program and AVL dyno program has not been done yet. Hopefully a couple of the spare cars are sent over the to the US for this ASAP, if organisers insist on the control car idea.

But the control everything idea is fundamentally a bad idea IMO. It's too much pandering to the smaller "boltie" teams that just bolt stuff on and off. Perkins Engeering were happy to sell stuff to privateer "boltie" teams but it doesn't mean they felt that this should be the model of the whole series, indeed Larry Perkins found the idea of a control exhaust in the 90's preposterous (his words, "any decent workshop can fabricate an exhaust"), yet now that's exactly what the series has one control exhaust for each "model" -- let alone teams being unable to design more performance-relevant stuff.

A Holden Racing Team Project Blueprint VE Commodore may have only been good at street circuits and Bathurst, but at least it was good at *something* and that was their choice to build and engineer their car like that.

Despite moving to Melbourne with two customer HRT COTF Commodores, Erebus were smart enough to get off the 888 or HRT/WAU upgrade treadmill and build their own front suspension under the COTF regulations with some success, for example.

The control everything is to try and keep the costs down, and the playing field a little move even. The small teams are still important. If it's going to just be cheque book racing, that just can't be sustained in todays world. Not enough rich guys willing to throw money at racecar forever, and sponsors have so much choice. The sport needs people and they only stay long term if they can succeed at some level. You have seen a little of that this year, next year probably a little less when the big teams work the cars out more.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Ares

The sport needs people and they only stay long term if they can succeed at some level.

The irony of this when Ford Mustang teams and Ford Performance itself have had little to no success.

Is this because they did a bad job or because their body style and engine has some disadvantages and is not 100% equivalent to the other one: nobody knows. At least with the previous cars, teams could design bits to try to find advantages elsewhere.

Losing Ford Performance and losing the right to have Mustang body styles out there is certainly a huge risk for category organisers.

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by Ares

The control everything is to try and keep the costs down, and the playing field a little move even.

I'd argue it's leveled the playing field but spit out my drink at "keep costs down"

That's the problem with Supercars (or at least those who run it) - even good ideas like control parts are a semi-failure.

Why has it ended up more expensive? Why does a racing series renowned for bumping have so much carbon fiber/composite?

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Compromised

Why has it ended up more expensive? Why does a racing series renowned for bumping have so much carbon fiber/composite?

Do you have even a whit of awareness of what has gone on in the world in the last 2-3 years?

Just in the industry I work in (which is slightly related) prices have risen between 30-400%.

How much MORE expensive would the original cars be now?

Also even though they will be cheaper in the long run, adoption is always more expensive.

[GTRMagic]

Interesting to read some chatter in the NASCAR ranks suggesting the aero on their Mustang is a contributor to the Ford teams’ lack of consistent competitiveness in that discipline.

Maybe Ford used the old Volvo program from the old days when they owned Volvo and designed a very pretty house brick…

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Do you have even a whit of awareness of what has gone on in the world in the last 2-3 years?

Just in the industry I work in (which is slightly related) prices have risen between 30-400%.

How much MORE expensive would the original cars be now?

Also even though they will be cheaper in the long run, adoption is always more expensive.

This isn't 100% on COVID - remember COTF? Remember Gen2? I see a history of failure to achieve stated goals (mainly cost reduction), Gen3 is just icing on the cake.

[Ares]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

The irony of this when Ford Mustang teams and Ford Performance itself have had little to no success.

Is this because they did a bad job or because their body style and engine has some disadvantages and is not 100% equivalent to the other one: nobody knows. At least with the previous cars, teams could design bits to try to find advantages elsewhere.

Losing Ford Performance and losing the right to have Mustang body styles out there is certainly a huge risk for category organisers.

I think the Ford teams at this point in time are average, but I do think there is something in the cars. I just don't agree with just handing out stuff until the fords start winning some races. Last weekends track was probably not the track of choice for a first hit out after the changes. Will the ford teams run the same setups next year? were they being to aggressive with their setups?

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Ares

I think the Ford teams at this point in time are average, but I do think there is something in the cars. I just don't agree with just handing out stuff until the fords start winning some races. Last weekends track was probably not the track of choice for a first hit out after the changes. Will the ford teams run the same setups next year? were they being to aggressive with their setups?

Team18 were also struggling for rear tyre life at the same race weekend, and placed well down the order. Do I demand a parity adjustment for it?

At what point does car setup and driving get factored into tyre wear?

None of the teams blaming parity for tyre life were able to match 888 on tyre wear last year.

Arguably both Waters and Chaz both have issues with aggression and maturity which easily explains poor tyre life.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Team18 were also struggling for rear tyre life at the same race weekend, and placed well down the order. Do I demand a parity adjustment for it?

At what point does car setup and driving get factored into tyre wear?

None of the teams blaming parity for tyre life were able to match 888 on tyre wear last year.

Arguably both Waters and Chaz both have issues with aggression and maturity which easily explains poor tyre life.

I think supercars reduced the angle of the wing on the mustangs so it may be just a matter of allowing the Ford teams to take it up another notch.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

I think supercars reduced the angle of the wing on the mustangs so it may be just a matter of allowing the Ford teams to take it up another notch.

Simplistic special pleading.

So far:

Aero
COG
Engine Maps
Aero again

Now Ford are saying the engine is their issue, and their credibility is shredded.

Meanwhile Cam Waters has another dive down the order because of reliability issues.

In two weeks time Ford fans will be holding up the championship points again and blaming parity, when parity had nothing to do with that result, and not for the first time.

[Ares]

Originally Posted by Compromised

I'd argue it's leveled the playing field but spit out my drink at "keep costs down"

That's the problem with Supercars (or at least those who run it) - even good ideas like control parts are a semi-failure.

Why has it ended up more expensive? Why does a racing series renowned for bumping have so much carbon fiber/composite?

They start out with a plan and just keep adding to it. These are the people not paying to run the cars. They should just decide on a budget and build the car around that. Must haves in, nice to haves out. The control parts just cuts out the arms race bit every year. But yes, they are too expensive. I agree about the carbon fiber comment, I said after the first round they are very soft. I don't like the chassis, it a compromise too. This design has similarities to the Sub that imploded going down to the Titanic. It is strong until one component fails in the structure. going to be interesting when one has a big off. Maybe more chassis replacement in the future, more cost.

[Ares]

Also, they build a whole new car and they change everything. Like a tried and tested power steering system. You are putting in a lot of new stuff as it is without changing all that stuff. And then you have to suffer all the teething problem and failures.