Ford Forums banner

Holden use the force, say Ford stars

3K views 21 replies 16 participants last post by  all4ford  
#1 ·
There's always going to be complaints about inequality in this race, isn't there :fraz: : An article from SMH. Apologies if this is a repost.

Holden use the force, say Ford stars

Ford's chances of today breaking a six-year losing streak in the Bathurst 1000 for V8 supercars are made tougher by Holden's advantage in rear downforce, which makes the Commodore easier to drive flat out.

The annual Holden versus Ford stoush on Mount Panorama is not as even-handed as it should be, Ford drivers John Bowe and Glenn Seton say.

V8 supercar rules call for the two brands to race under a parity system, meaning the objective is for them to be as equal as possible.

The Commodore and Falcons have similar design engines, the same weight limit, identical gearboxes and suspensions, and the target of similar downforce front and rear.

But Bathurst has been a Holden playground since 1998, the last time a Ford (Steve Richards/Jason Bright in a Stone Brothers Racing Falcon) triumphed.

Ford star Bowe, a two-time winner of the Bathurst 1000, says Holden have an advantage in one key area - rear-end downforce.

Bowe says the V8 supercar Falcon is really "flighty" in fast corners, with the lack of rear grip making the car a handful around Mount Panorama, where the lap average speed is around 175kmh.

"I'm absolutely adamant that the aero performance on the rear of the Commodore racecar is better than the Falcon," said Bowe, who called for some accurate wind-tunnel testing of the two cars, "so the Ford teams are not disadvantaged in this way again".

The rear wings on both cars are identical except that the Holdens have a small vertical "gurney" flap.

Bowe insists he is not talking through his hat and that his team, Brad Jones Racing, conducted private wind-tunnel testing at Monash University earlier this year and found the current BA Falcon racecar had around 20 per cent less downforce than the old AU model V8 supercar.

Fellow Ford racer Glenn Seton, of Ford Performance Racing, agrees with Bowe. Alluding to Greg Murphy's Bathurst qualifying effort last year, Seton said: "You can't do a [2 minute] six-something around here unless you've got a better mousetrap."

But the Ford teams have no choice but to put their claims of inequity aside and get on with the task of winning the Great Race.

Holden Racing Team's Mark Skaife says success on the mountain is much more than having blinding speed.

"You've got to calculate what sort of economy you're going to get driving flat out," he said, adding that the pace-setting teams will make either four or five scheduled pit stops for fuel.

The V8 supercars have become thirstier as they have been developed to produce more power, Skaife said.

Skaife, who was on the pace right up until crucial qualifying on Friday when a broken rear suspension curtailed his assault on the top 10, will start the race buried in the middle of the 34-car field in 18th spot. His poor qualifying outcome means his task of turning around an ordinary season by winning the race that really matters in Australia is that much harder. He has no option but to take a huge gamble and charge hard.

If he can work his way forward, his team can then think about a strategy for the vital last hour or so.

"This is also a way more strategic race than many people would imagine," he said. "It's all about holding good track position and not being caught out by safety car periods [when the race is neutralised due to weather or crashes]."
 
#3 ·
It's not as though the people investing in the sport don't deserve the money be
spent to find out. I'd be pissed off if my millions were going into a disadvantaged
product in a parity controlled sport. I'm amazed they're not screaming to
the heavens.
 
#6 ·
I think the real reason why ford was 2 - 7th was more due to the fact there weren't many key holden runners left because most of them took each other out. I believe the falcon doesn't have as much downforce on the rear as the commodore, because if u looked at the holden over the mountain verses the falcon, the commodore did sit a lot better, which would give them the upper hand. The answer is simple really, do the wind tunnel test and see what the result is. If there is a difference fix it damnit, and that goes for both!
 
#8 ·
You could see by the end of it, the falcon that were front running just didn't have enough left in the tyres. This would be because of the teams having to set the suspension slightly harder to make the car slightly more taily which would use more rubber. now, the Schnozz in all his wisdom quotes: "You've got to calculate what sort of economy you're going to get driving flat out" now wouldn't that include more than just fuel economy? Things such as rubber come into that equation too, and differences in areo kits can't possibly make this racing any more even.

Quick fix: test the damned cars. Same suspension settings, and for god's sake make them surprise on the teams. There's nothing holden a team back from scraping a few mills of a wing and then re painting it.
 
#9 ·
RST2000 said:
just think for little here, why didn't any holdens show denigration on their front right tyre TO the same extent as the front running ford teams ? is it, setup, dunlop tyres or maybe the holdens use the fronts better because of MORE REAR DOWNFORCE...
I'd re think that...
Rear downforce will affect the rears in the opposite way --

ie: more rear downforce = more rear grip = less front grip ratio = fronts have to do more work.

If you have it the other way, the fronts litterally don't skid as much and don't suffer from understeer scrub at places like the cutting. The rears do hile the swing around and get mauled trying to keep up with the front's direction and cope with 600 horses.

The Dunlop official stated yesterday that the damaged tyres were from shrapnel on the road, and were flukes. nothing wrong with the tyre structurally, nothing wrong with them in regards to premature wear either.
 
#10 ·
ford.boy said:
I'd re think that...
Rear downforce will affect the rears in the opposite way --

ie: more rear downforce = more rear grip = less front grip ratio = fronts have to do more work.

If you have it the other way, the fronts litterally don't skid as much and don't suffer from understeer scrub at places like the cutting. The rears do hile the swing around and get mauled trying to keep up with the front's direction and cope with 600 horses.
Not quite right. The looser the back the more correcting the fronts must do to keep the car straight. If the back was settled down the fronts would not have to correct the car as much resulting in less wear.
 
#11 ·
AlbertM said:
Not quite right. The looser the back the more correcting the fronts must do to keep the car straight. If the back was settled down the fronts would not have to correct the car as much resulting in less wear.
Didn't show that way when the AU was nicer on the fronts than the VT-X was.
But, of course I'm only talking from very limited knowledge.
 
#12 ·
I also say there are no excuses. I was at the race for the 3rd straight year and it was obvious that the Ford drivers dominated, but the masterstroke of Murphys final pitstop gave them the win.

I am dissapointed but somehow satisfied that Ford are performing better each year.
 
#13 ·
RST2000 said:
just think for little here, why didn't any holdens show denigration on their front right tyre TO the same extent as the front running ford teams ? is it, setup, dunlop tyres or maybe the holdens use the fronts better because of MORE REAR DOWNFORCE...
there were a couple of Holdens that had a problem with the right front tyre as well. I think one of them was a HRT car.
 
#17 ·
Unless I'm mistaken the fastest lap of the race wasn't Murph, but was in fact Seton/Lowndes, so doesn't that show that what Bowe said doesn't really have a big effect.....


Forget about parity, why not just grab a bodyshell and stick ford badges on half the field, holden on the other half and let them race......
 
#18 ·
Devil CV8 said:
Forget about parity, why not just grab a bodyshell and stick ford badges on half the field, holden on the other half and let them race......
one would think it would be easier to shove a ford and a holden body shell into a wind tunnel and be done with the whole argument.......... :zzz:
 
#19 ·
Devil CV8 said:
Unless I'm mistaken the fastest lap of the race wasn't Murph, but was in fact Seton/Lowndes, so doesn't that show that what Bowe said doesn't really have a big effect.....


......

Yes he may have set the fastest time proving he had the fastest car, but it may have been a total handful to get it to that and doing 1 lap may be totally draining on the driver, if the car was fast but easy to drive, they may be able to drive it at those speeds for most of the day
 
#20 ·
A very touching subject this pararity debate isn't it, I'm not going to make a call on this because maybe Bowe/BJR and Seton/FPR are right in their explanation's, after all they would know more about this subject than anybody else but then again would we be having this debate if Ford had off filled the 1st 7 posistion's at the mountain like they were going to if it wern't for a lucky saftey car call for Murph, but I do agree there need's to be a test to set this matter to rest.
 
#22 ·
Devil CV8 said:
Unless I'm mistaken the fastest lap of the race wasn't Murph, but was in fact Seton/Lowndes, so doesn't that show that what Bowe said doesn't really have a big effect.....
Yes but this was common in the AU days when Ambrose would kick everyone's ass in qualifying and then race well until the tyres were stuffed and fall through the field, the same is happening today at tracks that have real fast corners. NZ and Bathurst are two very good examples of where holdens nearly always win and fords have tyre troubles.