Limited Pro stock rules..... Get a clue you guys! April 08, 2009 12:01AM
Ok Guys.... Here's the problem... Why change the Pro stock class? Why change the superfarm class??? It seems everyone that comments on this has their own agenda when they comment. So What's wrong here, why does everyone have a solution to fix each and every class, that still seems to cost every puller out there money! Plus, i don't think many of you have done a whole lot of research on this, to know that your "fixes" would cost pullers a ton of money, and flood Mr. Morgans classified sections with parts none of us would be able to get rid of because they wouldn't fit anyones application...

If you want to keep the cost of the LPS class down... it's simple... You put a 3.5x3.5 inlet and outlet slug on the turbo... Just like the NTPA Profarm class rules, only you make the slug 3.5x3.5..... It's that simple... If you guys have any clue, you would realize that the slug will keep the super expensive turbo's out of the class, and keep the turbo more affordable..... I've saw these profarm tractors on the dyno, with 466's in them, and change turbo's from a cheap 800 dollar S-4 with the slugs on, to a GT42 w/no slugs, to a columbus billet wheel superfarm turbo with and without slugs, and not hardly see the HP change at all..... I've also saw guys try to run 4.1's with slugs on them on the dyno, and they actually performed way way way worse than the S-4 turbo... What i'm trying to show you is, let's cut some of the cost's, and keep the manufacturer out of building expensive turbo's, and taking the money out of our pockets here. With a simple 20 dollars you can build yourself the 2 slugs you need, and you can run any turbo you want.... The smart guy goes out with 2 or 3 800-1500 dollar turbo's and spends 500 at the dyno, and tests them... Finds out which cheap turbo works, and pulls with it... Those expensive 4.3 intake turbo's, or 4.5's won't be any better than a 3.7 when you are running 3.5 slugs on the turbo.... NO seals needed like the sf class (especially when they are taken apart by many guys, and tinkered with anyways) and it takes less than 3 minutes to tech a guy who has the slugs on his tractor... There's your fix to the turbo problem.... Keeps the cost down, and lets YOU still choose which turbo you want to run... Your not limited to buying this one or that one, or buying from this shop or that shop... YOU get the turbo you want, which will more than likely cost you under 2000 dollars....

The Cubic inch limit... keep it simple... Leave the superfarms alone.. there's alread 100 of these darn things out there... Leave them alone... The profarm class is 466... leave that alone... Just build the LPS class at 540 or 600.... You can get to either Cube limit without having to stroke a crank, and with the 3.5 slug limit on the turbo, you shouldn't need billet cranks yet at that point anyways... If your going to call it Limited Prostock... Then give it some limits... Limits that separate it and differientiate it from other classes... Your making a NEW CLASS... Not CHANGING OTHERS! So build this class, and leave the other classes alone... If the superfarms, Pro stocks, and Profarms were broken, then change them and fix them... They aren't... There are plenty of numbers in them... Is there bitching in them? yes... And there are issues in the classes.. but there's also bitching in every class, and problems in every class... so leave them alone, and build a new limited pro class...
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro stock rules..... Get a clue you guys! April 08, 2009 12:13AM
It just seems to me that everytime somebody isn't doing good in one class, ntpa lets them start another. there is hardly enough tractors in the classes they have now to put on a real good show somtimes, So why do they keep inventing classes. It should be like nascar, here are the rules, if you want to race, race by these rules or stay at home. I just don't know why we have to keep changing classes all the time!
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro stock rules..... Get a clue you guys! April 08, 2009 12:34AM
NTPA wants to keep the memberships up.... That's why... And tell me this... Where does the money all go? Where does all of our membership money end up? Tell me that one... That's something that's very confusing to me, i have no clue where all of the money goes... It sure doesn't go back to the pullers, or points funds or purse... But everyone at NTPA seems to be living the "high life"...Regional directors seem to get a nice check for every Regional pull they sell.... So you tell me where the money goes... ANd that my folks is exactly why they add more classes... Keeps the membership up, so they can keep padding their pockets...
Reply Quote

NTPA Membership Money April 08, 2009 01:33AM
First - Of course NTPA wants more members… every organization (pulling or otherwise) wants more members. Heck even I want more members on this page, and membership doesn’t makes me a dime. Everyone wants more members in their organization.

Second - Of course the NTPA makes money from membership. It doesn't make money by selling magazines. It doesn't make money by selling Girl Scout cookies. Membership is their biggest revenue stream. Isn’t it that way for most (ALL) pulling organizations? How many pulling organizations have free membership and no fees, hook fees, registration fees, or dues? I’m guessing not many.

Where does all the money go?
There are salaries of the full-time employees.
There are paychecks for the part-time employees.
There’s a monthly magazine.
There are company vehicles.
There’s traveling expenses for the scoreboard and all the other accessories that go with an event. There is insurance.
There is office overhead and any other operating expenses (can be quite a good portion)
There are promotional and marketing items.
There are… (insert expense here)
And yes there is PROFIT.

Profit is not evil, profit is necessary. Profit is the reason most businesses stay in business (unless you get a government bailout). Profit is a good thing. Profit is why 99.99% of business get into the business of business in the first place. America is moving to a mindset where profit is evil, personally I believe in the free market system, and profit is a necessary part of that system. If the NTPA isn’t entitled to a small profit then why would they continue.

I don’t think anyone at the NTPA is getting rich from pulling. I don’t think anyone at the NTPA is going to be a millionaire from pulling. I think there are people who make a good, honest, and reasonable living at the NTPA. I think there are people who give almost all of their free time to a job and a sport they love. I think there are people who work hard everyday to make this sport better even though they are stuck in the overly bureaucratic system of the NTPA.

I’m sorry but I don’t know many rich fatcats working for the NTPA. Honestly I know more rich people pulling in the NTPA than working for the NTPA (which reminds me… don’t forget about my ADA fundraiser on the Home page)


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: Limited Pro stock rules..... Get a clue you guys! April 14, 2009 01:58AM
i know daddy dave takes out his cut first then everyone else gets paid
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 01:02AM
This is my opinion but I don’t think the Limit Pro Stock is trying to change the Super Farm class or the Pro Stock class. The Limited Pro Stock as the NTPA has proposed, and as the Outlaws ran last summer addresses two issues:

  1. There are a tons of Super Farm tractors. Actually there are too many SF tractors at some events. There are pullers in the SF class that want more power but don’t but still want reliability that they currently enjoy. A 4.1” turbo Limited Pro Stock class is a easy way to do this.


  2. There are many State level Pro Stocks that just can’t compete with the National caliber tractors. The Pro Stock class has grown into a HUGE money class and many in the class can’t afford the time or the money involved with maintaining and pulling on that level. For many of them the LPS is not a step up or step down because they are already at that level.
The Limited Pro pullers are not trying to change either the SF or the PS classes. They are simply trying to fill in in-between.

The LPS is not a replacement for either, nor is it filling the the niche that really needs filling… a small cubic inch class! See. Below:

I have no agenda and no tractor in any class so take my comments for what they are worth, but I consider myself fairly neutral on the LPS class.

Here’s what I’d like to see for the NTPA Limited Pro Stock:
640 cubic Inch Limit, P-Pump, Stock Head, Any Manifolds, As for the turbo… a 4.1 turbo limit is… alright, but I honestly don’t know why pulling insists on screwing around with ridiculous turbocharger limitations. A few years ago the NTPA proposed a restrictor tube on the inlet and exhaust, and honestly the idea is pure genius because it’s simple and effective. Give the LPS pullers a cheap restrictor tube on both sides of the turbo and be done with it. It’s time we got past all these ridiculously insane turbo limits. A restrictor tube is simple, straightforward and easy to police.

Limitied Pro should be basically SF with a slightly bigger charger and homemade manifolds. It should be an easy stepping stone for pullers to jump into if they choose. For that reason the weight should stay right around 9000 lbs.

Now you might be saying… Jake you always are in favor of small cubic inches, why the change of heart? It’s not a change if heart, it’s simply just a logical choice to get the class off the ground. The LPS class should be a bridge between the SF and the PS.

Tractor pulling desperately needs a small cubic inch diesel class, but 600 is not small cubic inches. 540 is the absolute highest a cubic inch limit should be. Personally I think 510 is a much more logical choice. The rules for a smaller cubic inch class should be built from the ground up with a great deal of thought and logic. It should be built based on intellect and not on emotion or current investment. It should be built for the long-term and not built on a whim to quickly fill a niche. The LPS is for next year, iron out the small bugs quickly and let the class be.

So for all you smaller cubic inch fans… I go back to this…

Lightweight Super Farm Division:
Here’s are my proposed rules for those that want a little tamer class at a reasonable cubic inch limit. I call the class Light Super Farm, but there are some minor changes from the Super Farm class.
  • 510 CID (just make it 510 and get rid of the idiotic 505 with 1% over rule)
  • Turbocharger
    • Any charger (see below)
      • Intake must be equipped with a 12” long, 3.000” ID (max) smooth bore cylindrical restrictor tube with no air inlet after the tube.
      • Exhaust must be equipped with a 12” long 4.000” ID (max) smooth bore cylindrical restrictor tube with no air outlet before the tube.
      OR
    • 3”x4” smooth bore charger. Slugs must be welded in place. Wheel must protrude 1/8” into 3” and 4” openings.
  • P pump
  • Any manifolds
  • Stock manufacturer blocks (no aftermarket or OEM replacements)
  • Stock cylinder heads limited to two (2) valves per cylinder (three (3) and four (4) valve heads can be machined to accept two valves).
  • No OHC heads
  • No inner coolers
  • De-cubing of larger engines is allowed
  • Stock Chassis (no component chassis allowed)
    • Removing transmission housing allowed only if equipped with full length frame rails that bolt directly to the rear-end housing.
    • If transmission housing is removed, rear of engine cannot exceed 60” from centerline of rear-end (even if manufactured further forward).
    • If stock transmission housing is used engine must remain in stock location.
    • If stock transmission housing is tie bars must be in-place and able to support the tractor.
  • 7500 lbs-8000 lbs.
  • 24.5 tires


I prefer 510 as a limit because most 98% of all the tractors ever built are near 510 or under. My rules probably aren’t perfect, but I think they are a great starting point for discussion. Build the right rules first before the tractors are built. Build the class right from day one, and try to address the issues and the niche the class should fill.

Again, it's already too late for the LPS, so build a different animal form the ground up and build it right.


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: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 01:41AM
I totally agree with Jakes comments. You can't make small cube rules for a class that basically already exhists, ie. superfarm add a bigger charger, lower budget PS probably are not going to have to make much of a change. I also believe that there are several hot farms, pro farms floating around that would be interested. Is this class being offered in all regions? Region 2 is the only place that I remember seeing the class listed on the NTPA schedule.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 02:47AM
alot of the tractors do not have room to put 24" of tubes plus a turbo under the hood, add it up 32-36" plus an air shut off. 12" sound a little extreme, maybe 3" but not 12"
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 03:44AM
If your going to limit it to stock manifolds then I agree, a 12” tube would be a bit of a stretch (I really dislike stock manifold rules for a performance class, all it turns into is who can find the most exotic stock manifold from a boat/dozer/garbage truck/jet ski/ etc…). I really doesn’t matter to me if its 18”, 12”, 6”, or 3” (3” seems like the minimum in my opinion) as long as everyone agrees on a standard length to be put in print.

On a side note, and please I mean no offense… but a DSS tractor can get 4 turbos under their hoods. A little restrictor tube on a single turbocharger tractor should be no problem, especially if there are no restrictions on manifolds. Even a little hood like a 4010 hood has plenty of room for a 12” restrictor tube if you put the turbo in the right place. Also you only need 12” in front of the turbo, the exhaust tube could be vertical and out the top of the hood (with a decorative) stack surrounding it.

For me the restrictor tube length is a very minor issue and I’m fine with anything 3” long or longer, the concept is what’s really important to me. I wish more pullers could realize that instead of spending all this money to modify a turbo, why not just modify a cheap restrictor tube? It’s easy to police and it’s easy to build. No stamp, no seal, now slugs falling out, no welding up a map ring, no big foot/small foot, just a simple tube that a tech inspector can quickly tech.


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: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 04:46AM
Remember...cost is not a big player. No matter how good your intentions are, the cost will be too much. Your comment on this new class being a bridge class is a great comment. That is exactly what it is. The NTPA can set all the rules as they see fit, but they need to remember that there are many other states that are planing on picking up this class and the NTPA better make an effort to chat with them or we will have another PPL vs. NTPA superfarm war in the limited pro class.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 06:49AM
I know what you all are saying but why not something with 540 cubes 4.1 charger and an A pump i know it sounds a little drastic but i have seen these type of clases run and man rpm out the rear and what a show.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 01:14PM
I agree that they put on a pretty good show but running an A pump just doesnt make sense to me. You can get a P pump for a third of the price of one of those good A pumps and the reliability is a whole lot better with the P's.
Reply Quote

TOO MANY DIESEL ONLY CLASSES April 08, 2009 07:58AM
What I would like to know is how many diesel only classes can we invent. This is REDICULOUS. The NTPA now has 5 classes for the diesel only crowd and 1 for Alcohol/Gas tractors. And now we are talking about a light super farm class. Is there anyone out there that is sick and tired of seeing green and red, green and red and green and red.
There is already a class out there called the Light Limited Super Stock that addresses the cubic inch limit and turbo restrictions and it seems to work well. And imagine this, they pull diesel tractors vs. alcohol tractors in the same class and it works. And best of all there is red, green, YELLOW, SILVER, ORANGE, BLUE, CREAM, LIME GREEN AND other colored tractors involved.
Almost all of the Diesel classes in the NTPA require bigger cubes and that is why we see so many John Deeres and Internationals. I think it would be good for the NTPA to adopt a class that ISN'T Diesel only and is less expensive for a puller to get into like the LLSS.
And I think everyone would agree that seeing Minneapolis Molines, Cockshutts, Olivers, Whites, Allis Chalmers, Deutz and Fords along with the IH's and JD's in the same class and competitive would be good for the FANS, the NTPA and Tractor pulling as a whole.
Reply Quote

Re: TOO MANY DIESEL ONLY CLASSES April 08, 2009 03:11PM
I think you are correct.I`d like to see more propane tractors in super farm & limited pro stock.I know that propane doesn`t have the energy that diesel has ,but some people are scared to get beat by propane.Those that run it are a little down on power ,but have their tractor dialed in correctly.
Reply Quote

Re: TOO MANY DIESEL ONLY CLASSES April 08, 2009 03:16PM
Also,the people in Missouri have rules stating must be designated fuel .They don`t have the next rule stating diesel fuel only,which makes no sense.
Reply Quote

Re: TOO MANY DIESEL ONLY CLASSES April 09, 2009 10:55AM
AMEN AMEN AMEN!!!!!!! If you pull a diesel JD or IH and you can't find a class to pull in that is your problem! Enough already, all classes should allow gas and propain especialy if it came that way from the factory. Diesel Sucks!!!! Long live spark plugs.
Reply Quote

I love sparkplugs... April 09, 2009 03:06PM
There are already a disproportionately high number of sparkplug tractor classes in comparison to the number of sparkplug tractors produced between 400-500 cubic inches. Roughly 99% of all 400+ cubic inch tractors were (and are) diesel. Yes Moline made some great LP tractors, as did Deere and others, but they made up a very small portion of the total number of tractors produced. Of those sparkplug tractors, only Moline pursued large cubic inch engines, and I don't like rules that favor any brand in particular.

I love sparkplug tractors, I like the way they sound, I like the RPM they can generate, I like that they are clean to work on, I like pretty much everything aobu tthem… but there are already enough sparkplug classes for tractors. I think the NTPA need to take a serious look at the LLSS class and find a way to bring that into their rule book (just make it a true Light class… 6000 lbs. or less, preferably 5500). I know the Badger boys think sparkplugs are the devils tool, but I believe the ORVTPA has a great thing going. I think they are very close to an ideal LLSS class. After that you have the LSS, one of the most exciting classes in pulling, and more than enough sparkplugs. Last but not least you have the OSS/ULSS which is 100% sparkplugs.

Based on the number of sparkplug tractors produced vs. the number of diesel tractors produced, I think the number of sparkplug classes is already more than fair. I love spark plugs and I think they have their place, but I don’t think it’s in the SF, LPS, or PS classes.


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: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 10, 2009 04:26AM
If it had spark plugs from the factory why not let them compete on gas or propain not alcohol??? WHY NOT??? Make them a hundred or more cubes short and carburated.. Is the BILLET&CHROME prostock and superfarm guys macho ego really that tender and sensitive??? Come on guys face it!! Your chicken!!! Your like the harley only drag races, no other brands can race, you know why??? cuz there so scared the the old low dallor singlestick cb750four fresh out of the shed with half the displacement will hand there A$$'$ to them!! And something else. boat ancors are boring to watch!!!! if a class weighs 9000 pounds and another weighs 6000 pounds' it will take a third more horsepower in the 9 to get the same action as the six ! Some people are under the impression or delusion the heavier the better. thats not the case!! Do the math. If theres any pullers that want to look down on a class thats lighter butt with the same or more hp. sorry to break the news butt dream on guys. again your chicken!!!
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 10, 2009 04:30AM
if memory stands correct not long ago several super farmers were whining about mark colberg
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 10, 2009 03:16PM
Mark Colberg is grandfathered in.We tried to go that way also.You can`t tell me he making more power than the diesels,he knows how to set up his tractor to do the job.
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 11, 2009 03:27PM
I agree with the previous statement. The diesel tractors have to run on diesel and nothing else. I have never seen a motor come from any manufacturer that ran on alcohol. If it has spark plugs from the factory, RUN THAT FUEL. Come on lets see you make power with LP. Lets see you make a gas tractor compete. You make us run diesel with nothing but diesel, why should you get the advantage of an alternative fuel to what it should be? Answer that for me. I have a feeling jake will agree. I like watchin an alky run as much as the other guy but it gets boreing watching 500 smokeless supers.
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 01:05AM
Are you kidding me. For one there probably isnt even 500 alcohol tractors in the nation compared to 5000 diesel tractors. And at a typical tractor pull the diesels out number the alcohol tractors 10 to 1. Furthermore if you want to make all rules even except diesel fuel vs. gasoline or propane or whatever the tractor came from the factory with, the diesels will still get there buts handed to them... Last I checked there is a moline out there that figured out propane and it kicks but on the diesels.
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 01:41AM
Let’s just call the stock fuel idea what it really is: The Moline rule or Moline exception. Nobody other than Minneapolis Moline made large tractors for LPG or Gasoline. The rule would only benefit one brand, and I’m not in favor of any rules that benefit a single brand or an extreme minority. Moline made plenty of diesel tractors as did EVERY other manufacturer.

As for diesel tractors being 10 to 1 that’s actually not really fair to the diesel tractors, the manufacturing ratio of large diesel tractors vs. all other fuel types is probably more like 100 to 1 or even 1,000 or 10,000 to 1 so the sparkplug tractors are already more than fairly represented with their current classes.

The LLSS is the perfect single charger class for stock fuels.

The Limited Pro Stock class should be a diesel only 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: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 03:29AM
Just remember that there are also many other factory sparkplug engines out there besides MM. There are ones for the SB Deere, 8.3 and 5.9 Cummins and the DV550 (originally the V550) IH to name a few off of the top of my head. With these combanations it could really stir up the pulling community.
Thanks Chuck
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 03:49AM
Yes, there are heads that fit, but they are still not stock fuels for those tractors. Only MM made large tractor with sparkplugs. After all the goal is a tractor class, not an irrigation pump 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: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 06:44AM
Jake your out to lunch on this one, why should I not be able to run the stock fuel just because the majority didn't make an all out effort for gas or lp. I have a couple of deere motors that are gas from the factory maybe if I built a deere to go along with the MM your pedestal wouldn't be as high.
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 08:05AM
Personally I love Moline, I grew up on a Deere and even though there is nothing like the sound of a two cylinder I’ve always liked the Prairie Gold, those big slow running engines are torque monsters. There have been times (numerous) on this page in the past where I’ve mentioned that I’m actually partial to Molines. I’ve mentioned on a few occasions that Moline would be at or near the top of my list for tractors I’d love to build someday (John Deere is near the bottom of that list by the way, even though I grew up on a Deere and like Deere, but there’s already plenty out there). It has nothing to do with the fact it was Moline vs anyone else. It’s simply about not allowing one color an advantage or different set of 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

another big cube heavy diesel only class ??? when it comes to computer pullers jake takes the cake April 13, 2009 12:06PM
Big cube heavy deisel only prostocks rules came about so a stock chassis 6030 bb deeres had a class to hook and chance to be competitive with less crying. They couldnt hack it in any ss class, never have never will . Then here comes the big cube deisel only heavy superfarm class . a second chance for a bb deeres to be competitive .theres 2 classes catering to one model series of tractor. both of these started out as a simple, low budget minded classes. for starters hence the zero challenge fool proof weight of booth classes. Now there both full of small red and green motors that have to be stretched to the max, covered in cookie cutter (( look how much money I spent)) parts. these big cube classes shun's alot more models and brands of tractors and people than it welcomes!!!!
Reply Quote

Dear new reader... April 13, 2009 02:19PM
Glad to have a new reader to this page… If there’s one thing I’ve done on this page it’s advocate for small cubic inch classes. I pretty sure I was one of the first people, if not the first person to openly write about lowering the cubic inches in the current classes. I was one of the first people, if not the first person to consistently write about starting new classes with lower cubic inches. I was one of the first people, if not the first person to spell out a vision for the future of the sport, and that vision primarily includes lower cubic inch classes. When my Opinion page is back up and running (as well as For Sale/Links/Wanted) please click on pretty much any of my old Opinion articles and read them, you’ll quickly see that I’ve never been a fan of big cube classes. I’m still not. I really think there is no need for a tractor class bigger than 540, actually I think 510 is the perfect number.

Why do I think the NTPA LPS should be 640? The goal of the NTPA LPS class is to weed down the SF class. It’s not really a new class despite what people may think, it’s just a way to split the class up and thin out the numbers. That’s why I think the LPS should stay at 640 with a 4.1, because it’s not really a new class, just the same old class re-badged with a little more power. If the rules go to 540 or even 600 you aren’t going to thin down the SF class one bit.

My other problem with LPS is there are half a dozen variations of classes that call themselves LPS. Of all those versions the East Coast Series has the best rules, but I’ve got real mixed feelings about the A-pump. The class the NTPA is proposing is called LPS, but really it’s just SF on steroids, it’s not a new class, just a split of a current class. Honestly the name LPS just opens a whole can of worms and really sums up what a mess this motorsport is in.

What I really care about much more than the LPS class is starting an actual true new class, a class that is not just a SF in wolfs clothing, but a small cubic inch single charger diesel class. Read my proposed rules for Light Super Farm and Light Pro Stock (search this page for: Light Super Farm or Light Pro Stock). Those rules (or something similar) are where I see the future of this motorsport. Those are the types of classes that will take pulling into the future.

As for stock fuel, again… rules should benefit the whole class and not a select group or color. The rules should be written to address the greater good and not the special interest minority. Rules that cater to the select minority are how we got in this 640-680 cubic inch mess in the first place. Rules that cater to one brand because they built big LPG tractors are just unfair as a 680 rule.


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: Dear new reader... April 13, 2009 02:43PM
Jake,Then we need to limit cubes on diesels and propane,not a unfair balance... All cubes should be 640 and keep it that way.How would it be unfair to build a Moline that has 4 main bearings,spend just as much on it to hold together as it would cost to build a Deere, International, Agco,etc...All would be a spectator welcome.Have you ever seen Mark Colberg run? The crowd loves him even if he does`nt win. This should be about fairness and entertainment.I can build MM 585 diesel (bored and sleeved to 640 that costs alot more than a propane that bored to 640.
Reply Quote

Re: Dear new reader... April 14, 2009 12:18AM
I have read the post from doug v 6 times and don't understand it. Is Mark C. allowed to run more cubes? I not understanding. A diesel minni with only 4 main bearings would not hold up to good on diesel with a large charger and I could be mistaken do they have a direct injection head?
And why would you want to spend all the money to bore and stroke it to 640 when it comes 504 or some thing like that seems like throwing good money after bad money????? IF you can build a 585 to 640 and run Superfarm or Prostock on diesel then what are you waiting for?? I am not aginst a mix of stock fueled tractors that would add the Praire Gold color and it is not wel represented above farm stock N/A no cube limit classes.
But a lower cubic inch may help in betting more other fueled models in If im mistaken correct me but Minni was the only one to make Large non diesel tractors?? But a limited prostock JD D would be neat LOL.
Reply Quote

Re: Dear new reader... April 14, 2009 06:47AM
This is a pretty hot topic, but maybee I can help to clear up some of the questions. MM made 425, 451, 504, 585, diesel 6 cyl engines. I believe the only one of these that was direct injected was a late 585. The rest were inderect injection, or energy cell heads. these heads are considered pretty terrible for high perf or turbo charging. So you may be saying OK, put the 585 heads on one of the smaller motors. I wish it were that easy, the 585 motor was the oddball of the MM line, not much about the 585 matches up with anything else from what I understand. Also, in one of the above statements, there was a comment on just taking the 585 out to 640 or 680 or whatever. This is very easily done, but you are correct about the 4 mains in the bottom, are just not going to hold up to well. It takes a massive girdle to make them hold, and then you just reach the next weak point, being the crank case by the cam shaft.

On the gas and l.p. side of the coin the company made 425, 451, 504 gas and l.p. 6 cyl, engines along with the enfamous 605 and 800 stationary motors. The gas heads on the 6cyl engines can pretty well intermingle, with mild modifications. The plus side to the gas heads, is they are good flowing heads. Someone may say otherwise, but it is my understanding you don't have to run the boost pressure to make the gas motor run. This would obviously help with the weak bottom end and crank case. Thus POSSIBLY making the MM gas motor a viable competition engine. I like my minnies. I love to see them go down the track when I get a chance, "if they make it down the track?" I know that comment sounds a little harsh, but most MM guys know very well the pains in making one of them run in a turbo charged class.

Finally, back to the issue at hand. Gas L.P. allowance, or Diesel only? I don't think that alcohol is a fair fuel for the limited pro, or any new small cube class. However, I think the fans would be rewarded with a good show with the allowance of stock fuel as competion fuel. Also other bonusses with alowing the gas or L.P fuels, maybe an influx of the number of folks willing to then move into light, or heavy super stock. It seems every one has always worried about feeder classes for Pro stock, but what about feeder classes for anything else, I think if these classes were to be diesel only, it would be an opportunity lost for these builder type classes and a lost oportunity for a good show for the fans. As said before, the number of these large displacement tractors was small. This is true, so how many of them do you really think would show up in competition. probably not many, and only a select few would be highly competitive. The main numbers are still going to be red and green and blow smoke, and all this would do is possibly spur some other color in the class, and yes, it would be primarilly yellow, but NOT exclusively yellow. It may be of interest to watch the Pro's out in I believe it is Ohio this year to see if there rule change will bring any new iron to the track, I think it was on this site a while back that there was a thread about that rule change, someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Reply Quote

Re: Dear new reader... April 14, 2009 02:50PM
Itpa2,your exactly right,The585 is a odd ball.It has a different bolt pattern on the crankcase.Thanks.
Reply Quote

Re: another big cube heavy diesel only class ??? when it comes to computer pullers jake takes the cake April 13, 2009 02:25PM
Amen:Winking
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 01:45PM
yea,a 4010 diesel is big enough in your eyes,but a gas isnt.how about a case 1030 or 970,both plug ignition.this isnt a mm rule its discrimination against gas or propane.how long would it take for the ps class to boot cespedes out if he ever bacame competitive more often.
Reply Quote

where you at bart. come on come on this is right up your alley April 13, 2009 02:09PM
where's DarkFarts JD prostock superiority speech (( its hilarious))
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs...thay cant stand spark plugs April 13, 2009 02:10PM
You can still limit cubes...on propane,correct?
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs... April 10, 2009 03:12PM
They need a budget minded class for spark plugs that allow 1 turbo.Everything with plugs has to be farm class or alcohol...
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs... April 10, 2009 03:33PM
Moline makes smaller cubes also.
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs... April 13, 2009 09:05AM
Gas is for getting to and from the store, LP is for grilling outdoors, alchohol is for drinking at the tractor pulls, and DIESEL is for PULLING!!!!!
Reply Quote

Re: I love sparkplugs... April 13, 2009 02:07PM
A little scared?? Yes propane can be used for cooking,Then unhook bottle and go pulling...
Reply Quote

Re: TOO MANY DIESEL ONLY CLASSES April 10, 2009 03:08PM
Agreed,How come there are so many diesel only????
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 08:12AM
I agree that the simple tube is easy to police, but I don't think it will keep the turbo cost under control. Inspecting the surface finish of the pipe could become a not so simple task too as it will become significant.

Flow thru an orifice is a function of area, boundry conditions, and pressure drop. You are taking care of the area, but the turbo builders will start working on pressure drop. That's essentially what they've done with their R&D on the 3x3 - the harder they suck on that 3" opening the more air they pull thru it. The inlet suck is controlled by wheel speed & the area of the wheel discharge, ie exducer diameter & tip height.

There was another post talking about a dyno session where they tried a bunch of different chargers with the 3" pipes and none made much difference. I don't dispute that, but none of those chargers were built for a 3" pipe rule. Look at how much better the current 3x3 chargers are than those from 5 years ago. Give the turbo shops 5 years & they will develop 3" pipe chargers that will leave the current ones in the dust.

This is why I proposed on the other thread controlling all 6 dimension on the turbo wheels. It leaves the turbo builders much less room to customize & the less room they have the less difference they can make. Yes, they will still be able to make improvements, but it will be 10 hp not 100 & that will keep the OEM charger competitive.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 12:04PM
The smaller cubic inch restriction (510 or 540 maximum) would make the class more attractive to a 426 allis and others I am sure due to the fact (especially if the OEM head is used) that the larger these engines are made the less competative they become against the red and green. Also 600 plus cubic inches is not easy to achieve with some of the "less common" colors. I like the 3.5 inch slug idea and I also like the idea of single turbo alky burners in the class as long as some good research is done which would give alky's and diesels the same opportunity to make equal HP. Limiting the cubic inches reduces cost, eliminates no one, and invites more color into the class - if thats what your lookin' for. Just one man's opinion.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 02:51PM
I think alcohol is great for a LLSS and a LSS class, but not a Limited Pro or a Super Farm class. 99.9% of tractors produced in the 400-500 cubic inch range were Diesels, the rules should reflect those numbers.

I agree that the LLSS class is a great class, and they would benefit from a uniform set of rules, but I think that class is a completely different topic than the Limited Pros Stock.


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: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 03:25PM
Maybe alcohol with smaller cubes and propane or gas with same cubes.It would make the class more exciting from the stands.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 12:28PM
I don't agree with the 640 CI limit for the LPS class. I'm ok if its 600 cubes. 510-540 would be better, but i can live with 600. At 600 there is no need for stroking the cranks. The turbo issue is up for debate. The restrictor tube maybe the way to go, or any turbo. I just wish the rules would be set. I plan on running LPS. I almost have my rolling chassis done now. Just have to get my Binderlite sheet metal set up, and steering. Then i'm going to build my engine. I've left this for last as I don't know if the engine rules will change. I'm starting to get fed up with all the debate on the rules for this class.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 12:55PM
I like the idea of the smaller cubic inch engines, just seems as though they'd be easier to build, and yes, the color variety would be there.

As to the turbos: The talk of custom turbo's & restrictors & slugs & all that, trying to restrict them, let me ask this: Is there currently a production turbocharger at 3.5x3.5, or whatever deemed size, that could be mandated in the rules as saying, Turbocharger P/N, out of the box w/ compressor housing p/n & exhaust housing p/n to be used, X" intake diameter, no slugs or intakes, or whatever. If it could be easier to say, here, this is the turbo you use, no questions asked, would this at all simplify things?
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 02:55PM
The restrictor pipe is a much easier and much cheaper long term solution. It allows for freedom and creativity, but everyone still has to pull the same amount of air through the same hole.

Pulling has tried turbo limits and it’s tried spec chargers, it’s time for a new approach. Restrictor pipe in, restrictor pipe out… simple and done.


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: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 12:55PM
there is a class running similar to what you are proposing for ppl midwest region, you need turbo limits on the wheels reguardless of restrictor plates or pipes, the plates and the pipes will work, but if you dont put a limit on the wheels of the turbo it will eventually get to where prostock is now , someone will figure out how to run a 5.25 turbo with the restrictor plate or pipe. when the hot farm class started people thought you would have to run a 2.5 in turbo because that was what the restrictor plate hole was and that would dictate the size of the charger, that came to be false in time. limited pro should have limits on everything ,in short it would be or will be an iroc class. as for the small cube limited pro 7500 to 8000 lb is too light, it would be a better weight for the show for wheel speed, but if the sled does its job he can have the class land 310 to 295 , just the same and a lighter class, if you keep it from 8500 to 9500 lb you can keep the cost of lightning the tractor to a reasonable cost and this small cube limited pro class needs to be the starter class for organized tractor pulling and super farm would probably be its next step , then 4.1 limited pro, and then if the class still exists pro stock. if you make it 7500 to 8000lb , it will take 7500 to 10000 dollars just to get the tractor light enough, a true starter class has much more to worry about than weight. i am sure someone will tell me i am stupid , but that is my 2 cents worth, hot farm class for ppl and limited pro 505 class at illinois stock pullers will have about 25 events in 09 and should average 10 tractors per event, we run 1 to 2 mile an hour slower than super farm and have same safety equipment. hr pulling
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 03:16PM
I highly doubt the efficiency of a 5.25” turbo sucking through a 3” (for example) inlet restrictor pipe, and pushing that same air though a 3.5” (for example) outlet restrictor. The turbo would be “starved” for the air necessary for efficient flow. A theoretical drastic decrease in air density or drastic increase in air velocity would be the only way to make the turbo run near efficient operating capacity.


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: Limited Pro Stock April 08, 2009 02:58PM
I agree,keep the costs down on existing tactors.Keep the cubes where they are.I like the turbo idea!!!
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 09, 2009 12:08AM
the restrictor is the only way to go...... the NTPA profarm's have been doing it for a year and it works great... I don't care what any of you say about the inducer, exducer, tip, trim, whatever on these turbos... Remember.... Your still pulling so much air through a 3.5 inch long, by 3.5 inch hole.... and your still pushing that exhaust out of a 3.5 inch long, by 3.5 inch hole... no matter what you do... you will only get "x" amount of air through it.... When you restrict the exhaust side of the turbo, it limits how fast it can turn, because of "backpressure" your creating OUTSIDE of the exhaust turbine.... This is the simple and easy way to police the class... You make the restrictor have to start within 3 inches of the face of the wheel, just like the profarms do.... Done, simple, easy.... 3 minutes to tech it tops.... and away they go.... For the guys out there that want the 4.1 turbo... Go ahead... buy them, put them on, run them.... It might work great with the restrictor tubes... But it also, might restrict it enough, so the guy with a 1800 dollar turbo can keep up.. Or maybe even a cheaper turbo... And maybe it's not possible.. But i do know that a 3.5x3.5 restrictor will only allow so much air through there... You could even go bigger... 3.75? ....That's all you would have to do to dial up more hp... Then make the class 540 with a "no billet pump" restriction... We all know of the 6000 dollar 14mm p pumps out there that last maybe half of the dyno session... So why not allow guys to buy the small sigma for 7500 and put that on... Or a Bosch "Z" pump... that has 14 or 15mm barrel and plungers in it... Which possibly could be built into a pulling pump for less than the 14mm P pumps...
Reply Quote

Re: pulling isnt cheap no matter what class April 09, 2009 12:33AM
It seems everyone is looking for that cheap class and it doesnt exist. Weight is not a issue to add cost to your tractor. Alot of it is work you can do yourself with alot work. Grinder,gas powered chop saw,ext. You have to have the rearend apart anyway for the needle cross. 7500 is a good weight. When there was the 7500 ss class around there were alot of tractors in that class. If you want someone else to build your tractor it will be expensive.
Reply Quote

The real reason NTPA wants new classes. April 09, 2009 01:17AM
The real reason NTPA wants new classes is they don't want to compete with PPL in PS or SF. The NTPA wants smaller cubic inch classes so they can have there own classes that are just for them. They see big cubic inch classes dying and smaller cubic in. will be just as exciting and they will not have to compete with the PPL. NTPA already is different in SF, FWD and NTPA really doesn't care much about the big alky tractors anyway.So in the end NTPA will have LSS, DSS. TWD, FWD, UL. Mods, mini's LPS and LSF and PPL will have Alky SS, PS, TWD. FWD. SF and Mods.
Reply Quote

Re: The real reason NTPA wants new classes. April 10, 2009 04:55AM
I agree Ntpa is probably figuring with the economy the way it is cheaper might be better [ what a change for them] a low ci lps tractor class and who knows maybe a change in another class might be enough to lure away a few more from PPL, this years season the poor economy won,t hurt to bad competiter wise i don,t think unless you have bad luck but next years will unless economy really changes
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 09, 2009 11:31AM
a restrictor pipe is not going to make for a cheaper class any different than an open turbo rule will, for the fact that it could take a dozen turbos to find what will work best with a given setup.beside that why are we woried about a "cheap class" because of a turbo, there are alot of other parts to the vehicle than a turbo that are not "cheap". this is a case of try to save a dollar and end up spending ten. if you want a cheap turbo class, run with farm stock, not a class that could/should become a GN class(if the class is done correctly).
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 09, 2009 04:10PM
Well Gang... it sounds like there is one BIG looming question still unresolved (that probably should be addressed before the debate over turbos rages on).

* What is the best way to establish a 505 - 540 class at the national level?

Here are three potential options to choose from:

Option #1: Have the 640, 4.1, Limited Pro class be the 505 - 540 class (instead of going to 600)

Option #2: Keep the 640, 4.1, Limited Pro class as-is... and have the Super Farm class become the 505 - 540 class (and give them a couple of years to transition)

Option #3: Start a new class

Which option makes the most sense and is best for pulling? Confused

(And, obviously... whichever option is best will also include a reasonably smart turbo rule).
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 10, 2009 03:44AM
The Limited Pro Stock Class that Outlaw runs is a very good class but i would like to see the cubic inch around 540 because there is no good class for the medium cubic inch tractors to pull in at least in upper midwest, ya there is light super stock but face it a lot of tractors aren't that light and most guys aren't running multiple turbos or alcohol, so your stuck with do I pull 466 or 640+ nothing for 500 - 540 C.I. single turbo diesel tractors and there is a ton of them out there in that 8500 to 9500lbs range look at events like Gordyville. At that weight and cubic inch you would get a lot of color variety and a heck of a show too. As far as rules similiar to outlaws, p-pump and upper 3'' to 4''charger range etc. As far as cost goes nothing that is fun is cheap!
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 10, 2009 03:23PM
Let the SF become the smaller CI with a lighter weight tractor .
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 13, 2009 06:51AM
has anyone ever had cubic inches even checked how are you planning on makeing this fair
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 11, 2009 09:41AM
p pump big plungers, why not any pump?
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 11, 2009 12:30PM
505-540, p pump with any size plungers, oem heads,any manifolds, 24.5's, any charger,7500lb-8500lb = a varity of color ,and a good show . Why limit the charger at all, we already have enough super farm type tractors.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 13, 2009 01:36PM
We LLSS pullers think alike; 505 with base chassis (no component) 24.5s , no turbo limit (cubes will restrict size), 8-8500 lbs,intercoolers. OR if you could go 540 , 3.6x4 ? and/or restictor tube with minimum of 1' at center of tube as restictor. This would be a great class with alot of color and alot of tractors nation wide! A pump / Ppump arguements are moot now . You still could run a 640 superfarm 3x3 with these tractors if you choose to also?
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 13, 2009 02:58PM
In Europe, 510 cubes limits them to 4.6"-4.8" chargers, granted they have Sigmas also. While no one likes limits, unfortunately they are needed. Especially in limited classes.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 14, 2009 07:16AM
Saying that the cubes will dictate the turbo size is not completely correct. The flow characteristics of a cylinder head have just as much to do with how much turbocharger an engine can use. In my opinion if you are using an OEM cylinder head there must be a turbo inlet limitation of around 3.5 inches.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 17, 2009 01:42PM
I believe that the class was introduced in order to do exactly what most of you say is the biggest problem with the SF class....clean it out. I love the SF class, it is the next step out of the state level 466 class and it a great class but it is gettin to crowded. What better way to clean it out than to make another class with 640 cubes but different, much different turbo and manifold restrictions. Most of the SF guys i know would be more than glad to move out of the class to LPS for just the price of a turbo and a manifold without having to decube there engines. So that would make 9 out of 10 people happy right, smaller SF classes another big cube diesel class with alot of smoke and tire spinning. for the last person out of ten this doesn't make happy ur probably an "ALKEY" lover so here is all i can say.... alchol is for truck pullers i have nothing against truck pullers at all they have some amazing machines...BUT IF IT DON'T BLOW SMOKE ITS NOT A REAL TRACTOR!!!!!!!
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 17, 2009 02:41PM
Quote

not a real tractor[quote then I guess all of those tractors made before the dsl revolution don't count. It continually amazes me how a group of people can't see the hypocrisy of there statements. I love the smoke but with certain combinations the spark plugs just make more sense. I wouldn't have a problem with dsl only but there are already tractors running in the classes that are not dsl. So it either needs to be legal or illegal not grandfathered, Grandfathering now there is a rule that only allows certain tractors.
Reply Quote

Re: Limited Pro Stock April 17, 2009 03:00PM
I wonder if that person thinks a component diesel with an aftermarket block is a real tractor because it blows smoke.
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: 38,731, Posts: 229,864, Members: 3,332.
This forum: Topics: 37,086, Posts: 225,984.

Our newest member WestonFarms