VE chassis debacle?

Grimace · 16 Feb 2006, 10:27 (Ref:1524159)

Whats all this stuff about the new VE chassis/floorpan being too long for the series rules as it is, and Ford

not allowing it,
Larry said the rules would need to be changed to allow VE to compete?
Is it all AA scaremongering or not?
Who has the truth?

V8RYAN · 16 Feb 2006, 10:38 (Ref:1524168)

aparantly the BA was too big as well but they changed the rules or simply just let them use it.

i cant see it being an issue, if they dont allow a new model commodore OR falcon compete because of something silly like that then the whole series will die.

we arent going to want to see VZ commodores racing in the top series in 5 or 10 years time.

the VE will get racing in 2007

dirttrack · 16 Feb 2006, 11:00 (Ref:1524189)

Fords turn finally to make it as hard as possible for the General , about itme too. They are going to fight this all the way.

6.213km · 16 Feb 2006, 12:07 (Ref:1524234)

Ford & Holden will do everything they can to protect their interests.. and to do so, they will both allow the VE Commodore to run in the series. The rules will be altered to suit, and so they should be, we should see current model cars racing on our circuits... its not commercial viable for a manufacturer not to be able to run their current car. Rules get changed all the time, I can hear it now , Ford fans will be crying blue murder that Holden has been given special dispensation to run their cars.... and your entitled to your opinions...

In the end , we all want to see racing, Ford V Holden.. thats how it will be, and besides a new model gives such a fresh look to the series.

dsg · 16 Feb 2006, 16:13 (Ref:1524412)

Once they sign off on the control chassis things should be simpler as teams will only have to change the sheet metal and possibly engine. Hopefully that will include Commodore, Falcon, 380 and Aurion.

SRabbit · 16 Feb 2006, 19:47 (Ref:1524536)

Ford arent trying to do Holden over, they have their own issue with the control floorpan.
Ford want the Falcon racecar to built on the Falcon road platform and wont sign off on the control chassis because of this.
Unfortunately Holden get caught in the crossfire because as mentioned, their road platform for the VE does not translate into a Blueprint-compatible racecar and need the control chassis to make the regs.
Dont get me wrong im sure Ford will enjoy the fact that Holden are sweating on them saying yes, but its for other reasons they will not play the game.

Where that leaves Holden? who knows?

pete55 · 16 Feb 2006, 19:59 (Ref:1524540)

I think i heard that the control chassis prototype has been modified and will be displayed again for discussion.

RotorFan · 16 Feb 2006, 21:58 (Ref:1524619)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsg

Once they sign off on the control chassis things should be simpler as teams will only have to change the sheet metal and possibly engine. Hopefully that will include Commodore, Falcon, 380 and Aurion.

Yeah that would be much better wouldn't it. The less that differentiates the cars the better.

Henry · 16 Feb 2006, 22:51 (Ref:1524656)

Why not just simplify it and have the likes of Ford, Holden, Nissan, Toyota & Mitsubishi just manufacture a single large road car between them, and rebadge it as their own... sorta like whitegoods... that way the Supercar rules won't need exemptions for the race chassis....

Or else, whack some sheetmetal and a badge on a heap of Formula Vees? The noise mightn't be quite right, but the partiry's pretty much there...

Ah stuff it, put 'em all in those other little tiddler thingies, the Aussie Races or whatever they are.

What a joke.

stoned pony · 17 Feb 2006, 01:41 (Ref:1524735)

Quote:

Originally Posted by V8RYAN

aparantly the BA was too big as well but they changed the rules or simply just let them use it.

So what you are suggesting there Bryan is that AU was also "too big" because AU and BA are the same car physically (not mechanically) with different cosmetics. Ditto BF. It's a very slightly cosmetically reworked BA.

V8RYAN · 17 Feb 2006, 03:08 (Ref:1524761)

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoned pony

So what you are suggesting there Bryan is that AU was also "too big" because AU and BA are the same car physically (not mechanically) with different cosmetics. Ditto BF. It's a very slightly cosmetically reworked BA.

no not at all!

i was reading AA and it had a story about the VE chassis and all the so called problems and blah blah blah and it said that when the BA came out, it was 6mm too big.

if the BA uses the same chassis as the AU then maybe that was 6mm too big as well, or ... AA is full of $#it !!

dsg · 17 Feb 2006, 03:23 (Ref:1524762)

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotorFan

Yeah that would be much better wouldn't it. The less that differentiates the cars the better.

For this type of racing series yes. If some sections of the public want to see different types of cars racing each other then other categories may be more to their preference.

The category is basically a silhouette formula at the moment so I think VESA should just formally make it happen.

dsg · 17 Feb 2006, 03:31 (Ref:1524765)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry

Why not just simplify it and have the likes of Ford, Holden, Nissan, Toyota & Mitsubishi just manufacture a single large road car between them, and rebadge it as their own... sorta like whitegoods... that way the Supercar rules won't need exemptions for the race chassis.....

I think my way is easier.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry

Or else, whack some sheetmetal and a badge on a heap of Formula Vees? The noise mightn't be quite right, but the partiry's pretty much there....

That could work and may reduce costs but I prefer the sound of V8s.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry

Ah stuff it, put 'em all in those other little tiddler thingies, the Aussie Races or whatever they are..

Maybe they could become the feeder series.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry

What a joke.

You provide the material I'll try to keep 'em coming.

B!tchie Renault · 17 Feb 2006, 04:26 (Ref:1524780)

I am not 100% certain, but when the BA was introduced the Ford teams could not upgrade their AU Falcons to BA's and had to build new chassis. Mainly because the floorpan of the BA differed to the AU. Whether the wheelbase was different between the AU & BA I do not know off hand.

The other thing they do not stipulate is how much longer the VE wheelbase is compared to the 'Blueprint' specification.

Remember also that the new Hollinger gearbox was deemed illegal because the dimensions did not comply with the rules. They created the rules by measuring off the old gearbox.

While I do not agree with the TEGA control chassis idea, I do think that the chassis should more resemble the road going version with regards seating position etc. and the rollcage should be built inside a factory built shell rather than the shell built around the rollcage/floorpan.

Sorry, my sermon has ended.

Henry · 17 Feb 2006, 04:30 (Ref:1524781)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsg

I think my way is easier.

That could work and may reduce costs but I prefer the sound of V8s.

Maybe they could become the feeder series.

You provide the material I'll try to keep 'em coming.

I love Fridays, it brings out the best in all of us.

racer69 · 17 Feb 2006, 05:28 (Ref:1524784)

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotorFan

Yeah that would be much better wouldn't it. The less that differentiates the cars the better.

Why is it better?

If two different cars are being raced, it's obvious the cars will be different. If less differences between the cars is what you want, why don't you propose a control manufacturer, then everything will be equal!!

stoned pony · 17 Feb 2006, 05:32 (Ref:1524785)

Really, as long as half the field has a Holden badge on the nose and the tail and the other half has a Ford badge, they all have a stone age V8 under the bonnet and all of them vaguely resemble a current sedan then what does it matter?

RotorFan · 20 Feb 2006, 00:19 (Ref:1526613)

Quote:

Originally Posted by racer69

Why is it better?

If two different cars are being raced, it's obvious the cars will be different. If less differences between the cars is what you want, why don't you propose a control manufacturer, then everything will be equal!!

It was sarcasm. I am a fan of a more production car based championship - quite the opposite!

WebberForWDC · 20 Feb 2006, 05:55 (Ref:1526693)

But unfortuantely we know the BA with the BOSS is not very fast compared to a VZ, so parity is needed.

Unless production rules will allow local homologation with rules encouraging the production of turbocharged 6L or 7L AWD Falcons and Commodores. Now that could provide some entertainment... excellent.

cav · 20 Feb 2006, 23:55 (Ref:1527528)

Having the same chassis with a different body has worked exceptionally well in Aussie Racing so maybe a control chassis is the way to go in V8's although really that is what they have now. If there was a control chassis then all different makers could be involved which would be pretty interesting

RotorFan · 21 Feb 2006, 00:03 (Ref:1527531)

I don't think TEGA realises how many fans a control chassis would cost them. I think its an insult to suggest that no one will care, as long as they look different on the outside. They're already heading down that path and people are already disenchanted with it.

Maybe I give average fans too much credit.

johnh875 · 21 Feb 2006, 02:51 (Ref:1527599)

The 6mm difference in BA wheelbase does ring a bell - however it is entirely due to the new IRS, so when the whole lot is ripped out to put a live axle in they could easily go back to the original wheelbase. The rear floorpan was different from the AU but again it is completely reworked for the race cars so any differences are inconsequential.

racer69 · 21 Feb 2006, 06:53 (Ref:1527673)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cav

Having the same chassis with a different body has worked exceptionally well in Aussie Racing so maybe a control chassis is the way to go in V8's although really that is what they have now. If there was a control chassis then all different makers could be involved which would be pretty interesting

It's all about how you write the regulations. You don't need a control chassis to include other manufacturers.

It's going to the extreme trying to compare and Aussie Racer with a touring (or not to be if this gets up) car, especially as there is no Ford/Holden anything to do with an Aussie Racing Car.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PMM Chassis	pete60	Australasian Touring Cars.	15	19 Feb 2006 19:25
#63 corvette Debacle	gttouring	Sportscar & GT Racing	15	13 Jun 2004 12:29
courage engine debacle...	tblincoe	Sportscar & GT Racing	47	6 Jun 2004 18:14
CRG Chassis?	speedy king	Kart Racing	6	12 Jan 2004 16:27
not so hot: NO new chassis for Bas	Happy Hippo	National & International Single Seaters	1	27 Jul 2001 20:57