Rule Changes for 2014?

PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
In my opinion the best set of rules for the 2.6 class would be a combination of PPL and FPP 2.6 rules.

Use FPP's turbo rule and PPL's rules for everything else as long as they do like they discussed at the meeting. (solid susp. allowed and no leaf springs or rear brakes required). This should make it simple for techs and cut some cost for pullers also.
Click to expand...

I agree, the no rear springs/shocks would be nice, especially being I gotta do a new housing anyway right now, the brakes for me, we gotta keep anyhow, us whacked out automatic folks need our brakes!!! LOL!!
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
In my opinion the best set of rules for the 2.6 class would be a combination of PPL and FPP 2.6 rules.

Use FPP's turbo rule and PPL's rules for everything else as long as they do like they discussed at the meeting. (solid susp. allowed and no leaf springs or rear brakes required). This should make it simple for techs and cut some cost for pullers also.
Click to expand...

That would be nice. Be easier to stup your chassis
 
DISTURBED said:
The way the turbo rules are right now with PPL both classes, 2.6 and 3.0 are basically unlimited single classes. Both run a .250 map groove and the way they are setting the bores they are all unlimited. It would save thousands of dollars to throw the clipped wheel crap out and set a smooth bore 83mm class and a 104mm class since that's what they are clipping to each class. Tractors do it to stop this stuff but the trucks don't!
Click to expand...

I dont see anything wrong with this but the turbos would need to be smaller. Because a smoothbore 83mm will make alot more power than the current 2.6 class turbo. Better match would be a smoothbore 3x4 or alittle smaller. Top smoothbore turbos would still cost the same as the current turbos now.
 
was wheelbase addressed by chance in 3.0 that's only thing stopping me going that way , since have a cclb
 
04jimc said:
Matt, what is different about this than what FPP is doing to us this year? At least it sounds like PPL had a rules meeting, whereas we are getting ignored. The one year the vast majority of pullers want changes, FPP decides to stiff them.
Click to expand...

Well, I can call FPP at any time just like the rest of you can. I don't have a "gold card membership" so to that extent we're all in the same boat, but I will say that I have always had a good relationship with FPP.

Put yourself in their shoes. Do they have a compelling reason to change for themselves? It's pretty clear that the class works as-is from a production standpoint and the fairs have been getting results that are acceptable.

So if there is some ground-swelling of a shift in pullers' desires, then that needs to be communicated to FPP. I don't know if that has happened or not, or how well it has been handled. But I can tell you that a Facebook Free-for-All discussion is probably not the best way to go about communicating a vision. What that FB thing did (IMO) was create a "you're either for us, or against us" situation and that is almost never the best way to come to an agreement, and quite honestly, creates a lot more enemies than friends.

I would have handled this in a far different way. But hindsight is always 20-20. In my experience, though, with the truck rules, FPP has always been pretty open and provided a lot of access that is not available at other organizations. This year has been the only exception and maybe we can still have a productive conversation about it. I don't think the fat lady has sung so I hope the dialogue can continue.
 
nwpadmax said:
Well, I can call FPP at any time just like the rest of you can. I don't have a "gold card membership" so to that extent we're all in the same boat, but I will say that I have always had a good relationship with FPP.

Put yourself in their shoes. Do they have a compelling reason to change for themselves? It's pretty clear that the class works as-is from a production standpoint and the fairs have been getting results that are acceptable.

So if there is some ground-swelling of a shift in pullers' desires, then that needs to be communicated to FPP. I don't know if that has happened or not, or how well it has been handled. But I can tell you that a Facebook Free-for-All discussion is probably not the best way to go about communicating a vision. What that FB thing did (IMO) was create a "you're either for us, or against us" situation and that is almost never the best way to come to an agreement, and quite honestly, creates a lot more enemies than friends.

every current USA east 2.6 member was included in the FB conversation, except 1, he was contacted by phone. all but 2 pullers were for or atleast didn't oppose the rule change. it actually worked better then a sit down meeting like you want, even RJ agrees on that, what are the chances of getting 20 some members together at one time in one place? along with a few members that pull the the EEP and Global series.

I would have handled this in a far different way. But hindsight is always 20-20. In my experience, though, with the truck rules, FPP has always been pretty open and provided a lot of access that is not available at other organizations. This year has been the only exception and maybe we can still have a productive conversation about it. I don't think the fat lady has sung so I hope the dialogue can continue.
Click to expand...

Good luck.....
 
Last edited:
house said:
was wheelbase addressed by chance in 3.0 that's only thing stopping me going that way , since have a cclb
Click to expand...

To my knowledge it stayed the same. Really the only thing stopping you isn't the wheelbase its the unwillingness to meet the current rules! Its a lot easier to cut a truck down that's to long then lengthen 100 trucks already running. You guys running these long trucks think they need to change the rules so you can fit when in reality you need to change to fit the rules
 
05_LLY said:
Good luck.....
Click to expand...

So it was an awesome job of collecting puller opinion; did it change FPP's direction?

If not...how effective was it really? Nice e-conversation that failed to achieve the mission?

I guess we all find out in a few weeks.
 
We have really de-railed PPL thread here.
By what RJ said yesterday eve, he is leaning towards adopting 3 to 4 things from the PPL rulebook. Not a wholesale conversion of them, but we will take what we can get.

Chris, if youre not gonna pull, why not tech. Ive always said the pullers themselves are the only ones capable of teching/knowing what they are looking at.
 
04jimc said:
We have really de-railed PPL thread here.
By what RJ said yesterday eve, he is leaning towards adopting 3 to 4 things from the PPL rulebook. Not a wholesale conversion of them, but we will take what we can get.

Chris, if youre not gonna pull, why not tech. Ive always said the pullers themselves are the only ones capable of teching/knowing what they are looking at.
Click to expand...

Same i got from RJ!

I aggree...Chris for tech 2014.... bring josh along too!
 
Just for clarification here, but when they say solid suspension will be (may be) allowed in 2.6, does that mean 3.0 style that's laddered full length?
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
In my opinion the best set of rules for the 2.6 class would be a combination of PPL and FPP 2.6 rules.

Use FPP's turbo rule and PPL's rules for everything else as long as they do like they discussed at the meeting. (solid susp. allowed and no leaf springs or rear brakes required). This should make it simple for techs and cut some cost for pullers also.
Click to expand...

Agreed ^
 
So, does anyone have a clue when any changes will be set in stone where others can read? And when will FPP do the same. Its build/change time!!!!!!
 
Pudge said:
Just for clarification here, but when they say solid suspension will be (may be) allowed in 2.6, does that mean 3.0 style that's laddered full length?
Click to expand...

According to the rules you could always do this as long as it bolted in and wasn't welded.
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
According to the rules you could always do this as long as it bolted in and wasn't welded.
Click to expand...

Sounds like this year the only difference may be deleting the one or two leaf springs left and a couple shocks.

Hopefully the rule changes will be up soon. We are coming up on fall meetings in the next couple weeks.
 
Since it sounds like you wont have to run rear suspension or rear brakes. Was there any discussion on gutting the bed. Without leaf springs you could tuck the tires under the truck but you would have clearance issues with the inner fender wells.
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
In my opinion the best set of rules for the 2.6 class would be a combination of PPL and FPP 2.6 rules.

Use FPP's turbo rule and PPL's rules for everything else as long as they do like they discussed at the meeting. (solid susp. allowed and no leaf springs or rear brakes required). This should make it simple for techs and cut some cost for pullers also.
Click to expand...

What is FPP's turbo rule?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top