Supercars Gen 3 (2022)

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Seems silly to allow different tyres on a test day such as this.......we'll just have to wait for Newcastle.

And being forced to soak up stocks of ‘22 wets when they are irrelevant
Allegedly the VESA group cancelled a mandated green tyre session because of weather

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by banksie

Hard to judge if teams don't run the same tyres. V8 Sleuth story

Worse than that:

Fastest in both sessions was Brad Jones Racing’s Andre Heimgartner, but Brad Jones himself argued that it is “hard to read a lot” into the timesheets.

He reasoned that, with minimum weights having not yet been determined for the Gen3 race cars, the Mustangs were running at around 60kg heavier than the Camaros.

:facepalm:

That would sure explain why the Camaro prototype was always faster than the Mustang prototype. What a fundamental error in efforts to determine parity between the prototype lap testing and between lap testing on this all-in test day.

Did SC even make sure the cars were the same weight for VCAT testing?

"You’ve got to remember that the Ford’s engine package is 60kg heavier and we don’t have a minimum weight to run to, so our cars are at least 60kg lighter, so there’s a lot of things that contribute to where we’re at," said Bradley Jones.

https://www.speedcafe.com/2023/02/22...-testing-pace/

Did somebody "forget" the engine minimum weight and engine COG rules that were already introduced previously and somehow forget to add engine ballast to LS engines to correct for that?!

Surely Mr. Hasted was not so remiss to 'forget' to weigh the two engines and strap weights to the sides of the LS engine?! He seems a fair operator, so that's unlikely.

So was the plan that it would be added to the chassis and it was somebody else who (accidentally on purpose?) " forgot " to mandate in-bay engine weights on the front of the chassis to correct the engine COG & engine weight of the Camaro?

[GTRMagic]

Still almost zero signage in cars/reams/trucks/garages pledging allegiance to Ford or Chevrolet…

Are the only Chev markings on the 888 ‘works’ cars really on the end plates of the front splitter?

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Still almost zero signage in cars/reams/trucks/garages pledging allegiance to Ford or Chevrolet…

Most pf the Fords have Ford signage on the front bumper and rear quarter panel or rear bumper, as well as on the team uniforms and racesuits.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Fords all running around on old hard tyres with mixed weather. Cynic might say deliberately.

How on Earth are they supposed to go as fast with a 60kg heavier engine?!

It seems a huge oversight that every example of both types both engines went through Hasted's shop. Hasted has measured both engines in weight and COG (not every single one, but a sample you wouldn't expect much variability), but nobody made sure to supply and fit the engine ballast to all the Camaros in time for an *officially timed* pre-season test (or even in time for prototype testing?).

[FIRE]

Maybe to early to conclude but I have the impression the Gen 3 cars lean less in the corners.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by FIRE

Maybe to early to conclude but I have the impression the Gen 3 cars lean less in the corners.

They are lower and have a wider track, so you would expect that.

Some stunning silence on the topic of why the engine ballast was allegedy missing from the Camaros, mind you... You'd assume the ballast would be delivered together with the checked engines from Craigsted, together with the brackets to install it -- whether it is to be attached to the engine or front chassis rails.

[bluesport]

More aero testing confirmed.

https://www.v8sleuth.com.au/supercar...o-parity-test/

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Worse than that:



:facepalm:

That would sure explain why the Camaro prototype was always faster than the Mustang prototype. What a fundamental error in efforts to determine parity between the prototype lap testing and between lap testing on this all-in test day.

Did SC even make sure the cars were the same weight for VCAT testing?


https://www.speedcafe.com/2023/02/22...-testing-pace/

Did somebody "forget" the engine minimum weight and engine COG rules that were already introduced previously and somehow forget to add engine ballast to LS engines to correct for that?!

Surely Mr. Hasted was not so remiss to 'forget' to weigh the two engines and strap weights to the sides of the LS engine?! He seems a fair operator, so that's unlikely.

So was the plan that it would be added to the chassis and it was somebody else who (accidentally on purpose?) " forgot " to mandate in-bay engine weights on the front of the chassis to correct the engine COG & engine weight of the Camaro?

Seriously this is amateur hour from supercars.

[V8 Fireworks]

Adrain Burgess: "Clearly [minimum weight] was was not something we were able to put in the draft rulebook until we got cars built."

https://www.v8sleuth.com.au/supercar...weight-figure/

You had two prototypes?! That doesn't make sense...

[bluesport]

More from speedcafe.

https://www.speedcafe.com/2023/02/23...rottle-issues/

[Tourer]

....all of which to me proves the old motor racing adage that the work needed will expand to fit the available time frame.

The time frame of course concludes on Friday morning at Newcastle, so I'd expect a few things to juggle around further between now and then but hopefully once we get to that Friday morning, all specs, weights etc will be sorted and in place.

Been there far too many times with far too many new cars to expect this to do anything other than go down to the wire.

[Backagain]

Should it be the case that the Camaros were running around 60kg too light in the front, this represents a huge advantage to the Ford teams as their data collected on the day despite SC mapping blunders are reasonably relevant whereas the Camaro data may as well have been collected from a Goggomobile. 60 extra kg on the nose is game changing.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Backagain

Should it be the case that the Camaros were running around 60kg too light in the front, this represents a huge advantage to the Ford teams as their data collected on the day despite SC mapping blunders are reasonably relevant whereas the Camaro data may as well have been collected from a Goggomobile. 60 extra kg on the nose is game changing.

For stupid chicken littles who CAN'T READ

BJR chose not to run their engine ballast.

888 did run their engine ballast.

It wasn't mandated because the minimum weight isn't set yet.

And No, it hasn't been "forgotten"

[Compromised]

So no minimum weight, but T8 ran ballast to achieve minimum weight, which again hasn't been set yet. Hmmm....

Chicken little meet ostrich with head in sand

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Compromised

So no minimum weight, but T8 ran ballast to achieve minimum weight, which again hasn't been set yet. Hmmm....

Triple eight ran ENGINE BALLAST which is designed to equalise weight and COG of the ENGINES.

Not to achieve mininmum weight, WHICH HASN'T BEEN SET YET

[bluesport]

Reynolds not optimistic.

https://www.speedcafe.com/2023/02/24...ear-for-fords/

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Reynolds not optimistic.

https://www.speedcafe.com/2023/02/24...ear-for-fords/

We went into that test day and we assumed they were about a second faster. So, hopefully… they’ve got two weeks to sort it out or otherwise it’s going to be a pretty dismal year for us.

- David Reynolds

It's a worry!

It's very concerning that Mark Rushbrook's concerns were not acted on promptly, such that he had to raise them publicly.

The use of unreliable (unrepeatable?) airfield testing instead of a wind tunnel doesn't help matters!

[bloggs]

Seems Supercars are going to be Very busy in the next two weeks, with so much to fix before the first race of the new Generation. The vision out the front was an easy fix, but we still have a wheel issue, throttle problems, aero differences and there are still the weight to be sorted out. Apart from Motorsport.com, nobody has been talking about the Flexi mounts on the front wing of the Camaro that have now been Banned. That was kept Quiet.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by bloggs

Seems Supercars are going to be Very busy in the next two weeks, with so much to fix before the first race of the new Generation. The vision out the front was an easy fix, but we still have a wheel issue, throttle problems, aero differences and there are still the weight to be sorted out. Apart from Motorsport.com, nobody has been talking about the Flexi mounts on the front wing of the Camaro that have now been Banned. That was kept Quiet.

I really don't understand why Ford persist with this category, it's a mystery to me.

[gomick]

How does an un-tried car be consistently that much faster than a car that has been in the series 3 years? Need more manufacturers. At the end of the day, as good as Triple 8 are, parity always goes there way. Be interesting if they ran Fords right now or brought in a new manufacturer...

[Tourer]

Neither of the cars have “been in the series for three years”. New engines, completely different chassis, different bodywork etc. Think that I read that the only carryover from before is the transaxle.

[V8 Fireworks]

James Courtney weighs in, having driven both prototypes around Queensland Raceway:

There is definitely a difference, quite a big difference. I think that Blind Freddie can see it needs to be addressed. That's why they did all of that extra tuning on the dyno and the Ford engines got a little change and the Camaro to help with that parity side of things. We're going back to VCAT so it highlights that there is an issue and as a championship they're addressing it. They still haven't agreed on the CoG or weight as yet, so I once we can achieve that and confirm the aero numbers this week, gelled with the engine side of things...

https://www.v8sleuth.com.au/courtney...parity-debate/

All in due time it seems, lol!

It seems a worry that Rushbrook raised concerns long ago from prototype laptimes, yet little action was taken in a timely manner, hence requiring Rushbrook to make a public statement. Rather unprofessional from ATCC organisers to not be more proactive to ensure Mustangs have no disadvantage! How did it even come to be that the Mustang prototype was 8 tenths per lap slower -- that's just bizarre.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

James Courtney weighs in, having driven both prototypes around Queensland Raceway:

https://www.v8sleuth.com.au/courtney...parity-debate/

All in due time it seems, lol!

It seems a worry that Rushbrook raised concerns long ago from prototype laptimes, yet little action was taken in a timely manner, hence requiring Rushbrook to make a public statement. Rather unprofessional from ATCC organisers to not be more proactive to ensure Mustangs have no disadvantage! How did it even come to be that the Mustang prototype was 8 tenths per lap slower -- that's just bizarre.

I have my doubts as to whether parity will ever be adequately addressed, T8 and Brad Jones will never stop whinging.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

I have my doubts as to whether parity will ever be adequately addressed, T8 and Brad Jones will never stop whinging.

Meanwhile slow Ford teams and Mark Rushbrook are non stop whinging.

On the flipside, DJR, Tickford, WAU and Grove engineers and management are silent on the matter.