Parity Review Has Been Called

[Compromised]

Wether Ford is lying or not is neither here nor there - the real issue is Supercars can't prove them wrong.

Think about how dangerous that is for the integrity of the series. The teams have and always will complain, it's their prerogative. It's up to Supercars to have an evidence based stick to whack them with.

Where is that stick?

[Mixer]

There is no such thing as a null hypothesis. You cannot disprove something.

Ford teams need to prove it.

They could start by having 2 consistent, competent drivers in each team, not crashing, not getting avoidable penalties, not shooting themselves in the foot with strategy or put errors.

Until then the points table is not a way to judge parity.

At the end of the day even if you measure all the data points for parity where is the unmeasurable difference between 888 and DJR?

DJR without Penske isn't a match for 888.

Tickford and WAU maybe need to be more involved in testing parts and there is mutterings about dissatisfaction with DJR results from recent testing.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

Ford teams need to prove it.

Certainly. Ford teams need to buy a Camaro or two, or just the aerokit and engine and convert their spare car(s), to get the back-to-back data which Supercars won't provide.

It could that the cars perform identically in every way, but without the direct comparison data, they cannot know that.

Supercars ban on overseas testing is not helpful. If they could send both models over to Ford Performance in the USA who have all the gear (AVL dynos, wind tunnels) for evaluation, I'm sure FP could narrow down where the differences are (if any).

And without that transparency of data, it’s very difficult for us as a manufacturer or our teams, that we love, to understand what the differences are in the cars – the Chevy and the Ford – and what changes we can make in the parameters and the restrictions that Supercars [employ]. It’s a guessing game in many ways.

- Mark Rushbrook
https://www.speedcafe.com/2023/07/31...ith-supercars/

It seems that the only way for Ford teams to get this data to "prove it" is to run their own Camaros, as Supercars won't provide the data.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

At the end of the day even if you measure all the data points for parity where is the unmeasurable difference between 888 and DJR?

Mostert still doesn't like the engine braking. Is Hasted sure the inertia and engine braking between the two engines is exactly the same? The LS flywheel seems very light at 4kg.

This back-to-back running would help to clarify this, as well as the long awaited AVL transient dyno testing of course.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Mostert still doesn't like the engine braking. Is Hasted sure the inertia and engine braking between the two engines is exactly the same? The LS flywheel seems very light at 4kg.

This back-to-back running would help to clarify this, as well as the long awaited AVL transient dyno testing of course.

What's the weight of the flywheel on the mustang?

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by bluesport

What's the weight of the flywheel on the mustang?

Not sure, but I think the complaint was the stroker crank itself has larger counterweights and more inertia.

I had an idea: why doesn't DJR build their Bathurst wildcard car as a Camaro? They are allowed to do wildcard testing, so this will help them to gather comparative data on Camaro v Mustang. So they'll have some ideas on what to propose to fix technical parity (if any are identified), instead of working "blind".

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by Mixer

There is no such thing as a null hypothesis. You cannot disprove something.

Ford teams need to prove it.

I agree with you in theory, but in reality, this parity issue has become such a controversy that IF Supercars had data/evidence showing parity, they would have smacked Ford with it, if only to shut them up.

[Mixer]

I want to make one point from which you can draw your own conclusions.

888 have been proven to be the kings of constructing a "customer car" with a wide setup window from their original Falcons which took DJR to their only non-Penske championship in 25 years, to various Commodores rolled out to great effect over many years.

DJR on the other hand produced cars that nobody could drive, including their own second driver. MSR attempted to run the DJRTP FGX that was good enough to win a championship but couldn't get anywhere near results with it, and switched to GM as a result.

I don't know why we're surprised about a championship where cars are much closer together, with less levers to separate the former "big" teams from the former "small" ones, that one car is easier to unlock latent performance from than the other.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

I don't know why we're surprised about a championship where cars are much closer together, with less levers to separate the former "big" teams from the former "small" ones, that one car is easier to unlock latent performance from than the other.

That is not permissible in a technical parity series. If true, that needs to be fixed to provide technical parity -- two vehicles that perform the same in every aspect: a one-make series with two superficial makes.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

That is not permissible in a technical parity series. If true, that needs to be fixed to provide technical parity -- two vehicles that perform the same in every aspect: a one-make series with two superficial makes.

You don't attempt to understand what a technical parity series means.

[Compromised]

Q -Why is there a parity controversy?

A - Because we are racing two different cars.

Q - Why are we racing two different cars?

[bluesport]

I wish supercars would just "fess up" and admit that technical parity is too difficult to achieve.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Mixer

You don't attempt to understand what a technical parity series means.

So WAU have the same opportunity to win as teams running Camaros and are just doing a bad job?

Ford Performance obviously disagree hence their intention to warn the series about their intention to withdraw IP from 2024, by first withdrawing the series advertising and safety car...

Originally Posted by Compromised

Q - Why are we racing two different cars?

At least a one-make Camaro Cup in 2024 would solve the parity issues!

[Mixer]

If WAU had built the Mustang every Ford team would have a better chance of winning.

WAU had significant success with customer cars also.

[mite5255]

How many times has Ford pulled the pin over the years

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Mixer

If WAU had built the Mustang every Ford team would have a better chance of winning.

WAU had significant success with customer cars also.

Woulda, shoulda, coulda......blah, blah, blah.

[Compromised]

If the Ford teams are considered generally weaker than the Chev team's how does it make sense to get the teams themselves to develop the cars?

Wouldn't that mean from the very beginning you have a discrepancy of performance based purely on who developed the car? Sounds great for prototype racing, don't think it's working too well for parity racing though....

[Mixer]

Who said Ford teams are weaker?

I think Grove and WAU are excellent teams but neither has a strong driver lineup.

My issue is that DJR have always built cars nobody but their star driver could drive.

888 always built cars people had great success with because they were easy to get in the window.

That history seems to inform the present.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

Woulda, shoulda, coulda......blah, blah, blah.

So it's ok for you to do it but not for me?

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by Mixer

My issue is that DJR have always built cars nobody but their star driver could drive.

888 always built cars people had great success with because they were easy to get in the window.

This only proves my point - if one homologation team isn't as competent as the other, performance will differ. That can't happen in a parity series and speaks to the issues Ford claim to be having this season.

If the series insist on racing different bodies and engines against each other, wouldn't it make sense for a third party to homologate ALL models?

Of course the Chev is a great package, T8 are the class of the series and they developed it. But, crucially, this isn't a prototype series where you are rewarded for outsmarting your competitors at the design stage.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by Compromised

If the series insist on racing different bodies and engines against each other, wouldn't it make sense for a third party to homologate ALL models?

Other than Tickford or WAU, 888 would be the only body capable of doing this. Ford would not allow it.

Conspiracy idiots would lose their freaking mind.

[bluesport]

Originally Posted by Mixer

So it's ok for you to do it but not for me?

You do it all the time because you just don't want ford to win anything.

[Ares]

With the introduction of a new car there should be a bipartisan approach. The best brains in pitlane are contracted, and split into groups based on ability and skills. It is in everyone's interest to get this job right. The tribalism starts at Race 1. The challenge is to build TWO good racecars that operate the same.

[Mixer]

Originally Posted by bluesport

You do it all the time because you just don't want ford to win anything.

I do hope Ford leave, if for no other reason that utter one eyed sooks like you leave the sport for good.

Fords were among the quickest cars in the races at SMP and passed more cars than anybody else but you didn't notice because you're too busy whining.

[Ares]

Everyone involved are there to build TWO cars. Anyone playing games are out including all other team members if any are involved.