V8 Supercars Australia Board has sought a parity review between the VE Commodore and BF Falcon.
Holden Racing Team’s Mark Skaife requested the parity review after the Queensland Raceway round of the Championship on the basis the Falcon had an aerodynamic advantage over the Commodore.
And the Board has agreed an investigation into parity is needed, commissioning V8 Supercars Technical Director Andy Bartley to conduct it.
A statement from V8 Supercars released today (Monday) said the Board discussed the issue of parity at its September meeting on Friday and “agreed that an analysis was required in response to the subjectâ€.
“Mr Bartley will examine all the relevant data of all cars in the 2008 Championship Series and make a recommendation to the board as to whether a complete parity review is required,†the statement read.
“He will also distribute all available aerodynamic testing data of the VE Commodore and BF Falcon to all competing teams for their information and analysis.â€
The statement also said Bartley would report back to the Board before its next meeting on October 22, which is the day before Round 11 of the Championship at Surfers Paradise, Queensland.
A Holden Motorsport source said Holden had only just received the news that a parity review will be held.
“Once we have a look at it we will talk to all the parties involved and go from there,†the source said.
Ford Racing Manager Ray Price had a similar response.
“From Ford’s point of view we would like to understand what it is that is being investigated, the process behind that investigation and what they believe the current deficiencies are in the system,†he said.
“I would hope that the investigation also compares results against 2007 given that the aero package that is currently in use was validated in 2006 and has not changed.â€
Author:Briar Gunther
Source:BigPond Sport - copyright
http://www.v8supercar.com.au/content/hero_news/september_08/vesa_to_review_parity/
Displaying 1 to 11 of 11 replies
There have been 11 replies to this Discussion Topic:
Greggo 8:05 pm September 8th 2008
This Sucks…
michelle hitchins 9:35 pm September 8th 2008
Thanks for the info, Mackenzie. Maybe v8 supercars should be changed to HOLDEN supercars! This is just rediculous, imo!
Mackenzie Price 9:37 pm September 8th 2008
Yeah, I recon. It is all fine when Holden win the championship 2 years running or 7 Bathurst’s in a row, nothing is wrong with Ford then.
Richi 11:29 pm September 8th 2008
I honestly DO NOT understand why they want a parity review. Holden is leading the championship. What more do they want??? Why don’t they just make a rule that Fords must only have 3 wheels on the car when racing? Idiots.
Andrew Robinson 9:02 am September 9th 2008
At least nothing happening before the ‘big one’
Hopefully, the review will show that there is no issue….
Was thinking though that V8SC is becoming a lot like politics - it doesn’t matter how well you perform in your job, its how you market the issues that matters. Stuff things up, but yell loud enough and it gets fixed for you….
David Wood 10:06 am September 9th 2008
Read between the lines here folks…
VESA have recommended a parity review, just a review mind you, to see if any change is warranted. Obviously VESA has to please two masters, so what is the easiest way to do so ? make it LOOK as if you are doing something….without actually doing anything…
The findings of the review will not be heard until the day before Surfers, so any adjustment will not be until after Surfers. Which only leaves 3 championship rounds with any adjustment in effect as holden have stated that they have no problem with the FG (at least until it starts winning…)
So if there is any change, it will only be for Tassie, Bahrain and Oran Park. Of these, Tassie is probably the least Aero sensitive track on the calendar. Leaving in effect two rounds of “Advantage Holden”.
So VESA are stringing it out so it doesnt effect Bathurst - they seem in no rush to push through any review - pleasing Holden because it looks like they are doing something, and pleasing Ford by leaving the BF untouched until after Bathurst when it is too late to change the course of the championship dramatically.
Screams of “Yes, Prime Minister”
Cheryl 11:07 am September 9th 2008
good call david! couldnt agree more!… i think that VESA have done the right thing they have responded to the complaint levelled at them….. my problem lies squarley at the feet of HRT n their sore loser complex!!! they seem to b scared s**less of the concept of fair competition!!!!
jp 4:48 pm September 9th 2008
i was just thinking today that i ws going to come on here and ask someone what is a parity issue. it seems to be talked about alot latly and i reallly dont get it. so what is it??
David Wood 5:15 pm September 9th 2008
great question jp,
The easiest way to explain it is that part of V8 Supercars and having a series with two different types of cars (Holden and Ford) things must be equal in terms of the specification of the cars. The rules are designed so one make does not have a mechanical or technical advantage over the other. This is parity. Leaving the teams and drivers to set-up and drive their toy to win, rather than bolt on bigger, more expensive parts.
The apparent dis-parity we are debating here is Holden are claiming that the Ford Falcon BF has a technical advantage which makes it a better car than the Holden Commodore VE.
Formula 1 for instance, has no parity between makes and the racing is quite dull with little overtaking.
Wheels 11:24 am September 10th 2008
If you have a read of the Tech. Regs (Div C), you’ll find that both makes have to conform to certain rules and restrictions.
5000cc engine
Inlet/Exhaust valve diameter
Minimum crankshaft weight
Differentials to be used at certain tracks….
There is a heap of stuff that both makes have to comply with.
What it comes down to is where teams are allowed a bit of freedom to try certain things. Cam profiling is one, whilst the lift is limited, duration isn’t, so they can play with that at certain tracks. The use of light-weight metals (Titanium and such), is limited in some areas, but free in others. Water cooling of brakes is allowed, but with that comes additional weight. ECU’s are limited, but how you do the fuel management isn’t.
For mine, the current issue Holden has is that they seem to think the (Mighty) Falcon has an advantage in its Coefficient of Drag (CoD). Both makes signed off on the aero package (with the limited data available), but it seems to me that Holden have only just realised that to gain the same aerodynamic downforce, their CoD is more than the Falcon at any given speed.
As I have mentioned elsewhere, the Holdens had a very unique “Rear wing support”. It extened out on the rear lip of the boot from where the spoiler supports were. There is a technical name for it, but I’ve had a brain fart and can’t remember….(Will advise when I find it).
Anyhoo, what this ’support’ did was to induce a small amount of turbulence behind the car to help the airflow, what this did was that it actually reduced the overall turbulence (Drag) behind the car, which is almost like a vacuum.
Less vacuum = more speed.
As I see it, the aero is the same, but the Ford teams have found a few more ponies to overcome the CoD issue.
Maybe Holden should just try harder?
jp 2:12 pm September 11th 2008
thanks heaps david