Visit The Dirt Forum for More Information

Author Topic:   Tranny Rules in IMCA
jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 04, 2001 03:06 PM UIN: 16262997
I know I am opening up a can of worms here, but what are your thoughts on the tranny rule for IMCA next year? Please keep it tactful and considerate or it will be deleted.

jammin

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 04, 2001 03:19 PM UIN: 16262997
This is my stand on this.... I personally think that IMCA should open the rule up and allow any type of tranny with the exception of a quick change. Why? Because first of all.....most of the upper level trannies in a one to one case are rotating very little weight now. There might be an advantage running some trannies rather than others, but as far as I know, there isn't a 20,000 dollar tranny that we can run in our cars and it should be left up to the owner of the car. I think it would help our racing to allow such trannies as far as durability goes. Rotational parts are an issue but you can't get any lighter than a straight shaft...so, there is only so much you can do with them anyway when you get to a certain point in high gear. Prices have already increased dramatically in our sport and will not cease to increase more because of the interest of track owners to increase speeds of the cars for entertainment purposes. Someone has to replace their "fast" class since most tracks aren't running Latemodels any more. I do not want to see our class disappear. But, I do not think a tranny is gonna make much difference other than with durability and finishing races. For this reason, I feel that they would help the racer and track because of closer racing and better shows for everyone. So, if we look at it from the standpoint of the fan, if we put a better show on, then more fans will come to see us. If we get more fans, then larger purses are likely to follow.


My two cents.

jammin

jbenn
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 10
posted November 04, 2001 05:22 PM
I was about to get on here and ask the same questions when I saw Jammin's post on IMCA transmissions. I think you might as well be able to run a Bert or a Brinn. I for one am not interested in giving $2,000 dollars for a tricked out transmission in a stock case. I have tried to find out information on some of the more affordable options, but haven't had much luck. I know that I am running against some Ernie slides and Ernie glides at my local track. Are they legal? How do they work? I already have too much power for our slick track, but might could benefit by lessening any of my more forward weight. I run a $65 Saginaw 3-speed with a triple disc and run very competitively. Do you all think that I would greatly benefit from a "different" transmission? From reading the rules I don't know what is legal and what isn't. I have also visited Layne transmissions website and am very impressed with the look of their units. What are some of my best options for my money? All input is greatly appreciated.

James Birmingham
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 9
posted November 04, 2001 05:59 PM
Gonna make this short.
By the time you buy the triple disc clutch and the scatter shield and a 3 speed. that wont take a full season. How can anyone not want a Bert style tranny? Built for a 1000 Hp it should last forever with 8" tires. Even if the clutch goes out you can still jam it in high and finish the night.......

rjs
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 72
posted November 04, 2001 06:46 PM
I run an Ernie in UMP & when it quits, I'll buy a Brinn in a heart beat. IMCA will keep costing everyone more than they will save anyone. That doesn't sound right but neither do the IMCA rules.

bbracer17
Dirt Freak

Total posts: 252
posted November 04, 2001 08:50 PM
At this point I don't care anymore. I have about $1000 dollars in clutch, bell housing, and release bearing and a heavy saginaw hanging off the bell housing. I can't afford at this point to buy a Bert or Brinn now. Heck I forgot abot the $700 dollars I spent on a power glide that I broke the case on twice. I think the rules should have allowed Berts and Brinns along time ago.

tmtrigg4
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 47
posted November 04, 2001 10:45 PM
IMCA cannot and will not give anyone a straight answer on this. it makes no sense to allow 4500.00 dollar units and disallow Berts and Brinns. If you all haven't noticed, we the racer has very little input about what we are able to run in IMCA. I've said it before and I'll say it again "They got the best deal going but the wrong leadership can bring any dictatorship down."
What happened to moving the fuel pumps this year? IMCA has been delaying the modified rules pending the outcome of Ernie's lawsuit with WISSOTA. You would think that as much money as IMCA has made they could defend Clinton in a sexual harrassment case. Jammin, I hope this meets the criteria. This is one subject that makes me mad. They claim to be for the weekly racer but won't write rules to eliminate distinct advantages that are way out of the average racers budget. Put a claim on the tranny and I'll own a Layne the first night I'm eligible.

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 04, 2001 11:30 PM UIN: 16262997
To be very honest, I feel that IMCA needs to have someone more knowledgeable handling the rules and taking care of the loopholes. If they did, they wouldn't have as many problems as they are.


jammin

tmtrigg4
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 47
posted November 05, 2001 09:22 AM
I agree completely. IMCA has this attitude that they have control of the rules and racers aren't intelligent enough to find the loop holes.
Try talking to them about "traction control" and how they police it and they want play it off as you are crying because you are not winning. They have made the statement that "IMCA doesn't have a problem in this area, it is only being used at big purse races and we've never seen one at the super nationals." BS!!!!!!
I've often wondered why they rework the track at Boone several times during the race nights turning it into a motor deal. This is the premier IMCA race and it takes more motor to qualify at this race than most of the nonsanctioned specials I know of. My understanding is that traction control is not needed if you are hooking up all the horsepower available. I do understand that there was a ton of VOODOO fuel additives used this year that weren't detected. Again, this goes against the philosophy they preach.
I am not wanting an overhaul of the rules but would like to see the problem areas addressed soon, IMCA may ignore them but the racer can't if he wants to cotinue to be competitive. In the end IMCA still collects a ton of money from us and we have to spend significantly more to keep up with the Jones'. They need to look at the economy and open their eyes before this starts the downward spiral that took weekly late model racing down in most of the country.

smayo964
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 90
posted November 05, 2001 10:38 AM
I agree with the comments from tmtrigg4. I'm just getting into this division, moving up from street stockers and building/preparing an older modified. As someone with minimal means, and following the supposed guidelines of IMCA, I'm trying to get my feet wet econimcally and be fairly competitive. I've been reading the IMCA posts here for months and all I have to ask is, with a 2400lb car on 8" flinstone rubber, do you need all that hp to break up transmissions? Heck, I've run the turbo 350 in my 3,300lb street car at darn near 7K without any problems for (2) years. If you open up the transmission rules you are opening the cost to the division. I agree with comments concerning someone knowledgeable governing the rules, but where does it end? The class should keep to basics so that you don't drive the division into financial extinction. Personally, if I wanted to dump major dollars, I would have gone latemodel racing. We never had a problem in WKA national karting based on the way the rules were basic, and enforced. Seen many drivers loose major money and points for a half thousand on a butterfly shaft. This division should get back down to grass roots and let it keep growing (like it is in our area). I'm looking forward to being able to travel and race against you guys in the future, and don't want to have to have a major bank loan to make it happen. Just my (2) cents worth.

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 05, 2001 10:55 AM UIN: 16262997
The monetary expense of the products are not really an issue. Your going to always have people spend money on parts they think might work if they have a budget for it. It is called choice. It would be similar to someone building their own motor for 5000 and someone buying a Draime for 30000. Your going to have it, irreguardless of the class or the rules. Money is apart of racing, like it or not. It takes a lot of money to run up front all the time. No getting around it....doesn't matter what class your in. If you want to win against people that have it, you have to spend it to stay on a level playing field. I don't feel there is a loophole in the tranny department of IMCA rules. I do however feel that this pump rule they stated shows exactly how they are NOT thinking about us racers. We all know we have to run a tranny....that is a given, but you can not limit the amount of money a person spends on it. IMCA thought they could do it with the claim on the engines, it hasn't happened. They stated that the pump had to be in front of the motor. I dont run a KSE pump....however, I feel that this rule was a specific target to allow their units to be able to run. This is not saving us racers any money. When IMCA allows you to run something that you don't have to have by adjusting a rule, then something has to give. IMCA is making decisions on it's pocketbook now, not the racers. We run a stock 15 psi pump and normal stuff on the front. I do not feel it is necessary to spend money on their pumps, but, for all these latemodel racers that come back down to IMCA and run, they already have them.....pretty easy. Seems to me that someone needs to get a foothold in IMCA that will take care of the issues to bring the cost back down for the racer. If it doesn't happen, we will turn into a weekly late model scenario. Then we are all gonna be like street stocks and pures again, with 35000 different rules to go by at each track we visit because of all the different scenarios. I personally think IMCA is one of the better sanctions out there, but they have to get the rules taken care of, or tracks are going to start dropping off like flies.


jammin

modracr41
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 55
posted November 05, 2001 11:15 AM
We've all seen what happens when the big spenders with the open checkbooks spend to get an advantage. Look at the late models. How many tracks have quit running them due to lack of car count? Why is there lack of car count? Too much money for the purses being paid. At Malden, MO, the modifieds pay $1000 every week for a car count of 30 or more. The Limited late models pays only $500. When this happens, a lot of guys that used to run late models, buy a modified chassis, and put their late model drive train in.
IMCA was designed for the budget racer in mind. The car was lightened and "modified" so that it could still go fast and do so on a limited budget. This is no longer the truth. The man with the bigger pocket book will go faster, thus making it harder, if not impossible, for the budget racer to be competitive.
I hope it doesn't appear that I'm whining, I'm just pointing out a couple of facts that a lot of people seem to forget..........imca modified racing was designed to be fun and affordable. It was designed so that the budget racer had the same chance to compete and win as the big spender. To do away with the tranny rule would be one step further towards us running late models with no fenders on 8" tires..............Just my two cents and.............see ya at the track!!

[This message has been edited by jammin (edited November 05, 2001).]

jbenn
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 10
posted November 05, 2001 11:22 AM
The money is definitely an issue with a large portion of racers. They can easily limit the transmissions by writing more specific rules that say no internal clutches on a manual. It could be made to where a $3,000 transmission would be unnecessary and against the rules. Bottom line, if they aren't going to put limits on a "stock type" transmission then let us run a Brinn. It would definitely make for more affordable racing in the long run. I for one am concerned about the ever increasing cost of the units.

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 05, 2001 11:39 AM UIN: 16262997
They arent gonna go down, thats for sure, but when IMCA starts putting rules like your talking about that keep this and this from happening in a tranny, someone will always build a better mousetrap and sell it. No matter who it is....there will always be an upgrade to the part you already have....This means the dollars will still be spent to get that edge. It doesn't matter who builds what or what the rules say...there is always a way to make things better within the structure of the rules. What do you think the guys in Nascar do when they are looking for advantages......same exact thing. The only difference is that they have much more money to spend.

jammin

[This message has been edited by jammin (edited November 05, 2001).]

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 05, 2001 11:53 AM UIN: 16262997
Guys, I just want to make one thing clear here......Layne is one of our sponsors, they help us make the forum what it is today. Please respect this and do not bash. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but be tactful on your posts. This subject is a very touchy subject. We will not discuss anything about court cases here or blast anyone. Rules are what we want to discuss.


jammin

[This message has been edited by jammin (edited November 05, 2001).]

tmtrigg4
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 47
posted November 05, 2001 12:55 PM
I have talked to the guys at Layne and they are as nice of people you could ever want to meet. I want everyone to know that I am not upset with them. They built the better mouse trap around IMCA rules. They will tell you that they would and could build a unit comparable in cost with the Berts and Brinns if they did not have to use the stock case.
It's IMCA that will not step up to the plate and fix the problem. Ask the guys at Layne about the advantages that their unit offers.
It is very impressive stuff but completely out of my price range.

modracr41
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 55
posted November 05, 2001 02:04 PM
If I offended anyone with my post before it got edited, I'm sorry. It wasn't my intention to bash anyone or to shed bad light on any brand of tranny. I'm sure that the name brands are all good, but the point I was trying to make was that for dirt, modified, imca racing they aren't a good thing. They are the next step in the road to us running late models on 8" tires and no fenders. That was my point. Once again, I'm sorry if I offended anyone and ............see ya at the track!!

smayo964
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 90
posted November 05, 2001 02:26 PM
One point that modracr41 and I hit on earlier. Granted, there are companies that can manufacture just about anything that is needed to fit a particular parameter, the bottom line is "costs". The IMCA was setup to be an economical santioned class where everybody didn't have to spend larges amount of capital to be competitive. Just because some or most can spend the required dollar amounts for the new, latest, or whatever, there is a large percentage that can't but still have the same desire, drive, etc., to get into one of these cars and be competitive. The kicker to the whole "ruling issue" is to not to write it to open the door for more costs, but write it so the "average" financing individual can afford to compete. If late model drivers drop down with all their high dollar equipment, the let them sell it and come down on to a level playing field. That is the purpose of a sanctioning ruling body, whether NASCAR, CART, IMCA, etc., to keep the standards the same at minimal costs for everyone. Granted, there are those the feel that is wrong or feel that they have all the capital to invest into trick technology, etc., but they should not be the ones dictating the overall guidelines for the balance of the organized sanctioned body. Like I said earlier, just my 2 cents.

bkap
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 61
posted November 05, 2001 05:12 PM
I guess I'd better get in on this. I don't favor opening up the transmission deal and would in fact like to close it up. We run a stock, junk yard three speed with a small single disk clutch. Works great. I don't abuse the clutch or the tranny. I don't shift on restarts and I usually get the jump on the cars ahead of me, even with a low-dollar motor. My view is that if someone wants to run a high dollar engine and breaks things when they hook it up, that's their choice. And their problem, not mine nor the majority of IMCA racers. They need to live with the outcome. The trick stuff should have never been allowed in the first place, just like the rear-mounted starters and pumps. Once you let that type of equipment in, it's very difficult to get it out. I think IMCA's rules should favor the mid-pack guys and occational winners over folks who consistantly win. There are many, many more of them (us). And on a related note, where's the logic in allowing racers to spend more money during a big economic downturn? I know some would say we don't have to spend the money, but you know many will in an attempt to "keep up." I've seen it happen over and over again since I started racing in the late '70s.

Of course, and as always, your mileage may vary.

FS93
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 39
posted November 05, 2001 05:45 PM UIN: 3107810
Thanks goodness for non sanctioned tracks. I dont think we will have an IMCA track within the Oklahoma area for next year. But seriously though. I see nothing wrong with being allowed to run whatever transmission you want to. I personally run a 3 speed with a mini clutch and plan to for some time, mainly because thats what was in the car when I got it, and I have 6 trannies in my shop. However, if someone wants to go spend 2 grand on a tranny and stuff, let them. I mean, how many people out there are running 500 motors? Not many. They are trying to keep the cost down but like many have said it costs us more repairing or upgrading stock transmissions since we cant afford the up front cost of a quality transmission that would last us for years.

KK17
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 144
posted November 05, 2001 07:05 PM
FYI if your looking for more discussion on the tranny issue you can go to Whowon.com and go to the benchracing section under Modifieds and read the"Real truth about Ernie vs Wissota" ..It has gotten a lot of response and some interesting points for both sides are presented....just thought I'd let you know

Wheels47
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 121
posted November 05, 2001 07:17 PM
I'm very new to the Mod racing class this year being my first to be involved in it but i have seen a little of what big money will do to the sport. late this year in the season a high dollar car and spender came to the track my son races at and started taking all the B-mod and a mod races.. including the heat races.. what happened next was cars started dissapearing because they had no way to compete... Imca needs to make sure this doesn't happen or it will be like the track I used to race at in the 70"s---gone Just my 2 cents worth.

racer6dad
Dirt Newbie

Total posts: 2
posted November 05, 2001 07:58 PM
I wish IMCA would change the rules on the tranny's because i just burnted up my tranny last week in meridian at an IMCA race...I want to buy a Brinn but IMCA will not allow it. The regular tranny's plus the bellhousing, clutch, and slave cylinder are about the same price as a Bert or Brinn.

modracr41
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 55
posted November 06, 2001 09:47 AM
I started racing modifieds because I wanted to be able to compete and possibly win some races. I think that most racers would like to do the same. The problem is that when you open up the checkbook for the trick, light-weight stuff, it does give an advantage. I had a guy tell me that aluminum heads were no longer an advantage at his track because they make the guys that run the stuff add weight to compensate. I agreed that it was a good thing, but now that person can add the weight where HE wants it rather than where it naturally lays. Again, an advantage is gained by opening the checkbook.
In our area, there are several tracks that run some form of IMCA rules, and there are a couple that run UMP. The reason I don't run UMP is that there are a lot more "big" motors and trick stuff there. Yes they go faster, and yes they may have longer part lives, but the bottom $$$ is substantially higher to be competitive.
This is what IMCA was trying and (I hope) is trying to avoid. For rules to work, they must be enforced. The rules are only as good as the promotor/tech guy enforcing them. This goes for the tranny rule, motor rule, tire rule, etc.
Just my thoughts and ............see ya at the track!!

fury
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 68
posted November 06, 2001 12:11 PM
I agree run ANY transmission that you want. IMCA is being too restrictive, in fact I dont know why we cant run quick change rear ends too. More reliable, gears are easier to change, and the cost is less when you consider all the Ford 9 inch gears you need to run the different tracks, Right ?

SO lets go for broke, if fact why not let us run big spoilers on the back too. Now that you mention it those crooks at IMCA are holding us back and taking are money by making us run there tires and there much too hard to hook up with my 434 attached to my Aftermarket big money trans.

So I say let us run 10' tires its only fair after all......

Listen to what I am saying..... here the mod class is already out of hand and we should add on to the cost buy legalizing big money transmission ? I think not.

I would like some more IMCA tracks to open up. The only people I hear crying are the ones with the big pocket books. Case in point Houston area HAD an IMCA track until the big money guys starting whining about the claim so the track changed and went to UMP rules.

So the big motor guys would still race at the track and not cry.

I would be willing to bet that these same guys are the ones running the big money transmissions too.

In all my years of racing when someone tells me that a more expensive piece is gonna be better for me because of durability, when I am not having any trouble with what I already have, I get suspicious.

I heard the same thing about motors and you still hear it right now. The big money motor guys will always sucker you by telling you that you cant build a good durable motor when you have the claim to worry about,once you buy in to that line and start running UMP rules, then you see them running 434's and the like.

Its no different with this trans deal once you open the door you will never be able to close it and we will be that much closer to a late model.


jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 06, 2001 01:13 PM UIN: 16262997
Money is always the key. "Big Money" Trasmissions as you referred to can be a reworked 3 speed, it can be a built powerglide...it can be anything that is legal also. Just because a transmission costs 10,000 bucks doesn't mean that it is not legal under a low buck set of rules. It is all in what you want to spend. There is no getting around it...money buys technology. If you want an edge, your gonna have to pay for it or build it yourself...There is no way around it.

jammin

Modking
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 11
posted November 06, 2001 04:58 PM
I agree with you Jammin and most of what Fury stated. However, when the current rules already allow a $4000 tranny, I don't see how allowing Berts/Brinns is going to increase my cost any.

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 06, 2001 05:41 PM UIN: 16262997
Just for example....what if Bushore started building a 4000.00 powerglide that was top of the line, aluminum valve body(yes, they do have them now) drums and everything to reduce all the weight in a glide....do you think it would be bought? YES it would. Would it be legal? Yes it would. There is no way to limit the money you want your competitor to spend. It simply is not possible. If that was the case, then you wouldn't have modifieds being hauled around in 400,000 dollar rigs. I truely believe if everyone wants cost to go down, they will open the rule up and let these tranny builders produce an aftermarket housing tranny that will be cost effective for all of us. Take a look at most of your other parts you have. Competition in the market makes the prices fall. It is plain economics. Competition means that you and I can buy this cheaper.

jammin

James Birmingham
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 9
posted November 07, 2001 09:10 AM
1st Not being a "Newbie" I started dirt racing in 1978. I built a "glide" using a Schoenfeld coulper back in 1977, a buddy of mine was running in "A" class. I've run TCI and Ive run triple disc and cone clutches. Without a doubt the Bert was the best move I ever made. Yes I was a Late Model racer. I started in "C" class and moved up the Alphabet, learning along the way. I've seen all kinds of things that were supposed to save me money and make the racin' more competitive. Every time a "stock part" was involved all it did was cost me money. "Stock Parts" are not designed for racing......period. How many of you go to the Bone yard and get your motors and just put'em in your cars? Any hands?........??

Is the intial cost of a Bert more than a stock flywheel and clutch or an auto? Sure. But when you dont have to worry about it quit'n all season long.........
How much does it cost when the stock stuff goes out during the feature? How much time do you spend repairing it during the week. If fact just how many of you can rebuild an "Auto"or OH MY GOD, the needle bearing in the countershaft of a "manual" How much would it cost to have someone else do it.

Something that doesn't need to be replaced or repaired constantly, more than offsets the initial expense. Especially when the price is competitive with the parts being used currently.


brownstone
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 107
posted November 07, 2001 11:31 AM
I disagree with this last take. If you do not like using stock components and have had nothing but trouble sounds like you should still be running late models. Based on your comments lets all run out and get a quick change too....

After all why did you drop down in class ?
I am sure cost was a factor. So now by trying to get the mods to switch to these high dollar trans we will end up on the same slippery slope that Late models are on or are have been on, no thanks.

I have been running a powerglide with a TCI coupler for 2 seasons now with minimum problems and I run against several cars with 3 speeds and they are not having transmission problems either. SO why should any of us want to go out and spend 2 or 3k or more on a transmission ? I can buy another powerglide for around $600 w/exchange ready to go, I dont need the more expensive stuff.

As a previous post said there is always somebody trying to tell you that if you spend more money you will get more reliability and that is true for the most part.

But what they wont tell you is the REAL reason they want to switch to the more expensive component. We all know its because they want to run a bigger motor, without worrying about breaking the the stock tranny, or they want to keep up with the other big dollar teams.

This the brass tax of the deal. Just like motors, for years when it was just IMCA around the big money teams whined that a good reliable motor could not be built for the claim price.

They went on and on about how no reliabilty could be built into these cheap motors and the claim price needed to be raised.

So they went to UMP where the claim does not exist. Did they limit there spending to just concetrate on building a reliable motor..... well of course not!! They built bigger and bigger motors until we got where we are today out of hand and motor costs out the roof.

Its the same deal here, once IMCA opens up the rules for transmissions, then every company around will do there best to build, lighter, faster units and the prices will go up and up as everyone tries to get the latest mousetrap, everytime a better one comes out.

No thanks. I am not having trouble with my powerglide and maybe its because I dont run a DART block stroker motor, in a new 2002 chassis that barely meets the min. weight.

I am not saying that the last poster is running this kind of car, but things are already out of hand cost wise.

The transmissions will only make it worse, and I for one WILL NOT buy into the old LIE about reliability I have heard it before.

Thats why my competition at UMP races now run those reliable 434's.

smayo964
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 90
posted November 07, 2001 12:50 PM
Man Brownstone, you said it right on the head. I also totally disagree with the philosophy that you have to spend more money on better parts for reliability, etc. I pulled a $125 350 turbomatic from a junk yard, spent $400 on engine internals (all new cast), bolted on a set of stock heads (intake blueprinted and better springs) and ran the @#$%*& out of the engine and trans up the 7000rpm every week in a 3,300lb car when I ran street stock. If someone would take the time to learn how the economical parts are bests used and assembled for a "total" package, then reliability becomes a mute point and costs are minimal without sacrificing the "correct" amount/balance of overall horsepower, especially in a 2,400lb car. I have seen many cast small blocks and stock transmissions in IMCA cars (friends of mine) run all season without one engine or transmission failure and still win features or place well on a weekly basis. That is one of the reasons I'm moving into this class, economics, durability and but not least, competition.

Many individuals lose sight and stay with what is actually required, or don't have the knowledge and consult with someone or pay someone for what they think is their solution for success (better parts, bigger engines, high dollar transmisions, etc.). Like I've said before (which I'm not alone), this class should remain close to the basics. Keep the rules enforced so everyone is on a level playing field (generally). Just my couple cents.

Modking
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 11
posted November 07, 2001 03:07 PM
If by close to the basics, you mean $4000 trannies, wake up and smell the coffee, they are legal already and I guarantee that you are racing against one.

smayo964
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 90
posted November 07, 2001 03:16 PM
No Modking, that is not the definition of close to the basics. The reason people are paying 4K for a tranny now is the reason for the issue that is presented now. Spending a couple/few hundred dollars on a transmission (stock) and making making the thing work/live, is far cry from 4 grand. Don't worry, consume plenty of coffee daily and it smells great brewing. If original point of being a cost effective sanctioned organization is to eiliminate the items as you mention. Therefore, getting back to basics is defined as being before people began investing mege dollars into components and still being competitive, making the class economical for the most, and not the few. Anyway, my couple cents.

Modking
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 11
posted November 07, 2001 04:11 PM
I think we all agree that the rules should be changed. Are you arguing for tighter stock tranny rules? The current rules allow for only stock units right? Then why is a $4000 tranny considered legal under the current IMCA rules? If you don't know the tranny that I'm talking about then you better read up on it because it offers a performance advantage over everything else that is currently legal. You have to run against them now. All I'm asking is that Berts/Brinns be made legal so that I have a snowballs chance of competing in an affordable fashion.

If you can run competitively with some automatic from the salvage yard, more power to you. Frankly, I'd rather spend money once on a reliable piece that requires little maintenance and be done with it.

General
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 151
posted November 07, 2001 04:33 PM
First I would beg you all to define the intent of the IMCA on a transmission for a Mod. Honestly, I believe their intent was for racers to use that "salvage Yard" tranny that only cost a couple hundred front to back at best. I do not believe the intent was for someone to heavily modify them so that the only thing rotating is the main shaft. Come on get real, are you telling me they intended for us to find a way to disconnect the flywheel when racing these things, no way. The class is supposed to be cheap and affordable to be competetive. Yes, change the rule to allow bone stock trannies with no modifications whatsoever.

brownstone
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 107
posted November 07, 2001 04:41 PM
Last time I checked UMP ( UNlimited Money or Parts) will let you run any trans you want and so will NASCAR mod or unsanctioned tracks.

If you have a bert or brinn there are plenty of options for those with enough cash to fork over for the big money trans.

Yes IMCA does have a loop hole but once they open it up all the way there will be no stopping it, and we all know it.

As mentioned before I do not buy the reliability excuse, myself and hundreds of other mods are running powerglides and 3 speeds with NO problems mechanically.

Our biggest opponents are the guys that keep trying to turn IMCA into UMP or keep dropping down from the Late Model ranks with there high dollar stuff and whining about the rules and the claim and the fact that we cant run quick changes or berts or brinns.

Sure there are people running the 4k trans now but if IMCA opens it up to all transmissions then the sky is the limit.

Howard Willis ran well at Batesville ( 3rd)and wins darn near every week in Houston a UMP track with a $500 powerglide, you notice his team aint crying about needing a high dollar reliable, more durable trans.

Heck the guy pitting two over from us at Batesville ran a 3 speed and ran 9th in the big feature.

I for one will not buy into the durability and reliabilty story, I have heard it before when people are whining about the motor claim. You notice with wide open motor rules in UMP and a non existent claim the motor prices have not come down have they ?

But since we can spend more money in UMP there more reliable and durable, oh sure there also 6k roller motors but who cares they are more durable and reliable.

I could make the same case for quick changes that many of you are making on this trans deal.

No thanks I am running mods not Late Models with an 8 inch tire.

cmiller51
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 52
posted November 07, 2001 06:30 PM
$100 Tranny claim...

jammin
Dirt Administrator

Total posts: 5060
posted November 07, 2001 06:55 PM UIN: 16262997
That worked on the motors didn't it.

jammin

PEDDLER
Dirt Freak

Total posts: 227
posted November 07, 2001 06:56 PM
Why don't we run anything we want for transmissions, put in a live axle quick change, hang on 16in tires on aluminum wheels that last one race and be out of the racing business in 2 years. makes sence to me.

James Birmingham
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 9
posted November 07, 2001 07:00 PM
Ya know what? Ya'll right about the darn trans. A claim on it would solve everything. Maybe even the Lawsuits goin on now.

jlfastride
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 79
posted November 07, 2001 11:02 PM
well here goes i run ump and i run a powerglide only because i build them myself, if i had the money at one out laying i would buy a bert, just to save on the dwindling number of cases that a break from ruts in the track or bust during a minor crash. i usually get them welded up,(20 bucks , yes that is a super deal for welding the case) but i spend about 4'5 hours on r&r and disasembly , of course i freshen it when it goes back together. not expensive just a pain in the ask.

bkap
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 61
posted November 08, 2001 10:39 AM
You know, a tranny claim may not be a bad idea. Why should the tranny be any different that the shocks? There's a shock claim, isn't there? That's because guys were starting to run high dollar shocks. The claim stopped that, as far as I can see. I agree with most of what brownstone said. It makes absolutely no sense to allow $1000-4000 transmissions in a class that races for $250-500 for a regular show. How can you justify that? Especially when less expensive parts will work and last. There has to be some economic sense here. Most of us are operating our racing operations on deficit spending anyway. Why make it worse? Most of us have one decent engine and maybe one weaker backup. Why bow down to guys that have a shop full of high dollar equipment? I don't mean to pick on people who throw a ton of money at their racing. It's their choice and I realize many racers nowadays don't have the technical expertise to build their own stuff, especially trick stuff. But let's be realistic.

The bottom line here is that more guys DON't have the expensive transmissions then do have them. Those are the guys you want to keep racing these cars. Go for the majority! Outlaw the high buck stuff now before more cars are parked because they feel they can't keep up.

I'm sure IMCA can find a lawyer to write the rules in a way that would discourage other lawyers from suing on behalf of a small group of manufacturers who want to push their own self-interest ahead of the rest of us.

modracr41
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 55
posted November 08, 2001 12:18 PM
What bkap is saying makes sense. I know I'm going to get some rocks thrown at me for this, but it won't be the first time. Everyone wants an edge. The drivers that used to run late models down a class and run the same powerplants and tranny that they ran in the late models. This accomplishes two things: first, it entices more mod racers to buy high dollar items in the first place, and second, it outprices the racer that is racing mods to be able to compete on a level playing field.]
If we were to drop down one more class to let's say Super Street, do you think that they would allow us to run the alcohol carbs and belt driven pumps? They'd kick us out so quick our head would have spun. This is what should have happened in the first place here. But somewhere along the way, someone let it "get by" thus setting a very bad prescedent for the future. I'm not a genie and I don't know where the future lays for imca modified racing. What I DO know is that discussions like this, and bickering over stupid things are going to make us no better than the late model guys were a few years ago. They decided to run the "limited" late models and eliminate the stock stub. It opened up a lot of questions and has aided in them being phased out at a lot of tracks due to loss of car count.
I really like the modified class, and as a whole, I like the imca rules, but only "as written". When we complain and whine about the need for more expensive parts and then try to justify them in the name of durability, it makes us look as stupid as the late model guys do now...........and I, for one, hope we don't have the same fate that they did.............see ya at the track!!

bkap
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 61
posted November 08, 2001 02:36 PM
Modracr41, I'm a former late model racer who couldn't afford to race them, even though I gave it a pretty good shot for a while. I've been racing, off and on, since the mid to late '70s, and I've seen this happen over and over again. You have a class with pretty good car count and competitive racing. Some guy (s)comes into the class and throws a bunch of money at it, buying this and that trick part, and pretty much upping the ante. Pretty soon the existing guys who can (or can't) afford it start following his lead. Not too many seasons later, the class is either discontinued from that track or morphed into some other class. Street Stocks to Mod Stocks. Street Stocks to Super Stocks. Super Stocks to Limited Late Models. On and on. (I'm not picking on Street Stocks here. It's just a simplified local example.) And each time the class shakes up, a bunch of fine racers get fed up and quit.

I've always felt that at least the top five in track points should have a shot at breaking even, money wise, for the season. The only ways to do this are; 1) increase the purse, or, more realistically, 2) keep the costs to race down. That's done through the rules process and enforced locally. I'm not trying to expand the discussion here. It's all part of the same problem. And the problem, it seems, was created by loopholes in the IMCA rules, which they've been sued over trying to fix. I think IMCA understands the slippery slope we're all on. I'm relatively new to Modified racing and I really like the class. I'm having fun at it without spending a fortune. And I'd like it to continue as America's most popular form of racing.

brownstone
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 107
posted November 08, 2001 02:48 PM
I agree with the last two posts. Opening up the motor rules did not work for UMP and opening up the trans rules for UMP did NOT work.

They are the prime example when it comes to wide open Mod rules and look what has happened.

Motor prices to compete are sky high, and since there rules allow almost any trans a lot of people run them too.

So its very easy to see from this example that opening up the rule DOES NOT bring the cost down.

I dont know why all these people cry about it when they are free to run UMP, Nascar Mods, AMRA, or Unsanctioned tracks.

There are plenty of tracks that will let you run any trans in your mod.

People need to quit trying to make IMCA into UMP and either accept the rules or go run with a track where you like the rules.

James Birmingham
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 9
posted November 08, 2001 03:47 PM
Beilive it or not I've been listening I was a LM racer too and ya'll got it pegged right I couldn't afford to play any more. I had to quit in 95.
I built Powerglides a long time ago to save money and get an advantage. I even built my own Alcohol carbs to save money, and no they didnt blow my motor up. In fact I built several for Mod and Limited racers and they won with them 1st time out. I've tuned on Motorcycles and Drag Cars and Boats.
My son is now 17 and he wants to go racing again. I was sneaking him into the pits when he was 8 by the time he was 10 I couldnt do with out him. I think Mod will be a class we can afford and the chassis will teach him how to tune the car instead of just driving around a problem.
What I remember with all the Glides the stock cluthes,minis,cones hydralic throwout bearing and the like was problems when I didnt need them **** I even ran a dog with a transmission, Man did we go through starters. No we didnt have trouble all the time. But it just seemed to be when I didn't need or could afford problems. When I was finally able to get a Bert I forgot about the trans no problems only a few rotating parts and a simple clutch pack that if you had a little ability was easily replaced.
The toughness vs the cost is only part of it. At about the same price as any o the other parts new $1300 I still think its a good deal.
Theidea of the lower rotating mass and the lighter weight is what I am thinking about. I am trying to remember what it was like with a stock clutch and alum flywheel. The guy with a stock torque converter and a th-350 would have a cow if he didnt have that weight to spin up. But at 3500lbs I guess a 2500 lb Mod will be a dream anyway. Guys I'm not trying to destroy your class I just think that with the cost of the "legal" parts you are running against you would find the Bert/Brinn style a resonable way of going. The whole deal cost the same as a scattershield and a mini clutch and a hyd release brg.
I know go the "Bone" yard and get a th-350 for $125 run it all season long and dont do anything to it, run it all season long and then do it again next year.
**** I even went slot car racing for awhile man ya wanna talk about cheating and crazy stuff on a little car that runs around on a wooden track. Special Magnets,shaved thinned motor cases,milled chassis, gold leads, and to top it all off CAPACITORS in the Hand controllers. Man I couldnot believe some of it.
Guess it goes with competion.

Modking
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 11
posted November 08, 2001 05:13 PM
Good posts guys!

Consider this. The original intent of the tranny rule was to try to keep costs low by using readily available and affordable transmissions. This worked because you could easily find powerglides, saginaws, muncies, etc. My first point is that these trannies are no longer manufacturered and are getting difficult to find. Likewise replacement parts are also getting harder to find. Supply and demand will teach you that the fewer there are, the more valuable they become and your cost will indeed rise.

My second point is that the envelope of this rule has been pushed to its limit and way beyond the original intent. You are racing against trannies that meet the rules because of wording technicalities. These are not inexpensive salvage yard pieces but full blown gutted out, ramped up and tricked out for high performance racing trannies which make a mockery of the stock tranny rule yet they are considered legal.

Maybe you propose to tighten down the tranny rule. Look at this option, you will find one difference, the tricked out trannies will go into hiding. They will still be used, but it will take a little more effort (read money) to conceal the trick components inside a legal and stock appearing casing and a lot more effort (read money, time and knowledge) to police the rule. I guarantee that you won't be able to identify one without tearing it down.

The only way that you can avoid having to compete against these is to buy one or change classes. I would rather not have to make that decision. The logical choice then is to allow Berts and Brinns to be used. These transmissions are in between the price and performance curve of what is currently the two extremes of legal. They do not offer a significant performance advantage, especially when used with a hard 8-inch tire. But they do offer economies of scale due to mass production, parts availability, repair centers, a vast dealer channel, etc.

Racers that want to, could still run the stock trannies and 'save money'. Many of them do that now.

And what about safety? Anybody ever blown-up a powerglide? I have and it wasn't pretty and the guys behind me weren't too happy about the outcome either. Never blown up a Bert or Brinn though.

And yes, I choose the tracks that I run based on the rules and none of them are IMCA sanctioned. Ever noticed the number of tracks that have rules stating "IMCA rules apply except claim is $x and Berts and Brinns ok"?. That should tell you what the racers want because if they didn't, then they would choose to go race at an IMCA track. A lot of the appeal of this class is a nation-wide standardized rules. Look around, we no longer have that. This single, simple rule change would bring that back.

Pickles
Dirt Forum Racer

Total posts: 76
posted November 08, 2001 07:08 PM
A spec tranny?? I really don't care which one would be mandated. I just don't want to have to keep buying different ones to try and stay current.

tmtrigg4
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 47
posted November 08, 2001 07:19 PM
You know how to make a small fortune in racing, Start with a large one. We can not stop the mega spenders. I would be content with going back to single disk clutches and torque converters or allow bert and brinns to put us at near equal footing to the top of the line units we have to compete against now. There is a LOOPHOLE, just fix it. If you have not been to an UMP modified race lately, you're missing fenderless late model racing at its finest. I realize that the cars are always going to get faster as technology progresses. I don't think any of us have a fix all answer, but I think that IMCA should recognize the problem and try to correct it. Take the NASCAR approach, make all the parts be approved for competition prior to being determined to be legal.

bkap
Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 61
posted November 08, 2001 10:35 PM
To the UMP guy. I've raced UMP and I'll take IMCA any day (night). I want to out drive everyone, not out spend them on trick parts, "big" motors or new tires every night.

And I don't want a NASCAR-type deal either. Too much about money and power in my experience. You have the same enforcement problems. What I want is the IMCA Modified class I've watched grow since it hit this part of the country in the early '80s. I want competitive racing with most of the field on the lead lap and the lead pack in the same turn. You keep opening this deal up and you'll loose car count and pretty soon tracks and regions will start their own series, as has happened in other parts of the country. Pretty soon you'll have trouble taking your car any where but your local track because the rules will differ too much.


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

Back to the Archives