CoG Parity...

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by Tourer

There is no publicly available proof at this stage that anyone has been disadvantaged. There have been rival teams making noise about the new commodore and 888 refuting the rival teams' claims.

I realise i am being pedantic in this case but "refute" means prove a theory wrong and triple 8 certainly havent refuted the theory

Denied it would be the better word, which means Triple 8s comments might just be a distraction or empty words

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

The Commodore hasn't been cut and shut, it's a much smaller car to start with, like the Volvo S60.

You are wrong. Because the car is FWD 100mm has been cut from the turret to fit COTF.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[leothedrummer]

Originally Posted by djr81

In a parity formula why should teams disadvantaged by a newly homologated car be forced to spend more money to return to the point of parity? Surely that just indicates the parity process has failed.

Let's be honest with ourselves for a moment - Supercars isn't really a parity series. It quite easily could be, but that isn't the direction that has been chosen.

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by djr81

Surprisingly:
FGX wheelbase 2838mm
ZB 2829mm
Altima 2775mm

FGX length 4955mm
ZB 4899mm
Altima 4859 mm

So nearly 10cm difference biggest to smallest

[djr81]

Originally Posted by Tourer

There is no publicly available proof at this stage that anyone has been disadvantaged. There have been rival teams making noise about the new commodore and 888 refuting the rival teams' claims.

888 have been strong at Adelaide for a while now and after struggling through most of last year have come out swinging. We MAY see different results in races to come.

I doubt we'll see any parity related changes after 1 race meeting.

Ofcourse other teams will cause a stink.
Ofcourse 888 will refute any claims.
Ofcourse proof (Whatever constitutes proof these days in the era of fake news) wont be released publicly.

At the end of the day either the combined mass of the roof/hatch/hinges/bulkhead from carbon/fibreglass confer a mass and cog advantage over the steel equivalents in the Falcon & Altima or they don't. A few mouse clicks on the drawing package will give that answer.

As much as 888 will want to obfuscate the homologation/manufacturing/engineering process it doesn't change how straightforward an exercise it should be.

You are 100% correct though. Supercars will sit on their hands about parity. They inevitably wait until after Bathurst unless Holden are affected.

[Mixer]

Blah blah blah.

Public release of information nobody has the expertise to understand? Good idea.

Supercars is run BY THE TEAMS, and Roland Dane isn't even on the board anymore... So the rules the car is built to are rules all of the teams have had input on.

Commodore wins almost everything at Adelaide. 888 is the best team this category has ever seen. Why are we surprised DJRTP are complaining about inequality when they have been beaten?

There isn't yet any actual information to support an inequality in technical parity, but its too early to say it doesn't exist. Lap times from other circuits where Commodores have not dominated may tell a different story.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by peckstar

I realise i am being pedantic in this case but "refute" means prove a theory wrong and triple 8 certainly havent refuted the theory

Well I see your pedantry and raise you the following meanings for "refute" from the Google Dictionary:

• Prove (a statement or theory) to be wrong or false; disprove
• prove that (someone) is wrong
• deny or contradict (a statement of accusation)

I'm going with the 3rd meaning listed - when Mr Dutton referred to the process with Supercars on the weight distribution of the new car

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by djr81

At the end of the day either the combined mass of the roof/hatch/hinges/bulkhead from carbon/fibreglass confer a mass and cog advantage over the steel equivalents in the Falcon & Altima or they don't. A few mouse clicks on the drawing package will give that answer.

As much as 888 will want to obfuscate the homologation/manufacturing/engineering process it doesn't change how straightforward an exercise it should be.

You are 100% correct though. Supercars will sit on their hands about parity. They inevitably wait until after Bathurst unless Holden are affected.

According to Mr Dutton's statement over the weekend, Supercars engaged in just such a straightforward exercise.

I'm not particularly of a "blue" or "red" hue but can't agree with your last statement (although it's been some time since parity adjustments have been made) as the parity adjustments that I can recall all were to slow down Holdens, not the other way around and made at various times of the season.

[djr81]

Originally Posted by Tourer

According to Mr Dutton's statement over the weekend, Supercars engaged in just such a straightforward exercise.

I'm not particularly of a "blue" or "red" hue but can't agree with your last statement (although it's been some time since parity adjustments have been made) as the parity adjustments that I can recall all were to slow down Holdens, not the other way around and made at various times of the season.

“There’s all these little bits and pieces and Supercars, I believe, did the right thing, added all those weights up, worked out the weights, worked out the centre of gravity, and said, ‘you know what? Actually, you’re all pretty much the same.’

The process and the outcome are different. They may well have gone through the process but "pretty much the same" from 888 and djrtp viewpoints is obvious not the same.

[Driver TBA]

The VE was 'cut n shut' in the Blueprint days to bring it in line with the BF and still eligible VZ.

When the Blueprint FG was released it also had to be 'cut n shut' to Match the above.

This was also carried over to COTF.

Last year when Fabs crashed in NZ, DJRTP had to source a road going FG roof and chop it to fit.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

888 is the best team this category has ever seen. Why are we surprised DJRTP are complaining about inequality when they have been beaten?

DJRTP should be able to perform better, and they have every right to note unfair disadvantages.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by djr81

“

The process and the outcome are different. They may well have gone through the process but "pretty much the same" from 888 and djrtp viewpoints is obvious not the same.

Yep, they should release the data.

The last thing that is acceptable is for Ford and Nissan runners to have an unfair disadvantage.

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by Mixer

There isn't yet any actual information to support an inequality in technical parity, but its too early to say it doesn't exist. Lap times from other circuits where Commodores have not dominated may tell a different story.

Why do we have to wait? Hasn't the ZB already been through Supercars rigorous aero/parity homogulation testing? They've signed off on it so I'm not sure what will change once we go to more tracks - are you suggesting Supercars homogulation procedure may not actually be adequate?

[peckstar]

Originally Posted by Compromised

Why do we have to wait? Hasn't the ZB already been through Supercars rigorous aero/parity homogulation testing? They've signed off on it so I'm not sure what will change once we go to more tracks - are you suggesting Supercars homogulation procedure may not actually be adequate?

Parity in supercars is a series of rules around motors chassis etc and then aero testing.

It would seem replacing a steel roof had not been an issue before but may have become one now.

would think a half decent group of engineers (of which there are many in supercars) can work this out and the rule can be adjusted accordingly if needed

[mayhem]

More Good News for Holden teams

Triple Eight’s Mark Dutton says there is more to come from the package.

“I’m hoping we’re just scratching the surface,” he said.

[Mixer]

One of the best drivers, in the best team, won the weekend, which he also did last year, in a car with a steel roof.

I fail to see what is news.

[mayhem]

Last year he didn't do it in a car that was "just scratching the surface" of development.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by mayhem

Last year he didn't do it in a car that was "just scratching the surface" of development.

Does it matter?

Commodore has utterly dominated this race for years, so I fail to see how the sky is falling because Commodore won there again, with a new body over the old chassis.

[mayhem]

How many meetings of similar Holden dominance would you need before you thought there might be a problem?

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by mayhem

How many meetings of similar Holden dominance would you need before you thought there might be a problem?

You're the one apparently with the crystal ball... Holden go significantly less well at flowing tracks like the GP, can we at least have a second data point to compare?

Even Walkinshaw, somehow always have a showing at Clipsal and then disappear - couild easily be an aberration.

[mayhem]

I'm asking you a genuine question, if similar dominance continued, with continued uproar from Ford and Nissan, how many rounds would it take for you to say there might be a problem here?

[Umai Naa]

More water needs to pass under the bridge before we can insinuate who's dominant.

[Mixer]

It is too early to say anybody is dominant, it is just hysterical whinging from teams who are getting beaten.

DJRTP were not consistent last year and they were not consistent at Adelaide - they failed to maximise their package.

Tickford were better but didn't seem to have winning pace, but obviously all ended up in the top 10.

Nissan are actually just a joke and shouldn't enter into the discussion, but the Kelly's never won anything in the Commodore, which people at the time whinged had an advantage...

So 888, Erebus (DR at least) and Walkinshaw found speed, but BJR in the identical mechanical package to 888 didn't trouble the scorers, running solidly in the mid-pack with the Nissans they are supposedly so much faster than...

[djr81]

Originally Posted by Mixer

You're the one apparently with the crystal ball... Holden go significantly less well at flowing tracks like the GP, can we at least have a second data point to compare?

Even Walkinshaw, somehow always have a showing at Clipsal and then disappear - couild easily be an aberration.

Walkinshaw have come out and said the new bits they have for Melbourne will increase their competitiveness on non street circuits - the idea being they will have better rear on the cars. The cars for the last few years have been much better on street tracks than on traditional circuits.

Using race wins as a benchmark for parity isn't a good path forward in any case. You cannot tell the extent to which a team is doing a better job within the regulations as distinct from the regulation handing them an advantage.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by djr81

Using race wins as a benchmark for parity isn't a good path forward in any case. You cannot tell the extent to which a team is doing a better job within the regulations as distinct from the regulation handing them an advantage.

Did you see Larko's analysis of laptimes for the last half of Sunday's race at Adelaide? There was no apparent advantage of the ZB vs other cars apparent.