fishracer Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 A agree with the notion of anything that will help durability should be allowed. You cannot destroy a miniclutch with a 450hp motor unless you are dumping the clutch every restart and with those 8" tires the tires will give before the clutch. As for the steel bodied shock, here here. Yes you may have more shocks, but when you bend one your replacement cost is alot less compared to those $350-550 ones alot of the teams are using.(also as many wrecks that happen this is a savings.) As for the 56% perimeter, thats a no brainer. I don't know why some people are so scared of the 2x4 clips most of the cg is centered around the center of the crankshaft and motor and doesn't TSRS have a crankshaft height rule? From a durability standpoint, would it not be easier to see damage and repair a 2x4 clip than run several races with a stock clip that is hard to tell were it is damaged. Who says 8" tires save money. Now before most of you front runners who post on here answer, you guys are smooth and know how to race. Its the other 15-20 guys who slip slide around coming off the corners with more horsepower than tire that drive the costs up. Wrecks costs both money and the show. I agree with Pacecar on the performer intake. If everyone has to run one, then its easier for Jack to tech, everyone knows they are on a level playing field and it helps get rid of those ugly hood scoops that get in the way of some drivers view. Hell a few less horsepower would not be noticed with the 8" tires. O yeah, you kind find one a just about any AutoZone for about the price of one 8" tire. As for the wheelbase, I don't believe anyone can show the difference, heck let the 108 cars keep their trackwidth and make the 105 cars be 64-65. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
droppindahammer Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 I also agree that anything that that helps the motors last, do it. I think for the most part leave the motors alone, intakes, heads, bottom end. I think the shock rule should be left alone just to keep guys from buying lots of shocks for different tracks etc. etc. 56% also a no brainer. Keep the 8" tires! Also about the limited amount of tires, not a big fan. It becomes a huge hassle to keep track of tires, serial numbers, how many everyone has, they would have to employ people just to track tires. And from the racers stand point, if you blow a tire, and the main problem is STAGGER, it becomes such a pain trying to keep it from growing or wanting it to grow, and having 3 old or 2 old and 1 or 2 new it becomes a big headache keeping track of tires and how they are growing. Also since the races are long, so tire wear becomes an issue. I like the long races, more racing for the money, and the guys that travel long distances it makes it worth it. PLEASE lighten the cars up!!!!!!!!!!!! they are tanks.....lol. My 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerpete2 Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 I believe that more races this year have been won by perimeter cars. Sounds like there is no advantage to the offset chassis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hray Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 It was a bad batch of Australian Rollmaster chains that failed. And Cloye's also had a bad batch. OOPS!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The_Greek Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 10. All races 100 laps; first 75 yellows count & last 25 they don't Oh No! dont get that stuff started again, we all know what happens when u start counting yellows, you will probably only get 25 laps of green flag racing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lane77 Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 any changes that are made should be to make it cheaper to run this class. Everyone admits that the car count dropped off mainly due to the Economy. Most racers that did not race last year was due to mainly the lack of sponsorship & Cash. We had over 40-50 cars that met the TSRS rules a year ago, and the cars are still around , but they are not all being raced. Rules should be made to keep the existing cars & bring back the ones that have not been racing. Making all these changes to enable maybe 5-10 cars to be able to run this class is crazy. Tighten up the rules , and get 20-30 cars back. I agree that Changing the rules to a steel body shock only & no adjustable shocks would help bring the cost down. Why should you spend $3000.00 on shocks??? Why should you spend $1500.00 on a minni clutch?? Why should the 40 - 50 cars that already are build to TSRS rules change to a 105 wheel base , and replace the front clip??? ( more money has to be spent to make this happen.) I am sure that people will argue that teams will not change over to this , but it will happen so that guys can compete. Why not allow a torque link for the rear end to help balance out the feild? $150.00 Do things to cut costs & bring drivers back to TSRS. Do not run more away beause they can not afford to race in this class. The cost of racing TSRS is expensive as it is without adding more un-needed changes that will cost more money. This is not ROMCO, and should not be close to their rules. That is my 2 1/2 cents. Bryan Lane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpfan Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Only allowing steel body IS NOT the answer. Most teams already have adjustables. You dont have to have adjustables to run well. If TSRS were to go to steel only then everyones adjustables are now wasted money and now need to spend more money to have steel ones built for each track.Thats a lot of shocks hanging around on the rack verses 4 on the car and 2 back ups JMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lane77 Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 I agree that a good number of teams have the Adjustable shocks , and TSRS should have never allowed this to happen. You can buy a heck of allot of $50.00 - $100.00 each shocks for what it costs to buy an Adjustable shock @ $500.00- $800. each......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpfan Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Lets just hope since TSRS allowed it they will leave it. BTW our shocks were 250.00 ea. and were dynoed to verify accuracy. I cant remember the mans name or co. name in houston that will dyno your first set for free and after that I think (but not positive) the second time is 100.00. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp17 Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 The longer this thread gets the more expensive our shocks become! Have they gotten up to $1000.00 apiece yet? From this competitors standpoint: The shock rule is fine just how it is. TSRS didn't allow anything to happen. Aluminum bodied adjustable shocks are and have been legal in every weekly and touring late model class. It's the remote reservoir ones that are ultra high dollar and those are not allowed anywhere except Romco. Shocks are not a barrier to entry, just ask the series champion. How much do you pay for those steel bodied QA1 shocks Brad? The engine rules are also well thought out. The manifolds have little to do with why we need hood scoops, it's the crankshaft height rule. A common manifold as suggested would still require that we run a cowl hood on our car. More importantly it would give a distinct advantage to certain teams. As it is now the better heads get lesser manifolds, lesser heads get better ones. Everyone running the same cruddy one gives the teams with better heads a big horsepower advantage. Not sure of the reason for the crank height rule in the first place but let us all lower `em to 10" and the big hoods disappear regardless of intake. I could definately go for that. jp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lane77 Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 JP, I agree with you on the crank height. It would make it easier to see over the hood if you could lower the Motor a bit more. This is a change that would not cost money. That is my point. Make the changes where they are really needed, not just to try and draw another class of car to our series. Bryan lane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishracer Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 Read what your saying closely. The statement"We already have the parts" has killed more classes over the years than anyone can count. Sometimes it takes stepping back to go foward especially during an economic downturn. Unfortunately the people that complain the most about the rules are the ones that can afford the changes that cost more. What also was said is we need more car count. Look at it as everyone opening up their mind not the rules. Nit picking the small technical issues of wheelbase, front clip construction, type of clutch etc,type of shock and spring. are not huge performance advantages. Remember leftside, total weight and engine height are the biggest common denominators that help to make cars equal, oh yeah don't forget the motor. IN THEORY, the wheelbase, weight of clips etc do mean something. TSRS is not NASCAR and there are not 40-50 teams within .0001 sec of each other and everyone has huge resources to draw from. When it gets to that point then worry about those things. Hell if that was the case make the guys with 105/tube clips run a steel body on their car, thats weight up high. The key is economical racing=car count=good show=long term series. Control the cost of the most expensive items and you may make a few teams with the parts shelve them but long term the series will grow. Mary Ann is fond of how the cars look, save money on the engine, shocks etc and more teams can afford to look more professional. The other statement that was made "our series". As long as that is the attitude that some teams have, the growth stops here. If you make it a club then you limit membership, when limit membership ,you limit growth. The long term problem in this area, has been and will continue to be is that the racers have been using rules that are 1 or 2 pages long for so many years that everyone thinks that is the way it is supposed to be. Horse manure. A good, concise and safe set of rules takes more than 1 or 2 pages, its a rules "book" and takes a technical staff who understands everything written in it and why it was written.(No offense Jack). There was a time a few years back when some of the current ROMCO guys tried running one of the limited latemodels with a good "book" of rules, one of them responded after running middle of the pack "I don't like it because I can't spend enough money to be faster". I believe the majority of racers really want to be policed but have never known what its like. I think TSRS is very close, but again look at as opening your minds not the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.