Visit The Dirt Forum for More Information

Author Topic:   Rule changes
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted June 24, 2004 02:31 PM  
i was talking to another mod guy today about rule changes we would like to see made.
what about you guys? what ideas do you have.
mine is the quick change, iknow i know been down this road a million times.
a few other rules i would like to see.
a tubular lower control arm for chevelle stubs. must be stock size. then you could copy them on your own with some tubing and make some cheap ones.
full sweged tube tie rods, not just outers, think about it, what 9 bucks for a rod end versus 14 for a tie rod end.
arm restraints and window nets.

but this list could go on forever, i am sure soembody will want 10 wide tires and stuff like that but i want parts to lower the cost.

a lower cost would be a steel nonadjustable coil over, then you dont have to buy a slider too.
there are 1000 changes that could be made, but these are a few of my ideas, what do you guys want or disagree with.

also it is coming, fab stubs. what are your takes on them. they will be in mods eventually but do you think they will be a good idea? i am kinda undecided.

here is one thing to consider.
i know one guy with a harris with alot of trick stuff and work for a guy with a larry shaw late model that runs mlra some that is tricked out.
up until you get to motors the latemodel is much cheaper than the mod is. even to fix it after it has been in the wall. i mean 50 bucks lower a arm. stuff like that.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted June 24, 2004 02:50 PM  
We run UMP rule set, so here is my ideas.

Hosier A & H (Hard & asphalt) compounds on the right side only, period. Siping allowed.

Bead locks on the right front.

8" spoiler on the rear.

Also agree with the quick change.

As well as the tube lowers for the chevelle stubs.

Full swedged tie rods, another good idea.

A spec type coil over i have mixed feelings about. I like them but, i could see issue's with using them.

[This message has been edited by Kromulous (edited June 24, 2004).]

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 2007
posted June 24, 2004 03:34 PM  
I like the quick change.

As well as the fabbed lower a frame for chevelle or even fabbed front stub as long as it matched stock geometry. Even better someone could start stamping repros of the chevelle stub. That way you keep the spirit of the original rules by using stock design points, but a lot cheaper to build and repair.

Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 45
posted June 24, 2004 04:10 PM  
does anyone think the motors are getting out of hand ? what about a 360 rule? compression limit? seems like that is the biggest expense to me

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 119
posted June 24, 2004 05:44 PM  
i had heard that howe has a reproduction stub with stock geometry just isnt approved yet cant recall where i heard it from

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted June 24, 2004 05:55 PM  
engine rules are a good idea.
i like the spoiler idea, we already have them, unsanctioned track.
also your refering to a circle track article i think, they talked about the stub very little.

i like the tube lowers, you can make them yourself if you wanted to.

350 block rule would be good, no dart blocks.
no roller cams, make it so you have to choose from a set of like 8 pre apporoved cams.
50 lb crank.
steel rods
no msd boxes.
all of these could help control cost.

heck there are alot of people on this, too bad not many tracks, or we all dont race the same place we could start a dirt forum sanctioning body.

also thicker stuff on the windshield bars, mine are 5/8 solid. i have seen alot of stuff come flying off a race car.

and 2 other saftey deals
1/8 inch steel cable teather on weights, and 1/8 steel cable teather on bumpers and nerfs.

more input the better.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted June 24, 2004 07:51 PM  
Motor rules would be most welcome in UMP, things around here are wild. People running high HP LM motors etc.

Compression rule would be doable i think, not to hard to check. No Roller cams, another fair idea. No MSD boxes would be really easy to tech.

Anything to lower modified engine costs.

As well a Dirt Forum sanctioning body is a awesome idea !

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 180
posted June 24, 2004 10:25 PM  
Quickchange rear would be good. Is there anyone who makes a steel QC which more closely resembles a stock 9" Ford? Is there one that is heavier and more durable than the Alum. or Mag. ones that are in late models?

The cable tethers are a GREAT idea. I saw Johnny Bone Jr. last year in Arkansas get hit in the HEEL, through the floorpan, when a chunk of lead came off a car in front of him!!!

Steel coilovers on steel body shocks on the rear are do-able. The cost should be cheaper than the sliders we have now.

From a safety standpoint, I would like to see all batteries moved off of the LR corner of the car, where they are too exposed. We moved ours this year to inside the cage, near the centerline, in front of the RR tire. More protected and the car actually scaled out better!

[This message has been edited by sdracer12 (edited June 24, 2004).]

Dirt Freak

Total posts: 229
posted June 24, 2004 10:28 PM  
Why not start a "dirt forum sanctiong body"
let everyone on here make the rules, hash them out and then submit them to all other drivers at your track, if everyone agrees or at least majority, then approach your track promoter and change the rules.
I know a lot of your sanctioned tracks would be hard to change but it is the cars and drivers that make the show, so "strike"
at our track the modified guys get together over the winter and hash out rules then the track promoter ok's them.(non-sanctioned track)
This year we went with current IMCA rules except no claimers and open 8" tire rule.
We decided this because all the tracks around us are IMCA, no one likes claimer rules and some people want to run hoosiers others want towell city etc...
I think this winter we are going to put in a tire rule, which tire we don't know yet, just talking about it now.

My rule changes

quick change YES
aftermarket lowers for any car not just chevelles
tube type tie rods for sure (inner and outer)
as far as the coil overs I'm not sure, most cars now only use a slider on the left rear and a weight jack right rear.
I don not want a compression rule, just quit street stocks for that reason, I think that, if you want to spend 10K+ for a race engine you should run Late models, I spend no more than $4k for a complete mod engine, I spend most of that on the heads because, very seldom do your heads get ruined when you blow an engine, then next engine is only $2500 for short block since I already have the heads.
When you blow a 10k engine you really have a hard time sleeping at night, trust me I know.
cheap engine blows=good night sleep

Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 33
posted June 25, 2004 06:03 AM  
Rule changes,that always seems to spark alot of interest....most of my experience is with ump so thats where my opinions are formed from...tubular bottom a-frames are legal Pierce is making them, they have to have a stamp from ump i'm sure others will follow and the rumor is that ump gets 10 bucs for the sticker....fabricated front idea i've heard for mods,most the chassis builders are giving 150 to 200 dollars for a front stub thats full of rust,I can remember seeing Howe late models in the late seventies with fabricated stubs with somewhat stock steering stuff on them,and the cost of late model chassis and a mod chassis are very close so do u still want rust?Quickchanges...yes in the long run they would be coilovers there is a very stupid rule..ump allows a voight slider which is a large coilover,then tells you that the dummy shock must be in the slider,well I have yet to see or hear of them taking either shock off and checking them and on the L.R. spring behind its a tremedous advantage to have the dummy shock in front for the cost of this you can have coilovers on both sides.Tires..since Hoosier needed to sell more tires and convinced ump to let u cut up A's and H's most are just running the D's to hotlap anyway.Engine rules...i've always thought that the spec carb. would be a good place to start,but I don't look for ump to ever do anything about the cost of engines..well there is a few of my opinions...whats yours?

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 755
posted June 25, 2004 06:23 AM  
Here's what I'd like to see legalized:
-Fabricated stubs with any front-end geometry you want. Place a minimum wall thickness and diam. on the stub tubes.

-Fabricated lower control arms with any geometry you want.

-Quickchanges....cuz they just make economical sense over the long haul and you can not dispute that.

-Keep the stock steering boxes, they are cheap to run and hold up better than a rack/pinion in a crash.

-Add "swap" to the IMCA claim rule.

-Allow Coilovers.

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 190
posted June 25, 2004 08:40 AM  
i always luv it when people with money start talking about rules changes to lower costs.
#1- the coilover kit is cheaper than an eliminater. cheaper yet is simply disallowing an eliminater. the eliminater was originally what i would consider a "homemade coilover type assembly" and should have been made illegal years ago when it first appeared.
#2- the quick change is cheaper than the 9", with 4-6 gearsets. what percentage of modified racers have more than 2-3 gearsets. truth is only about 10% travel to more than 2-3 tracks.
#3- fab control arms, fab clips. only an issue for those whose time is more valuable than what is in their wallet. there are still junk yards to browse, and hicks with yards full of cars. if you cannot find stock parts for your chassis, why did you buy it? have you decided you will purchase a different one next time?
#4- if you need better parts there is always a class to move up to, do not ruin a class because you need to spend money. try thinking of the people who are actually racing on a budget. you know, the people who dont race 3 times a week, and travel to 5-6 tracks a month, the guys who race one track, with actual junkyard parts, just like the class was originally intended.
#5- am i forgetting evolution. not a chance, i have watched racers and classes evolve right out of excistance. i cant stand the people who have $40000 into a car in a class racing against $10000 cars, thinking they need to spend more money, to save money "in the long run", simply because they didnt know where to spend the money in the first place, because they obviously dont know what makes a car fast.
#6- if anything all rules need to go back to where they were 10-20 years ago, except safety improvements.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 755
posted June 25, 2004 12:12 PM  
Boa- I think you are missing the boat about people with money wanting to change rules to lower costs. I know of 2 individuals on here that donít have a lot of money to spend on their modified operation and want to change the rules with equipment that you feel increases costs. Perhaps they think differently than you.

#1-You are probably right that the eliminator should have been outlawed years ago, but thatís in the past. The point is, the coilovers donít cost any more than an eliminator setup in todayís world. Do you have eliminators on your car?

#2- Tell me if it is cheaper to replace an axle tube on a quickchange rearend or buy a new ford 9Ē housing? Or Iím sure you go to the junkyard hoping you to get a straight one if you can find one. You spend more time and gas money tracking one down and cleaning it up than itís worth. I put a dollar value on my time.

#3-Iíve spent countless hours modeling front end geometry in CAD. I look at the fabricated front clips and control arms as being a bullet in the racerís arsenal. There is a lot of room for improvement with what is currently being used (metric, chevelle clips) as far as handling goes. With a stock clip and stock control arms there is so much compromise when it comes to caster/camber curves and bumpsteer.

Iíll even have a contest with you. You go to the junkyard, get yourself an old junker and do everything you think you need to do to get it on a modified. Iíll purchase the tubing and fabricate all of my parts. Weíll see who gets done first and who has more money in thereís. I predict that most chassis builders would welcome the change to convert to fabricated clips and control arms.

I just donít feel youíll have more money in a 100% fabricated car vs. a junkyard mod. Sorry I feel this way, just so you know I am one of those low buck boys who runs a $1200 motor and prays the track slicks off so those hogs donít eat me for lunch. And I do know where to spend my money at. Itís all in the suspension design. Darn sure not in the engine bay. It is such a high for me when I can hang with those big hog motors knowing it is my setup carrying the day for me.

#5/6- You are right about the evolution process in racing. Heck, isnít that what racing is all about? If you are worth your salt, you are constantly trying to get your car faster. I donít know about you, but my car never goes back to the track with the exact same setup it had on it the previous week. It is this kind of thought process that is common in our sport.

You are probably right, the modified will price itís self to extinction someday. But hasnít every class?

Todays modified is not the modified of years gone buy that came out of the junkyard. Perhaps the SIMS mod or IMCA sport mod concept is more along the lines of a junkyard modified.

Maybe I just need to make the move up to late models so I can fabricate all my own components. Several late model guys have told me that they donít spend any more money on the late model than they did with the modified.

Donít get me wrong I do respect where you are coming from. There are plenty of guys out there that get a kick out of building racecars with junkyard parts. But I just donít see where it saves any money in the long run. And what are you going to do in 10 years from now when the 9Ē ford rearends, chevelle frames and metric cars are no longer around.

Just so you know my mod is a 1999 chassis that I bought used and it goes to the race track on an open trailer.

Dirt Freak

Total posts: 270
posted June 25, 2004 12:35 PM  
Rules.The least amount of rules the better in my opinion.Chevelle lowers are available new from Southwest Speed.They are after markets and are Identical to the stock ones and are stronger than anything tubular you could build at the same weight.
If you are worried about engines I like the spec carb or two bbl rule.You can't build too much HP with a 390 cfm 4 barrel or a 500 cfm 2 barrel. Large motors would be a waste of time if they can't breath. Leave the tire thing alone, it works and makes it easy to go from one track to the other. That was the intention of the mod class in the first place. G-60 American racers may not be a real race tire but they are tough and if everyone has them no one has an advantage over another. Last year in our area the mods were running on three different tires and honestly it just made things more expensive and confusing.The car count dwindled. If you wanted to run at different tracks you could'nt unless you had all the different tires. Racing is supposed to be fun, changing tires is'nt, not to mention the expense. If you keep it simple we will have more racers. And that is my opinion.
This is a great site. I enjoy hearing from all you racers. It is really informative and helpful to hear everyones opinions. Good Luck to all of you! Dman

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted June 25, 2004 01:10 PM  
the tube lowers idea is because i have a backup car with a chevelle stub and it would be cheaper for me to fire up my welder and weld up a set than to buy them.
as far as big time racers lets see.
i would like to see the rule changes because it would save me money.
1)i make all my chassis modifications my self, i buy all the parts from my pocket. i have looked it over and would like to save some money.
2) i dont have alot of money to spend on my car, heck i only work 2-3 months a year
3) for those woundeirng no i am not just a deadbeat, i am a full time college student, yeah i know young one, i just turned 20.
4)i do race 3-4 or more tracks a month sometimes, alot of the time i borrow gears to go, would be nice to have a qc and just buy a new set for the different tracks.
5)right now the motor i have in the car cost me 1300 bucks, i would like to see soem motor rules so i dont get beat so bad when the motors come in.

but this is an open forum so speak up if you have feelings for or against rule changes.
just wanted to express that i am not pushing rule changes so i can outmoney everybody.
by the way i just got my second pay check of the year...177 dollars.
luckly payout on races usually pays to keep the car up and running.

Dirt Freak

Total posts: 280
posted June 25, 2004 03:18 PM  
This is exactly how Late models evolved and exactly why they don't run weekly almost anywhere. What you haven't considered is the impact changes have on the show. All that engineering and fabricated parts on the front end and open rear suspensions will decrease parity in the mod class and begin the end of weekly mod racing.

Racing industy surveys show that fans want competition over speed. They want a close race with multiple winners over a season. Exposing weekly racing to too much engineering will kill the parity that keeps the show exciting. No fans equals no racing. Yeah I know, "no racers means no racing". The problem is racers will race FWD cars backwards in a corn field for nithing if they think they can win and most importantly if it' fun. Regardless of how cheap or how well engineered the racing is, if it isn't fun for the racers and the fans then it will die off.

NASCAR and CART are perfect examples of how more people can relate to a less engineered and more recognizable car than not. CART is suffering from all the engineering allowed while NASCAR's highly restricted OEM styled cars grow in popularity at an incredible rate.

Parts left out cost nothing and dont break. Simple cars run close and cost less to build and race. High tech cars cost more and the gap between the front and back gets big fast. Fans won't pay to see that. No fans.... Perception is the biggest stumbling block for new and potential racers. They look at the coil over, aftermarket stub, racing tired, spoilered car at the track and tell themselves "I'll never be able afford that" and quit before they start.

Lastly, Ford Crown Vic frames. 22 years (80-2002)and 8 million produced. Front steer, boxed rails and incredibly similar to a Chevy. Don't let the blue oval turn you off. They are a dime a dozen.

Good luck,

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted June 25, 2004 04:33 PM  
Allowing engineering in the front end as Super Dave said would be very bad for Mods.

Tubular lowers, and reman'ed front clips, that have to be the exact same as stock would be good. Overall i think it would lower cost, once alot of manufactuers started to sell them (Supply & demand).

Allow craftsmanship in, but keep the engineering out. Thats what LM racing is for.

Although, i see a potential problem. Whats going to stop a guy from peeling off these stickers, and plastering it on a new A-arm he redesgined? I've done it before in other types of racing, and i'm sure it will happen again in Mods.

Link another poster said, simple is better if the promoters make no effort in teching cars. There is the base problem with adding any rules.

[This message has been edited by Kromulous (edited June 25, 2004).]

Dirt Freak

Total posts: 446
posted June 25, 2004 05:39 PM  
Eliminators should be eliminated...springs on top of rear with wedge bolts.

Fab fronts... they will be soon enough.

Quick changes...not really but whatever...

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 5390
posted June 25, 2004 06:59 PM  
I guess its really were your at in the country.Here in Ok our factory stocks still use the 73-77 chevelle,cutlass frames.We can get them fairly easy,and anything metric is a dime a dozen,here I would say more metrics go to a car crusher than a racetrack,since we use the metric bodies on our 75 chevelle frames,and the metric frame just sits there.

the older chevelle frames are kinda hard to get,but you can still find em on the salvage yards down here.

quick change for the travaler is a good thing,kinda a waste of money for a guy that runs 1 or 2 tracks a year,but i see how it would cut costs for a guy that races at alot of different tracks,to me quick change is a 'catch 22'

I think a cubic inch rule would do alot as far as motors.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 755
posted June 26, 2004 02:27 PM  
"All that engineering and fabricated parts on the front end and open rear suspensions will decrease parity in the mod class and begin the end of weekly mod racing"

Superdave, that might be true. But suspension improvements are the cheapest thing you can do to any racecar to get it faster. You can't go down to your local speed shop and buy "speed" when it comes to suspension changes. The guys that make their cars fast because of suspension improvements are the ones using the gray matter, not the credit card. If a racer doesn't want to continue to develop his or her suspension knowledge then let the 4bar/zlinks leave them in the dust.

To achieve large gains in the engine department it takes money, not brains. All the tricks used in racing engines have pretty much been discovered, nowdays its' bolt on speed. So, I'm all for rewarding the smart ones who are making 8" hockey pucks hook up on a dry slick track.
Don't penalize the ones who try to make their cars faster without their pocket books.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted June 26, 2004 08:41 PM  
Simple cars run close and cost less to build and race. High tech cars cost more

i disagree. if you do it yourself a high tech car can be built cheap, just fire up a welder and cut some tubing up. and i have not seen a whole lot on these so far that is high tech. they are pretty simple so far.

as far as the front clips go...what about a pre approved design front clip, then the guys that want to build the clips can get a pre approved design, make it themselves, part of the rule book. and then they would nto have a super advantage over the rest of the field. no one car would have the magic front.

good point about the ford stubs.

by the way guys as far as thinking the stubs now are stock...hate to break it to you...THERE NOT!!! alot of the fast usmts cars are not exactly stock stubs, they cut lower mounts, move them, bend the frames, move the horns. a whole bunch of work. seen one up close, looks like a 68-72 chevelle but better geometry, and 40 lbs lighter. alot of time, thinking and money in that one. much cheaper for him to just fire up a welder and start from scratch.

i agree that the aftermarket stubs or lowers would have to be teched often and hard.

next point. quick change, i would be for one even if you could only run gears that are in a ford 9 inch, or very close, limited the gear choices so you dont ahve 200 sets. and steel tubes.
the gears are very easy to check on the qc so they could tech them very easily.
just cheaper if you break a gear, housing tube, or travel much.

heck i would even take a 25 pound wieght penelty.

as far as motors go.... there are alot of options in this department.
you could go with a good dart steel head, and a protopline equvalent.
spec carbs are a good idea.

as far as outlawing late on that one, i agree i dont see how they are legal, but its to late to get rid of them.
and that is why coil overs would be cheaper than sliders, and a shock extra.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted June 26, 2004 08:55 PM  
here are some front stubs ideas.

most of these are a camaro similar design, but shows it can be done. i know the wiehgt difference, make them add 50lbs ahead of the midplate.
but just wanted to show some options.
hte cscracing one shows some good pics of a tube front stub that takes stock parts.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 5390
posted June 27, 2004 09:51 PM  
It will be very simple to alter these new fabricated pieces like the control arms without anyone finding out unless they plan on pulling them off the car and measuring.

Most of the IMCA tracks we go to "tech" does not exist.

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 195
posted June 28, 2004 11:00 PM  
If you want a spec car then buy a legends car. Motor goes three years and you fab the whole chassis from scratch. Won't break the checkbook either.
IF you get away from the so-so goemetry of the stock stub and move towards a fabbed stub, then what is creative about that?
I guess Iam a purist. What happened to learning to drive the car? i see guys at the track every week throwing springs and shocks at thier car all night long but they never change their driving style to meet the needs of the track. That is why some guys win and many don't. look at the points for the usmts tour and count the years of experience, not to mention three to four nights a week every year. Practice makes perfect.
Building all my own stuff out of "junk" has taught me far more than any mod builders chassis setup sheet will ever do.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted June 29, 2004 07:42 PM  
i am just trying to save money. and look under alot of the fast usmts cars, they love to change stuff at a moments notice.

Dirt Freak

Total posts: 259
posted June 29, 2004 07:47 PM  
Late model chassis with same--- tires ,body rules--engine set back -wheelbase and so forth as a mod.A complete late model chassis is cheaper to build then a mod chasis these days.Tubing is cheaper then a stock stub .

[This message has been edited by Racer111 (edited June 30, 2004).]

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 168
posted June 29, 2004 10:50 PM  
Heres an idea on these fab stubs. Put a spec on your pick up points on our lower control arms to match that of a stock stub and a spec on the lower control arm length and let them fly this would make it easy for tech guys it wouldn't be any harder to tech that than it is to check motor set back. By the way when is the last time you seen engine set back checked??? hummm That takes care of the front end. In the rear Two links or leafs lets get rid of the pull bar to, simple rule two springs two shocks no eliminaters, option jack bolts or coilovers and either qc or 9 inch. Again making it simple to tech. In the engine bay spec holley two barrel cast engines maybe a cid limit. We cant afford high end tech guys or tear downs so we need to keep it simple here to and nobody wants a claim. On tires around here they are letting us go crazy with the grooving iron with the AR tire not a bad idea but I think it might be better if it was limited to only tire after the tread depth was down to a spec depth or just let an under class do the grooving making it easier for the upper class to pass there tire on and cheaper \ better tire program for the under class to run. The thing with rules is make rules that are easy to enforce rules good or bad are worthless if they can not be policed in a simple way.

Dirt Full Roller

Total posts: 34
posted June 30, 2004 12:21 AM  
hi guys just started mods I run barnet mods in az. hear are my thoughts
NO forged pistons

Flat top pistons

Open chamber heads

Cast crank

AS for a ci limit what ever you can get out of a stock 350,351,360 block

No roler aneything


keep front as is or even limet it more make it more in the driver hands than set up.

Rear end open EX 9in, 12bolt, qc as long as it is steel or iron.

Dont know on suspison in rear dont have ideas

limit the gear choices

smaller tires make it hard for the big hp to get down

IF u all think from reding this i am a big buck racer for som od reason u are badly mestaken i bought the car as roler for 700$ its a 93. Engine cost 500$ to biuld.

[This message has been edited by bigdog11 (edited June 30, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by bigdog11 (edited June 30, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by bigdog11 (edited June 30, 2004).]

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 192
posted June 30, 2004 12:11 PM  
This message seems to get posted a couple times a year.
The quick change is a nice idea, and like a bert you don't have to run out and get one if they allow them tommorow.
The fully fabricated front clip however seems to me would be a tech mans worst nightmare,who would jig up a car to make sure the pick-up points are correct?
They have been racing fully fabricated Modifieds back east for 30 years

And you can pick up a good used car complete with bert, QC and four beadlocks for around 6K,( like everything some will pay more, some less)

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 5390
posted June 30, 2004 08:40 PM  
racer17j forged pistons cost more than cast or hipertectic so that can help lower cost.

as for gear u jack the car up put it in nutral spin the back tires 1 rotation and count pinon rotation to get a aproxment gear ratio or just check winers or top 4

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1875
posted July 01, 2004 03:14 PM  
spec gears will not work very well. i mean limiting the gear ratios you can in a qc to ones that are close to 9 inch would work. but limiting to it, saying this is a 5.67 track. that wont work. i never run the same gear as other cars. i run one track i am on a 5.29 and almost every other car is on a 4.86. if i use a 4.86 i idle threw the corner and only turn abotu 5500rpm.

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 5390
posted July 01, 2004 04:29 PM  
I think that the roller cam should be allowed. From a stand point that I have seen quite a few people screw up good engines buy not properly breaking in a new engine. The 600 dallors spent up front far outways the cost of a complete rebuild after a cam failure. There are alot of ways to keep the cost of an engine down, but they only work if the track does its job! when rules are made and the track doesnt enforce them, the guy trying to be legal will never do any good ( seldom do any good ).

Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 192
posted July 02, 2004 11:51 AM  
The only people who can save money better then racers are politicians. Here we are, the $300.00 pistons will save me money over the $129.00 set, the $600.00 roller cam is going to save me more instead of the $119.00 solid set.
As a racer, I have burnt $80.00 forged pistons, and $17.00 hypers, and so far, I have worn out one solid lifter cam verses the 3 I have replaced because some part of the rotating assembly has hit it on its way out of the block ( boy, those $800.00 Carrillo's could have saved me a bucket of money).
But really, why have any motor rules on parts that somebody can claim for $500.00?

Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 755
posted July 02, 2004 12:08 PM  
rrrick, your probably rrrrrright! lmao.

Back to the Archives