Results from BSTP spring meeting - PPL sneak attack on the Duramax

EricStaab said:
I know you don't have an issue with the heads, but being ok with rules that are not bennifiting you is not ok. Yes that is the 2017 as of March. I get that, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be discussing what can be done better. This isn't just about my company or any single person, it is about fair easy to understand impartial rules, and not pulling the rug out from under people. But working with them to improve. That is it.
Click to expand...

I was pissed about the 158" wheelbase rule. Where was the outrage there?? I had a perfectly fine crewcab long bed truck that we just built. Guess what, if we wanted to run with Ohio State/PPL we had to "fix"it. Did we throw a temper tantrum about it? No, we contacted Mears and he sent me the 2016 rules before they were published. And we built a new truck. So this year I contacted Mears again in December and he sent me the 2017 rules before they were published. I thought I was doing a good deed by posting them but all I caught was a big pile of **** for doing so. I'll never do that again.

So you're saying everyone that's ok with the 158" rule are assholes for being ok with the 158 rule?
 
Last edited:
I get that. That should be curved as best as possible. There should be an agenda every year before the meetings, and really sent out to those involved. They also post changes to the rules early on the PPL web site. They actually did do that, and did not post the head changes, and wheel base. Why not right? It isn't a tantrum being thrown. It is serious questions being asked. And yes that is the rule. So that is fine, but it should be enforced fairly. That is also what we are saying. If a head is more than 1 piece, than it is illegal. And if that is a problem lets look at the rule, and available heads, and come up with a better rule.
 
The 158" rule was being enforce fair across the board. Is the head rule going to be enforce across the board? How many multipiece Aluminum heads with ductile inserts are being used?
 
EricStaab said:
The 158" rule was being enforce fair across the board. Is the head rule going to be enforce across the board? How many multipiece Aluminum heads with ductile inserts are being used?
Click to expand...

I can't answer that one. All I can say is at the state level, it was voted on that in 2017. For the 3.0 class,Ohio State would run PPL rules 100%.
 
EricStaab said:
I know you don't have an issue with the heads, but being ok with rules that are not bennifiting you is not ok. ( Ones that cost you money to stay competiting.)
Yes that is the rule for 2017 as of March. I get that, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be discussing what can be done better. This isn't just about my company or any single person, it is about fair easy to understand impartial rules, and not pulling the rug out from under people. But working with them to improve. That is it.
Click to expand...

They were deemed illegal because the big money sponsors don't sell them. Same with the bo aftermarket block. Big sponsor could not make what they wanted on selling it, so they got it tossed. It's how it rolls fellas. Deal with it or move on. Unfortunate for sure!!!
 
I have no horse in this race, but face a similar situation of another organization wanting to run a box turbo from a certain supplier. What happened to the spirit of competition between manufacturers? As pullers, we are pushing stock parts way past their intended design. The technology and materials available today, were not available at the time these engines were designed. While cost prohibitive for OEM to use on the assembly lines, the new technology that is available today gives us the ability to make parts more reliable that ever before. The initial cost may be high, but any manufacturer worth their salt should understand the "no risk, no rewards" slogan. Produce a reliable part, the parts will sell themselves. If major rules are going to be changed, make them available in November/December, not in March, after everyone has their engine program in place for the season. I don't like it when a pulling association limits the rules to where it allows one manufacturer/supplier to provide a part, whether it is a set of heads or a turbo. Get as many manufacturers involved and get their input before you finalize and pass new rules. Find out what parts are working and what parts are failing. I know some rules may be passed because of sponsorship, but I think that is a conflict of interest. I just hope PPL and other organizations amend the rules to open up these rules before the season starts. As pullers, we have thousands of dollars invested in trucks in our hobby. The pullers and promoters need to work together so we can have fun and put on a good show with reliable parts. Most of us have jobs that require at least 40+ hours/week, which limits how much we can work on the trucks during the week. When repairs get too expensive, the trucks will sit and hurts the most important group that we rely on, which is the fans.
 
jedeka said:
I have no horse in this race, but face a similar situation of another organization wanting to run a box turbo from a certain supplier. What happened to the spirit of competition between manufacturers? As pullers, we are pushing stock parts way past their intended design. The technology and materials available today, were not available at the time these engines were designed. While cost prohibitive for OEM to use on the assembly lines, the new technology that is available today gives us the ability to make parts more reliable that ever before. The initial cost may be high, but any manufacturer worth their salt should understand the "no risk, no rewards" slogan. Produce a reliable part, the parts will sell themselves. If major rules are going to be changed, make them available in November/December, not in March, after everyone has their engine program in place for the season. I don't like it when a pulling association limits the rules to where it allows one manufacturer/supplier to provide a part, whether it is a set of heads or a turbo. Get as many manufacturers involved and get their input before you finalize and pass new rules. Find out what parts are working and what parts are failing. I know some rules may be passed because of sponsorship, but I think that is a conflict of interest. I just hope PPL and other organizations amend the rules to open up these rules before the season starts. As pullers, we have thousands of dollars invested in trucks in our hobby. The pullers and promoters need to work together so we can have fun and put on a good show with reliable parts. Most of us have jobs that require at least 40+ hours/week, which limits how much we can work on the trucks during the week. When repairs get too expensive, the trucks will sit and hurts the most important group that we rely on, which is the fans.
Click to expand...


Well said !!
 
On 3-14-2017 We drafted a formal letter on administrative review that relevant and admissible evidence and knowledge of facts were not disclosed. We await PPL response.
 
Update, the Letter was drafted on the platform of contingent liability, good will intent, as the rules state NOW it exposes the greater majority of pullers to actual loss, many of the Duramax heads produce for pulling are multi pieces, (inserts). It’s necessary that prospective balance be enforced.
The letter requires a timely response, all parties should be interested in resolving this matter Quickly.
 
WI Huck said:
The Lucas Oil Pro Pulling League is supposed to be the national standard, which it is.
Click to expand...

When it comes to rules, PPL is a pile of crap, not worthy of a "national standard" IMO. They could be considered as such for tractors maybe, but for diesel trucks....what a disaster.

They make politically influenced decisions, write verbiage a middle school student would laugh at, and change things behind closed doors with horrible or NO distribution. And they have ZERO internet presence.

It would be hard to imagine an organization being worse than PPL.
 
There has been progress, This is not the official announcement, As it stands the head will NOT get you DQ form pulling at PPL sanction events, Placement and Prize money can be pursued , YOU CANNOT COMPETE FOR PPL POINT STANDINGS.

NTPA,BSTP THE HEAD IS ALLOWED, Waiting confirmation with other associations.

The Duramax crowd pulling against Cummins iron is a battle that will continue.

Power plant builders and Owners of Duramax pulling trucks need more options. When you tear down your Engine mid-season BC of failed heads is just NOT acceptable to Me, Than to wait weeks for replacement BC your choices are limited, Just FUBAR your season in many cases. It takes time just to dial in the weight distribution on the truck, Hitch direction, Clutch settings, Gear, etc WTH who wants to tear down your power and spends $1000s in repairs, on any device/component that should stay together until off season freshening, inspection.

PPL is considering changes in 2018, Progress is being made, Please keep supporting changes that benefit the league and pullers.
 
Last edited:
TCDiesel said:
There has been progress, This is not the official announcement, As it stands the head will NOT get you DQ form pulling at PPL sanction events, Placement and Prize money can be pursued , YOU CANNOT COMPETE FOR PPL POINT STANDINGS.

NTPA,BSTP THE HEAD IS ALLOWED, Waiting confirmation with other associations.

The Duramax crowd pulling against Cummins iron is a battle that will continue.

Power plant builders and Owners of Duramax pulling trucks need more options. When you tear down your Engine mid-season BC of failed heads is just NOT acceptable to Me, Than to wait weeks for replacement BC your choices are limited, Just FUBAR your season in many cases. It takes time just to dial in the weight distribution on the truck, Hitch direction, Clutch settings, Gear, etc WTH who wants to tear down your power and spends $1000s in repairs, on any device/component that should stay together until off season freshening, inspection.

PPL is considering changes in 2018, Progress is being made, Please keep supporting changes that benefit the league and pullers.
Click to expand...

Todd if you run a crappy engine platform don't be pissed when you have to fix it all the time. haha
 
Have no problem with fixing, have problem with wasted time and Money. The other rule that applies is ,if your not breaking Stuff your NOT making power. "Who said that"
2018 is goona be a great year I hope, 2017 I ran out of Time and $$$$$$, Being deathly Ill for over 6 weeks in Dec, Jan, Feb was a set back I didn't plan for, that's not going to Happen in 2018. l have Power plants looking for Homes in 2017 .No takers so Far... Just Enough looking like 2018 and the No limit motor Maybe late 2017... Just the way it is.heeeheeee
 
TCDiesel said:
Have no problem with fixing, have problem with wasted time and Money. The other rule that applies is ,if your not breaking Stuff your NOT making power. "Who said that"
2018 is goona be a great year I hope, 2017 I ran out of Time and $$$$$$, Being deathly Ill for over 6 weeks in Dec, Jan, Feb was a set back I didn't plan for, that's not going to Happen in 2018. l have Power plants looking for Homes in 2017 .No takers so Far... Just Enough looking like 2018 and the No limit motor Maybe late 2017... Just the way it is.heeeheeee
Click to expand...

Wish you the best of luck Todd. I'd love to see another truck out there.
 
Personally I've experienced both sides of the issues and I can say that whole heartedly going from a Duramax platform to now a Cummins Deckplate build. Everyone knows Duramax cylinder heads no matter who the manufacture is, are vulnerable to the conditions that high horsepower classes subject them to. From a reliability standpoint there is no harm/no foul to the cylinder head that Eric Stabb has built. Eventually meaningless rules will take committed pullers out of the class, then there will be less hooks due to low turnouts. Lets face it unless your a complete and utter moron there is one and only one contributing factor to how much horsepower any cylinder head can make if paired with the right short block, and that's the turbo in front of it. Each class has their own turbo rules so how about we let that be the determining factor. Like any major motor sport, if there's no reliability to how long or well a performance part can hold up, then there is a group of very dedicated like minded people who get together and figure out how to solve the issue. These guys have done just that with this 2 piece design. They've taken the right material and met every specification (limiting factor) that a stock cylinder head possesses. The only thing gained here is reliability. Its been mentioned before but this entire issue has been driven from a political issue behind multiple failed attempts to manufacture a long lasting performance cylinder head to service a Duramax Platform and now that someone has found a way to run all season competitively with a better product at a very reasonable price, it has pissed them off for spending money on their own product that's flaws are inevitable due to the material of which they are casted. Unless you have a problem with keeping competitors on the track and the sport of pulling in good graces with promoters, fans, and our own wallets then I suggest PPL to have a little more common sense. Battle of the Bluegrass would happily have you to the track for more numbers im sure. Just call the Vice President Kevin Fulks he will talk to you. Anyone who's reading, bring your gutted cabs, beds, and firewalls too cause that's all meaningless **** that they don't enforce starting 2017 for the Smooth Bore 3.0 class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top