2009 V8 Champ - Page 2

STEALTHY · 23 Nov 2009, 03:49 (Ref:2587535)

Quote:

Originally Posted by peckstar

Yawn, point made, now let the grownups have there discussion without turning every discussion into your pet topic

He said he'd like to hope jamie would thank ford. I was explaining theres no way he would. T8 has nothing to do with ford this year.

Why don't you run along back to the SC thread

If you don't like reading my posts, utilise the the ignore function. You wont be the first, and probably wont be the last

V8 Fireworks · 23 Nov 2009, 03:58 (Ref:2587538)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

But they are just racecars. When Ford stopped their funding, that stopped all alliance with the name ford.

Why about the Metro Ford sponsorship clearly displayed on their team overalls?

Shame they couldn't have it wrapped up to wheel out the VE for extra publicity on the J-Dub side of the garage. Presumably it will be sitting on a gold coated raised display in the 888 merch tent gathering maximum publicity?

Nice of CL to thank Ford on the podium in WA.

STEALTHY · 23 Nov 2009, 04:01 (Ref:2587539)

The difference being, Craig is under a Ford contract, Jamie (And T8) are not.

I'd also love to see them Bring out the VE. The ultimate kick in the teeth 'you stopped your funding, so we went to where the money is'. Shame they had already said they wont be racing the VE at all this year.

peckstar · 23 Nov 2009, 04:07 (Ref:2587545)

Now as i said you have made your point, we understand its is not a ford car, we are cool with that and we don't care, so stop hijacking everyones posts withs your point and let us discuss as we need

STEALTHY · 23 Nov 2009, 04:08 (Ref:2587546)

Quote:

Originally Posted by peckstar

Now as i said you have made your point, we understand its is not a ford car, we are cool with that and we don't care, so stop hijacking everyones posts withs your point and let us discuss as we need

Read my post again, and utilise the ignore feature.

peckstar · 23 Nov 2009, 04:14 (Ref:2587550)

I dont want to ignore you just the posts where you prattle on about the cars not being ford or holden or falcons and commodores again and again.

as i said point made, we dont need to hijack discussion each time someone brings it up, this is a thread about the champ for the year

STEALTHY · 23 Nov 2009, 04:19 (Ref:2587553)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micklegend

and Will has to earn 300 points....everyone will be going for the first win in Sydney so odds on JW has it in the bag.

I'd like to think that Jamie will pay some respect to Ford in his winning speech, given that the word Ford appears to have escaped his vocabulary all year. I know that he has probably been told not to acknowledge them at all, but some people have long memories and if he has any desire to go to Nascar, he may not want to poop in the Ford nest as they could potentially be his employer again.

After all...he has said he "is just a race car driver".

Well done to go back to back, hopefully he can beat all the other Holdens again next year, just not all the Fords!

THIS is what I was responding to. Stop trolling!

Quote:

Originally Posted by peckstar

I dont want to ignore you just the posts where you prattle on about the cars not being ford or holden or falcons and commodores again and again.

as i said point made, we dont need to hijack discussion each time someone brings it up, this is a thread about the champ for the year

smokin'joe · 23 Nov 2009, 08:15 (Ref:2587644)

i would love to see how the championship standings would look if there was some consistency with the rules.

there are at least 5 guys in the top 10 points, who are average at best in heavy (or even light) traffic, and who have consistantly employed the 'Morse Code' method of unsettling the car in front, often reuslting in the persued car going off line/track and the offender going unpunished.

their are also 2 cars that had 'active aero' on their front splitter in the guise of 'damage reduction' for at least a few rounds, who should have had a reduction of points for those rounds, if it wasn't for former team members 'being on the board'.

i'm not saying Will should ( or could) have won it, nor do i want it to sound like 'sour grapes' but rules are rules, and they should apply equally to every team, and every driver.

i guess congradulations are in order for Jamie and T8, as unless fate deals a trump card, one of the guys previously mentioned will win the title.

Axeman444 · 23 Nov 2009, 22:49 (Ref:2588105)

i can't see how this movable splitter thing still has legs, the team swapped it out ages ago and still trounced the field at Barbagallo. How can it be deemed it was performance enhancing when 888's performance (and DJR as they operated the same parts) has not dropped off in the slightest?

Oh thats right sorry, there is the 888uminati within VESA running the show

RotorFan · 24 Nov 2009, 00:35 (Ref:2588144)

That's always the big question "what if". Its not the first year that steward action/inaction has influenced the championship result.

Micklegend · 24 Nov 2009, 04:17 (Ref:2588207)

The point I'm making is that the 888 car is a Ford for the purposes of this form of racing, powered by Ford, the fans associate it being a Ford and rightly, CL acknowledged that the Ford fans would be glad they won.

I would just like to see some acknowledgement of the Ford support JW has had that has also helped him become champion.

STEALTHY · 24 Nov 2009, 05:26 (Ref:2588222)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micklegend

The point I'm making is that the 888 car is a Ford for the purposes of this form of racing, powered by Ford, the fans associate it being a Ford and rightly, CL acknowledged that the Ford fans would be glad they won.

I would just like to see some acknowledgement of the Ford support JW has had that has also helped him become champion.

Fair enough if they had money coming from ford. But this year, they didn't.

This year THEY made the cars, and THEY made the motors. They have no affiliation with ford at all. So FORD havn't done a thing to help Jamie get THIS title.

bluesport · 24 Nov 2009, 05:28 (Ref:2588225)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

THIS is what I was responding to. Stop trolling!

Pot calling the kettle black maybe stelfy?

STEALTHY · 24 Nov 2009, 07:59 (Ref:2588253)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesport

Pot calling the kettle black maybe stelfy?

Trolling is deliberately posting something to start an argument.

All i was doing was setting the record straight about something (That certain people still refuse to accept)

Holly Wood · 24 Nov 2009, 08:24 (Ref:2588270)

If Ford homologate a car with VESA as a Ford Falcon FG, and a team subsequently builds a car to those specifications... it's a Ford. It doesn't matter who built it or who is in the team's sponsorship portfolio. It's built to the regulations for a Ford Falcon, so by definition it is one.

The record you are 'setting straight' is well and truly broken.

STEALTHY · 24 Nov 2009, 08:47 (Ref:2588282)

This is getting way off topic. At the end of the day, the cars on the Track ARE NOT Fords or Holden, just cause VESA says they are doesn't mean they are.

bluesport · 24 Nov 2009, 15:59 (Ref:2588480)

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotorFan

That's always the big question "what if". Its not the first year that steward action/inaction has influenced the championship result.

I thought the "inaction" was because it was not found to be illegal but rather a grey area.

Micklegend · 24 Nov 2009, 21:29 (Ref:2588653)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

Fair enough if they had money coming from ford. But this year, they didn't.

This year THEY made the cars, and THEY made the motors. They have no affiliation with ford at all. So FORD havn't done a thing to help Jamie get THIS title.

Well further on this point, JW didnt thank ANY sponsors in his winning speech on Saturday...

Axeman444 · 24 Nov 2009, 22:11 (Ref:2588684)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesport

I thought the "inaction" was because it was not found to be illegal but rather a grey area.

correct, but you will still have the sceptics believing the Illumin888ti run the show and show favouritism

V8 Fireworks · 24 Nov 2009, 22:43 (Ref:2588705)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

This year THEY made the cars, and THEY made the motors.

I'm pretty sure the bonnet and bootlid are stamped at Ford Geelong, and the block and head come from a Ford factory too. Not to mention Ford footing the hefty bill for their star 3x champion driver. Plently of Ford at 888 and Ford and Holden are both bigger and much more important than 888 or racing.

smokin'joe · 25 Nov 2009, 02:13 (Ref:2588762)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axeman444

i can't see how this movable splitter thing still has legs, the team swapped it out ages ago and still trounced the field at Barbagallo. How can it be deemed it was performance enhancing when 888's performance (and DJR as they operated the same parts) has not dropped off in the slightest?

definately performance enhancing, if the mount wasn't flexible, they would have done half their races this year without the splitter due to "morse-code" damage.
if the part was legal, they would still use it today.......... it was deemed 'grey' as no-one had the balls to penalise them for a technical infringement.

Axeman444 · 25 Nov 2009, 02:40 (Ref:2588773)

If i recall Mr Lowndes has not done any less Morse coding since the alleged infraction, without damage? It was looked at, if it was illegal, they would have been penalised for it in some way. The weren't, end of story, move on...

bluesport · 25 Nov 2009, 03:00 (Ref:2588777)

Quote:

Originally Posted by smokin'joe

definately performance enhancing, if the mount wasn't flexible, they would have done half their races this year without the splitter due to "morse-code" damage.
if the part was legal, they would still use it today.......... it was deemed 'grey' as no-one had the balls to penalise them for a technical infringement.

Joe, you've been smokin' too much........every team designs parts to be performance enhancing but that's not illegal unless the rules say it is.......if the splitter was illegal please research the subject and post the rule that says it is so we can all read it for ourselves.

STEALTHY · 25 Nov 2009, 03:02 (Ref:2588778)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesport

Joe, you've been smokin' too much........every team designs parts to be performance enhancing but that's not illegal unless the rules say it is.......if the splitter was illegal please research the subject and post the rule that says it is so we can all read it for ourselves.

If its legal, do the teams still currently use it? And all teams up pitlane jumped on the bandwagon and have them too?

bluesport · 25 Nov 2009, 03:39 (Ref:2588787)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

If its legal, do the teams still currently use it? And all teams up pitlane jumped on the bandwagon and have them too?

It was subsequently made illegal (or has it?) because it was a grey area that no-one had previously considered......they were asked to remove the movable mount AFAIK but not illegal to that point so no penalty......quite simple really.

All teams jumped on the bandwagon? Or some teams? Or a couple of teams?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
CAMSO V8 2009	kelvin88	NASCAR & Stock Car Racing	68	24 Feb 2009 06:47