Jones confused by Supercars parity claims

Parity has been a flashpoint of controversy throughout the latter stages of the development of the new-spec Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro.

Ford first aired concerns over the Mustang compared to the Camaro late last year, concerns that led to a last-minute aero change on the eve of the Newcastle 500.

Even then there was lingering apprehension over engine performance, which bubbled back to the surface on the fast, flowing Albert Park circuit where Camaro drivers locked out the podium in all four races.

The whitewash was, however, flattered by Mustang drivers twice finishing on the podium on the road and then losing the position due to post-race penalties (James Courtney on Friday and Will Davison on Saturday).

Discussions between Ford, its teams and Supercars have continued since with lobbying for more engine changes thought to be underway.

While Ford drivers have indicated that the acceleration deficit appears to be from third or fourth gear onwards, Chevrolet driver Jones isn't convinced that there's enough clarity on the issue.

Speaking on his podcast, the BJR Run Down, he said the situation was different to 2019 when the Gen2 Ford Mustang had a clear aero advantage.

According to Jones, this latest parity debate has left him confused as to what Ford wants changed.

"I hear there are parity discussions, but I'm not exactly sure where they are saying the parity isn't there," said Jones.

"When the Mustang first came in there were parity issues in aero. It was, 'okay, the aero is the biggest problem, they've got more aero than the Holden'.

"We all knew what the parity was. It was 100 per cent the aero. We needed more or they needed less.

"Now, its like, 'no its a party issue', but nobody is going, 'the engine is no good', or, 'the drivability of the engine is no good', or, 'it's the aero...'

"I'm a little bit confused. What exactly do they want to make it more fair?

"[The Mustangs] seem to be quite hard on tyres, but I don't know if the aero is any different. I don't know if that's the power delivery of the engine.

"The top speed of them, I don't see any difference out there.

"I'm not trying to be biased or anything, I'm just not exactly sure what they are trying to chase in the parity. It's not like every team is going, 'we don't have the grunt, we don't have the top speed, we don't have the mid-range'.

"It's not specific, it's [just] 'parity'. But what area of parity are they actually chasing?

"Maybe the Chev [teams] have come out the gate and they've done a really good job. The same as when the [Gen2] Mustang came out they did an amazing job making a fast race car. Is it just that Chev has made a nicer race car at the moment?"

Jones also highlighted that assumptions on parity were being made too soon, and that a clearer picture would be available after a few more events with the Gen3 cars.

"It definitely will play out," he said. "It is two rounds. Even last year, some tracks suited the Ford and some suited the Holden at times better.

"There needs to be more running and more information. Then we can all get our ducks in a line.

"Perth will be something more focused on that parity. After three, four five rounds, we might start to see where it is."