Supercars is a technical parity formula. The cornerstone of the series is that a well built, well set-up and well driven car can win any race, regardless of the badge that's on the front.
In some ways, parity has become a simple prospect to achieve over the years. As the cars have become more controlled, there are less factors that need to be equalised. It was even easier at the end of the Gen2 era when it was Ford vs Holden and both cars were powered by five-litre, pushrod V8 engines.
What the controlled nature of modern Supercars has done, however, is shine a light directly on the big ticket items in parity. In Gen2 it was aero and Centre of Gravity. With Gen3 you can throw engines into the mix.
Given there is so little room to move elsewhere, small imbalances in these key areas have become significant performance factors – and led to some bitter rows over parity.
In 2018 it was the ZB Commodore and its composite panels (with the CoG benefits that came with them). A year later, along came the Gen2 Mustang with even better CoG and better aero than the category had ever seen.
Gen3 was meant to rein a lot of this stuff in by slashing aero and controlling even more parts under the skin. But instead we're locked in yet another discussion over parity, currently headlined by issues in equalising the 5.4-litre quadcam Ford motor, and the 5.7-litre pushrod Chevrolet unit.
Here, we'll attempt to answer some of the burning questions about parity in Supercars.
As it stands the focus is on finding proper, unequivocal parity between two radically different motors.
Feedback from Ford drivers is that the motor lacks drivability, which in turn affects rear tyre life, while there is also a performance deficit at certain parts of the rev range.
Source: Autosport