This is the problem with a control chassis built for sedans. You get this thing.T8 have always been quick to jump on other teams in situations like that. Not so much when they're at fault.
Oh, hey here we go. Still not a fan of the facelift on the new Mustang but it looks pretty good in race trim.
Funny you should say that. When @Spacegoat first posted the images I did an Google Image search to try and work out where they'd come from. The result that came up was... Best guess for this image: FGX.
I can see the rear wing angle being adjustable just like all the previous Supercars but adjustable mounting points? Not without it starting World War 3.
I'm pretty sure they only do this for cost effectiveness and that T8 did the same with the ZB. It makes sense for car balance testing and parity testing reasons. Just in case it doesn't pass the run down down test they can easily reset the rear mount positions without having to fabricate different wings for every separate position.
Once it's homologated the mounting points will be set just like what happened with the ZB rear wing. T8 also had several different front bars at the homologation test in case the first one didn't pass. Wouldn't surprise me if the DJRTP/Ford/Tickford boffins have got a plan B and C as well.
Yeah, no surprises there. We're on the same page 👍 I thought they were trying to get multiple mounting points homologated, that they could then pick & choose come race weekend. They're obviously not so it's all good.
This is Supercars sitting on their hands & turning a blind eye despite knowing this day was coming.
👍
👍 Yes, they should have known when they first allowed two doors in that the control chassis and rollcage should be modified.
.They'd be able to see out okay. The nose would have to be raised to a ridiculous height for them not to be able to see. I went on a ride day in a pre-COTF FG Falcon where you sit further forward and I was much higher than the driver (Michael Patrizi) was, and I still couldn't see the front, even with the much higher front corners. I could only just see the bonnet bulge in the centre (which in my road BA GT-P is very prominent). It would also greatly reduce the new model being able to compete with the very slippery ZB.
It was Boost Mobile boss Peter Adderton that said no V8, no Boost.Which manufacturers have VASC been talking to though? Also, which ones are actually interested, but want to race which cars? What cars would a manufacturer race?
Cars sold and/or imported here:
May come here
We've seen the S60, E63 and Altima make it work over the same chassis.
We now have, just about, open engines available to enter the series. I'm glad Ryan has shed more light on this, but who is hesitant besides BMW(as an example, menyioned the M4. Rules didn't allow for coupes and 6-cylinders) and Chrysler? Have any manufacturers gone as far as WAU, to at least see what their cars would look like? What are Kia and Alfa waiting for? Just what are "the potentials" concerned with(other than wanting to join with a competitive team)? That's what we should be reading/hearing about. At least, with what those manufacturers want to race with.
Edit: On the back of the TCR news R1600Turbo posted, about Hyundai running the Veloster N next year, as that's the car they sell(USA doesn't get the i30 N, in the USA
https://www.speedcafe.com/2018/11/10/jones-supercars-can-learn-from-dtm/
I hope more owners start being more vocal about their investment in VASC. I remember Todd Kelly saying they hoped VASc would help them with engine power. The category has to look out for keeping manufacturers in. We all know this, but it's like the owners have their hands tied or something.
Wasn't it Zak Brown or a Walkinshaw sponsor, saying they'd pull funding, if they couldn't race a V8? VASC should be looking out for the brands like DTM and Super GT. Especially, the way Super GT maintain their relationship with the manufacturers.
.
