505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 01:06AM
I personally think the US needs a high performance 510 CID single charger diesel class. I think almost every diesel fan would really enjoy a colorful high RPM class here in the US. Bigger isn't always better, Nascar lowered cubes and moved the sport forwards, Indy cars continue to lower cubes and move the sport forwards, NHRA lowered cubes to move the sport forwards. Every auto maker is building smaller, more efficient engines with more HP. Tractor manufactures offer engines in the 500 range but keep squeezing more and more power out of them. Big cube engines are dinosaurs. Smaller cubes isn’t going backwards, but rather it’s forwards thinking. The backwards mindset of bigger is better is stone-age thinking.

Since pulling organizations either don't have the backbone, or foresight to dramatically lower the cubes maybe they should just start a new class for diesels with lower cubes. Write the rules now and give it time to develop (by the way, 505-510, not 466) Look at the success of the LSS class, it’s growing by leaps and bounds. I think we’re long overdue for a Light Pro Stock class here in the US, I’d love to see something very, very similar to European rules: 505-510 CID, stock tractor blocks, (no OEM replacement Hyper blocks, no billet blocks, just IH, JD, AC, NH, etc… blocks), something that is similar to what manufactures actually still sell.

Let the guys that want to build 640-680 run in their class, but start a new class for the 505-510 guys. Give it some time to build and then see where it goes.


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.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 07:01AM by Jake Morgan.

Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 01:33AM
I enjoy reading every time Jake makes a post of a smaller class being started. Europe is ahead of our stone age times we live in here. Bigger is not always better. 505-510 any charger 7000lbs no cooler. let the guys run the big cubes don't change their class. Their are guys out there that would build for 505-510. I was until NTPA changed it and I am not complaining about that I see their idea to thin out Superfarm and what a ride with a 4.1 on that must be. I can't complane too much I will be pulling Superfarm this year.Grinning



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:34AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 01:49AM
the folks here mostly all run intercoolers

Anyhow.. I said this about adding a new class about 5 years ago already.
There is no sense in killing an existing class that works well


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:35AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 01:58AM
Light Pro Stock
510 ci
OEM block and head only
24.5 tires
8500 lbs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:42AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 02:28AM
Back then when the PS class was started here, it was some talk about a higher cube level, but it was set to 510 after all.... I said it then and I still say it, best thing that ever happened to European diesel pulling! No need for expensive stroker cranks, no block issues, all brands have an engine that fit right in. The teams had to build their own European stuff, they just could not buy "off the shelf " from USA. And a lot of teams take a great pride in what is "home-made" ... The list just goes on...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:43AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 02:33AM
The following is an opinion article I wrote on February 5th, 2008, I then edited it on February 10, 2008. I never finished my thoughts so I never posted it on the Opinion page, I never really edited it either so sorry about the misspellings and rambling.


**************************************************************************************************************************

Since there seems to always be so much uproar about lowering the cubic inches in the Pro Stock class maybe it’s time for pulling to take a different approach. Maybe it’s time for this sport to take a serious look at developing a lighter weight Pro Stock class.

Now before everyone starts thinking I’m a hypocrite since I’ve always advocated few classes, yes, this does go against everything I’ve written in past years but I think this class could fill a very important niche in pulling – a lower cubic inch but high performance single charger diesel class.

There are already plenty of classes in this motorsport for big cubic inch motors, there are classes with limits from 640-680 and the last thing tractor pulling needs is another version of Super Farm or big cubic inch Pro Stock or even a big cubic inch Limited Pro Stock. If you really want to build a big motor you already have plenty of choices and options no matter where you live.

What I’m proposing is a 505 cubic in Light Pro Stock class. I’m not proposing a Limited Pro but rather a full blown Pro Stock class with a slightly lower cubic inch limit. All the rules would be identical to the current Pro Stock class but with a minor change in engine size. The Light Pro Stock would still allow any pumps, any head(s), any manifold, any single charger, component chassis, 24.5 tires, etc… Make the class 7000-8000 lbs. No aftermarket blocks (including the Hypermax block) and no Ag blocks.

No before everyone jumps on me and says it’s a “Limited Pro” because you limited the cubic inches to 505, I’d argue that the current Pro Stock class is also “limited” to 680, infact all the classes have limits of some sort or another, there is NO unlimited class so lets just dispense with the “limited” argument.

Ii assume the next point of contention is the weight, most people will argue that you can’t call a class Light at 7000-8000 lbs. I’d argue that the term “Light” is relative and when the heavy class is a 10,000 lbs an 8000 lbs class is pretty light in comparison.

The last argument that I could see people putting forward is a horsepower argument. Before anyone starts to argue “505 won’t have any power” I suggest you click on some of the videos in youtube for the European circuit. Infact Sascha Mecking recently posted a link on the Feedback page to a great video clip from [www.stage6.com]

The problem in this sport always comes back to cubic inches. Unfortunately the sport will not formally address the problem in a serious manner.

For those that argue that backing the cubic inch down is moving the sport backwards. . . maybe we should mover the sport forwards and remove the CID limits all together.

Here what I proposes:

Lightweight Pro Stock Division:
  • 505 CID
  • Any charger
  • Any pump
  • Stock manufacturer blocks (no aftermarket or OEM replacements)
  • Billet cylinder heads limited to:
    • Two (2) valves per cylinder
    • Push rods only (no OHC)
  • Stock valve heads limited to:
    • Stock number of valves (3, 4, 5 etc… valve heads legal)
    • Overhead cam heads legal
  • Component chassis allowed
  • Removing transmission housing allowed on stock chassis if equipt with full length frame rails
  • 7000 lbs-8000 lbs.
  • 24.5 tires

I’d love to hear peoples comments or ideas.


**************************************************************************************************************************

To Sascha,

I've always been against having too many classes, but you were right about leaving the PS class alone. It's an unfortunate commentary on leadership and foresight in the US.


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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:42AM by Jake Morgan.

Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 07:40AM
YOU FORGET THEY SAY THERE RUNNING 640 OR680 BUT ALOT OF TOP GUYS RUN 600 WHICH ISN'T A BIG CUBE MOTOR THERE NATIONAL AND REGIONAL CHAMPIONS BIG 640 680 DON'T STAY TOGETHER THEY PUT MONEY IN 600 THAT DO YOU RUN WITH THEM YOU'LL KNOW THE TRUTH FACT



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:44AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 17, 2009 12:46AM
A 600 is still a BIG cube motor. We need a high performance diesel class for 505-510 cubic inch motors. Ask a Ford or AC guy if 600 is a BIG motor!


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: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 02:30PM
Jake,

You're absolutely right! Even 540 is on the borderline of being too big! 505 (which is really 510 in the NTPA , with the 1% variance) is the perfect size. I love the rules you're proposing for a Lt. PS class. The only other thing that I think should be considered is a P-pump limitation... IF that would help the reliability. If a SF style P-pump would NOT help the reliability, then I would let them run the Sigma. Either way, you'd have high-reving engines that would put on a great show.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 02:52PM
I would love to pull a 505 class with p-pump and 4.X inch charger at no more than 8500 lbs. It would be fun to hook, you can run it to your personal budget, and there would be fan appeal.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/18/2009 02:53PM by AV.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 19, 2009 12:02AM
505 P-pump OEM head any manifolds 4 something turbo 8500lbs. I could have 2 of these engines in a long block complete compared to 1 Superfarm engine for the price. Stock block bored no deck plate stock crankshaft no stroking aftermarket stock pistons where is all the cost now? If a national class could be made like this with uniform rules accross the country it would take off. The more you stay close to stock engine configurations the more people can afford to build for it. But what do I know I pull Fords and cant go to an aftermarket supplier and buy all the parts I need to just bolt a 640 together I have to do my home work and homework for 505 is kindergrden stuff.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 02:49PM
Jake,

The class you're proposing would be AWESOME... because of the competition rules... so, what it would be called really isn't that relevant. (THOUGH, I agree Lt. Pro Stock seems like the best name choice). AND... even with the addition of the 're-tooled' NTPA Lim. Pro class there still isn't a single charger National Class that has rules that make sense (because of the BIG cube limits)... SO, adding one that does would be a good thing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:43AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 02:53AM
also need coolers to turn bigger turbos
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 04:02PM
billet head,overhead cam,sigma pumpEye Popping still sounds like alot of money too me
just another rich mans class with those parts
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 09:16PM
How about OEM head?
If you get the OHC with it, there is no extra costs...

Sigma Pump - I was at a meeting where a german diesel shop showed all the various things he offers to pullers and they talked about 16mm and bigger elements that can be squeezed inside the P-Pump. He admitted, they would only last for a few hours though...


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 11:54PM
Billet head would allow the older motors to all be on a level playing field. AC, IH, Oliver, JD etc… could all run a billet two valve pushrod head. That would even the field for all colors, and give old engines new life, and new engines alternative options.

Stock OHC 4 valve heads would allow the Fendt, Valtra, Lambourghini, and any other new tractors to use current factory technology. It would reflect what’s being sold all over the world. It would reflect the present, as well as the future.

The goal is to get more brands and new technology in the game. No matter what the rules, it’s not going to be a cheap game. Just look at what a SF can sell for. Look at what some of the antiques are selling for. Pulling isn’t cheap, and I am not proposing a cheap starter class. I’m suggesting a very high performance class that is similar to what is being sold at dealerships today.

True new Deere vs. old Deere, Oliver vs. Fendt vs. Massey, AC vs. Agco, Ford vs. NH, it would be a class that could represent a very, very broad spectrum.

The class would not be limited to red vs. green, and using 1960’s engines, but your right, not a cheap 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: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 19, 2009 12:09AM
Nothing away from stock is "cheap" but 250 cid up from stock is not as "cheap" Pulling is a hobby we do it beacuse we like it. It all costs money and that is one separating factor in who pulls what. I am only moving to Superfarm beacuse a friend of mine is building a new tractor and I will be running his old one if that was not the case it would not happen.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 21, 2009 02:24PM
By allowing something you are basically requring it to be competitive. If you allow billet heads you're gonna have to have one to be somebody. If you allow sigma's or 2 plungers per cylinders or billet pumps you're gonna have to have one. Then you'll have to have billet injectors. Then you're gonna be able to make use of a big dollar charger so you're gonna have to have one. If you allow all those things you're gonna have a 510 pro stock. If you limit the charger they're gonna be expensive.
If your rules just say p pump, someone's gonna have a 16mm pump that may only last a few runs but it makes more power and everyone else will need one too. If you went with a 13mm (sealed) p pump, that would limit it to a pump that is very reliable and reasonably priced.
Limit the head to factory heads for the block used. That would allow 4 valve if it bolts to the block. Most manufactuers have a 4 valve on something.
The pump and head rules would limit the turbo.
Honestly, if you allow 24.5's you would need to have puller 2000's. 20.8's would be something to think about.
You would be able to make 1800 horse without too much work, and a 7500 or 8000 lbs it would be alot of fun and go fast.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 05:38AM
I couldnt agree more. I love the tractor classes and in my opinion the 10 pro is the best class in pulling. So instead of all this talk about decubing i also think that a 505 or a 510 class would be an awesome choice for a more economical and diverse class. Do you think there would be much intrest in the class jake?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:47AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 05:46AM
I could imagine there would be some interest from the "off brand" teams that probably have an operation going that can handle a national competition - but currently wouldn't stand a chance because of the cubic inch issue.
Teams like Hurricane Allis or Forresters come to my mind here...
If it wasn't for the damn financial crises, I could also imagine, it would be possible to pick up some sponsorships from the McCormick / Landini group, Fendt/Valtra = Agco (if they plan on keeping the Valtra brand alive on the US market).
Would think it would be kinda smart to have one set of rules that apply worldwide. If technology / know how / parts from Europe could be applied, the development of the class would probably go on a lot quicker.
We could possibly then do some exchange tractor shipping during the winter for the indoor pulls in the US and Europe. Foreigners in the competition are usually good to get more crowd into the stands...


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:47AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 06:01AM
You're definitely right about the foreign tractors adding some excitement... I know I was curious to watch the alcohol SS class to see how the Dutch motor would perform. I’d love to see the Farm Show chip in a little money to get the Bit’s and Pieces tractor(s) over here some Winter so we could see how the complete European tractors compare.

Check your PM, I sent you a message.


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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:48AM by Jake Morgan.

Reply Quote

Re: Dutch Alky Motor February 16, 2009 12:17PM
The dutch motor ran good but was a little short on hp compared to the us engines



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:48AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: Dutch Alky Motor February 16, 2009 01:20PM
I would wait and see how it does here. Sjors was not one of the very top guys here last season either. He's still kinda new to this game (though VERY ambitious and professional) and from what I was told, it was last years engine he ran at the NFMS (that info might be wrong though). Anyhow - I wouldn't want to bring out a new tractor with a new set of them "tricky when new" HP tires to the NFMS pull and be judged on that "first time out" performance.
I know I'd be more than happy if that thing made it down the track at all. I think it was a good overall result for the circumstances.
A judgement on that tractor probably has to be made later in the season. And yes - it is very possible the dutch engine was and is short on power - but I wouldn't want to tell before I have not seen the EGTs of that run.


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:48AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: Dutch Alky Motor February 16, 2009 01:32PM
Don't get me wrong it ran good. Just saying on that particular night it was a little behind.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:49AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: Dutch Alky Motor February 16, 2009 01:33PM
I saw that, too Smiling


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:49AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 05:49AM
A 505-510 class won't be any more economical at the top tier. The top guys will have just as much into a 505 as they do a 680. However, here the big BUT… It might be cheaper for the guys looking to start out and finish at the back of the pack. They might be able to jump in the class with a few less expenses. The limit will always be what you can spend.

Europe proves it can be more diverse. Europe also proves they can turn some serious RPM.

Good color and a screaming motor will put butts in seats.

I think there could be some interest, but the class would need to get built very slowly.

Europe is getting another great looking Pro Stock for an already great circuit. I really wish we had something similar over here.


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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:50AM by Jake Morgan.

Reply Quote

Re: RPM Limited Class February 16, 2009 07:24AM
Hey Jake ,here an opinion from a "superfarmer / supersporter" from the Netherlands

"Good color and a screaming motor will put butts in seats"

do you have a good colour full rpm limited class over there ???

Between Stock and Pro-stock , in the Netherlands we have the S-division Supersport Rpm limited tractors (max 2700 rpm)

they have also proven "Good color and a high -torque!! motor will put butts in seats"

we drive 42 inch rims with 1-20 / 1-22 gear ratio , HX80 turbo (no 3 inch-limit) on 2700 rpm max .....


[www.youtube.com] link to short movie


Maybe a good idea to switch with your large Pro-stock engines to a rpm - limited class ??

greetings, Marcel www.teambrutus.nl



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:50AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: RPM Limited Class February 16, 2009 07:45AM
Marcel - your super sport class is a blast, but aren't you talking a little different level and topic here???

The pull at Gordyville is packed with classes very similar to yours. Check that video link:

[www.veoh.com]


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:51AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 19, 2009 07:00AM
the class sounds very interesting to me.i would also add gas or propane fuel,if the tractor came from the factory with it.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 10:48AM
Jake, one problem you have is that it won't be any cheaper in the short or long term to build a 505 like you propose. Don't get me wrong - I'd like to convert every SF and LPS to what you propose - but it's a lot of money.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:51AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 11:32AM
I would think this is less about "saving money" (because it isn't) but more about "how to get the sport more exciting for a wider fan base and more interesting for colors that are currently not in the position to win"...
I mean - for how long do you want to base the sport on engines from the last century?


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:52AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 12:21PM
Oh I understand the premise, but the majority of the folks building do so based on money and if you can build a 680 for x and pull anywhere or a 505 for the same x and pull virtually nowhere, it's a problem.

I started a thread on here a few weeks ago about the most recent farm tractors converted to pullers and they were all European. I can't imagine what it will be like in 20 years when someone has a component with 2029 sheetmetal and a 619 block.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:52AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 16, 2009 01:04PM
well said and very true


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 12:53AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 02:46AM
I agree with 007, but we need to start somewhere. We need a 505-510 cubic inch diesel option. We need a NASCAR class that somewhat represents what tractor companies are producing today. The sport needs to start it's future plan 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: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 18, 2009 08:25AM
I also do agree on that.

I mean look at what's build these days, with the technology of turbocharging.
A big deal of the advantage of the big cubes is the fact, people are allowed to put a different head on those engines.
Tractors were built with big cubes to make horsepower to begin with. Them Lanz Bulldogs come to my mind with their huge 600 cui + single cylinders.
What made them obsolete was the fact they couldn't do any engine speed and were replaced with much smaller engines with more cylinders that made the same power but burnt way less fuel and were more efficient.
Then the development of cylinderheads went on, quality of materials improved and tractors could be build with much smaller engines making the same power (or alike in sie and make more power).
Then Turbos came into the game and again you could make more power without increasing the size of your engine / make the same power with a smaller engine.
Today we're at the point where a 410 cubish MAN diesel produces over 300 horsepower and in combination with the Vario transmission doesn't need any low end tourque, as the transmission takes care of the tourque needed.
Why can it make that kind of power?
Because it has a rather mordern cylinder head, intercooler, electronic injection ...
If we put it right next to a standard tractor engine from the 70s with the same power, it's kinda half the size, half the fuel consumption - but probably not performing much better on a dyno.

So - what does that tell us?

By allowing "up to date" technology (heads & turbos) on antique blocks, we have created something rather odd.

I think it would become VERY interesting, if you limit them all to their factory head and maybe +10 bore over stock to allow for rebuilds.

I know this won't happen - but that would be a limit that would probably work for a long time to come.

There is something coming to my mind right now:
Super Farm with that 3 x 3 turbo.
Basically it should be possible to allow ANY OEM head in that class in combination with the factory cubes (+ - some) and the factory transmission.
The newer engines would probably rev higher down the track - but in the end they would all get the same amount of air from the turbo...
The factory transmissions should also be able to somewhat handle the power.
The Valtra Pro Stocks used to run Powershift until not too long ago. It was quite a sight to see them shifting down at the end of a run...
Anyhow - this would be something related close to the "stock" tractor and might interest producers a little more. Because then it's their product going down the track - and not a homemade tractor with their color.

Just some thoughts...


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 22, 2009 09:45AM
Jake Morgan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with 007, but we need to start somewhere.
> We need a 505-510 cubic inch diesel option. We
> need a NASCAR class that somewhat represents what
> tractor companies are producing today. The sport
> needs to start it's future plan now.


Just remember that NASCAR requires a push rod v8 and a carburetor,[which is tech from the 50's-80's]
they don't have EFI or overhead cam. John Deere ran the old tech mechanical diesel motors until 94 with the 4960. So NASCAR is behind just like us old school [60's tech] pullers, but the factory tractor tech is ten years less out of date than the race cars are[94-vs.85]. NASCAR is new sheet metal with a tube frame and 1950's small block with all the race parts you can throw at it just like pro stock pulling.

just my 2 cents, nick


P.S. thanks for this sight to share ideas and for the classifieds.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2009 10:16AM by Michigan Puller.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 22, 2009 11:17AM
In Nascar a Ford is still powered by Ford. Nascar knocked the cubes back and the sport grew.

I completely agree regarding some of Nascar’s antiquated rules. If Nascar is smart I think they will probably eventually adopt updated engine rules. I’m not a Nascar expert, but common sense makes me predict that the engine limits in Nascar’s future will be smaller than they currently allow. It wouldn’t shock me to see all EFI injected V-6 rounding the NASCAR ovals some day.

The one thing Nascar knows is their audience. Unlike pulling Nascar caters to the fans first. I also believe that Nascar knows where their future lies, and they know that their audience is gradually shifting away from muscle car enthusiasts.

By the way, an injected V-6 will put on every bit as good of a show, maybe even better.


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: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 22, 2009 12:37PM
A V6 is about as crappy of an engine as it will get. Only good thing about them is, they are cheap to build and do better low end tourque than an inline 6...


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 22, 2009 01:00PM
One thing that needs to be accepted when you guys want to compare Nascar to pulling is,... there is no comparison. Yes it is a motor sport but so is lawn mower racing, however I think pulling is a higher level than that. Lowering cubic inch limits in a GN class(USS DSS PS) is really kinda silly if you think about it. The technology is already there,... they make awesome HP,... and put on a heck of a show ! If the proponents of grass roots pulling want a 500 inch engine, large turbo, and large pump they should start it at a lower level of competition and see if it grows. I suspect it won't because of the financial investment involved in making large RPM HP will be more than the new entry pullers will want to maintain. Something that always needs to be remembered is that high HP & fast wheel speed is what separates the GN show from all other pulls, and when fans pay for a GN show they don't want to see restrictor plate pulling !
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 22, 2009 01:48PM
I agree, nobody likes to pay good money to watch firestone, firestone, firestone!!!
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock..oh really ? February 22, 2009 01:19PM
In NASCAR a Ford is powered by a Ford engine. A pushrod V8...how many of those does FOMOCO sell anymore ?

NASCAR reduced cubes and the sport grew...not ! A huge decrease in factory involvement made that rule come about. A 433 c.i.

engine was legal until mid to late 70's,but it required a restrictor plate,small blocks could run w/o plate. NASCAR hitched it's wagon

to factory backed small blocks..Chevrolet being the most popular . They remained a small,southern region sanctioning body ,Mopar left stock car

racing in mid 70's. NASCAR started it's growth with the return of Ford,1980. Current Cup engine rules have a 358 ci maximum AND a 350 ci

minimum. Bill Elliot tried a 317 Busch setup to defeat restrictor plate,France and company were not going to have those boys stink up their

series with a superior engine plan,hence the minimum. We still ended up with 9000 plus rpm combo's . V6 engines were run in the Busch series.

The rumble of a 90 degree V8 is a huge part of the appeal of stock cars,hence their return. Fans didn't like bumblebee buzzing V6 cars.

Audience is shifting ? Fools who claim NASCAR is a driver's series are wrong. Tony Stewart worked hard to get back in a Chevy. Earnhardt

Nation would shrink considerably if Dale Jr went to racing a Toyota. The part of the audience that is leaving room for muscle car fans coolers ?

Casual "driver series" newbies who can't quote mechanics of competitors cars from memory. Flavor of the month folks.

What tractor pulling needs ? It's participant driven, so what increases numbers would help the most. Might be a new class,allowing new or

different parts. I disagree with you,billet won't kill it . There is tremendous momentum in pulling with new light classes, I think that's the next step

up the ladder.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 24, 2009 05:35AM
What ever happened to the little cubed motors in the pro stock like a 301 AC or a 404 or 414 JD. It wouldn't take a lot to turn a small stoked motor fast and would be very economical and possibly put on a decent show.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 17, 2009 05:09AM
I'm 100% in favor of a 510 cube class.The Europeans did it right and have lots of color..I sure do wish that they could bring over 10-12 of their top running tractors to put on a show for us.

[www.youtube.com] [www.youtube.com] [www.redattraction.nl]

I never get tired of watching these hard runners.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2009 05:28AM by G-1000.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 17, 2009 07:00AM
I agree, I can't wait to see the Euro Pros in person some day.

I honestly believe that fans “feel” RPM’s more than they do torque. From a purely marketing standpoint; high RPM classes would be much easier to sell. As mentioned earlier there are some great limited RPM classes, but I think if fans were given a choice (especially new fans) they would probably prefer the high RPM class over the low RPM class given similar variables.

Many organizations seem to forget about the fan “experience” when making the rules.


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: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 17, 2009 06:55AM
lim pro, will prove you right in the future. the smaller motor 500-560 ci will be the first full season points 2010 champion!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 17, 2009 09:00AM
Here in Europe.
Pro-stock 510ci 6000+ rpm many brands,,, many colors

USA
Pro-stock 680ci 4500 rpm green and red....


Sascha did spell check



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/18/2009 02:31AM by Sascha.
Reply Quote

what would be a good weight for the class February 19, 2009 03:43AM
what would be a good weight for the class, could you hook in with the light supers or diesel supers and do any thing. I know when the PS jump in with the Supers they do real good. I think the class would be exciting at 7000 lbs.
Reply Quote

Re: what would be a good weight for the class February 19, 2009 07:53AM
Looks to me like the proposed class runs really well at 7700. Why mess with what the Europeans have made work really well.
Reply Quote

Re: what would be a good weight for the class February 19, 2009 09:04AM
Hi!
7700 lbs is fine with components (them Alky supers can run well balanced at 7700lbs here and 8000 lbs in the US with 30.5 tires - a diesel class with smaller tires wouldn't have a problem with that).
With stock transmission and engine location, the older "rear wheel drive designed" tractors are at disatvantage compared to newer designs like the Valtras, who have the engine sitting MUCH more forward. Non Component John Deeres, New Hollands and IHs here are running out of front end weight here by now.
Anyhow - I agree with the post above:
Why mess with rules that have prooven to work well? As less wiight for the power as bette the show. WIth components it's a piece of cake to make that weight anyways... would not even take ANY aluminium parts in the driveline, meaning you can go with truck rear and planetaries form the junkyard and probably also use one of them simple and rather cheap Holden three speed trannies (or whatever is and was used in modified tractors and is avaliable in the used parts market)


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: what would be a good weight for the class February 20, 2009 02:38AM
I think the new class would be great, it would be nice to see a smaller single diesel turbo class. The bigger PS class runs 24.5s why what tire should the smaller PS class run 24.5s also. What would be the right turbo size and what would be the right pump. Stock head or billet head????
Reply Quote

Re: what would be a good weight for the class February 20, 2009 03:58AM
At least you can buy 24.5 made for pulling (that don't tear up badly)... so I don't see a reason why not to use those.
As far as it concerns the limits and their outcome here:
Top machines have a 4.6 and up turbo, billet pumps and intercoolers and have to run the OEM head.


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: what would be a good weight for the class February 20, 2009 04:24AM
The best idea would be to adopt the exact rules from europe. They work great there, install them here and lock them for a couple of years so they can't be changed. Other than a safety item of coarse.
Reply Quote

Re: what would be a good weight for the class February 20, 2009 06:01AM
I THINK THE LIGHT LIMITED SUPER STOCK IS A GOOD FIT FOR ALL. SMALLER CUBES/ONE TURBO AND CHEAPER TO BUILD. THE LAST THING WE NEED IS ANOTHER ALL DIESEL CLASS. NTPA CREATES A NEW ALL DIESEL CLASS ABOUT EVERY 2-3 YEARS AS IT IS.
THE LLSS CLASS IS A GOOD START.
Reply Quote

6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 20, 2009 02:10PM
we need both class's here in the states. the llss classs is here and growing fast! it has alot of color and more to come. ya ya every association has different rules , butt hopefully we can come together sooner or later and all gett along!! it would be nice to keep it light. ((LIGHT!!)) theres alot of deisels guys wanting a small cube class to play in butt dont want to build a light tractor. Im an alkey lss fan by hart!! BUTT this limited pro class you guys are talking about sounds AWSOME!!!!! Sounds perfect! bring the same rules from over there to here!!

Sascha what are the exact rules if you could please?
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 20, 2009 02:32PM
there is another thread on here with a link to the ETPC rulebook...
if you can't find it, go to "tractorpulling.com" (skip that stupid, bandwidth eating intro and don't wonder about the screaming colors) - choose "rulebooks and forms" in the menu - and there is a link to the rules in PDF


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 20, 2009 03:52PM
How about cast rears, oem heads, p pump, 8500lbs, 4.X charger, 24's, and 505 cubes. I know that 7700 pro class works well in Europe, but they also don't have the 10,000 lb pro class or a DSS class at 8000. We don't need another $150,000/tractor class. If you are going to just run to the builders and get all the new billet stuff we already have those classes, they would welcome new blood.

Put together a class in that is actually "tractor" yet, welcomes color, puts on a show, and doesn't require $150,000 to build a winner. This is a class that would be comparable to what the LLSS is accomplishing. I would bet to venture there are super farm guys that would have rather built this configuration but didn't have the opportunity, as it isn't offered.

Components still have the option with lss, uss, dss, or 10pro.

(in no way am I against components, just for a good single charger smaller cube class)
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 20, 2009 04:54PM
No doubt, your proposed rules would make a good Lt. Limited Pro class. My question is... would a 505, OEM head, P-pump, non-inner cooled tractor even need a turbo limit? Sascha has suggested that a tractor with those competition specs wouldn't be able to spin much more than a 4.1 charger. If that's true, why bother with a sealed turbo (save the pullers and tech officials from that headache). And doing that might even keep the turbo cost down.? If a turbo restriction is really necessary, then a 3.6 charger may make more sense.?
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 21, 2009 12:50AM
A cast rearend class limits the class to "old" tractors. I don't think there are many new rearends that are going to be compatible with pulling so the componenet option really would open the door to new technology.

Honestly, I think that a logical approach would be to not worry about the rules yet, but establish the goal of the class. Are we looking of a starter 505 class? A high performance 505 class? A 505 class that allows new technology? a 505 class that caters to 1960's technology? Where should this class fit? How "hot" should this class be?

We have to figure out where we are going before we figure out how to get there!


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: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 21, 2009 04:27AM
Jake,

I don't believe the goal of a class like this will be "new" technology becasue if you want to spend the money to R and D that stuff pick a class that leaves it wide open for you to do so.

Run a poll... that asks that question.

Do we need a class like the European 7700 Pro class or a cast rear, oem head, 4.1 charger, p pump, 505 cu, 8500 lb max?

However the best way to word that poll question would be.
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 21, 2009 07:43AM
How many more "entry level, limited cheap" classes to bore the specators do you need?


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 21, 2009 08:50AM
NONE! We don't need any more classes period.

Adding a 77 Pro class here would make as much sense as you adding a 10 Pro class there.


If you have $100,000 - $150,000 laying around to build a tractor isn't LSS, USS, DSS, SF, LimPRO, 10 PRO enough for options?

But if you want to spend $50-$70,000 and win, and want a small cube motor and bigger single charger what class should I build for? I am all ears.

I am sure promoters are just chomping at the bit for another $3500-$5K Purse class to add to the line ups. But I bet they would book a class for $2000-2500 to add to the other big money classes, that has numbers and ran as hard as the superfarms.

I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 21, 2009 02:53PM
Currently, in sanctioned pulling, DEMAND for smoke exceeds SUPPLY (and it's been that way for quite some time). SO.... adding smoke classes (especially, ones that have smart competition rules) is actually just responding to a "need." (If the existing smoke classes had better rules that might not be the case.?)

You're right, adding the U.S. 10 Pro class in Europe would be totally unecessary. BUT, adding a lighter weight, smaller cube, component Pro Stock class in the U.S. has some merit... AND SO DOES, a lighter weight Limited Pro class with rules like you were proposing. Frankly, I'd like to see them both be offered at the National level.
Reply Quote

why limit the pump and charger ? February 21, 2009 09:14AM
small cubes, oem head with stock valve locations, 2 or 4 or hemi valve . shouldnt matter as long as its an oem head that macthes block. big wind mills,BIG!!! I can understand allowing component chassis because theres no late model rearend availible for the brand tractor that are in production these days. 8000 ibs or less. the llss class and super farms make near the same hp. butt the lighter the class the more ACTION!! that,s just simple math!!!!!!!! forget about the old heavy red and green show, theres plenty of class's that cater soley to them all ready !!!! lets move on
Reply Quote

Re: 8500lbs, 540ci, p-pump or A-pump and a 3.9 or 4.1 February 21, 2009 08:07AM
I believe we need a starter class. The problem I have is...every year new classes are made and knowone looks at whats out there already. There are several groups running a 540ci, some are runnig a p-pumps and some are running a-pumps, weights ranging from 8200 to 8800. Turbos ranging from 3.15"X4" to 4.1 trubos. IF you want to start a class, build off classes like theseor similar. Then you have a better chance on getting numbers. My opinion is what NTPA did with there Limited pro class, they knew some SuperFarms would jump up and some pros would drop back for the class. My opinion again just my opnion they will have 20 to 25 tractors in this class this year. Its easier to change a pump or a turbo than building a new motor and less exspensivefor sure.

My choice would be an 8500lbs, 540ci, 24.5 tires, p-pump and for turbo 3.6 or 3.9. The turbo needs to be easy to check if you put restriction on it. Another option is a plug on the turbo.
Reply Quote

Re: 8500lbs, 540ci, p-pump or A-pump and a 3.9 or 4.1 February 21, 2009 10:22AM
any turbo
cooler
any pump
comp chassie
oem head
any manifolds
8000 lbs
24.5 tires
510-540 ci

elimiate the 4.1 class, there are enough big cube and heavy classes already
this would be real similar to the euro tractors, and we could poss hook together in the off season both here and over there.
Reply Quote

Re: 8500lbs, 540ci, p-pump or A-pump and a 3.9 or 4.1 February 21, 2009 10:43AM
Not really being a tractor man,l but I think Jake's original idea of a small cube, single charger, light weight puller makes sense. Lighter weight means less motor is needed. As Sascha says: 'it is about hooking the power to the ground" (sic). I think any weight over 7500 would be detrimental in this application. There is already "starter" classes--all over the country. They are called brush pullers. As well, there are already "true farm" classes. They are called "antiques". The current Pro Stock class could use a "little brother" class. JW
Reply Quote

Re: 8500lbs, 540ci, p-pump or A-pump and a 3.9 or 4.1 February 21, 2009 11:48AM
I like the idea of basically a true pro stock class at 510 or 540 cubes and 7700 lbs. If you use a newer tractor that has a 4 valve or ohc head you can use that as long as it is cast. That way the old motors can still be competitive with the new better flowing heads. I need to disagree with puller 1 though on one point. Lets try to get the super farm class running the 4.1 turbo and get rid of the 3X3 on the National level. This change and add would really help the shows.
Reply Quote

Re: 8500lbs, 540ci, p-pump or A-pump and a 3.9 or 4.1 February 21, 2009 01:46PM
The only thing with lighter weights like 6500 to 7500 raises an another issue. The transmissions and rear ends...the comp chassie should only be used in the supers and pros and not in a class like this one. It adds to much cost to build a tractor. There is no need for it. When you get in the 8000 to 8500 u have some stronger rear ends to work with. You can use a IH1066 or a ford 9600, JD 4430 or even an AC D21.

As for all these starter classes that are refered to what you see at brush pulls. Well thas the problem, not with brush pulls, cause I have been to some of these brush pulls that I hate to call them brush pulls cause they are as good as the state hooks. The problem I see is everryone has different rules for every pull. Some places are starting to get a common set of rules to get more tractors and its working.

As someone said about pulling with the Europeans in the off season over there or over here, either you ave alot money to blow or you have no idea what kinda cost it would be to ship a tractor across the pond. You would have $10,000 in shipping your tractor from here to there, trucking to the pull and back to the port and back across the pond to here. Don't get me wrong its a good idea, but not for the average puller.
Reply Quote

Components February 21, 2009 02:46PM
“the comp chassie should only be used in the supers and pros and not in a class like this one.”

The class I’m proposing is a Light Weight Pro Stock Class. Not a hot farm, not a light super farm, but a true lightweight Pro Stock class. High horsepower, high revving engines, not a starter class, but a full fledged 505-510 Pro Stock class.

“It adds to much cost to build a tractor” [speaking about a component chassis]

I speak from limited experience building a component tractor, but from my experience a component chassis can be built very, very inexpensively. You can even see pictures on me bending up some chromoly tubing on my photos page.

Yes, there is a need for going component, the new CVT transmissions housings are heavy! Very, very heavy. Turning them into a puller would be exceedingly difficult and very expensive. If a guy wants to build a Fendt what rear-end is he going to use? An AC? An Oliver? A Moline? That is just ridiculous. Agains, that rule would cater to old 1960’s technology.

Allow a component and make the hood match the block and you are all set. Then anyone can go to the junk yard get a truck rear-end, find an old Loader, take the planetaries and fab a rear-end for next to nothing. Sure you can order an expensive chassis, but nobody is making you. Just like dinner, I can go to an expensive steakhouse and spend $100 for my wife and I… or I can get the grill out and for a fraction of the cost I can cook a few steaks up myself. Whether it's steaks or a component chassis you can do it much cheaper yourself.

We need componenets and OEM 4 valve heads because we already have enough classes that cater to 1960.


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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2009 12:53AM by Jake Morgan.

Reply Quote

Re: Components February 21, 2009 07:48PM
Jake don't take this personally but some of you're ideas work well in a vaccuum. This stuff has to actually be bought and sold in the real world. We all want to see another $150,000/tractor class go down the track but who is going to build for it, and where are you going to sell it?

You like to say 60's technology and I take a little offense to that because if I can take a 400 series IH block and get 2500 hp out of it, that is not even close to 60's technology. You name one 60's super stock puller that was making 2500 hp?

Is it new technology? No, not even close,

But we already have those classes that allow that growth and R&D. Will it look like Europe's classes? No, cause they voted on theirs and we built ours.

Right or wrong it doesn't matter, it's what sells tickets there and here.

Not everyone can build their own chassis and you act like its no big deal just put one together, There are 3 year waits for the best and they cost up to $50K for the best.

Yet you have no tractor at all...cast or component. Should we hold that against you? No we shouldn't, cause you are very connected and knowledgeable about tractor pulling. But I do know if you were invested to the extent these pullers and promoters were you might have some different opinions as to how to grow this sport locally eventually feeding the surplus of national classes we already have.

And I asssume seeing your pics of you bending chomoly tubing that I can get your help when I build my component Winking

For now I will just tinker on my 60's show.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2009 12:54AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 21, 2009 10:15PM
Just something to throw in:
So far there is no component Pro Stock in the class here. There will be a few this season and maybe that will turn things around, because they will have more front end weight.

Anyhow - building a component chassis for a tractor with less than 4000 hp at 7700 lbs is NOT costly.
The sheet metal wedge rails I think are less than a 1000 $ ( cost like 300 € each to make here).
Narrowing a truck rear.. what does it actually take?
A torch, hand held grinder, a straight shaft and welding. Then some machine work to get the flanges for the planetaries right... then a trip to the junkyard to get some planetaries. That's like a week's evening work ...
The first chassis (complete tractor) I helped building, we were three 15 year old boys and me being like 19 or 20 guiding them. And that was a TUBE chassis. We had a budget of 10.000 US $ and an Allison with clutch and bellhousing that needed help.
This is what we came up with after one winter:



If you pay 50.000 $ for a chassis, you need psycological help!!!
If you want one for 30k, give me a call. We all then should stop our jobs and build chassis instead...


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2009 12:54AM by Jake Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 22, 2009 12:48AM
Thanks Sascha, components are only as expensive as you make them. Adam, if I had more spare time and you lived closer I probably would help. I’ll probably will help out on a team again someday when I get spare time. I never said a component won’t take time, but I completely disagree that it needs to be expensive.

Rules that cater to 1960’s engines and rearends doesn’t mean the internal parts are 1960’s. I never said the current HP was not enough, I never said the current classes didn’t use modern parts, I never said I didn’t like 1960’s blocks. The point I was trying to get across was that we need a class that is a mix of old and new. A class that has rules that are inclusive to new technology. A class where a 478 Hercules can run, and a class where a Valtra can be built to be competitive, a class for new CaseIH, and old IH, new Deere, vs. old Deere. A class where everybody is going to be on an equal footing. A class where a 706 rearend can still run against a fabricated rear-end.

Honestly, I don’t see what’s wrong with a class that looks at current technology, and also incorporates the future as well as the past.

Here’s my quick analogy: When people think of the Shakers they think of a backwards community similar to the Amish. The truth is they were a very progressive society and they used the latest technology. Eventually they looked at what they had and they stopped, and basically shut themselves off to new technology. They gradually dwindled, and with the exception of a few remaining Shaker’s in Maine, have almost completely died out. Pulling is like the Shakers… at one time this sport was progressive, it had factory supported teams and it had parts on the track before they were even in production. Now days people look at what they’ve got and are happy to slow everyone down to stay the same. The rules have stayed the same as technology has pushed forwards. I just want a class with rules that embrace “new” technology.

The rules I’m suggesting are almost identical to the European limits with the only exception being the heads. As a fan, the European PS class really peaks my interest.


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.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2009 12:55AM by Jake Morgan.

Reply Quote

Re: Components February 22, 2009 01:59AM
Not trying to strike a nerve here Jake, but if you desire to be inclusive of NEW technology in pulling, why then are you so against an after market block in SS and PS? I dont want to hear that it DOES NOT match the sheetmetal/rear on the tractor either because there are tractors out there that are component. If and when a Billet block(s) are made available to all brands, that my friend is advancing the technology of blocks both in integrety and reliability (please do not start the block bashing thing again folks!). Yes I know there is the potential to "Push your luck" with this type of block and that is something that will have to be looked at. Anyway, if you want to technologically advance the sport, you can not rule out this option when Components are beginning to be the choice of these 2 classes when new iron appears on the pulling circuits. I can also guarantee you that the average "Joe" with his kid(s) admiring the vehicles in the pits before the show could nor does care less what block or rear is in their favorite brand of tractor. I do, however, believe that there should NOT be brand mixing with blocks and sheet metal.


J R
Eastern Extreme Pulling
www.easternextremepulling.com
EEPPULLINGVIDEOS

Pro Pulling Magazine
Hook Magazine
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 22, 2009 11:00AM
There are a few reasons why I don’t like billet blocks:

- I don’t think they will be a long term solution.
- I don’t think they will stay brand specific in the long term. It will evolve to the same billet block for any hood.
- I think the block is the heart of a tractor, it’s not the cab, it’s not the tires, it’s not the rear-end, it’s not the frame rails, to me the part that keeps a component tractor a tractor is the block. Yes the hood makes it look like a tractor, but if still feels like a tractor if it’s actually tractor powered. A billet block for me as a fan will just be a single engine mod class. Some people see component tractors as a mod class, and that’s fine, I respect their opinion, but to me it’s the block.
- One other reason I’m against a billet block is because I honestly don’t believe we have exhausted all of our resources yet. There are tie downs, and other restraints that can be implemented to keep blocks together in an unfortunate event, some of the technology is out there already and in use..
- The last reason I’m against billet blocks is cost. From scratch I could build a component tractor cheaper than I could a stock chassis. So a component can be built cheaper and it can also allow new model tractors. I could never build a billet block cheaper than I could find a junkyard block. I'm willing to bet that I could look around at some local junkyards and find a block suitable for a pulling tractor for under $600. How much would a single billet of raw unmachined steel big enough to machine a block myself cost?

I believe that billet blocks are class killers.

I honestly don’t think billet blocks are new technology, just alternate technology. “New” tractor technology is OEM 4 valve heads and OHC. New stock tractor technology is 300 HP on a 500 inch motor with EFI, low emmisions, great fuel economy. Pulling needs to embrace what’s being sold today, and not what was being sold 40 years ago. Nascar is successful because they run a Ford block in a Ford car. Fans care that a Ford is powered by a Ford. Nascar isn’t perfect, and some of their rules are antiquated, but they have never forgotten that Fords are powered by Ford, and they never forget how brand loyal their fans are.


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: Components February 22, 2009 03:02PM
Jake Morgan Wrote:

> I honestly don’t think billet blocks are new
> technology, just alternate technology. “New”
> tractor technology is OEM 4 valve heads and OHC.
> New stock tractor technology is 300 HP on a 500
> inch motor with EFI, low emmisions, great fuel
> economy. Pulling needs to embrace what’s being
> sold today, and not what was being sold 40 years
> ago. Nascar is successful because they run a Ford
> block in a Ford car. Fans care that a Ford is
> powered by a Ford. Nascar isn’t perfect, and
> some of their rules are antiquated, but they have
> never forgotten that Fords are powered by Ford,
> and they never forget how brand loyal their fans
> are.


NASCAR might run what you call a ford block, but it's a small block that is only for NASCAR. You can't get it in a current car. You can't even buy it for any other racing purpose. The blocks they use are not the same that you get from Summit or Jegs. They are made for NASCAR racing only, and there technology is very similar to pulling with hyper blocks with the old fuel technology. There is no stock parts on a stock car, not even the block. And the core of the tractor is long gone years ago, the vin number is on the rear end. I'm not saying billet blocks are the way to go, but some kind of better after market blocks could bring back more color.


nick
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 23, 2009 02:47AM
Jake I thought we killed this cast/billet block issue already. I'm starting to think this is just a personal issue for you and not a unbias perfessonal opinion. I have a hard time under standing why you think that saving a few $$$$s on a cast block is going to save the class? On Fonda's board one post stated that if you can't afford a billet block then you couldn't afford to pull PS/SS either.

With the idea of straping the block or bracing the block why put all the time and money it to finding some thing that will work when you can just build billet and be over? Like I posted earlier look what a billet aluminum block will take. Top fuel is running 7000+ HPs with nitro and the best SS may only be running half that or a little more.

If it comes down to it being the only "stock" piece of tractor left then have them run a stock streering wheel or have a factory 3rd link on the back of the tractor I just don't understand why a person would spend $1-200,000 on a engine with a factory block that was designed to handle 250Hp at the most. It have been posted that NASCAR or NHRA are all using high performance block designed for their specific needs, then why should pulling be any differant??? If you think that the major manufactures are going to come in and save the day, Well I guess we could all dream.
Thanks Chucky
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 23, 2009 03:31AM
I don’t remember the billet block issue ever being resolved. I’m not sure where you got that impression. I don’t even remember this billet block issue being resolved by any one particular class. The pullers in the classes still disagree on billet blocks, heck the pullers in the class still disagree about the cast Hypermax block. I’m sorry, but these block issues are very, very, very, far from being resolved. Maybe your mind is made up, but that doesn’t mean there’s a consensus.

It’s all speculation, whether a billet block will: save a class, kill a class, or have no effect on a class. Nobody really knows what will happen. I don’t own a billet block or a stock block so I have no bias on which way the rules go as per an investment. As a fan I do have a bias on what I prefer to watch. I prefer to watch tractors powered by a tractor block. That’s my choice and my preference. I don’t and I won’t support a billet block in the tractor classes. That is my opinion, and my choice. You don’t have to agree with me, we can agree to disagree and that’s fine with me.

There’s only one way to really know… take a scientific approach, start a full blown 510 Light PS class and a 510 Light SF/ Light Limited PS class with stock blocks and keep the LSS stock blocks. Then go to billet blocks in the 640+ classes. Give it ten years and then we will know what pullers and fans truly prefer.

Time will be the real test. (WinkingI'm going to blow my own horn but...) I’m still sticking with my predictions though, because my track record of predictions hasn’t been too bad.


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: Components February 23, 2009 08:05AM
i don't see the difference ,wouldn't the aftermarket block be a reproduction,able to receive the manufactured crank,cam,and head bolt pattern.it would also have the manufactured deck height,and cam and crank centerlines.my son runs a pro-stock gt,the gt world went through this block deal probably 10yrs ago or better,at first it was probably a 50-50 on prefference.now there is less than 1 percent of the factory blocks being used.over the years i have had and seen the cast blocks break,pretty much junks the engine.since the aftermarket blocks have become the norm i have not seen 1 break.which is always cheaper,no matter what anyone thinks.
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 23, 2009 09:00AM
That brings something to my mind:
You run in a world of 1930s flatheads...
They put on a nice show and have a very special appeal ( I ran a Kohler single cylinder Super Stock about 10 years ago, too) - but put to a performance test against OHC and OHV engines... ouch


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/23/2009 10:09AM by Sascha.
Reply Quote

Re: Components February 22, 2009 11:26AM
Thank you Jake. That is what I'm getting at. The proposed class wouldn't be a state and regional only class. This is a class to run the National circuit. I think this class could be great.
Reply Quote

Two classes February 22, 2009 11:47AM
I’ve talked about this class with my father and a close friend for a few years now. Actually all three of us agree that pulling really needs two new 510 diesel classes:

One that’s a full blown 510 Pro Stock class (any charger, any pump, etc…)
and
One that a 510 Super Farm type class (P-pump, Stock heads, 3x4 or 4.1 type charger, etc…)

Personally I’m more interested in watching the 510 Pro Stock class, but I think the sport needs both classes in the future. I think both classes would be an absolute great additional to the sport. I would like to see a 510 SF type class stay a state/regional type of class, and the 510 PS type class be a national class. This thread has been some great discussion on both types of classes I'd like to see.


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: Two classes February 22, 2009 12:19PM
the llss class almost has that covered with a 470 3x4 diesel limit, butt they have to run agianst 370 cid alkys and be light tractors
Reply Quote

Re: Two classes February 22, 2009 12:53PM
Jake,
The one class you speak about, does exist. Its called Light Pro 8200lbs, 540ci, oem head, p-pump and 3.15 X 4 turbo. They run the class in Ohio and also Missouri. I believe Missouri run a 3x4 turbo.
Reply Quote

Re: Two classes February 24, 2009 09:41AM
Jake Morgan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’ve talked about this class with my father and
> a close friend for a few years now. Actually all
> three of us agree that pulling really needs two
> new 510 diesel classes:
>
> One that’s a full blown 510 Pro Stock class (any
> charger, any pump, etc…)
> and
> One that a 510 Super Farm type class (P-pump,
> Stock heads, 3x4 or 4.1 type charger, etc…)
>
> Personally I’m more interested in watching the
> 510 Pro Stock class, but I think the sport needs
> both classes in the future. I think both classes
> would be an absolute great additional to the
> sport. I would like to see a 510 SF type class
> stay a state/regional type of class, and the 510
> PS type class be a national class. This thread
> has been some great discussion on both types of
> classes I'd like to see.


I'm all for this 510 SF class you post here. If the class is ever made I'm in. Maybe with 3x4 turbo and 8,000lbs.
I'm in hot farm and would love to move to a SF class, just not 640ci. With 510ci and the bigger turbo and lighter weight it would make for a good show. I'm ready to upgrade my tractor to a class like this.


my 2cents, nick
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 21, 2009 12:47PM
Make the rules just like Eurpoes! It works for them and could work here.7700 lbs is heavy enough.
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 22, 2009 04:17AM
what about common rail or electronic diesel technology, I think its time that a class would allow it.
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 22, 2009 06:46AM
Hey Jake , Just another opinion here. Light Limited Pro-Stock 7500 lbs component , 8000lb. non -component. 505 cid, any pump ,any injection(deisel) any factory head ( no valve limit) NO billet heads - hence the other part of "limited" along with cubes. Any camshaft configuration , NO turbo limit . Engine and sheet metal must follow heritage lines. Wouldnt this make for some interesting combinations , not to mention some colorful classes.
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 22, 2009 08:04AM
510 cubes so the V-8 Masseys can pull.
Reply Quote

Re: 6000 llss and 7- 8000 limited pro class February 22, 2009 11:37AM
505 with a 1% variance is 510. (Personally I think the variance is stupid, just make the limit set in stone with no variance, (510 in this case) but that’s a debate for a different thread).

I don’t like different weights for component and non-component tractors. Horsepower is created in the engine, not the rear-end.

Let’s take two almost identical tractors, let’s make them 1066’s one with a stock rear-end, one with a truck rear-end and planetaries. Let’s say both tractors have full length chromoly frame rails. The 706 rear-end has been lightened up quite a bit (lets assume it used to be a LSS, Heck maybe it was the old Tennacious tractor), and the new component tractor has steel planetaries and the big Eaton center section. Both tractors weigh almost the same thing bare. Both tractors make 2500 HP and have identical combinations. Why should a guy with a 706 rear-end get 500 lbs? Just because he built a 706 rear-end?

Let’s take it one step further, a CaseIH rear-end is different from a 706 rear-end, should there be a different weight for a CaseIH rear-ended tractor vs. a 706 rear-ended tractor?

In my hypothetical situation I’d bet on the better driver and the guy who sets his tractor up better, not the one who has a certain rearend.

Personally I think one weight is fine for whatever chassis you CHOOSE to build. The rearend doesn't make the power.


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

decubeing February 22, 2009 11:50AM
allow decubing so 1468 dv550, early oliver cat v8s and the perkins have a chance in to pull. ya ya ((they)) say they ((cant)) hold up, but then again who the #e!! are ((they))? and ((cant)) never accomplished anything!!!! so why Nott
Reply Quote

Re: decubeing February 22, 2009 12:08PM
Personally I’ve got nothing against decubing. If someone wants to run a IH 550, Cat 573, JD 531/619, Cat 636, or Perkin 640 in a 505 class that’s fine by me. If they can get their motor down to the 505/510 limit then I see no reason to not let it run.


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: decubeing February 22, 2009 12:40PM
problem with decubing is, you get short stroke (high rev), big bore and big flow engines.... that would mess things up rather badly.


Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com]
Reply Quote

Re: decubeing February 22, 2009 12:49PM
that ,s detroking ,they have the option of deboring as well. some motors could use a little more sleeve any way
Reply Quote

Re: decubeing February 22, 2009 02:02PM
I think that Jake is right weight is weight componet or cast,the cost to take a cast rear and make it hold up to 2500hp is not cheap but that should be the pullers choice to what they want. The 505 or 510 limit shouldnt matter if it is decubing or changing bore or stroke as long as it in the limit of the rules. This is going to be a pro stock class not a beginner class,7700 lb. would be great 2500lb. less weigth to have to pack on these tractors is also going to eliminate alot of rearend failures that use to happen at the heavy weights with cast rearends.This is a good class for the fans,alot of HP ideal weght good sled setting one hell of a show.
Reply Quote

Re: decubeing February 22, 2009 08:15PM
not sure but....

how the EU Pro Stock Rule is written down, it is not allowed to downsize the engine when it is equipped with stock 4Valve head. max size with 4V is 7300ccm (445cui). the 2Valve head engine with max 510cui, you are allowed to downsize.

Regards
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 22, 2009 03:42PM
If we're going to redesign the pro stock class, I say let the word "STOCK" mean something.... with regards to fuel.

I'm fine with components. Not going to touch the block rule.

However, I question why any fan or puller has an issue with a tractor being able to run the fuel it came from the factory with.
Does Colberg dominate sf? No, but he can win from time to time. Does Cespedes dominate PS? No. I'm not sure he's ever won, but I enjoy seeing him pull at BG. So, the dominance argument is a red herring.

Why only diesel? Why have grandfather clauses for 2 yellow tractors (one in SF and PS)? I think for both SF and PS, whether the existing cube and weight breaks, or what Jake is proposing, should allow a tractor to pull the fuel it came from the factory with for that make/model of tractor. Whether LP, Propane, Pure Purple Maple Syrup, etc, if the manufacturer had a tractor run on a given fuel (except for some eastern European tractors that I've heard rumors were made to run on methanol... not sure it that's correct), that fuel should be allowed in the class.

It would give more variety, and color.
Reply Quote

Re: 505-510 Light Pro Stock February 23, 2009 05:49AM
i've thought that for years.i would enjoy a gas tractor,and i dont want to be in line at a pump shop.i think a competitive fuel system could be made rather inexpensive out of a jegs or summitt catalog.
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: 38,704, Posts: 229,806, Members: 3,330.
This forum: Topics: 37,081, Posts: 225,953.

Our newest member LT Limited Pro