Rule Changes???

RSieck said:
I'm not sure why I typed smooth bore to be honest, it was probably already on my mind after working on the 2.6 smooth rules for our club. I don't have a preference to any particular size charger, just any single. But hanging a single 5.5" charger meant for a 680cu prostock on a 460cu motor probably won't work out that great..lol

The weight argument is kinda a toss up for me. I know that a diesel is going to weigh more than a gasser, but when you start throwing around tube frames and fiberglass bodies, that weight can drop pretty quick. I'm still in favor of not going over 8000lb for any sanctioned diesel truck class.

I was basing my assumptions by comparing the ssd4x4 trucks to the sm4x4 trucks, but didn't realize that there was almost 24-25" difference in wheelbase. I assumed they were all 158". Didn't know this till looking at the PPL rulebook while writing this post. So, yes, getting to light will be detrimental to driveline parts.
Click to expand...

24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
 
kjpcummins said:
24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
Click to expand...

Yes a larger than 5 had already been run in the ss class it's just not very driveable. Traction is one of the bigger problems with the ss class now. Going lighter would hurt the high hp vehicles. but it would make it easier for the 3.6 class to dominate the ss class if they could make weight. The less hp would be killer.
 
kjpcummins said:
24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
Click to expand...

The total weight isn’t as big of an issue. The issue is how far away from the rear tires the front tires are and if you can’t hang enough weight out there the front end will float more and chatter. You break parts every time a frontend chatters on a SSD with bar tires. With gassers the wheel base is much shorter and float is less on the front end with less weight out there.
 
There is no minimum wheelbase if I recall just a maximum. You don't have to build to maximum wheelbase that is a choice.
 
kjpcummins said:
There is no minimum wheelbase if I recall just a maximum. You don't have to build to maximum wheelbase that is a choice.
Click to expand...

Get real. Guys already have their trucks built. You really expect guys to cut up $30k tube frames and refab everything? There’s no reason to reduce the weight.
 
takedown95 said:
The total weight isn’t as big of an issue. The issue is how far away from the rear tires the front tires are and if you can’t hang enough weight out there the front end will float more and chatter. You break parts every time a frontend chatters on a SSD with bar tires. With gassers the wheel base is much shorter and float is less on the front end with less weight out there.
Click to expand...

Not starting a pissing match just saying, most every ss out there can be picked up and spun by one person. The ss trucks have a lot bigger weight bias to the front than the 3.6s trucks at 7800..... A few 3.6 trucks you can do that but the ss seem to be a lot more frequent..... if you watch the ones that are bad about hoping the front tires, it's very easy to see the problem. And it's not weight over the front tires.
 
jones95runner said:
Not starting a pissing match just saying, most every ss out there can be picked up and spun by one person. The ss trucks have a lot bigger weight bias to the front than the 3.6s trucks at 7800..... A few 3.6 trucks you can do that but the ss seem to be a lot more frequent..... if you watch the ones that are bad about hoping the front tires, it's very easy to see the problem. And it's not weight over the front tires.
Click to expand...

Your statement is more than fair and I don't disagree. :Cheer:

I think the weight limit is fine where it's at and my argument is not to reduce it. There are certainly trucks that come out and run pretty smooth just about every time (Atley, Deeters...etc). If you reduce it 500# I think you will just see more trucks not being able to get down a good pass.

One of the things I like most about SS is it's no longer a "who's got the most power" class. It's a drivers (and set-up) class and it should stay that way but be careful making rule changes and still make it a spectator worthy class. I have been hearing complaints for years that it takes forever for the trucks to get into the throttle. Even with the unlimited mods they are in it sooner than SSD 4x4 on most tracks.
 
I just wish they would leave it alone for once, all classes. I'm working on a 3.0 SB and it makes me want to sell it all! I'm one who can't afford to change every year. I've sat out for 2 years cause I can't throw money away like some can.
 
takedown95 said:
Get real. Guys already have their trucks built. You really expect guys to cut up $30k tube frames and refab everything? There’s no reason to reduce the weight.
Click to expand...

I didn't say weight needs reduced. But you act like weight couldn't be reduced because they don't have very much moveable weight. This is very false. Also your other defense is certain people cant seem to figure out how to setup a longwheel base chassis. This is a horrible defense to change or not change a class rule. You are a great example of how diesel trucks have got to where they are today.
 
cumins01 said:
I just wish they would leave it alone for once, all classes. I'm working on a 3.0 SB and it makes me want to sell it all! I'm one who can't afford to change every year. I've sat out for 2 years cause I can't throw money away like some can.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat as you and know many others that are as well in our area. The constant rules changes are what killed a lot of class numbers in the last two years. I built my 3.0 truck over the last two years and by the time I had it running this year I had to change a bunch of stuff just to fit rules. It would be nice if they left things alone for a year and let some of the classes regain some numbers
 
We just had the rules meeting for PPL Western Series. John Mears was present. As far as the 3.0sb class, he said the "No bed floor as long as it's covered" is really the only change and it's for helping some of the old 3.0 trucks to drop down. He said the 7,800 won't work cause there's a couple v8 trucks that struggles to make 8,000. As far as spec fuel, its not gonna be a thing as of now, could possibly be something for the future. For the 2.6sb class, we are just clarifying some grey areas such as wording the intercooler so that electric fans are allowed, must have a safety hitch, clarification on the wheelbase rule, and clarifying to make sure all rules we have do not allow us to run something the classes above us are not allowed to run such as block, head, ect...

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
X2. He was at ESP banquet, didn't know where everyone thought the proposed changes came from and squashed the bs like said above. Not in writing, but was talked about during the yearly meeting
 
rawdog said:
X2. He was at ESP banquet, didn't know where everyone thought the proposed changes came from and squashed the bs like said above. Not in writing, but was talked about during the yearly meeting
Click to expand...

It started the same place every rumor starts..... Facebook........ :bang :bang :bang :doh: :doh: :doh:
 
rawdog said:
X2. He was at ESP banquet, didn't know where everyone thought the proposed changes came from and squashed the bs like said above. Not in writing, but was talked about during the yearly meeting
Click to expand...

What was squashed? No bed floor is a pretty serious change. Fuel change and weight I guess? Neither of those seems to be a game changer no bed floor is a 600#+ bias change. One of those things almost has to be done when one truck does it.
 
bigstacks95 said:
It started the same place every rumor starts..... Facebook........ :bang :bang :bang :doh: :doh: :doh:
Click to expand...

you mean audra...... :lolly: well that's who I seen post it first and more then one time. in multiple places at that. once again rules are changing and so will the classes. really happy i didn't stick a ton of money into body work just yet to have these rules change yet one more time.
 
kjpcummins said:
24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
Click to expand...

the euro tractors are pulling with the 540 light pros. even though they have billet pumps n other parts that do not fit the 540 lp rules. that class has really exploded up here and I believe will continue to grow. it features tractors with 4.3" chargers at 2000hp-5.3" 3250hp. pretty fun to watch and help with.
 
TheHammer said:
you mean audra...... :lolly: well that's who I seen post it first and more then one time. in multiple places at that. once again rules are changing and so will the classes. really happy i didn't stick a ton of money into body work just yet to have these rules change yet one more time.
Click to expand...

And next year when they combine the 3.0/3.6 into the 3.4 DOT tire class, it will change again. Allowing gutted cab floors and such.
 
TheHammer said:
the euro tractors are pulling with the 540 light pros. even though they have billet pumps n other parts that do not fit the 540 lp rules. that class has really exploded up here and I believe will continue to grow. it features tractors with 4.3" chargers at 2000hp-5.3" 3250hp. pretty fun to watch and help with.
Click to expand...

the only thing making the two tractors coming not fit the 540 lp rules is they run sigma pumps and component chassis. The 540 lp can run aftermarket heads where the euro 510 pro stock must use oem heads and they also run less weight. Most top 540 lp are running 4.5-4.6 turbos.
 
The Light pro guys cannot run intercoolers but the euro tractors can. The LP tractors engine and rearend must match factory option to the year of sheetmetal, the euro guys obviously, not the situation.... and there is a reason a motion to make a turbo limit on the class. A certain 4.6 struggled with reliability trying to hang with the new larger chargers. Although the ones I saw let go, were covered and replaced, but the engine builder had something to do with that being a common denominator. Which impressed me, so kudos to them.... back to the truck rules as Jason stated about 3.4, which will actually be 3.2/.25 or 3.3. Which allows some of the guys who had good parts in 3.0slotted to compete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top