So Balfizar.
Lets get this right.
The car in the photoshoot has a bigger sticker than as seen at Sandown and Bathurst.
It also appears it hasnt got the exhaust fitted.
So lets rule out the photoshop car because it is unlike any vehicle seen on a track, either because it was a mock up or was changed before hitting the track.
Its livery would seem irrelevant to anything because nothing like it raced.
You say the painting was the most time consuming part of the build (or words similar). Have you proof of that?
If that was the case why wouldnt they build new cars consistently? An old interview with Brocky had him saying that they didnt do touch ups, they stripped and repainted vehicles. Seems if paint took so long it would have been just as easy to retire the car and build a new one.
That leaves the existing evidence that has been shown on this forum.
The stone chips on the sill being a good start.
Then the rear quarter and so on.
Seems someone is clutching at straws. But to what end may be the question.
So Balfizar.
Lets get this right.
The car in the photoshoot has a bigger sticker than as seen at Sandown and Bathurst.
YES to Bigger NS rear quarter HDT logo
NO not a sticker but a hand painted logo (as per Investigation description)
It also appears it hasnt got the exhaust fitted.
No exhaust and no fuel tank – you can see that in the push/transporter photo. (Australian Motor Racing + GT issue 9 on sale Aug 29th:- quote “On the day of the press release the VK wasn’t ready to fire up, but all the indications that is was were there”
So lets rule out the photoshop car because it is unlike any vehicle seen on a track,
I think you missed the point:- The point was the logo was changed, the change should have necessitated a respray, a respray should have been detected and was not. Now you see it now you don't = change. Whether it raced on the track in the larger font HDT logo is relevant only in the fact that it did not, no photo has or I think could be found because it was changed after the photoshoot.
either because it was a mock up or was changed before hitting the track.
Mock-up is highly unlikely if not impossible.
- HDT were struggling to get one car ready for the press release, if that car was a mock-up how much time did building what looks like in time and effort if not expense at least a 60% complete mock-up take away from the “real” race cars.
- There has never been any residual info or photo of a mock-up VK Big Banger
- Very expensive project for a few photos
NOTE:- 7 HDT employees pushed that car onto the transporter and 11 HDT employees were photographed in the promo poster. I wonder what car they say was photographer.
Its livery would seem irrelevant to anything because nothing like it raced.
See” I think you missed the point” above
You say the painting was the most time consuming part of the build (or words similar). Have you proof of that?
“most of the work time consuming wise it building these cars was in paint and panel”
Australian Motor racing + GT issue 2 and 9 will give you an appreciation of what consumed most of the time in building a group C race car.
If that was the case why wouldnt they build new cars consistently?
So you think every scratch means build a new car?
An old interview with Brocky had him saying that they didnt do touch ups, they stripped and repainted vehicles. Seems if paint took so long it would have been just as easy to retire the car and build a new one.
Cost comes to mind.
I think Brock meant IMHO stripped and repainted as required on the panel required to stop paint build up / multiple layers for weight saving purposes. Or if it was a change in livery, strip and repaint as necessary. Brock obviously learnt this lesson very early on and as late as 1984 with the JFR 956 Porsche that had 8 liveries stripped off before the Bob Jane livery was applied.
That leaves the existing evidence that has been shown on this forum.
The stone chips on the sill being a good start.
Everyone will have their own opinion as to whether the resolution of the photos is enough to make that call. Others seek something a little more easier to confirm than paint chips.
Then the rear quarter and so on.
Yes, some people can see and make a call on paint chips of a few millimeters, but can’t see a difference in a 400 x 260 mm logo or understand its significance in the complete context of the Investigation. But that’s the way it is, see it, don’t see it, don’t care all legitimate outcomes in this discussion.
Seems someone is clutching at straws. But to what end may be the question.
IMHO I don’t think so, I put up what I see and think. I seek not to change anyone’s opinion in this discussion, the validity of the information I preset is just a catalyst and if it inspires a change of opinion on this matter than that is up to the individual.
A one sided discussion is not a discussion it’s a monologue.
Cheers
Balfizar
