04:24:19am, Thursday, April 18, 2024
|
It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,445 |
The real problem with the SS and PS classes is pretty simple, cubic inches. The limit in both SS and PS is the ridiculous cubic inches that are allowed in those classes. However that ship has already sailed and it's pointless to try and go to a sane and sensible cubic limitations for them.
However my point is that when they first allowed 680 cubic inch PS and 650 cubic inch alcohol SS tractors the HP was not nearly at the level that it is today. While I don't have clear and precise numbers what the HP was 10 years ago I believe that it's safe to say that the HP increase over the last ten years is at least a 50% increase. A 2500 HP PS from 10 years ago is now on the other side of 3500 HP. And it's also safe to say that all the SS classes have increased in HP in the 50% range in the last 10 years. And there is no reason to believe that we have seen the last of the increase in the HP gain game. I believe it's safe to say that the current HP has far exceeded what the OEM blocks are able to handle. And the race for more and more HP is a never ending pursuit of the pullers. And if the increase has been 15 to 20 % every year it's a losing game to try and keep the block and tractor in one piece. The amount of boost and HP that the DSS running it's not possible to run an entire season and not have major engine failure. It is a vicious cycle that the class and the pullers are in, more HP more breakage, more breakage more money. It's past time to look at some form of HP restriction, be it the restrictor plate or some other form. It's time for the pullers and leadership to put in place a program that will save the PS and SS classes. And it's time to stop believing that the SS class is going to heal thy self. It's losing numbers every year and there is NO reason for that trend to change. Lets look down the road 5 years from now and ask ourselves what will the PS and SS classes look like if the HP is not restricted. Will there be any 680 PS left or 650 alcohol or a DSS class left or will the new national classes be the Light PS and the LLSS classes? I know there is a group that wants no restrictions, every class has a set of rules that limit what you are allowed to build. It's time for pulling to be proactive, it' time for pulling to write rules that will save these classes.. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/26/2016 09:31AM by Dick Morgan. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Communist tractor pulling
|
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
These limitations already exist in the lighter tractor classes. By alledgelly "saving" the big PS and SS, your actually completely getting rid of both. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Maybe it will work time will tell. Just like they did in the sprint cup series this year by cutting back some horsepower you can't tell one bit. But technology will never stop and the blocks have reached most of their capacity. In my opinion this is a bandaid and we will still be talking about this 3 or more years from now. Just my opinion from a fan that is not as knowledgeable as most but trying to keep up on things. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Northeast puller NY
|
Dick.,
Well said ., Unfortunately it's all across pulling .., cubic inch has really hurt pulling in most diesel classes Super farm 640. Let's be realistic this is suppose to be a starter class for pulling Unfortunately it's too late to turn back but. Or maybe not .. If new rules are put together for new classes you will get more interest in affordable classes There is a few elite group that can afford what your talking about.... I always like to watch exabition pulls I will get bashed for what I wrote I'm glad you started this conversation Dick.,, and I hope people will put some real thought into this before they respond Thanks. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
None of these classes should have been above 540 CI! You can run any mfg motor yet and would saved a lot of money over the years |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Lewis
|
With todays sleds the ss or ps tractors from ten years ago could have put on a show better than is put on today. The class has already priced a lot of pullers out and its to expensive for a new puller to stepp up to the plate SS is done just like every class in the past a new one with anew name and tighter rules will take its place that's why we have limited pro hot farms, llss super farms ,classic ss and all these other classes,Why has no one thought of combining SS with the unlimited mod and I'm not talking uss we have all these stupid rules to try and run three classes in one or try to fix it to were one fuel can catch up with the other .just like the llss class here in KY that I pull in we gave diesles a 100 cubes that didn't work then we gave them a bigger turbo now this year they've dominated so what do we do give the alkys more cubes or a bigger turbo to catch back up every amended rule cost money and in some cases puts pullers out and gains very few todays pulling don't hold a candel to the 80s and 90s |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
To Lewis? Why didn't the akly tractors change before giving in to the diesels? Why didn't you try a weight difference first. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Registered: 03/26/2008 Posts: 343 |
in KY there has always been a 100 cube difference since it first started running here. Eric Prewitt The Prewitt Pulling Team Public Relations for The Pulling Radio Network |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Registered: 01/29/2011 Posts: 95 |
True facts,
Say what you like but why not be up front and say who you are. You did not give away any secret with your information. What you are generally describing is the standard lss setup. The facts the you provide with air filter restrictions are incorrect. We have used them for years on several applications. I was turned on to using them by terry blackbourn. He does not seem to have an issue with them either. We have outfitted about half of the dss trucks with them with no ill effects also. The only thing it did for any of us was improve intake air quality and reduce turbo failure due to debris ingestion. These have been used on turbos from 2.6 all the way to 5+ inch pro turbos.(11"diax6tall on all but the bigger pro turbo using 11x8) You just might have had other issues. I do not like the idea of the turbo restrictor bushing idea at all. If it does come down the line in a reasonable limit it should not be that big of a deal. As long as its just not a flat plate directly in front of the wheel. That would make for a lot of changes needed as you describe and would definately play more to your idea of what might happen. If it was kept even two inches away from the wheel and a smooth transition you should not have to do a thing to your setup. We currently make plenty of this type of bushing for limited turbo restrictor plate truck pullers. It is common place to run a much bigger turbo than the bushing size with no ill effects to the turbos. This is not a new idea in pulling just new to ss tractors. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
Years ago jake had a opinion page on the cubic inches being too high and some people didn't like what he wrote. I thought he hit the nail on the head. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Registered: 04/12/2008 Posts: 398 |
If cubic inches is the real problem, then why isn't that the aspect that the NTPA is focusing on? Cubic inches are to big- we have to allow the big money teams billit blocks to widen the gap between the corporate puller and the small machine shop innovators. It's completely ignorant to allow any billit block, while striking down guys that want to run actual ag blocks. I suppose the restrictor plates will get imposed for next year and teams can spend their way back to the top. When they get back to splitting blocks in 4-5 years cubic inches will be restricted and the spending game will start again. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2016 12:31AM by neilsroom. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
I agree cubic inch rules have always been a problem with the rule makers. For instance this year at the NFMS you will have 4 diesel classes all running 640-680 cubes between DSS,Pros,4.1s,and Super Farms. The 4.1s were the last class to be created and should've stuck with a 600ci limit I have talked to several in the class most agree with the exception of the BBD pullers. Very little thought has went into creating rules from my experience with SF and 4.1s doesn't cost alot more to build a big Pro than a good running 4.1. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Rule Problem
|
The problem has been and still is, the rule making process. NTPA has let the cat out of the bag way to many times and it has gotten us to this point. A lot of thought, research, planning and understanding of how it effects not just a few pullers but ALL PULLERS needs to be done. Plus how does it effect pulling now and 5 to 10 years from now, not just for the hear and now. I agree safety issues need to be addressed immediately and should be put in effect immediately. But competition rules need much more debate and thought put to them in actual use. R & D has always been done in pulling by using pullers as guinea pigs to see if it works. This costs money to the puller and now the dollar is pricing large numbers out of the sport. While I do not have a answer or a solution to the problem, one thing does need to happen and that is slow the process down and make rules which ALL CAN LIVE BY AND WITH and make the rule a level playing field so the small guy can get started and work his way to the top. Pulling no longer has for lack of a better term a farm team to draw from, you are all in or you just get to be a bottom feeder. It was shared above the Super Farm class which was to be a cheaper way to enter pulling and it has gone off the deep end and was made a Grand National class with tractor costing large dollars to be competitive.
If you want to save pulling and the various classes THINK before WE LEAP and that will be a painful process for all. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Anonymous User
|
Everybody keeps beating this cubic inch drum. The class you are trying to Save SS Diesel doesn't have a cubic inch problem. A very high percentage of the tractors are 540 or less. The maintenance and cost of engine parts is similar or more than a 680 prostock. Look at the LSS class. 505 cubic inch limit, and we have heard the most about billet blocks for the last year in that class. At 505 cubic inches is it limiting the power. No. The reality is the turbos or the fuel is the limiting force. Limit one of the those things and you will limit the hp. Has anyone considered that the big reason for low tractor count is the economy and time. Everybody has a limit even those with deep pockets, let alone the time. Also most of these pullers are business owners too. So time is a big factor. That is also why you see more tractors in limited classes. It is easier to afford the maintenance plus there are more events closer to home for them, and they can still take on a few big events during the season, and not create a high cost travel plan. So how do these classes get started with so many. Well look at Light Pro, and 4.1 Limited Pro. You could buy up used Pro Stock parts for a very reasonable cost, and then the limit of fuel and air has created a fairly low maintenance cost. The parts that have been developed to take a beating for a season or two in ProStock, and then when you put them in a 4.1 or a light Pro they last much longer at almost a 1000 less hp. Eventually these two classes might run into the same problems. Light pro already tried to get a bigger pump, and that is a bad idea. Once they have a sigma pump, you can guarantee a 3000 hp tractor. That is why a 4.1 and light pro are about the same hp. Even though a light pro can have a bigger turbo, they don't have enough fuel to make more power. And the 4.1 limited pro has the extra cubes to make up the difference for less air. As far as what to do with the SS classes. No matter what is done to restrict the class, it will not change the cost in the short term. It will cost more for the competitors that want the most from their engine program. But at some point the restriction should hold the jumps in hp to a lower amount. It will not be perfect every competitor. It will hurt some, and help some of them. That is the way it is. So what has to be decided is can the SS class help it self without a rule change, or do you effect 50% of your class with a rule change, and take the long term approach to maybe saving it. Not sure on that. Also to be considered. In region three area in the last few years we have seen new tractors built so I just don't know how bad this is when you consider the countries economic out look. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Unintended Consequences- Is anyone considering how limits on the GN NTPA DSS class will relate to and affect State level competition? 1-- HSS Tractors Leaving the GN Circuit or not going there? For example, in western NY (ESP) John Raymond is legal to pull as is, maybe he decides with his current turbo setup to not bother to change to this restrictor plate setup and leaves NTPA behind and pulls the very strong Smoke N' Mirrors at ESP (and NYTPA) events instead. Also Han Boxler Jr. is going to push the brand new Special out of his barn next spring, designed without any restrictor plates. Will he push it back in the barn to make it NTPA GN compliant with restrictor plates or decide to go the state circuit instead? 2-- Are the Most Powerful DSS Tractors Now Going to be the ones that run State Level Pulling? So you drop HP on the GN but not the State pulling level. Can the restrictor plate DSS compete with non restrictor tractors like in NY Smoke N' Mirrors, Final Decision, Chain Reaction? 3-- You just excluded state level non-restrictor tractors from the big GN events- Bowling Green, Tomah; or do you let them to bring their HP against the regular restrictor plate tractors at a limited number of big events. The down side to this is for GN DSS tractors it would be a bitter pill to be even up or behind state tractors at the super national events. 4-- Which brings to question how easy/ costly is it to have 2 turbo setups in your barn and switch them out to run GN NTPA one weekend and then State level the next? These considerations will be in the eyes of tractor owners and builders who have to choose to go GN with restrictor plates or to run other places without them. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
TED
|
The question is, will a restrictor plate or any other rule change actually make people want to build new DSS tractors?? If not, a drastic rule change will probably only speed up the demise of the class....Why does everyone keep thinking that pro stock is broken and needs to be fixed too?? 5 years ago this class was dying and HAD to be fixed and nobody agreed to make any changes, and in 2016 every GN and champions tour hook had 15-25 tractors. Whats wrong with that?? |
|
Do Something or Do Nothing
|
Hands off or make it count
|
DO NOTHING option: Have at it Boyz... and let "pulling Darwinism" play out --- there are folks in this division that can spend enough $$$ to stimulate the economy
DO SOMETHING option: Restrict air and/or fuel and/or engine size --- smaller engines consume less air and fuel 
There is a part of me that wants to see all these classes die, and replace them with classes that have rules that make sense... and there is a part of me that wants to see all the SS classes (and heavy PS) make meaningful changes, so they can grow, thrive and be sustainable for many years to come. Which option makes the most sense? I think the NTPA should either or make NO changes or make REVOLUTIONARY (not evolutionary) changes to the SS division. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,445 |
I appreciate all the comments here. I have had another thought that is likely as important to the health of Diesel Super Stock as the restrictor plate and that is limiting the hook numbers at the National level. It begs the question, because it wouldn't cost any more money than what is poured in the class already, would a limited schedule of 12 to 16 hooks also be an important matter to consider? Those 12-16 hooks would all need to be two-day hooks. That number includes 6 total hooks at the three Super Nationals.
There are five points to gather from this idea. 1) Less wear and tear on the tractors for the season. They would run just as hard but less. 2) Less wear and tear on the pullers and their team members. If you're not close to a DSS team it's hard to understand the number of hours on the road and hours in the shop that are spent on these machines, especially if the team is chasing chronic problems that limit performance. 3) A lighter schedule would likely appeal to more pullers, if you know going in to a season that you only have to make 8 trips out on the road to wage a points battle. 4) As has been discussed elsewhere, putting a premium on the class would heighten the appeal of it. DSS is a top-level class that does not need to be everywhere on the schedule. Make it special again like it is supposed to be. 5) Float the finish on the class, set the sled for 300 foot runs and make that first and only pass count. Nothing I have said here is new news or some grand new idea. There has to be a good balance between offering DSS to as many events and fans as possible without it being a three tractor race at the end of the season. I go back to the thought that I think this will save pullers time and money and overall wear on their equipment. So, is this the smarter alternative and are those parties that have the ability to make this happen, the pullers, the promoters, and the sanctioning body, willing to do commit to this kind of idea? Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2016 09:54AM by Bryan Lively. |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
True Facts
|
Axi-symmetric stall, more commonly known as compressor surge; or pressure surge, is a complete breakdown in compression resulting in a reversal of flow and the violent expulsion of previously compressed air out through the engine intake, due to the compressor's inability to continue working against the already-compressed air behind it. The compressor either experiences conditions which exceed the limit of its pressure rise capabilities or is highly loaded such that it does not have the capacity to absorb a momentary disturbance, creating a rotational stall which can propagate in less than a second to include the entire compressor.
The compressor will recover to normal flow once the engine pressure ratio reduces to a level at which the compressor is capable of sustaining stable airflow. If, however, the conditions that induced the stall remain, the return of stable airflow will reproduce the conditions at the time of surge and the process will repeat.[1] Such a "locked-in" or self-reproducing stall is particularly dangerous, with very high levels of vibration causing accelerated turbo wear and possible damage, even the total destruction of the turbo Rotating stall is a local disruption of airflow within the compressor which continues to provide compressed air but with reduced effectiveness. Rotating stall arises when a small proportion of airfoils experience airfoil stall disrupting the local airflow without destabilising the compressor. The stalled airfoils create pockets of relatively stagnant air (referred to as stall cells) which, rather than moving in the flow direction, rotate around the circumference of the compressor. The stall cells rotate with the rotor blades but at 50–70% of their speed, affecting subsequent airfoils around the rotor as each encounters the stall cell. Propagation of the instability around the flow path annulus is driven by stall cell blockage causing an incidence spike on the adjacent blade. The adjacent blade stalls as a result of the incidence spike, thus causing stall cell "rotation" around the rotor. Stable local stalls can also occur which are axi-symmetric, covering the complete circumference of the compressor disc but only a portion of its radial plane, with the remainder of the face of the compressor continuing to pass normal flow. A rotational stall may be momentary, resulting from an external restriction, or may be steady as the compressor finds a working equilibrium between stalled and unstalled areas. Local stalls substantially reduce the efficiency of the compressor and increase the structural loads on the airfoils encountering stall cells in the region affected. In many cases however, the compressor airfoils are critically loaded without capacity to absorb the disturbance to normal airflow such that the original stall cells affect neighbouring regions and the stalled region rapidly grows to become a complete compressor stall. Axi-symmetric stall, more commonly known as compressor surge; or pressure surge, is a complete breakdown in compression resulting in a reversal of flow and the violent expulsion of previously compressed air out through the engine intake, due to the compressor's inability to continue working against the already-compressed air behind it. The compressor either experiences conditions which exceed the limit of its pressure rise capabilities or is highly loaded such that it does not have the capacity to absorb a momentary disturbance, creating a rotational stall which can propagate in less than a second to include the entire compressor. The compressor will recover to normal flow once the engine pressure ratio reduces to a level at which the compressor is capable of sustaining stable airflow. If, however, the conditions that induced the stall remain, the return of stable airflow will reproduce the conditions at the time of surge and the process will repeat.[1] Such a "locked-in" or self-reproducing stall is particularly dangerous, with very high levels of vibration causing accelerated turbo wear and possible damage, even the total destruction of the turbo A compressor will only pump air in a stable manner up to a certain pressure ratio. Beyond this value the flow will break down and become unstable. This occurs at what is known as the surge line on a compressor map. The complete turbo is designed to keep the compressor operating a small distance below the surge pressure ratio on what is known as the operating line on a compressor map. The distance between the 2 lines is known as the surge margin on a compressor map. Various things can occur during the operation of the turbo to lower the surge pressure ratio or raise the operating pressure ratio. When the 2 coincide there is no longer any surge margin and a compressor stage can stall or the complete compressor can surge as explained in preceding sections. Following are a few ways that this problem may occur ,inlet air restriction , compressor blade damage, turbine overspeed , plus many others listed in the trouble shooting tech manual , I wanted to share this with the pulling world that will be affected with this proposed ruling , This was not written by myself nor another puller or pulling turbo builder, but it was written by a engineer of one of the largest turbo manufacture in the world ,Now I want to share some facts that I as a puller/ mechanic /builder want to share We have been running a alcohol superstock tractor with a 3 Charger Setup ,We have done extensive motor & turbo changes the last couple years trying to make the engine more efficient , We have worked with headflow , camshaft, piston design , and turbos , We have dropped cross over air temps over 220 degrees which will yield more horsepower with less damaging effects , Top stage turbos we have ran from 3.9 to 4.4 inlet size and right now the one that works the best for our setup is approx. .135 larger than the restrictor proposed , The one thing after doing the trial and error research we noticed that with 1 K&N Filter with a filtered top that with the 4.050 we seen we seen turbo slow down & few stall moments with thrust bearing damage & lean pops when this was occurring, @ that point we doubled the air cleaner capacity to 2 filters & filtered top and the problem went away! just to confirm this I do have speed sensors on my turbos that are linked to my data logger, After speaking with a engineer from one of the major turbo manufactures engineers , You take a Holset HX82 with a 4.050 wheel place a restriction less than the 5.0 inlet which is what they come with from the factory [this was designed into the turbo for air capacity not for fitment of a air intake /aircleaner , there is a good chance if you engine flows good air flow numbers you will have turbo stall & pressure ratio will get out of range which on diesel or alcohol could easily result in turbo failure , and on the alcohol it could also result in lean detenation, We have ran the same engine in our tractor since 2010 with not 1 short block failure! still retaining original ,crank , bearings & rods , with boost #s from 90 to 112 and know that the engine is more efficient we are back running lower boost #s around 100 , With that being said there are ways to get back the air we have know if the restrictor rule is put in place but after talking to several turbo experts/builders it will take some R&D with different combinations to try with different ,compressor wheels, different sized compressor covers & the custom exhaust shafts & wheels , Right now the two top chargers are less cost than 1 super farm turbo and the new ones to work with the restrictor plate with cost anywhere from $7000 to $12,000 one builder told me that it would cost minimum of $ 7000 with no guarantee that it will work or that it may need to have more changes after being built but was willing to work with me, And know is the questions I would like to ask 1st Why do we need another bunch of limited classes ? 2nd If these restrictor plates do case damage due to improper air ratios, will the pulling organization implementing the restrictor plate pay the damages or will the puller just have to park it due to lack of funds? One last note If you believe the statement that a puller ran his air shutoff half closed on a diesel and noticed no change in performance ,I have a challenge for him make 6 passes and see what you have left of your turbochargers, maybe they believe Santa Class will bring all the parts to fix his tractor also ! I am leaving my name out of this post because Id rather not have everyone one know what setup is on my tractor nor what my plans are if this rule goes into effect ! |
|
Re: It's time to save SS pulling with the restrictor rule
|
Dick I do agree with a few things you have stated. It's time for "Pullers and Leadership" to put in place a program that will save the class. I am thinking that this is what was proposed to the board. So I am not sure how NTPA got to the restrictor plate discussion, but they did.
As far as cubic inch and OEM blocks you are correct the OEM blocks have been maxed out or better yet passed up. But let me switch gears on you for a second how many trucks,mods, unlimited or mini classes run OEM blocks, I don't hear of any rule changes to those classes to limit them so the new guy can afford to compete in these classes. Heck you never know they might get another 12 two wheel drive trucks. LOL I am not picking on the 2wd class. I do agree with a few less hooks but will say I understand that it isn't the easiest when certain pulls want your class back this is a tough thing to juggle for NTPA. With this I am only in my 2nd year of grand national pulling but will say that at the end of our 6 week straight run from Chapel Hill to Hudsonville it was a long haul for a team to endure. You hit the nail on the head it is not only the driving but the non stop maintenance, and I didn't have a major tear down thru this run so it was just general maintenance which will be same with restrictor plate. I did say this year if we could get a week off in the middle of that run it would be great. But back to what I stated earlier this is not that easy for NTPA to make a perfect schedule for every puller and promoter. To finish I want to go back to my first statement It's time for Pullers and Leadership to put in place a program that will save the class. Thanks Travis Schlabach |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,571, Posts: 229,597, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,057, Posts: 225,853.
Global: Topics: 38,571, Posts: 229,597, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,057, Posts: 225,853.
Our newest member BadHabit2
