Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 19, 2012 08:02AM
One thing that I enjoy most about events such as the one I just attended in Gordyville is the opportunity to visit with pullers, fans, promoters or anyone that just loves the sport of truck and tractor pulling. It was also a great time to pick my friend Bryan Lively’s brain on the direction he felt the 4.1, 640 cubic inch class is heading. Bryan always has a very clear and concise view of the sport. Here is a compilation of our conversation:



Link to My Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2012 02:42PM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Regarding the chassis... January 19, 2012 10:10AM
I've not hid the fact that I'm a fan of the component chassis. They are easier to work on and they can be built very inexpensively if you have some basic machining and welding skills. (I know those are broad statements, but generally speaking you could build a component chassis much cheaper than you could build a high performance stock chassis).

All that being said, should the Limited Pro allow components? Well, first things first, are they needed? The simple answer is no. They aren't needed, every tractor can get light enough to make weight, even the BBJD can be trimmed down to 7500 lbs if you've got the time/desire/money (COATPA has a few at that weight) and that leaves plenty of weight to put on the nose.

Will they help the class? Hurt the class? Have no impact on the class? I guess that depends if you're looking short-term or long-term. I think in the short-term they would hurt the numbers and class growth, the Limited Pro is just starting to get a foothold and a chassis change would be a huge change for many pullers to swallow. They might go the component direction eventually, but I don't think it needs to go there now. Afterall, there are some pretty stout stock chassis Super Stocks and Pro Stocks that do just fine with the extra torque and horsepower, I'm sure the Limited Pro guys can figure out a way to make it work with the power they have.

So while I don't think they're needed, and I think they'll hurt the class in the short-term, I'm also not againt them in the class at some time... just not now.


Jake Morgan
Owner, PULLOFF.COM
Independent Pulling News


This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated.

Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal.

Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 19, 2012 12:28PM
I feel if you want to ruin a good class let components in. say what you want but every time components are allowed in a class the numbers drop. i will not argue the benefits of a component chassy as they have certainly proven themselves. i realize some people might want them in the lim pro class and that is there opinion. i just dont think they are needed. Bash away
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 19, 2012 01:17PM
Love the class, however having a hard time believing the "2000 HP myth" ! Dyno parameters are a moving target at best . With that said the class is making excellent HP and a component chassis should be considered in the infancy instead of later. The mentality of the lower HP classes is that components are a bad thing, couldn't be farther from the truth. At 9500 lbs with the limited turbo charger rule 4.1 and small injection pump P-series this class won't see a competition benefit from a component chassis. Simply put they don't make the HP or torque to ! Now some will disagree and say that maybe some day they will but the fuel and air restrictions are too great. The class has great tractors and great competitors however the chassis , engine, fuel and air rules need to be set by the sanctioning body. Whoever that may be, please somebody step up and take the bull by the horns so to speak. Components are cheaper than cast at these HP levels and that's just a cold hard fact that some refuse to accept. Scrap the cast and start bending some pipe! This sport needs to expand into the future not keep retreating into the past with trying to legislate perceived economy into it! Sometimes "pullers" need to look farther down the tract than their own hoods. Good luck to this class I'am sure it will be a success ,........how much of one is the real question though.
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 21, 2012 12:17PM
Quote
black letters
Love the class, however having a hard time believing the "2000 HP myth" ! Dyno parameters are a moving target at best . With that said the class is making excellent HP and a component chassis should be considered in the infancy instead of later. The mentality of the lower HP classes is that components are a bad thing, couldn't be farther from the truth. At 9500 lbs with the limited turbo charger rule 4.1 and small injection pump P-series this class won't see a competition benefit from a component chassis. Simply put they don't make the HP or torque to ! Now some will disagree and say that maybe some day they will but the fuel and air restrictions are too great. The class has great tractors and great competitors however the chassis , engine, fuel and air rules need to be set by the sanctioning body. Whoever that may be, please somebody step up and take the bull by the horns so to speak. Components are cheaper than cast at these HP levels and that's just a cold hard fact that some refuse to accept. Scrap the cast and start bending some pipe! This sport needs to expand into the future not keep retreating into the past with trying to legislate perceived economy into it! Sometimes "pullers" need to look farther down the tract than their own hoods. Good luck to this class I'am sure it will be a success ,........how much of one is the real question though.

For the average puller building a big red or a big green ag rear that can handle 2000 hp @ 9300ibs is a walk in the park compared to all the bucks that would be shelled out to complete a component rear from the engine mount plate to the wheel hubs out of salvage yard parts. even if you were to do all the custom machine work and fabrication your self thats required(( engine plate, brake rotors, drive axles, drivline shafts, couplers, driveline sheids ,the frame structure,so on and so on,you would have more money in raw materials alone than you would in a stock ag rear core from a salvage yard, Not to mention all the time and money making jigs and manderals to line the planitaries, truck carrier, truck housing, imaginary truck transmission, engine,and chassis up to each other correctly.
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 19, 2012 02:00PM
Good to see some thought being put into this thread. I give credit to Dick for 90% of what is said, I just stuck my nose in a couple places.

A couple points:
Point one: 2000hp is no "myth." Now that said, I dont know as though this tractor had that much at the flywheel when it pulled since it had been on the dyno for a significant amount of time. Dyno readings vary from unit to unit--yes--but I have no reason to believe the number isn't truly attainable. The dyno read it to be in that neighborhood, and I have no reason to not believe the number. I personally got the figure from two reliable sources.

Point two: I'll parrot what Jake says and interject that I like components, but not in this case. There are too many chassis already out there, available and set up for this class to not use them. In pulling we'll have an engine block problem long before we'll have a OEM cast drivetrain housing problem.

It's worth saying again, ladies and gentleman who are in LPS 4.1: Set your rules in stone. Make as many grey areas as black and white as possible. The sessions of the class I have seen this year have been outstanding, and when the fans and promoters in some NTPA member-states see this class on this side of the river, there will be some folks wanting more. So--if it aint broke, don't go fixin' it!


Bryan Lively -

Photos
YoutubeTwitterFacebookThe HOOK Magazine Blog
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 19, 2012 02:26PM
Hey thanks for solving the "myth".....will now sleep good to night . hahaEye Rolling !
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 19, 2012 03:20PM
This class needs a mulligan!
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the chassis... January 20, 2012 12:30PM
keep it a tractor class theres already enough log skidder classes .Next will be props and wings would that still be a tractor
Reply Quote

A Modest Proposal January 19, 2012 02:57PM
Why not try this- East Coast allows the pros and supers to run together with a weight handicap.

Why not allow this on the state/regional level. Let the true pro stocks stay at 10,000 lbs. Let the limited pros run at 10,500 (or 11,000 depending on what would make it most even). The advantage of that is in areas where there are few of one or the other, both could still get a decent number of hooks and hopefully have strong numbers for the promotor.
Reply Quote

Re: A Modest Proposal January 19, 2012 04:45PM
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Reply Quote

Regarding the "stone" January 19, 2012 05:24PM
For an outsider looking in, this is what I have to say. As far as getting the rules "set in stone" for the 4.1 LPS class, I think they are already off on the wrong foot. There are several organizations that offer this class but there are already several different sets of rules. Although the rules differences are minor, they are still enough to divide the competing tractors in seprerate directions. This is the biggest and most common problem in the sport of pulling. Instead of pullers working together to make the class stronger it seems they work harder to create rules to benefit themselves. Everyone needs to remember: Taking one step backwards yourself could create several giant leaps forward for your class and organization.
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the "stone" January 20, 2012 04:51AM
If we don't start having rulesfor turbos and pumps we are going to start breaking to many parts. I talked to a couple other pullers that already busting stuff that they don't think they would have to worry about. whem we make more power we always start fixing our tractors more, starts to cost alot of money
Reply Quote

Re: Regarding the "stone" January 20, 2012 10:31AM
Brian made a good point. Guys aren't building these tractors from scratch. They are converting super farms or buying old pro stock chassis. There are too many good chassis out there for sale and the chassis can take the powere. As far as rules I know 3 guys that are switching from super farm because they can run PPL and NTPA like the pro stock guys do. So the rules for the 2 major organizations must be very close
Reply Quote

Re: A Modest Proposal January 21, 2012 01:52AM
Quote
idea
Why not try this- East Coast allows the pros and supers to run together with a weight handicap.

Why not allow this on the state/regional level. Let the true pro stocks stay at 10,000 lbs. Let the limited pros run at 10,500 (or 11,000 depending on what would make it most even). The advantage of that is in areas where there are few of one or the other, both could still get a decent number of hooks and hopefully have strong numbers for the promotor.


the east coast does it because there down in numbers in all classes
Reply Quote

Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 20, 2012 08:46AM
After Reading the Topic about the LPS 4.1 class... I am puzzed about the hole " locking down the rules " As an outsider i was under the impression the the NTPA rulebook was the holy bible of rulebooks... My local organization play's by that book. Why not every one else... I agree with "Bart's" post in that "This is the biggest and most common problem in the sport of pulling. Instead of pullers working together to make the class stronger it seems they work harder to create rules to benefit themselves." ( sorry i cant figure out to quote from a different topic ) .


2 poor 2 pull :-(
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 20, 2012 02:31PM
Unfortunately lots of organizations have thier own rules. I think most of the 4.1 classes have the same rules except the Outlaws. I might be wrong though.
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 20, 2012 04:33PM
Outlaws (and other smaller orgs.) want to make their own sand box rules, so no one else can come play in their sandbox, but more importantly from the leaderships perspective, so those playing in HIS sand box, can't go play in any other sand boxes.
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 20, 2012 11:36PM
Your comments seem to show you as unwilling to go by someone elses rules. No one says you can't go run with Outlaw, Excalibur, ect. Some people, however, would rather spout negative comments about those rules than participating according to them or moving on quietly. The more the merryer. Some peoples fascination with the sandbox is troubling though, you might see a therapist about that. My two cents.
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 23, 2012 11:29PM
Outlaws started this class 4 years ago and other associations close by where going to have the same rules. Turbo, tires, water, fuel, heads, pumps, etc. But it wasnt long before the other associations wanted to change the rules for a few in thier associations. Outlaws wanted to avoid the mistakes and not go the same path as the big prostocks did 10 years ago. Goal was to keep cost down and fair competition with multiple winners. It has worked great as now in 4 years they have over 28 different tractors competing in the class and averaging close to 16 tractors per pull, with some pulls having over 20 tractors at a pull. Heard of 4 new tractors for this class already for this year. Purse has went up every year to $4500 now, which is right between the $4000 for super farms and $5000 for the pro stocks. Hooks has went up to over 25 now, so dont look for Outlaws to change what they are doing. The first letter sent out on this class stated these are the rules if you like them ,build to them, if you do not like them, do not try to change them. Surprising only a few super farms moved up, been mainly new tractors and old pro stock pullers that got out years ago when that class got out of hand on rules and cost.
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 23, 2012 11:33PM
Tire rule has to go down in outlaw history as dumber than all the other click rules combined !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Thumbs Down
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 23, 2012 11:57PM
Back to the original letter. Old style puller tires, not HP puller tires, so class will have another difference from the pro stock class that announcer can talk about along with other differences like billet head, sigma pump, turbo size, cubic inch, etc. Back to original letter, Cost, New HP $9500 vs. Old pullers $2500. Beat the Outlaws all you want, but with the other associations allowing recasted heads, any turbo, any pump size, etc. the big spenders will win and the others will drop out and the class will have fewer and fewer tractors, hence the path of the big pro stock class. Outlaws will pickup the tractors as the pullers want better and stable rules that keep cost down and have lots of tractors that promoters will want and pay good purse for, while the the others associations with big spending rules will have less and less tractors, so promoters will not book as many, and not pay as good of purse. That makes good sense, spend your money on billet turbos, big pumps, aftermarket heads, HP tires and get less hooks and less money.
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 24, 2012 12:42AM
you can run hp tires in super farm but not in the limited pro?????
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 24, 2012 03:34AM
Very well put,but you left out a few things. Outlaws did not start the LPS class. NTPA had it first, and still does today. OBW not with outlaw rules.First of all let me say I have no problem with Doug Roberts ability to promote pulls, and keep purses strong. He has proven that fact. The problem lies in the helter skelter rules making to omit a few tractors that might be a threat to upset the apple cart. Getting rid of the Black Cases and BBJDS is nothing short of stupid! 640 is 640 no matter how you measure it. Throw out the head rule these tractors still cannot pull with the outlaws. If you have a 6030 with a stock block you cannot pull Outlaw Lim pro according to their rules! Then there is the turbo rule, why does everyone have to run the same turbo from 1 or 2 suppliers? The last time I checked a 4.1 was 4.1 no matter who you bought it from. You argue to keep cost down, when in fact that does the total reverse. elimanate competing companys, and the ones left can charge what they want. It also opens the door for corruption at the top if you know what I mean. The tire rule was probably ok when it was put in, but now it going the other way. A good set of old style pullers is getting hard to come by, where a set of good used HPs is pretty easy to find. With a lot of the pros putting on new ones each year thats only going to improve.

The bottom line is there seems to be a bunch of you Outlaw 4.1s [25 according to you] that love your rules and your pulls, so stay in your sandbox and have fun and quit getting on here crying about all the Other associations rules. Were doing just fine without you. We have more pulls than we can make now. BTW if you do choose to cross that line feel free to change your turbo,tires,head etc. we wont cry about it!
Reply Quote

Re: Golden Rule book ??? LPS 4.1 January 24, 2012 03:43PM
All this arguing over the 4.1 LPS rules is just a bunch of crybaby b-ll sh-t! There is never a set of rules to satisfy everybody. Should all the rules west of the Mississippi river be the same? They are not, and that is fine. The one set of rules that applies to everyone is at the Nebraska Bush Pullers. Is it fair to everone? About as good as it can be to fit all 50+ tractors west of the Miss. if they want to pull at the same place. Even as good as the "other" organization is, then why did they change to a smooth bore "box" turbo? Let me guess, from a good source that is, that there were a few cheaters moving the map ring in or out. So, no matter what you think is right, somebody can and will make it a wrong. Darin
Reply Quote

Re: Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 21, 2012 12:42AM
I personally love the 4.1 class.. I don't want to see component chassis come into this class. When PS had first introduced the component chassis I didn't agree with it. As time went on I understand why they needed to go that route. I don't think the 4.1 ever needs to go that same direction. It would be the beginning of the end of the class. I just hope the class doesn't become a National class keep it at the state level, try to keep the rules as uniform as possible and it should be a excellent class. Like someone said earlier its too easy to take a SF and put a bigger windmill on it and you get a instant 800 hp. More hp equals more fun in my book.
Reply Quote

Re: Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 21, 2012 01:27AM
Didn't a superfarm win the 4.1 lim-pro finals@ Gordyville 2012? A 1 in. bigger inlet is all it takes to be a 2000 HP competitor? Man if that is true, then there should not be a superfarm class even offered at any events this year. That's gotta be the biggest HP gain per dollar spent in several years, (cheating substances excluded haha) ! Why would a superfarm not spend the $ to gain 800 ponies? Didn't the thursday night 2nd place 4.1 tractor @ Gordyville 2012 that got beat by a few feet, also compete in the friday night pro-stock class and spin it in with authority,.......... about 60 feet from the leader? Cool Oh by the way components won't hurt the class only make it better! Don't be afraid of the component boogyman he's harmless!!!Eye Popping
Reply Quote

Re: Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 21, 2012 02:00PM
Some of my thoughts… probably not worth .02 cents. Here is a quick, non-exhaustive Pros and Cons list of the 4.1 Limited Pro class:

Pros:
Stock-based Hooded-tractors
Diesel smoke!Thumbs Up
Wheel-turning HPThumbs Up
Demand – strangely enough there is a need for a class like this in some parts of the country
Convenient gateway class for the large contingent of Super Farm tractors who want more HP
Emerging strong presence west of the river
King of the hill among all the classes/divisions named Limited Pro Stock (there are enough versions of Limited Pro Stocks that is actually an accomplishment by itself Grinning)
Newer class with some throw-back nostalgia
Sound… love that deep ‘throaty’ sound of a BIG cube single chargerBeer
Reasonably priced turbo (FOR NOW)
Black Cases that run strongBouncing
Some ‘good folk’ representing the class
Did I mention diesel smoke and wheel-turning HP!?

Cons:
Another class with a cube limit that prevents all brands from being represented and competitive Thumbs DownThumbs Down (thank you Lord for two black Cases and one V-8 Perkins MF)
A class that could stymie the growth of the 540 NTPA Light Pro class (which makes more sense)Thumbs DownThumbs Down
A class that’s on the verge of making enough HP the debate over component vs. non-component will never end
“Reasonably priced” 4.1 turbo cost GOING UP
Distinct possibility some other club will want a Box Turbo version or Slotted Turbo version (and some organization/club is bound to want an Inner-cooler) --- In other words, multiple versions of it (SEE ALSO Super Farm division).
One more class that will give the Super Farms even more of an “inferiority complex”Winking
One more class that visually looks like several other classes (little distinction for fans and promoters)
Expense… not exactly a class for most pulling budgets (a Regional/State class with a National pulling price tag) --- I KNOW… you’re right, that’s virtually all of them these days!Drinking

Ok… I promised “non-exhaustive”… sorry about that! Spinning
Reply Quote

Re: Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 22, 2012 01:49AM
just wondering why everyone spends so much money making tractors so light- wouldnt it be a lot cheaper to have the 4.1 class at 10000 or 10500
Reply Quote

Re: Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 22, 2012 02:04AM
.Thumbs Up
Reply Quote

Re: Tougue OutMy Opinion the 4.1 640 LPS class January 27, 2012 12:47AM
I love the concept of this class but I like the 540 cube class better. Every color can play and it is a distinctive class that separates itself from prostock and superfarm.
Reply Quote

Where is this comming from? January 23, 2012 02:08PM
I still say all of this is over some prostocker who has a conponet chasses that cant beat knowone in that class just wants to step down and have there cake and eat it to. If not just go prostock and leave everyone else allone that is usually why RULES in the lower classes get changed. thats why we have hot farm, super farm lim pro llss lss they are all classes that has been there done that.Just started over with a new name when the classes got out of hand.what will the next one be SUPPER PRO FARM



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2012 02:42PM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 23, 2012 11:08PM
FOR PETES SAKE, LEARN TO SPELL 570
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 23, 2012 11:21PM
Hot do you look under your bed everynight? .................hahahahahaha
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 24, 2012 04:03PM
my opinion on the whole thing is i really like the 4.1 turbo with the 540 cube and no components.the amount of color this could bring to a pull would be a good show. i know the bb deere a very few massey's maybe a oliver here and there dont like this kind of class, but the majoity of these tractors have blocks that dont match the tin or the chassies either.whitch if they matched the cubes wouldnt be a issue. we all like our colors to win and all that but i think a 540 class could be a fun class that could have good numbers for good shows.and be a reliabe tractor that could be a lot more affordable to run.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 24, 2012 11:13PM
The 540 cube rule is why I like the Light Pro class so much. I beleive most of the guys in that class are running around a 4.3" Although 4.1's and 4.5's have had sucess as well.

I honestly beleive the Light Pro has the potential to be the mst colorful Diesel class in all of pulling.

As for where this component talk in 640 Limitied Pro is coming from, it's not from Pro Stock guys wanting to step down, it's from guys currently in the Limited Pro Class.


Jake Morgan
Owner, PULLOFF.COM
Independent Pulling News


This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated.

Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal.

Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 25, 2012 12:56AM
The 4.1 will continue to see alot of growth @ 640 because when the sf guys figure out it is much more fun to go faster, all they have to do is bolt on a bigger turbo and try it...they dont have to dcube their motor....
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 25, 2012 11:43PM
the when the lawn mower class does that there is already a class for them, the 10 pro.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 26, 2012 12:20AM
Quote
680
the when the lawn mower class does that there is already a class for them, the 10 pro.

Proved your knowledge there!
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 26, 2012 12:53AM
You're right Dragon Motorsports just approved a 11,000 Super pro class.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 26, 2012 01:11AM
Explain that one please, what kind of class rules is that and what do they actually weigh?
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 26, 2012 05:38AM
11000# I don't see any rules posted yet. Check Eastern Extreme -message board- then click on Dragon Motorsports.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 29, 2012 09:21PM
Being in the pulling business for a number of years now, it didnt take me long to realize that when you wanted to move up in classes you had to save the money. Having driven a limited pro before, i can speak from experience that they are making a pile of power with the 540 cubic inch motors. Why is it people feel the need to change the rules to 640 cubic inches? What will be the difference between a limited pro, and a PS if that rule gets passed? If there are a few people in the limited pro classes around the country who feel they have to have 640 cubic inches under the hood, save up some money and build a 640 engine and move up to the PS class. Then people can have their fun in limited pro class, and you can have the extra horse power you've been looking for. Plus, the limited pro class is too new to start changing rules already, although its growing in size, let it get on its feet first. If the 640 rule is adopted, i think it will sideline alot more pullers who cant compete with 640's, than it will be able to replace with those who have the money to build bigger engines.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 29, 2012 09:26PM
In addition, if the super farm guys want to "bolt on a bigger turbo" and be "those" guys to ruin a good class, bolt on a bigger one and move to the PS class.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 29, 2012 10:48PM
Ok why is it that when ever people start talking about Limited Pro people think we are talking about the 540 c.i. Light Pro class. Light Pro isn't even the focus of this thread. The 640 c.i. 4.1 class is what is being talked about. Nobody wants to change the Light Pros (except perhaps the gray area in the head rule). Now on the subject I personally don't see the need for components in the Limited Pro class. The way I see it is components are for the high wheel speed classes. A lot of people are saying Pro Stock shouldn't have allowed components but I think they are ok there because of the stress that the weight plus the horsepower put on things.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 29, 2012 11:46PM
The very first post in the thread says "my opinion on the 4.1 640 LPS class". The class already exists and has for a couple years. Nobody is talking about the 540 Light Pro class which is new. Yes there are areas where the light pro class is called limited pro but that is on a local level. All you have to do is read a little before you post.
Reply Quote

Re: Where is this comming from? January 30, 2012 12:55AM
Actual pullers dictate what happens to a class--not keyboard pullers... this is evident by how many tractors are getting built and how many associations are adding the class... the 4.1 640 wins hands down...mid south is adding 4.1 and so is hoosier state..give them a couple years and their will b no sf in those states..just like itpa..good ridiance....maybe someday we will only have to suffer thru 40sfs @ BG!!!
Reply Quote

Newer Topic Older Topic

Author:

Your Email:


Subject:
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically. If the code is hard to read, then just try to guess it right. If you enter the wrong code, a new image is created and you get another chance to enter it right.
Message:
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,780, Posts: 229,959, Members: 3,338.
This forum: Topics: 37,099, Posts: 226,042.

Our newest member Jacklovik2009