Please everyone, lets be factual.

[stevie05]

I've personally never been your biggest fan Jason, but I really can't see how anyone can think that the equalisation that was promised is even close. If they think it's close, then they really need their eyes tested. Sure, they may argue that you've won four races. Let's remind them that two of those were at Brands Hatch, from the front of the field and a track with no significant straights. Thruxton was a reverse grid win with no weight in the car and of course Oulton Park was Matt (Neal) having a "senior" moment. Even at Brands Hatch, by the end of the pit straight the gap the turbo cars would pull on the full S2000 cars was crazy.

There were also a couple of examples of Nick Foster getting overtaken way before the Island hairpin in race three at the weekend. Tim Harvey kept saying how he was just getting out of it early, but the turbo cars were clearly by him before the braking area. Perhaps he didn't want to make a fuss about it, considering the rumours he might be in a turbo car somewhere soon.

For those that think parity has been achieved, then it's also worth remembering just how old the Civic and Vectra are. They first appeared in the BTCC in 2007. This is the fifth year for both cars and cars that are that old surely won't have much performance to find in them. The Cruze is in it's third season in full S2000 spec (including the 2009 WTCC) and is still being developed by the best team in touring car racing, RML. Suddenly the Vectra's and Civic's get these turbo engines and are suddenly as quick or significantly quicker than the newest and fastest S2000 car there is. Even Matt Neal said in a interview that was shown before the races said they had an advantage with the turbo!

Unfortunately, given the situation with the Ford's last season, I don't see Toca actually ever getting this right. The worrying thing to me is Alan Gow seemed to genuinely think they had it about right. Whilst people may not like it, if there was a level playing field then the Cruze would almost certainly be walking it.

[Andrew Webster]

Wow if this isn't Honda jealousy to the extreme then what is?? Matt takes out Shedden.. who is in 3rd place?? erm Mr Plato? What! ahead of all the other turbo cars! impossible!! and how far behind over race distance? ohh not very....

You had the quickest car last year, you havent this year. period.

How do you define true equivalency? that every car passes the finishing line together? only one car can win, why should the rules be amended to make sure that is you? Why dont AMD get a turbo increase to push them up the field... stupid, unworkable and quite frankly pathetic from a professional driver.

How about this.. would someone like to average the race time for all the turbo cars and then for all the NA cars from the results at Oulton, then compare the times. That would be an interesting figure.

Are all the turbo cars equivalent? Do they all lap at the same speed? nope! Why oh why is it that the ONLY car you seem to think you should have parity with is the Honda? Is that fair on the rest of the field to be restricted further?

[Daniel]

Wow if this isn't Honda jealousy to the extreme then what is?? Matt takes out Shedden.. who is in 3rd place?? erm Mr Plato? What! ahead of all the other turbo cars! impossible!! and how far behind over race distance? ohh not very....

You had the quickest car last year, you havent this year. period.

How do you define true equivalency? that every car passes the finishing line together? only one car can win, why should the rules be amended to make sure that is you? Why dont AMD get a turbo increase to push them up the field... stupid, unworkable and quite frankly pathetic from a professional driver.

How about this.. would someone like to average the race time for all the turbo cars and then for all the NA cars from the results at Oulton, then compare the times. That would be an interesting figure.

Are all the turbo cars equivalent? Do they all lap at the same speed? nope! Why oh why is it that the ONLY car you seem to think you should have parity with is the Honda? Is that fair on the rest of the field to be restricted further?

People like you are the exact reason we don't get more professional drivers on here.......

[Dave B]

I hope this will put an end to the churlish forum banter.

Apparently not

[Alfa Fan]

Don't feed the troll. In the couple of months he's been on this forum this is the only topic he's commented on, so there's clearly some agenda...

[MrJan]

Don't feed the troll. In the couple of months he's been on this forum this is the only topic he's commented on, so there's clearly some agenda...

Nah, he's just stupid and obviously struggles reading.

People seem to really misunderstand the difference between engine equivilancy and chassis equivilancy.

[Eurotech]

Maybe Mr Plato should just attempt some "Classic Matt Neal" moves on the opposition if TOCA leave the situation as it is now...

[Andrew Webster]

Troll blah blah... dont make me laugh! Why arent you all realistic? Lets take Honda out of the equation for a minute, pretend they dont exist. Lets also look at the last race at Oulton - a fairly balanced track. Plato would have qualified 2nd 1/100th second off pole. There would be 2 turbo cars in 3rd and 4th then MacDowall and O'Neill in 5th and 6th. Turbos 1, 3 and 4 NA cars 2, 4 and 5. I would say thats pretty damn equivalent.

Now race results, Race 1: Plato and MacDowall 1st and 2nd, BMW's 4th and 5th. Race 2: Plato and Collard 1st and 2nd. Race 3: Plato 9th after punting Collard off.

The ONLY issue and Platos SINGLE focus is on Honda as he is quicker than the rest of the field.

This is not a personal vendeta but the view of THOUSANDS of fans, look at the comments all over Facebook and Twitter.

To Daniel: The reason there arent more professional drivers on here is because they are being exactly that, Professional. Not moaning that his car is faster than mine.

Barryfullalove: I have no problem problem understanding the difference between engine equivilancy and chassis equivilancy but most people clearly do. Honda have built an engine to the same spec as all the other turbo teams but their car is quicker. Plato is as quick as all the other turbo cars bar the Hondas..... duh thats not rocket science to work out where the performance gains are and that is the point I am trying to make. Reducing the boost to all cars would be grossly unfair.

[Eurotech]

Troll blah blah... dont make me laugh! Why arent you all realistic? Lets take Honda out of the equation for a minute, pretend they dont exist. Lets also look at the last race at Oulton - a fairly balanced track. Plato would have qualified 2nd 1/100th second off pole. There would be 2 turbo cars in 3rd and 4th then MacDowall and O'Neill in 5th and 6th. Turbos 1, 3 and 4 NA cars 2, 4 and 5. I would say thats pretty damn equivalent.

Thats a good argument, well done. Just a shame you were too busy with your anti-Plato rant to notice that Oulton was a wet race. N/A cars are always going to do better in the wet cos of the way the power is delivered. Don't treat us like idiots if you don't know the facts yourself.

[Eurotech]

Now race results, Race 1: Plato and MacDowall 1st and 2nd, BMW's 4th and 5th. Race 2: Plato and Collard 1st and 2nd. Race 3: Plato 9th after punting Collard off.

Thats a good argument, well done. Just a shame you were too busy with your anti-Plato rant to notice that Oulton was a wet race. N/A cars are always going to do better in the wet cos of the way the power is delivered. Don't treat us like idiots if you don't know the facts yourself.