|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
8 Apr 2019, 06:01 (Ref:3896125) | #1 | ||
Race Official
1% Club
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 46,678
|
[VASC19R9R10]WD40 Phillip Island Supersprint, 12-14 Apr
Phillip Island is aero country...
A place where the low drag, high downforce setup, accompanied by strong engine power, will be super competitive... The expectation therefore is that this might be a full house Mustang track.. Or not.. Hard to know.. But not long til we find out... |
||
__________________
Happy David Thexton Day, 21st March 2003 “I am not uncertain” - Dollar Bill Stern, Billions “Fear stimulates my imagination” - Don Draper, Mad Men “Everybody Lies” - Dr Gregory House, House “Trust But Verify” - Commissioner Frank Reagan, Blue Bloods |
9 Apr 2019, 06:46 (Ref:3896367) | #2 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 324
|
Quote:
https://www.motorsport.com/v8superca...nshaw/4366978/ |
||
|
9 Apr 2019, 10:14 (Ref:3896393) | #3 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
He's absolutely right.
We're at a crucial point where the technology is far ahead of the testing process. Some very clever people have managed to reverse-engineer the tests to design a car that fits them. |
|
|
9 Apr 2019, 11:00 (Ref:3896400) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
Quote:
The test gives you a target: therefore you get the best performance possible (i.e., at untested conditions) while hitting the target. Seems like Engineering 101, nothing more than that! I would more than welcome proper touring car rules where you start with the actual car, weld-in a roll cage and upgrade the suspension arms, engine, gearbox, differential while starting with the engine block and suspension points and type of the road car. Where you are given dimensional boxes for your front splitter and rear wing, rather than an aero target. Glass windows, and production panels all round! That would sure be a lot better IMO! Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 9 Apr 2019 at 11:06. |
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 06:24 (Ref:3896525) | #5 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,618
|
Quote:
1. Cars that are far less reliable than current 2. Cars that are more time consuming & expensive to repair and far less repairable than current (meaning more non-starters of racing due to damage 3. Literally neverending complaints of unfairness between makes, and domination by one make as one finds a loophole in the rules or is given extra freedoms And probably most significantly: 4. Guaranteed fatality crashes Really, if you want the above, watch TCR. They manage to more or less avoid point 4, by being slow. |
|||
|
10 Apr 2019, 07:28 (Ref:3896537) | #6 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
Nailed it.
|
|
|
10 Apr 2019, 07:52 (Ref:3896541) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
These:
But obviously with Mustang, Camaro and Infiniti Q60 instead of EBs and VPs (and the stroked out BMW 540i that SHOULD have been on the grid from the Gardner team!). Your other points are a load of nonsense. Rallying is from more dangerous than circuit racing, yet WRC works perfectly well with production bodyshells. A Toyota Yaris actually looks like and is based on a Yaris, a Citroen C3 actually looks like and is based on a C3, a Ford Fiesta actually looks like and is based on a Fiesta, same goes for the Hyundai i20. Quote:
Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 10 Apr 2019 at 08:07. |
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 08:10 (Ref:3896544) | #8 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
So the teams have to buy a $60K-$150K roadcar, strip it right back to a bare shell, acid dip it, seam weld it, put a cage in it, add in spefic-to-the car driveline components and suspension, and somehow you'll tell me that's more cost-effective as well as "better" than what we have now, and be able to acheive the parity that is cornerstone to the sport?
Nah. |
|
|
10 Apr 2019, 08:45 (Ref:3896552) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
Quote:
2. Yes, they did it this way before, they can do it again. It works -- it actually removes the parity shennigans because you will be racing three cars that are fundamentally similar (Mustang, Camaro, Infiniti Q60), all with say 5.0L engines with a simple 8000rpm rev limit (knock yourself out on engine development! ). They will be using production panels, standard suspension pickup points & wheelbase of each vehicle, have a clearly defined box to design their aero in, a clearly defined maximum wheel track -- and may the best team win. No "but he has that", "but, but, but I want to have that to". You are actually allowed to build the best car and best engine you can. Don't you see how well the WRC example works!? It actually fixes everything that is contrived, stifling and restrictive about the current rules. Rules like control wheels, control pedal boxes, control brakes and control camshafts have brought nothing positive to the sport. Costs are as high as ever -- the teams will always spend as much as they can find, so let's give them something useful to spend it on! Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 10 Apr 2019 at 08:53. |
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 08:55 (Ref:3896555) | #10 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
How are 3 different cars more similar than the three we have, where the only key differences are the outer skins and engines?
|
|
|
10 Apr 2019, 09:02 (Ref:3896556) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
Well most obviously, they are all coupes, instead of a mid-size sedan, a mid-size hatch and a coupe...
Infinti Q60 Height 1395mm Length 4690mm Mustang Height 1381mm Length 4784mm Camaro Height 1380mm Length 4840mm As you can see the dimensions match up closely, especially in height. As opposed to currently where the Altima and Commodore are extremely mismatched to the Mustang which has led to a so-called parity debacle (as well as a hideous race car). Though to be fair, if the Mustang bodywork package is actually ~80kg lighter than the Commodore bodywork package as reported (120kg ballast for Mustang vs 40kg ballast for Commodore), that is a significant difference! All-in-all, the mismatch has created an untenable farce and should have been handled properly during homologation... Quote:
I think it's much better to set the same rules for everybody and may the best team win! It removes the parity shenanigans altogether, as everyone has the same rule book and same areas of developments to work with. Here is a box, design your aero within with a maximum of 2 wing elements (etc). It works in F1, in works in WRC, it is the way rules should be written -- free from farcical runway 'equalisation' exercises. |
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 09:44 (Ref:3896558) | #12 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
It's a parity series.
That's what the catagory is trying to ensure. |
|
|
10 Apr 2019, 10:10 (Ref:3896563) | #13 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 519
|
Supercars have been a step behind on this one for sure. The rules need to move with the cars, but I don't think it's broken. The ballast thing should have been a lot tighter. Going back to production car bodies will open up another can of worms for sure. pick out WRC yes they race mostly on dirt. F1 ok one manufacture gains a technological edge so wins all the races, the team mates fight over wins all session and the championship is decided with four rounds to go. Or do you go NASCAR, plastic body looks nothing like the road going car, but for the grill and headlight shape. works for them looking from afar? Then in saying all that, how long is the rear wheel drive Mustang Camaro or the like going to be around for?
|
|
|
10 Apr 2019, 10:32 (Ref:3896565) | #14 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 10:48 (Ref:3896569) | #15 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
They've allowed several aero revisions, composite panels, and have set them as the baseline for COG.
The Kellys need to work harder. |
|
|
10 Apr 2019, 12:23 (Ref:3896588) | #16 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,447
|
Which back in the days of Euro TC was a speciality of the Walkinshaws, to be fair. Those Rovers...
|
||
__________________
Bill Bryson: It is no longer permitted to be stupid and slow. You must choose one or the other. |
10 Apr 2019, 13:15 (Ref:3896595) | #17 | |
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 324
|
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 14:25 (Ref:3896607) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,941
|
Yet Ford Performance DID work harder, and are not being allowed to enjoy the fruits of their hard work even though it was within the rules. How does that work!?
Quote:
|
||
|
10 Apr 2019, 20:26 (Ref:3896674) | #19 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 519
|
Quote:
|
||
|
11 Apr 2019, 00:57 (Ref:3896709) | #20 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,561
|
||
|
11 Apr 2019, 08:07 (Ref:3896742) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,069
|
Quote:
Versus how many years of 888 dominating everything? But it's only now we need to inhibit a winning edge for "the good of the sport". |
||
|
11 Apr 2019, 08:22 (Ref:3896744) | #22 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 519
|
You talking about when 888 ran Ford also? 888 fan back then were you? come on tell the truth. Mustang taking five of the six grid positions SM driving away from the rest of the field and pulling a large gap within four or five laps of the race. having to move round 30 Kgs into the roof of their car after crying about a lot less weight than that the year before. The year they won the championship. Parity who has a problem with an even playing field?
|
|
|
11 Apr 2019, 08:33 (Ref:3896747) | #23 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
Even with the COG adjustment, they'll still be at the front of the field.
They claimed the FG-X was at a disadvantage last year, yet still won the championship soundly. The amount of whinging from the Ford teams' fanbase is unsubstantiated. |
|
|
11 Apr 2019, 08:43 (Ref:3896750) | #24 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,396
|
For what it's worth, I don't have a foot in either camp.
I just enjoy the racing for what it is. Even moreso, when it's close racing. |
|
|
11 Apr 2019, 08:50 (Ref:3896752) | #25 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,069
|
Quote:
Quote:
Is that close racing by your definition, or does it constitute winning the championship soundly? |
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[VASC18R09R10] WD40 Phillip Island 500, 20-22 April 2018 | GTRMagic | Australasian Touring Cars. | 93 | 26 Apr 2018 10:22 |
[VASC17R5R6] WD40 SuperSprint, Phillip Island: 21-23 Apr | GTRMagic | Australasian Touring Cars. | 248 | 1 May 2017 22:09 |
[VASC16R6R7] WD40 Phillip Island SuperSprint - 15-17Apr | GTRMagic | Australasian Touring Cars. | 32 | 17 Apr 2016 13:49 |
[iV8SC15R31R32R33] WD40 Phillip Island SuperSprint: 20-22Nov | GTRMagic | Australasian Touring Cars. | 145 | 25 Nov 2015 00:17 |
[V8SC09R21&22] The Island 300, Phillip Island | Go Harder. | Australasian Touring Cars. | 303 | 13 Nov 2009 05:59 |