[VASC19R25] SuperCheap Auto Bathurst 1000, Mount Panorama 10-13th October (WITH POLL)

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Haha, behave yourself, when did you turn to the dark side anyway???

I don’t mind if Ford or Holden or Nissan or anyone wins...
If their cars comply with all the rules, and the racing is fair as per the rule book.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

I don’t mind if Ford or Holden or Nissan or anyone wins...
If their cars comply with all the rules, and the racing is fair as per the rule book.

And I don't like ongoing parity throughout the year when everything was signed off prior to the commencement of the season.

[Sandgroper]

Originally Posted by M91

What advantage did they gain?

Um Pole Position IM guessing !

[Sandgroper]

Originally Posted by Trevor

which part of the media release did you Holden idiots miss, oh wait it must have been the bit where they said there was 'no performance gain'.. What was it? o.oo5 of a mm on ONE piston (no 4) FFS

Still out of spec whichever way you look at it "shurgs"

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Sandgroper

Still out of spec whichever way you look at it "shurgs"

Not only out of basic VASC spec but also beyond the additional leeway that the regs allow for. VASC have a stipulated max for valve lift, then give a small leeway for whatever reason, but DJRTP were (admittedly only by 0.003mm) over the leeway amount.

Its a line that has been crossed, so they are guilty. No question, regardless of whether it was accidental or non performance enhancing.
A bit like being pregnant... you either are or you aren't.

The only issue really is was the penalty appropriate. Thats another discussion.

(I am another who favours not Ford or Holden, I follow/support drivers from both sides. ie I was happy for a CL win and happy for Scott to take the title)

[GTRMagic]

Errrr...

[Casper]

Originally Posted by djr81

Thanks. Had to laugh at their web page. Shows a dial guage measuring valve lift.

And what would you use?

[Jerico]

Headline. Murphy urges McLaughlin to quit Supercars.
Old Greg still with the hot temper and the big mouth ah.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by Jerico

Headline. Murphy urges McLaughlin to quit Supercars...

Well lots of noise with Scotty going to good ol' 'Merica.

[Forda]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Errrr...

Yep - winners are grinners.

[Gaz170]

I'm a DJRTP follower, but I think the team need to have a long hard look at themselves and realise all of these incidents, whether accidental or on purpose, are damaging their reputation, and by association the reputation of their drivers.

Scott has been awesome all year but through no fault of his own his Bathurst win is tarnished and he is being called a cheat.

Someone needs to step up and say "It ends here" and double and triple check everything. I've read the report on the engine, in my mind there is some doubt however in the end it was outside of the rules. Whether it was a different reference used by the engine builder, heat expansion, whatever, it failed and they need to make sure from now on all these are allowed for in their settings.

[GTRMagic]

Good answer..

[Umai Naa]

Originally Posted by Gaz170

I'm a DJRTP follower, but I think the team need to have a long hard look at themselves and realise all of these incidents, whether accidental or on purpose, are damaging their reputation, and by association the reputation of their drivers.

Scott has been awesome all year but through no fault of his own his Bathurst win is tarnished and he is being called a cheat.

Someone needs to step up and say "It ends here" and double and triple check everything. I've read the report on the engine, in my mind there is some doubt however in the end it was outside of the rules. Whether it was a different reference used by the engine builder, heat expansion, whatever, it failed and they need to make sure from now on all these are allowed for in their settings.

Spot-on.

Take the emotion away, remove the blue-tinted glasses and ask "how long this does need to go on for?". Even if catagory management had a hard-on for them, they should have done due dilligence and made absolute sure they were operating within the rules.

They have been the benchmark team for the past 3 seasons. They've got arguably the best driver in the paddock right now, the best engineer, and the biggest budget. Going against good sportsmanship, by making a mockery of perceived ambiguities in the rules, trying to sneak things through, and so on, has been to the detriment of their image and reputation. It's all completely unnecessary. Had they played a straight bat, they'd have sewn up the teams championship coming out of the Gold Coast, and probably the drivers championship too. I suspect Mr McLaughlin was trying to make up the points lost, in the process of hanging thing off the fence.

There was nothing to gain, and everything to lose. Hopefully they sit down and have a solid re-think about how they go racing, over this coming off-season.

[blizard]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Errrr...

He is just making it worse. He's getting poor pr guidance.
He is a branded cheat, by popular vote it would seem.
I hold out hope that at least the Bathurst win will still be stripped from that team.
Shameful display. The blatant lies which insult anyone following. And now the smiles...

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Good answer..

Not really, because it doesn't fit with the rules.

[JAFA851]

Originally Posted by blizard

He is just making it worse. He's getting poor pr guidance.
He is a branded cheat, by popular vote it would seem.
I hold out hope that at least the Bathurst win will still be stripped from that team.
Shameful display. The blatant lies which insult anyone following. And now the smiles...

Very well said, in all respects.

[Trevor]

Scott will leave the series under the same disgust that Ambrose did - I hope all the whinging ******s will be happy then

[Langers]

My gosh, all this fuss about nothing. It's not as though they ran illegal fuel, a different cam or compression ratio. It was a minor error in engine setup with no performance gain. The penalty was fit for that team, and any other.

[Jamolad]

Originally Posted by bludvl_x19

Not really, because it doesn't fit with the rules.

I agree with you with respect to the Bathurst Q engine, but I agree with Hazelwood when you have something like The Bend last year where there is a cover-up.

The rules state run a car that is not to spec and you get excluded from the session. I don't think they knew 17 Q engine was out of spec at Bathurst, but it was, so the DSQ from qualy is fair enough. Just gets murky when he should have also started rear of grid, but the issue was not identified in time, and I don't think the team knew it was out of spec, so not much can be done about that.

Where I agree with Hazelwood that there should be further penalty like a one race ban is where you have a situation like The Bend last year where DJR knew they had fielded a car that was not to spec, knew that this would be identified, and chose to cover it up until after the race to ensure they still started from 10 instead of rear of grid. In situations where they are aware of their mistake in qualy prior to the race starting, and know that they will be found out, there needs to be something that makes teams prefer to self-report so they don't compromise the integrity of the starting grid.

Something like a one race ban would be enough. DJR admit they knew as soon as the qualy session started that their car was not compliant at The Bend. Their choice would have been self-report, get excluded from the session, and start from rear of grid (cop the standard penalty which means the start grid is not tainted). Other option would have been cover it up until after race start, still get to start from 10 but cop a one race ban. You'd self report in an instant and take the exclusion and rear of grid start.

So no intent and no cover up (like Bathurst) and the current standard penalty applies...but have bad intentions and/or cover up your error to start higher than you should and cop the harsher one race ban.

[Forda]

Originally Posted by Langers

My gosh, all this fuss about nothing. It's not as though they ran illegal fuel, a different cam or compression ratio. It was a minor error in engine setup with no performance gain. The penalty was fit for that team, and any other.

Nothing more than a storm in a teacup; however it shows the lengths, no matter how small, being taken to try and discredit DJRTP.

Highlighting a negligible tolerance difference in a crook engine (which was emitting water vapour from the oil tank after Supercars seized and tested it themselves), as well as making the announcement just prior to the Sandown race, reeks of over-the-top grandstanding.

[HDTVKSS]

Originally Posted by Forda

Nothing more than a storm in a teacup; however it shows the lengths, no matter how small, being taken to try and discredit DJRTP.

So i'm curious, at what point does out of specifications as defined by the rules not become an issue? how much leeway should be given?

IMHO if its out of spec - circumstances or not - that sucks that you may lose a win but if its out of spec, its not in accordance with the rules and you cannot afford to be soft on that. Especially with an organisation such as Penske that has been shown to take a mile when given even close to an inch.If this is a risk that you want to be wary of then build the tolerance into the engine - or you run the risk of a penalty.

Heres an example from 2017 of a very similar looking Penske ford in Nascar - https://www.foxsports.com/nascar/sto...scandal-050417

"Here are the two ways of looking at it: Penske is cheating up its cars. Period. How else do you explain both Penske crew chiefs getting suspended for violations in the first eight races of the year? They cheated, they got caught. And if your team gets caught multiple times, in my opinion, the penalties should get progressively more severe."

I believe it was also Penske teams that were purposely nosing their cars into the walls post win to avoid some sort of post race inspection.

So, if what you want is a series where teams are constantly looking to flout the rules and not care if they get caught because they can just pay the fine and move on, im not sure if we want the same things.

Yes, team always will push the rulebook, but this is more than taking the ****.

[Forda]

And if the Q engine in car 17 was pushed further, and ended up detonating, how would the tolerances have been at that stage?

Extrapolating out what occurred here, Supercars would have measured tolerances of the shrapnel by the metre, and then insinuated there was some foul play at hand.

[M91]

Originally Posted by Forda

And if the Q engine in car 17 was pushed further, and ended up detonating, how would the tolerances have been at that stage?

Extrapolating out what occurred here, Supercars would have measured tolerances of the shrapnel by the metre, and then insinuated there was some foul play at hand.

They'd probably penalise them for going over the 5L capacity due to the hole blown out the side of the cylinder...

[HDTVKSS]

Originally Posted by Forda

And if the Q engine in car 17 was pushed further, and ended up detonating, how would the tolerances have been at that stage?

Extrapolating out what occurred here, Supercars would have measured tolerances of the shrapnel by the metre, and then insinuated there was some foul play at hand.

well then we would have gotten close to what should have been the correct result where instead of being DSQ he would have been DNF....

[Forda]

Originally Posted by M91

They'd probably penalise them for going over the 5L capacity due to the hole blown out the side of the cylinder...

That wouldn't be surprising at all