Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

V8 Supercars set to allow any engine configuration from 2017. Why can't F1 do the same?


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#1 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 20,502 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 05:46

V8 Supercars announces they'll allow teams to use any engine configuration from 2017. Why can't F1 do the same? 
 
 

Manufacturers will no longer restricted to just V8s and will be free to use any engine configuration they wish.

The next-generation of V8 Supercars will be known as Gen2 Supercars.

The decision to allow freedom in engine choice was made in an effort to appeal to manufacturers that may be interested in joining the sport.

 

 

 



Advertisement

#2 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 10,082 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 05:51

Because in that series the engines will be BoP'd to hell to ensure competitive racing and parity across the brands... Think of it as GT3 regs for Touring Cars.

 

There's no way that would happen in F1.


Edited by DanardiF1, 03 December 2014 - 05:52.


#3 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 20,502 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:00

Because in that series the engines will be BoP'd to hell to ensure competitive racing and parity across the brands... Think of it as GT3 regs for Touring Cars.

 

There's no way that would happen in F1.

Then how did they do it before?



#4 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,393 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:05

V8 Supercars has been about parity since they ditched Group A for the 1993 series

#5 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:06

Ferrari and Renault essentially became engine maintenance divisions during the past era and could not compete with Mercedes under the new (highly restricted) regulation.

 

Opening them up would result in a Mercedes style domination to the power of infinity.



#6 Richard T

Richard T
  • Member

  • 2,108 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:11

Any configuration WEC style?

Are they limiting fuel or how are they controlling it?

#7 Gyno

Gyno
  • Member

  • 657 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:13

Ferrari and Renault essentially became engine maintenance divisions during the past era and could not compete with Mercedes under the new (highly restricted) regulation.

 

Opening them up would result in a Mercedes style domination to the power of infinity.

 

 

No it wouldn't.

 

it didn't before and won't happen now either...

Aslong as they are allow to work on them and update them through out the season and none of this 4 engines for 1 year bullshit regs.



#8 krod

krod
  • Member

  • 122 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:29

 

V8 Supercars announces they'll allow teams to use any engine configuration from 2017. Why can't F1 do the same? 
 
 

 

 

 

You have a little think about things like: budgets, unlimited spending, space-race, six-car grid.

 

Let me know.

 

Have a great day.



#9 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 20,502 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:38

You have a little think about things like: budgets, unlimited spending, space-race, six-car grid.

 

Let me know.

 

Have a great day.

Well, I'm not talking about an unlimited engine formula. I'm talking about allowing teams/manufacturers to bring whatever configuration they want. There will always have to be limits and some degree of parity, as much as we don;t like to admit it, but that does not necessitate a single spec. Restrict displacement, fuel flow, etc, but why do we assume the only way to attract new manufacturers is to restrict everything to one spec that the group seems to think will entice the most manufacturers? It seems to me that opening things up a bit would entice more manufacturers who'd want to show everyone that their way works best or at least works very well.

 

ETA: I'm also curious as to why it's automatically assumed it would be more expensive than what we have now. When you have a company who doesn't work in a certain engine type and then has to develop it for a racing series rather than doing what they're already good at, how are they saving money over a more open spec?


Edited by AustinF1, 03 December 2014 - 06:41.


#10 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 6,110 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 03 December 2014 - 06:39

Gen2 Supercars

Gentoo_Penguin_at_Cooper_Bay%2C_South_Ge

It's got his seal of approval!

#11 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,067 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 07:50

You have a little think about things like: budgets, unlimited spending, space-race, six-car grid.

 

Let me know.

 

Have a great day.

 

One acronym for you: GT3. Sort of run-what-you-want, every car is BoPed (yes, the ugliest acronym in racing), and grids all over the world in the 20+, 30+, even 40+ bracket (not to mention 60+ at the Spa 24h).



#12 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,393 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 03 December 2014 - 07:57

Look at the difference Mercedes radical turbo concept has made and translate that to the whole engine concept, and there's potential for even more performance differentiation than we had.

#13 Sash1

Sash1
  • Member

  • 1,291 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 03 December 2014 - 08:07

V8 supercars has no other choice as consumer V8's and probably even V6's will be a thing of the past within 5 years. Except for the US.



#14 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 03 December 2014 - 09:42

Why can't F1 do the same?


Because F1 isn't a touring car series.

#15 TF110

TF110
  • Member

  • 3,068 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 December 2014 - 10:55

Lexus rumored to be interested in entering. They just wanted the rules to open up (2 doors). Looks like thats on the table now.

#16 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 12,548 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 11:42

Out of interest, is it still going to be named V8 Supercars? Even if in the next few years no one actually turns up with a V8 engine?

#17 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 15:09

Call me an unreconstructed moron, but I think V8SC is onto a winning formula with big, heavy cars with big, strong, loud engines, unsophisticated suspensions, no fancy diff and quite poor brakes. Those cars really get the driver working. The cars are tricky to drive, as evidenced by the typical big gulf in performance between the regulars and the internationals at Surfers' Paradise.

Ultimately one reason why a lot of touring car series have resorted to short races and gimmicks is because they're not much to look at when they're just going around. But V8SCs are absolute monsters to behold even when they're driving around on their own. So I hope whatever we end up with doesn't end up looking and sounding weak by comparison, and I hope the cars won't be too easy to drive. They might end up with something less powerful that does quicker laptimes but is just far less exciting to watch or drive - a bit like the difference between a modern WRC car and a Group B machine; yes, the modern car may be faster, but that's mostly down to improved tyres and clever diff, which is why WRC had massive problems controlling the huge crowds in its heyday whereas nobody bothers to go anymore.



#18 Pingguest

Pingguest
  • Member

  • 942 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 December 2014 - 15:15

To me, the plan sounds like a break from the trend of increasinly standardizing the cars. I like this idea.



#19 byrkus

byrkus
  • Member

  • 1,011 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 03 December 2014 - 15:27

I quite like the idea. It's as if in F1, someone say like "you can have any kind of engine configuration, as long as it's 1.5 litre, with turbo... If you have a Hybrid system, you have a 100 l/h fuel flow limit, while if you don't have any Hybrid system, fuel could flow at (let's say) 120 l/h. 100 kg fuel limit remains the same".

 

But in this case, I don't think anyone would ever bother fitting Hybrid systems. ;) But I would quite like such a formula. 4 cylinders? 6, 8? Even 12 cylinders, you say? No problem, welcome aboard! :D



Advertisement

#20 Imateria

Imateria
  • Member

  • 2,424 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 03 December 2014 - 15:34

Well, I'm not talking about an unlimited engine formula. I'm talking about allowing teams/manufacturers to bring whatever configuration they want. There will always have to be limits and some degree of parity, as much as we don;t like to admit it, but that does not necessitate a single spec. Restrict displacement, fuel flow, etc, but why do we assume the only way to attract new manufacturers is to restrict everything to one spec that the group seems to think will entice the most manufacturers? It seems to me that opening things up a bit would entice more manufacturers who'd want to show everyone that their way works best or at least works very well.

 

ETA: I'm also curious as to why it's automatically assumed it would be more expensive than what we have now. When you have a company who doesn't work in a certain engine type and then has to develop it for a racing series rather than doing what they're already good at, how are they saving money over a more open spec?

It should be pointed out that the last time F1 allowed teams a choice of configuration in the 3.0 era of the 90's/00's, all the manufacturers ended up going to V10's anyway since they offered the best compromise on power/weight/reliability/size over the V8's and V12's, long before the rather pointless rule if limiting manufacturers to only V10's was brought in.



#21 chipmcdonald

chipmcdonald
  • Member

  • 1,824 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 03 December 2014 - 15:57

“The current climate in world motorsport is absolutely clear. Manufacturers want choice in what they go racing with, otherwise they won’t participate.

“They want their DNA represented and so do we. We will not compromise our DNA – fast, loud and fierce racing.”

 

Sounds good to me.



#22 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 17,232 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 03 December 2014 - 16:01

There seems to be much more freedom in WEC engine regulations as well.

 

F1 is just ran by a bunch of loons.



#23 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 20,502 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 16:03

Sorry to be a bit nitpicky, but "any" isn't quite ANY - for now [first draft version] it's the choice between V8 NA and V6 turbo or 4 cyl turbo, all need to run on E85 fuel, so no TDI's, V6 NA, 5 cylinder, 3 cylinder &/or rotary engines for example.

How they plan to "balance" the performance remains to be seen.

One point is that all engines will need to have a common CG and probably weight.

So does this mean, if you turn up with a 4cylinder flat turbo (Subaru) you will need to bolt a lump of steel/lead/weight about 20cm over it, to make it the same weight and CG then a iron block V8? I'm sure Subaru will just "love" such a rule.

 

On a side note, the linked articel shows once again, the rather low level of quality journalism these days, and considering that this was published in what you would call a "specialist publication" it makes you all the more "wonder" what's happening, and if people actually "know" what they are talking about, or just parroting around to make some noise.

Good point, and even in my mind it would be difficult to allow them to just bring anything they want to bring. But that's a pretty wide variety and within that there are likely many ways to go about it and still be within the rules. Imagine the variety of PUs we'd see in F1 with the same configs being allowed. F1 has allowed multiple configs before. I don;t see why it couldn't be done again.

 

As for the weight concern, most any series, including F1, will allow underweight cars to be brought up to the minimum weight using ballast. I can't see why the same wouldn't apply in your scenario.


Edited by AustinF1, 03 December 2014 - 16:05.


#24 AustinF1

AustinF1
  • Member

  • 20,502 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 16:08

It should be pointed out that the last time F1 allowed teams a choice of configuration in the 3.0 era of the 90's/00's, all the manufacturers ended up going to V10's anyway since they offered the best compromise on power/weight/reliability/size over the V8's and V12's, long before the rather pointless rule if limiting manufacturers to only V10's was brought in.

And under this scenario something like that would probably happen again as well, with teams gravitating toward one or two configs ... but it wouldn't happen overnight, and likely not long before a new engine formula was introduced. But then again, it doesn't happen in the WEC.

 

 

And like you say, that rule was pointless as hell. Why mandate the teams to do something they're already doing?


Edited by AustinF1, 03 December 2014 - 17:49.


#25 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 16:58

V8 supercars has no other choice as consumer V8's and probably even V6's will be a thing of the past within 5 years. Except for the US.

 

Consumer cars with carbon fibre tubs, open wheels and tyres that only work above 100C are also rare, but Ferrari and Mercedes Benz don't seem to mind.

 

An engine that's designed to win a race over 300km is never going to be anything like an engine that's designed to perform well enough to meet the average motorist's expectations while being as economical as possible and being capable of doing hundreds of thousands of miles without having to be stripped down and rebuilt all the time. There is no reason why racing engines should get smaller just because road car engines are getting smaller other than marketing, and it's not even strictly necessary for that purpose.


Edited by redreni, 03 December 2014 - 17:00.


#26 FerrariV12

FerrariV12
  • Member

  • 934 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 03 December 2014 - 17:04

I quite like the idea. It's as if in F1, someone say like "you can have any kind of engine configuration, as long as it's 1.5 litre, with turbo... If you have a Hybrid system, you have a 100 l/h fuel flow limit, while if you don't have any Hybrid system, fuel could flow at (let's say) 120 l/h. 100 kg fuel limit remains the same".

 

But in this case, I don't think anyone would ever bother fitting Hybrid systems.  ;) But I would quite like such a formula. 4 cylinders? 6, 8? Even 12 cylinders, you say? No problem, welcome aboard! :D

 

This is pretty much what WEC does, although instead of just hybrid/no hybrid they allow 4 different levels of hybrid power (and no fixed capacity either) - with a corresponding fuel allowance, and off you go.

 

The end result has been a 2-litre V4 turbo, 4 litre V6 turbodiesel, and 3.7 litre N/A V8 have all won at least once this year.


Edited by FerrariV12, 03 December 2014 - 17:05.


#27 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 December 2014 - 17:06

“The current climate in world motorsport is absolutely clear. Manufacturers want choice in what they go racing with, otherwise they won’t participate.

“They want their DNA represented and so do we. We will not compromise our DNA – fast, loud and fierce racing.”

 

Sounds good to me.

 

Sounds like a potential conflict to me. One that the manufacturers have, perhaps, not thought through as thoroughly as they could.



#28 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 39,694 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 03 December 2014 - 17:45

Call me an unreconstructed moron, but I think V8SC is onto a winning formula with big, heavy cars with big, strong, loud engines, unsophisticated suspensions, no fancy diff and quite poor brakes. Those cars really get the driver working. The cars are tricky to drive, as evidenced by the typical big gulf in performance between the regulars and the internationals at Surfers' Paradise.

Ultimately one reason why a lot of touring car series have resorted to short races and gimmicks is because they're not much to look at when they're just going around. But V8SCs are absolute monsters to behold even when they're driving around on their own. So I hope whatever we end up with doesn't end up looking and sounding weak by comparison, and I hope the cars won't be too easy to drive. They might end up with something less powerful that does quicker laptimes but is just far less exciting to watch or drive - a bit like the difference between a modern WRC car and a Group B machine; yes, the modern car may be faster, but that's mostly down to improved tyres and clever diff, which is why WRC had massive problems controlling the huge crowds in its heyday whereas nobody bothers to go anymore.

 

THIS.

 

I'd like to see another 100HP and no increase in grip. You're right, on a decent track they are good to watch on their own, get them at Bathurst and it's an eye opener. 



#29 Jamiednm

Jamiednm
  • Member

  • 2,546 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 03 December 2014 - 17:50

I imagine it isn't an open engine formula to control costs and at some point, all the teams would naturally converge on one engine configuration once it becomes apparent that one is better suited than the others. But that is all speculation. I'd love to see a Formula 1 where there are different engines, and therefore drastically different aero philosophies.



#30 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 39,694 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 03 December 2014 - 17:53

The early years of V8SC were marred by constant parity **** fights, really soured my interest in the sport and is one of the reasons i don't think production car racing is really as good as people make it out to be. 

 

Inevitably someone comes to the party with some beast of a thing that blows everyone into the weeds and/or the governing body is forced to implement highly complex parity arrangements that piss off everyone and are not a true reflection of production car capability at all. The moment you slow down one car in any way shape or form for being too fast, you may as well go full spec series because the purity is lost. 



#31 FerrariV12

FerrariV12
  • Member

  • 934 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 03 December 2014 - 18:07

The early years of V8SC were marred by constant parity **** fights, really soured my interest in the sport and is one of the reasons i don't think production car racing is really as good as people make it out to be. 

 

Inevitably someone comes to the party with some beast of a thing that blows everyone into the weeds and/or the governing body is forced to implement highly complex parity arrangements that piss off everyone and are not a true reflection of production car capability at all. The moment you slow down one car in any way shape or form for being too fast, you may as well go full spec series because the purity is lost. 

 

Yeah to be honest it's why I've never properly gotten into production car racing - only ever had a passing interest in touring cars and the only GT racing I watch is when they share the track with sports prototypes. The two alternatives seem to be performance balancing or one production car being inherently better, whereas at least with (multi-make) single seater or prototype racing any advantage or lack of is more in the hands of the constructor and/or team.

 

I suppose you could count a DTM/NASCAR-style silhouette formula as a third option, but then I don't consider that to be production car racing at all.



#32 Imateria

Imateria
  • Member

  • 2,424 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 03 December 2014 - 19:00

Has it been said if these are bespoke racing engines or production based?

 

This will have a big impact, in the case of the former it usually means that eventually the manufacturers will arrive at an optimal configuration that everyone will adopt and in the case of the latter BoP becomes the big thing.



#33 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 39,694 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 03 December 2014 - 19:46

Yeah to be honest it's why I've never properly gotten into production car racing - only ever had a passing interest in touring cars and the only GT racing I watch is when they share the track with sports prototypes. 

 

Yet all I hear from the throng is "go back to production car racing". Right, where factory Torana's won by two laps at bathurst, where if you were not in a Sierra you were dead meat then finally you had GTR's lapping 2 seconds a lap faster than the nearest car. 

 

IT DOES NOT WORK. EVER. 

 

Even the epic 12 hour had cars that were hobbled in order to keep it interesting. 



#34 king_crud

king_crud
  • Member

  • 7,984 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 03 December 2014 - 22:07

The early years of V8SC were marred by constant parity **** fights, really soured my interest in the sport and is one of the reasons i don't think production car racing is really as good as people make it out to be. 

 

Inevitably someone comes to the party with some beast of a thing that blows everyone into the weeds and/or the governing body is forced to implement highly complex parity arrangements that piss off everyone and are not a true reflection of production car capability at all. The moment you slow down one car in any way shape or form for being too fast, you may as well go full spec series because the purity is lost. 

 

 

and all these changes will come in, and once the Fords and Holdens start getting beaten the bogans will complain about "foreign cars that no one drives" winning and they'll invent a new series. Maybe with just Ford and Holden, a simple car layout, and call it V8 Supercars or something?



#35 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 61,507 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 04 December 2014 - 00:19

"Working, at least for a while" is the highest level of achievement any racing series has ever reached. Don't knock it!  ;)


Edited by Risil, 04 December 2014 - 00:20.


#36 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 39,694 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 04 December 2014 - 03:12

and all these changes will come in, and once the Fords and Holdens start getting beaten the bogans will complain about "foreign cars that no one drives" winning and they'll invent a new series. Maybe with just Ford and Holden, a simple car layout, and call it V8 Supercars or something?

I think the market is way more mature than it was 20 years ago. 



#37 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 39,694 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 04 December 2014 - 03:19

I still reakon they would be better off with a fire breathing, barking 3 litre 6 cyl turbo. 

 

Ford has one (typhoon)

Volvo has one in many production cars

Holden could blow the dust off the old Saab 2.8 litre 

Nissan has a history of this configuration

 

So the main manufacturers may like the idea, Audi and Beemer have production vehicles with a similar engine (they are the new V8's really) .

 

Tell me I'm wrong. 



#38 MattFoster

MattFoster
  • Member

  • 4,831 posts
  • Joined: May 00

Posted 04 December 2014 - 04:41

Yay it's 1992 again!



#39 wonk123

wonk123
  • Member

  • 1,658 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 04 December 2014 - 05:09

There was talk that V8SC were going to run a torque sensor in the driveline to equalise the 5 V8 engines they have now, did that ever eventuate



Advertisement

#40 Murl

Murl
  • Member

  • 743 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 04 December 2014 - 07:44

and all these changes will come in, and once the Fords and Holdens start getting beaten the bogans will complain about "foreign cars that no one drives" winning and they'll invent a new series. Maybe with just Ford and Holden, a simple car layout, and call it V8 Supercars or something?

 

 

What are the bogans going to do when there are no more true blue cars?



#41 LORDBYRON

LORDBYRON
  • Member

  • 1,645 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 04 December 2014 - 21:40

Why can't F1 do the same? 

 

They don't want to simple .

 

It would mean we were In a time warp with 80'S customers cars breaking down on track.


Edited by LORDBYRON, 04 December 2014 - 21:40.


#42 275 GTB-4

275 GTB-4
  • Member

  • 8,274 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 04 December 2014 - 21:53

Yet all I hear from the throng is "go back to production car racing". Right, where factory Torana's won by two laps at bathurst, where if you were not in a Sierra you were dead meat then finally you had GTR's lapping 2 seconds a lap faster than the nearest car. 
 
IT DOES NOT WORK. EVER. 
 
Even the epic 12 hour had cars that were hobbled in order to keep it interesting.


Even the epic 12 hour had cars that were hobbled in order to keep it interesting"...contrived Motor Racing for a TV/DVD audience?

 

Do ALL 12 hour competitors get a prize?...just for competing?

What is wrong with a crushing, outstanding win or drive...

 

[answer: audience has been trained to have short span of attention and expect an advert every 10 minutes to do other things, rather than concentrate on an unfolding drama or inspirational event]

Has the world gone far too PC " these days"?

I know! Questions! :lol:



#43 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 05 December 2014 - 06:03

It's a good move by V8SC, even if they were pushed. My greatest interest in touring cars was when they had all sorts of makes and engines, but the greater interest may also may have been because I was younger then. 

 

I'm starting to think the best series would be a cost-capped free-for-all. Like most, I used to think a cost cap was impossible to police, but now I'm not so sure it wouldn't be easier than policing every little aspect of every single car to ensure they abide by the current minefield of rules. Just go build whatever the hell you like, but you can only spend X amount. 



#44 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 12,106 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 05 December 2014 - 06:15

Out of interest, is it still going to be named V8 Supercars? Even if in the next few years no one actually turns up with a V8 engine?

 

Somehow the name "Inline 4 Turbocharged Supercars" doesn't have the same ring...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol:



#45 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 6,110 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 05 December 2014 - 07:57

To my ears it doesn't sound any worse

I've always thought 'supercars' sounds like it came out of a committee of 14yo boys

#46 Ian G

Ian G
  • Member

  • 1,395 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 05 December 2014 - 10:17

Holden next to go once the dust settles on Fords decision,it will be interesting to see what the Supercabs series morphs into in the years ahead.



#47 katmen

katmen
  • Member

  • 822 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 December 2014 - 10:32

Because F1 is FORMULA One, it has rule that engines must be configured/constructed to given specification aka formula



#48 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 39,694 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 05 December 2014 - 14:30

Holden next to go once the dust settles on Fords decision,it will be interesting to see what the Supercabs series morphs into in the years ahead.

Nah, Holden were extremely smart to hang in there during the turbo era and with the launch of HSV they have THRIVED on V8SC's. One of the reasons Ford V Holden died is that Holden won, we'd out number the Ford supporters 4:1 on the mountain, particularly the younger guys. 



#49 Ian G

Ian G
  • Member

  • 1,395 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 05 December 2014 - 23:42

Who knows but time will tell,we will probaly know more this W/end but the scuttlebutt is that the Holden/Ford battle will continue,in the short term at least,via private Teams.