VOLVO OUT AT END OF 2016 (NOW CONFIRMED)

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

Isn't that a little contradictory from GRM?

He is backpedalling with every public statement, I for one would not be at all surprised to see him in Holdens next year, but I am not sure I see the sense in building 2 new Holdens a year before the new shape comes out!

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

If he is building Holdens for DVS - why can he not also race Holdens in the Shell Series?

Shell Series? What decade is it?

[Jack65]

Originally Posted by Mixer

I am not sure I see the sense in building 2 new Holdens a year before the new shape comes out!

Would expect that with the exception of 888, all other Holden teams will continue with VFs into 2018.

[Umai Naa]

Originally Posted by Jack65

Would expect that with the exception of 888, all other Holden teams will continue with VFs into 2018.

All Holden teams will most likely apply the new Triple Eight-supplied bodywork to exisiting chassis.

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

All Holden teams will most likely apply the new Triple Eight-supplied bodywork to exisiting chassis.

I would agree with that.

would be reasonable confident its part of the support package that T8 have been offered by Holden.

Maybe not all at the start of the season but definately by end of the year (if they can afford it)

Wonder what it will be

[Jack65]

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

All Holden teams will most likely apply the new Triple Eight-supplied bodywork to exisiting chassis.

In time, but would think it unlikely they will throw away 5 years of knowledge to step into the unknown. In theory the new car should have no performance advantage per parity equalisation, and as we have seen in years gone by, it often takes time to bring a new model up to speed. 888 may be at their most vulnerable while they develop they new car, although they did manage to get to grips with the VE fairly quickly in 2010.

With the chat about GRM possibly racing the Volvo with a Holden engine, am I correct in thinking that teams will be able to race the new Commodore with either the new V6 or the existing V8, or if they desire drop the V6 into a VF?

[Umai Naa]

I doubt they'll be allowed to run a hybrid new body/old engine arrangement.

[one five five]

Originally Posted by Jack65

With the chat about GRM possibly racing the Volvo with a Holden engine, am I correct in thinking that teams will be able to race the new Commodore with either the new V6 or the existing V8, or if they desire drop the V6 into a VF?

I wouldn't think so

The VF has only been homologated with the Chev V8, while the next Holden will, i assume, only be homologated with the Turbo 6.

Any "mixing and matching" I would assume could only happen if approved by the Supercars technical board, probably on a case by case basis. (eg... GRM wanting to use a Chev V8 because they can't use the currently homologated Volvo S60 engine)

[Umai Naa]

I believe the SC generic motor, although based on the current GM-based unit (Chev/HMS Aurora), won't be referred to as such.

Similar to how the TOCA motor in the BTCC is simply that.

[GTRMagic]

Change the machine that mills the rocker cover sets to write 'Volvo' on the Chev...

[twinwebbers]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Change the machine that mills the rocker cover sets to write 'Volvo' on the Chev...

Garry has a sense of humour... He'll get it to engrave "Ovlov"

[Jack65]

Of course we may end up with a hybrid regardless if the new Commodore is front wheel drive as rumoured, yet the regs IIRC require cars to be rear wheel drive.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Jack65

Of course we may end up with a hybrid regardless if the new Commodore is front wheel drive as rumoured, yet the regs IIRC require cars to be rear wheel drive.

The new Commodore IS front-wheel drive/all-wheel drive, but so is the Nissan and the Volvo...

[Umai Naa]

Originally Posted by Jack65

Of course we may end up with a hybrid regardless if the new Commodore is front wheel drive as rumoured, yet the regs IIRC require cars to be rear wheel drive.

It's irrelevant.

The racecar is not even close to what the road car will be. It just has to vaguely look like a Commodore.

[Jack65]

True, IIRC the racing Commodore is shorter than the real thing to give it the same footprint as the Falcon.

[Umai Naa]

They're all on a control chassis now.

[old fart]

Reminds of the old song by Pete Seegar 'Little Boxes'.
" Little boxes on the hillside all made out of ticky tacky and they all look just the same."

[Terry S]

Attached for interest of Volvo followers.

Note shots in Volvo wind tunnel.

https://racecarsdirect.com/Advert/De...-tc-10-exhange

[mayhem]

GRM/Volvo Mediation scheduled for December 13

[D.R.T.]

Volvo and Polestar have made it clear they wants to exercise a clause in the contract to buy back the cars and the B8444S engines developed specifically for the Supercars program.

GRM agrees the engine, developed by Volvo’s global racing motorsport partner, Cyan Racing, is Volvo’s to reclaim, but argues the Chinese-owned Swedish car manufacturer has no right to the cars themselves, which are based on a proprietary Supercars chassis.

I am no lawyer however those two paragraphs seem to contradict each other? There is a clause in a signed agreement which is being exercised but the other party is saying they have no right to them? Why sign the contract in the first place?

Garry and Barry Rogers have insisted the team will race the Volvos in 2017 and have taken no course of action to do otherwise.

GRM is currently building two new Holden Commodore VFs, but they are for the operation’s Dunlop development series program.

This might not be looked on favorably by the courts.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

This might not be looked on favorably by the courts.

Who are the Commodores being built for? Dragon Racing may indeed be the entrant ongoing...

[peckstar]

from the same article that DRT "partially" quoted

“We are racing the Volvos,” Barry Rogers said. “Those Commodores are 100 per cent for DVS and we have commitments on both those cars.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

I am no lawyer however those two paragraphs seem to contradict each other? There is a clause in a signed agreement which is being exercised but the other party is saying they have no right to them? Why sign the contract in the first place?

As always it's about the detail isn't it, rather then casual statements in a media piece. According to GR during his interview on RPM, the clause in the contract about the cars possibly going back to Volvo is not about the whole car but about the Volvo original panels on the car.

GRM could provide those and then buy replacements through the dealer network here I guess.

Most of this is going to be public posturing from both parties until some kind of end is reached. Until then, none of us (I assume) has seen the actual contract, nor the correspondence between the parties so we are taking shots in the dark.

[Axeman444]

In any case, if the chassis is the IP of VSC, surely GRM has no legal ability to hand them back to Volvo if VSC don't let them, regardless of what the contract between GRM and Volvo says

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Axeman444

In any case, if the chassis is the IP of VSC, surely GRM has no legal ability to hand them back to Volvo if VSC don't let them, regardless of what the contract between GRM and Volvo says

What a load of ********.

If that was the case then very few people or companies would any claim over any property.

The missus wants the Samsung in the divorce settlement. "I'm sorry love, Samsung own the IP and therefore I can't hand it over".

[Umai Naa]

The chassis are built under license, which is why they carried a dual chassis number.

One from the constructor, and one for Supercars.