01:23:21pm, Thursday, April 25, 2024
|
Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Curious Puller
|
I heard a rumor that Outlaw adding a Light Limited Super Stock class. Can someone confirm? If so, are there rules some where? Thanks |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Posts: 158 |
Yes in 2018. Rules are not set but proposed cubes are 320 alcohol 420 diesel. Small frame chassis and engine. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Why
|
Where did 320 alcohol and 420 diesel come from? Is there another association running that? What do they mean by small frame chassis and engine? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Yes they are thinking about it. I talked to Doug about a month ago about it. He wants small frame tractors (IH 460-560, JD 3010/3020, and the other colors). He also wants to run them at 5500#. I tried to talk to him about using common rules but he already had his mind made up.
For the sake of this class I hope he will reconsider and follow the rules that are already out there and drawing in good numbers. In other parts of the country. Chris Vanatta Future LLSS Puller |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Retirement
|
Using rules that are already in place makes much more sense. Tractor pulling does not need more classes it needs more associations using the same classes. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Johnson
|
What is Doug thinking for a turbo a rule? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Posts: 158 |
Same Precision turbo that is currently on the super farm and light limited pro |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Interested
|
This could be a neat class. I think 420 cubes on diesel is to big if you are trying to maintain small frame tractors.
Rules Idea - 310 - Alcohol 360 - Diesel 10% Cubic inch allowance for 4 cylinders No decubing No converting fuels 2.6 (smooth bore) turbo 24.5-32 Tires 5000 - 5500 lbs |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 10/18/2011 Posts: 262 |
Interested must be a DT360 IH man ? Ha Ha |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Interested
|
Actually I would build an alcohol tractor. But the 360 cubes allows cheap and easy power for John Deere 359, Perkins 354, IH 360, IH 358, Duetz 345, and Cummins 5.9. 310 allows 310 Waukesha, 301 Allis, 301 IH, and 302 John Deere. A 2.6 smooth bore turbo would be the equalizer. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Outside Looker
|
It appears like there is quite a few tractors pulling in the outlaw light supers that would have to change much to fit the purposed light limited super rules. Then the tractors that should be in the light unlimited can step up and do away with the "cast light super class". |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 08/14/2013 Posts: 203 |
Why not follow the current rules that others are running. I would think about running some outlaw pulls it they did. I currently building engine to meet the southwest wi rules. Would love more place to hook |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Jake Davis
|
T wood is southwest wi coming out with a llss or did you mean sout central wi? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 08/14/2013 Posts: 203 |
south central sorry about that. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
If organizations are going to completely re-write the rules then I hope they re-write the name of the class and call it something different: Light Limited Pro Farm, Light Limited Super Farm, Light Limited Hot Stock, etc... Please, Please, Please don't call it LLSS. The LLSS is getting closer and closer to unified rules every year and Pulling doesn't need to add more confusion. If you want to call it LLSS then either make rules extremely close to the current rules or just adopt an already proven 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. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 09/13/2014 Posts: 155 |
I agree with Jake, and everyone else that is in favor of unified rules. There are so many discrepancies in the rules from coast to coast, in all classes let alone LLSS, the last thing that we need is another association to throw their spin on the rules. If you want to draw more tractors, unified rules will do that. Why would you rewrite the rules and disqualify the tractors that already fit the existing rules? Makes no sense. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
Well if they kept the rules most of us run as far as the 370 or d 470 and made it a 5000 or even 5500 a good running 460 with a 301 would be hard to beat |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
Lewis, I totally agree. Weight is one of the greatest equalizers. 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. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Interested
|
There is quite a few different sets of rules for the LLSS across the country.They all seem to use a 3" charger, The more engine options, the more color and numbers the class will have. If you combine most of the cubic inches used in LLSS rules, the following set would catch almost every other association.
Diesel Engine 470 - Single turbo , No Intercoolers and /or Aftercoolers 410 - Single turbo , Intercoolered and /or Aftercoolered 360 - Twin turbo , No Intercoolers and /or Aftercoolers 315 - Twin turbo , Intercoolered and /or Aftercoolered Alcohol Engine 370 - Single turbo , No Intercoolers and /or Aftercoolers Jake and Lewis - I agree that 5000-5500 lbs would be a great equalizer. Personally, I think that component should be allowed. They are safer and future of the sport. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
Component that was the start of killing the ss class and that's why we have the llss class its not needed with one turbo next would be after market heads and then so on that's were it all gets started from Weve already made one mistake here in KY letting the diesel run a lot larger turbo withen a year or two if nothings done everybody running alcohoul wtll be wanting a bigger one to catch back up what was started with the intent to be affordable will be gone .Theres already some 100 thousand dollar tractors in the class for any class to last for a long time there needs to be stiff rules and stick by them |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Lewis, so true! |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
LSS fan
|
All that component has done is give other brands an opportunity to compete in the LSS. Ford and John Deere where the only tractors that could get a big motor and still have moveable weight. Now if you go to a good LSS show you will see an IH, John Deere, Ford, AC and Case and all competitive. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Yeah and at what weight? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
LSS fan
|
5500, 6000, 6200.... with component there is enough moveable weight they could go to back to 5500. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Interested
|
There is places already allowing re-cast heads in the LLSS. The equalizer in this class is the turbo, a 3" charger is only going to build so much horsepower. Especially a smooth bore or a spec turbo (as much as i dislike them). And I agree 5000-5500 lbs would help equalize it more. But component is cheaper and more dependable than some or most cast rear ends. And the best way to keep or grow a class is to make it inexpensive to build and maintain a tractor. But the part pullers forget is that its the crowd that is the most important part of our sport. Most of them don't know the difference between a component and cast tractor, They come to root for there favorite brand of tractor and don't care what kind of engine, transmission or rear end is under the sheet metal. And if component will allow more brands or make other brands more competitive that is what is important to grow the sport. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
Component needs to stay out of this class, and 410 cubic inch should be as big as it goes. With one turbo size ,3 in and 4 out |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
snowy
|
There is one simple reason that the Outlaws always want different rules. In the classes that have different rules than the rest of pulling it keep all the Outlaw pullers from being able to hook any where else and keeps everyone else from being able to hook with the Outlaws. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Interested
|
So what do we tell the people with tractors in the class that don't fit 410 cubes and a 3 x 4 turbo? Thanks for competing but we don't need you now?? We need to quit looking at rules so selfishly and what fits my tractor best. How about we think about it as if we are building a new tractor from them ground up. Would you want to spend thousands of dollars on heavy and weak cast rear end? Or build a light stronger component chassis. A chassis that can easy changed to move up to a higher level of pulling if you ever wanted to. Its the same way with the engine . Its a lot cheaper to build a 400 series at 470 cubes than it is a 410 cube 300 series. If we want a class to grow, that class has to be appealing to build for. The cheaper and easier it is to build for the more appealing it will be. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
In are area there are a lot of 466 classes, but that rule all ready exists . If you want a top running tractor ,you will still spend more than you expect |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 10/18/2011 Posts: 262 |
No components should not be allowed. That's the whole problem with tractor pulling, every-time a good class is started someone has to come up with a way to destroy it. Take Pro Stock tractors for instant, was designed to be a entry level class. Look what it has evolved into, the most expensive Ag tractor class around. Take Light Super Stock, it was suppose to be a cheaper alternative to the Heavy Super Stock class. Guess what ? Not much difference in cost to build !!! My point is don't change a class that works. If you want a component chassis then build a Light Super. Don't mess with something that is working. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Off base
|
You are dead wrong that "component chassis" have ruined classes. The chassis has very little to do with it (if that were true every Mod class since 1970 would be "ruined"). Lets start looking at the real culprits for the two classes you have mentioned...........
For PS, it is two major things driving the class to where it is. The biggest problem there is the cubic inch limit. The second biggest problem is turbo size. The class has got it to the point of stupidity (although it's fun to watch that crazy HP). For LSS, it is essentially only one thing driving it, and if you don't agree you must be blind: the Hypermax/IH block. Take a look at who's dominant in the class. Then take a look at what the BS sheetmetal rule did for it this year. Nothing against Kyle Karlen, he has a fantastic looking and running tractor, but make hime run a 426 based engine and he's not even in the mix. Why do you think the Ford guys are complaining? But let's get back to the heart of the topic............ The purpose of a component based tractor is primarily for easy servicing, and to a degree safety. Anybody who has worked on a true Ag chassis, and then owned a component, you know exactly what I'm saying. It is also easier to build (and nobody is saying it costs less) than converting an Ag. And finally, while nobody in their right mind will ever admit it, too many out there in the LLSS class have shaved entirely too much cast and structure away to make weight, and they are no longer safe at all. That's the problem with with someone who puts their mind to it and has the funds - they will find a way to make it no matter how unsafe it becomes. Bottom line (like it or don't), more people every year are seeing the true benfits of a component based chassis, and someday it will be commonplace in all classes. With a limited class like LLSS, you can still make an Ag chassis win without question, but that should be your choice, and not railroaded because "I already have one" or "my 460 makes 5500 so why can't you?". Look what happened in Outlaw LSS cast class this year.......you had a team make essentially a component out of a cast tractor by "interpreting" rules. Have at 'er boys, I know I'm the minority, but I can take it. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
I agree that many have ground alot out to make weight. Then the question is why is this class so hell bent on pulling at 6000 and under? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 10/18/2011 Posts: 262 |
Wow, Never said component chassis ruined tractor pulling !!!! You missed my whole point !!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you don't like the Ag chassis rule, find a different class to run. If your so Hell bent on Component chassis, then build a tractor to run in those classes that allow them or start your own class !!!!!!!!!! Why ruin something that has worked for years. If they allow components in LLSS I would never build one !!!! |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
As in some my post earlier I was against letting components in this class. With all the grinded being done, I was interested I knowing why this class wanted 6000 or less for weight. Because some don't like more that 6000. I pull with a AG rear and at 6250 to 6500 . It only a question asked |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Off base
|
David,
I hear you on the light comment. Sooner or later the guys from KY will chime in here about how it should be 5000, or say you are starting with too big/heavy chassis to start with.......or you belong in another class (a favourite recently used by PULLMX!) but I quite agree with your concern. Anywhere between 6000 and 6500 is reasonable (and safe) in my mind. In fact I would say it is an advantage for the under 6000 tractors as they now have more moveable weight, but let's not get carried away. It's sometimes nice to pick a chassis that you know you can buy parts for, not a one off custom everything (hence my component rant). Not everybody wants to start with a 4000 Ford or 460 farmall....... Maybe PULLMX is on the right track.......I can see LLSS Component class going over quite well in my neck of the woods!! |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 05/24/2013 Posts: 380 |
Because they believe they can compete with the high horsepower tractors with their lower horsepower tractors if they make them weigh less..... |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
You are exactly write and can |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 05/24/2013 Posts: 380 |
I respectfully disagree, those willing to spend the money will figure out how to make it work regardless of the weight. It might even it up for a little while but it'll revert back fairly quickly. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
AAR you are exactly write again if Doug wants to get huge numbers with his new class he should set some Limits to keep the cost down to were the average person that loves pulling like myself can afford it box turbos s400s, ht60s and hx60s the ht can be bought for 600 new ,Ag tires only no data loggers or computers and as somebody said 410 cubes is more than a plenty if somebody ever takes one of the Cummins from shied diesel and puts it in one of these tractors everyone will wish 470 was never mentioned |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
I hope that the Outlaws change the name of this class or come around to using one of the sets of rules that are already commonly in place because as it is now, they don't really match anyone else in the country. I know that Doug does what he feels is in the best interest of his group but I think the purposed rules would alienate far more pullers then they draw in. Just my opinion. I know of 3 tractors (either built or being built) in SW Iowa and a couple more in Nebraska that will not be legal to run with the Outlaws LLSS class. Matter of fact I can only think of one that could run in this class currently and they are clear out in Western Nebraska. Maybe some of the East Central Iowa guys may fit but none of the John Deere's are "small frame". I guess we can always pull in the LSS class at the state fairs and Outlaws big three pulls if we choose. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
I'd hate to know the costs of getting a 3020 rear to hold. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
To start with a 3020 is already stronger than a 560 I have a steal carrier from Atlas 1100.00 two pulling gears from Atlas 500 a set and a 300 dollar input shaft and needle bearings its holding and if it breaks I will fix it and in the end I will have a tractor and someone with a component will have a log scidder impersonation of a tractor that there little jd loving boy could be proud of |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Off base
|
Lewis,
It's spelled Skidder.......not scidder, but thanks for trying. And by the way, thanks for validating my point on the component vs Ag argument. You just openly admitted how much it cost you to make an Ag rear stand up for the class, and you haven't even done all those custom transmission gears you'll be needing..........so basically you are looking at easily $4k in that Ag rear before you can dream of using it in the class. That sure is something to be proud of. Meanwhile, in the year 2017, I'll be finishing building my impersonation of a tractor and loving it. I'll be able to call up Pro Fab and get whatever gear set I need for the trans (cuz they're on the shelf), or better yet just pop the cover off and switch 'em on the shafts (you know, because I can access that in about 5 minutes with my "scidder" chassis). Heck, I'll probably not even get dirty doin' that! And I'll have time to sit around and review the data from last run when I get done. With all that extra time, I could probably search the 'net, or better yet cruise the country buying up old sets of Ag tires for your class (because I guess the old style pullers are evil). If this was 1970, or even the 80's, I'd be agreeing with pretty much everything you said. But it's 2016 and time marches on, progress waits for noboody. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 05/24/2013 Posts: 380 |
So how much was your Profab and extra gear sets? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Off base
|
Yes sir, you are right! That Pro Fab 3 speed cost me a few dollars for sure, but at least I can readily buy gears, and swapping them is a breeze......which is exactly the point - ease of service - the entire reason I will build the component. I'm not saying it necessarily costs less, but it is much smarter money spent, and you are a fool if think that an AG is significantly less.
FYI, you aren't making an AG trans durable and pull friendly for nothing..........and you will wait on that stuff for sure. Oh, and when you realize you need to gear up/down, there's a few hours splitting the tractor to do that. Been there, done that, tired of screwing with it. So tell me what happens when a guy puts a truck diff inside the stock cast rear, couple that to a set of custom needled leightweight axle/planetary assemblies, and stuff a Profab in the stock cast trans housing? Ya, thats' a component in antique clothing! Complete idiocy to do it, but if you don't think it has been or will be done, again you're a fool. Ya, the chassis is going to be a heavy type to start, but after he grinds the crap out of it to fit these items, he'll get it in. So how would that example be any different than my skidder tractor? I'm telling you guys, there will always be the guy who goes that far/has that budget, just wait and see (if it hasn't already happened). If I do it, it will be because the club allows it, and I'll be happy to play in my own sandbox until some other people come up to speed with technology. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 05/24/2013 Posts: 380 |
Just to clarify, in no way am I arguing ease of service and yes outside of a few brands parts availibility is an issue as well. However done right reliability can be similar at llss horsepower level, particularly if weight doesn't keep dropping.
Actually your analogy of component parts inside an ag rear is wrong. There is a difference, and a quite large one at that. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Off base
|
Agreed that reliability of an Ag can be there at the HP level discussed. Servicing is my number one reason for desiring component.
I will disagree and stand pat on the components in an AG rear comment I made. It is not 100% the same, but pretty darn close in terms of the end goal. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
AARP the lighter the class the easier it is on the agg rear ends that's why weve kept the weight at 6000 at 5700 the 460 rears wich aint much different than a super h farmal now the weight is causing some problems we have d 21s 706 ih and 1100 mf and 4020 jds in the class using those rear ends so theres no excuse to be any hevier |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 05/24/2013 Posts: 380 |
Biggest advantage to a component is chassis flex. Cast bolted to cast bolted to cast doesn't flex. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
Off base the two gear sets I was 500 each set if I want 3 pulling gears that would be another 500 the only way here in KY component chasses will ever happen would be if 30 of you would build a agg chassis tractor and over vote the rest of us and that wont be happening no time soon ,I don't disagree with what your saying a new club may love it I but the ones of us that's already built will have to be over rode befor that happens pull prostock or super stock just another Turbo and thanks for correcting my speling |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
You Guys that wants to keep the class in Range and affordable needs me as a class spokesman We will make it and keep it Great again |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Down south gang
|
Hang in there Lewis,you and I both know ag chassis need to stay in the llss class,if those that want to go component is saving so much,then just go ahead an put 3 chargers on |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Most, or alot of Ky. pullers have the profabs in there ground out housings now probably got truck rears also.I say leave it alone most of us in the class are in farming somewhat and $3.50 to $4.00 Dollar corn it won't matter we will all be in the shed .LOL |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
Off Base Your code name fits you well NO 1 mODS AINT and never was a tractor SO who gives a Rats A$$ what rearend they run the people running the llss class still have a little pride for the next several years anyone wanting component is wasting there time or at least where the classes are already established and Yes 6000 lbs is all the weight the class needs that is the best equalizer the class have it takes some of the advantage away from the big money pullers that have a 9 thousand dollar set of 960 pound tires and a 6 thousand dollaor turbo or the turn key puller built by Black burn make your classes heavy and se what happens the class started out at 5700 it was one stupid move going to 6000. I will guarantee if the scales is a little off the high rollers never want to go to the light side |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
This has made for interesting reading l guess I will give my two cents. I have an Allis One Ninety ag chassis. We have made it into a true llss as far as respecting all the rules in the class and I hope to run it with the northern tour at a few events in 2017. I like there rules and think they are on the right track. I am also building a Component John Deere to all the specs of the llss class other than the chassis. Around 5-6 years ago we allowed components in our organization primarily with the hope of attracting new vehicles. Scouring junk yards for useable ag chassis are getting fewer and the cost is more expensive than it has been. Most are buying complete tractors and then turn around and throw most of it away. Now as far as whether components help or hurt so far mine is the first but it gives the people building or buying more options. Is components needed in llss ? probably not but thinking an ag chassis will keep cost down is a dream at best. All the puller tires now have been allowed in a lot of groups and that will be the biggest factors in how long an ag chassis will stand up. Alot of people think there is a lot more advantage to a component than there really is. I was just looking for something easy to work on and it can grow with whatever I decide to do with it. As far as being cheaper yes definately providing you are doing most all of the building yourself.
Now with that being said I agree with the llss being left as a cast tractor class. If we had 30 vehicles like a lot of the southern groups I wouldn't rock the boat if it's growing leave it alone. I know where my new tractor can run and I am fine with it. But if your are like us letting components in to help grow your numbers isn't a bad option like I said the advantage on the track of that type of chassis is very overrated. Good luck to the outlaws which was the original post. Doug Roberts seems to be very proactive in there classes. The cube limits to me seem very small but if it works for them all the power to them. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Off base
|
"..........Is components needed in llss ? probably not but thinking an ag chassis will keep cost down is a dream at best. All the puller tires now have been allowed in a lot of groups and that will be the biggest factors in how long an ag chassis will stand up. Alot of people think there is a lot more advantage to a component than there really is. I was just looking for something easy to work on and it can grow with whatever I decide to do with it........"
No finer words have ever been spoken, you hit the nail squarely on the head, Robert! Congrats to you for your forward thinking and common sense. Every word of what you said righ there is true. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
I appreciate it Off Base but I also said this
Now with that being said I agree with the llss being left as a cast tractor class. If we had 30 vehicles like a lot of the southern groups I wouldn't rock the boat if it's growing leave it alone. I know where my new tractor can run and I am fine with it. But if your are like us letting components in to help grow your numbers isn't a bad option like I said. We are up here by ourselves we don't have multiple states to draw from . We have to do what works for our groups classes to grow. 
|
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Retared puller
|
Don't pull anymore but what would the cost difference be if I built component vs old 60 hp cast tractor rear end. Trough the years I spent a lot of money on custom made parts to make the cast rear ends strong enough. I would think component couldn't be anymore expensive, a lot more dependable, and much more safer. It really wouldn't matter what colored tractor you have or what cubic inch or turbo charger you have. I'm sure somebody with much more knowledge could chime in here with the advantages and oh yeah don't forget the disadvantages. Just my 2 cents worth |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
Theres 30 tractors here in ky you couldn't ask for a class to grow any better and it would have been bigger the growth has slowed down the past couple of years because it becoming a high dollar class theres more people out there that can play with a 30 thousand dollar toy than a 80 thousand dollar toy that's what grows a class .I'm sure thers some light ss pullers that's sucking hind tit that would love to bring there components down a notch and I don't blame them there class is dead and why |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Retared puller
|
I'm sure their class is dead because of the component dependable chassis. I'm sure it has something to do with the head of the flywheel. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
lewis
|
Well it seems everyone agrees weight is one of the best equalizers go component the weight does nothing anymore unless you make it say 4500 pounds wich would be kool make it a ULTRA LIGHT SUPER STOCK CLASS ULSS ,And someone said component would allow more color in the class that's as stupid as my spelling Olivers,Whites Deutz Fords JD IH MF all have pulled in the LSS class befor components you don't have to use a 4840 rear end to pull a JD you can put the 4840 sheet metal on a 2030 if you want the reason SS is dead the main equalizer is money and its not working and no the rear end didn't do it But maybe it did because the old 4000 ford rear couldn't handel the 3 turbos that cost 30 thousand or the twenty thousand dollar head 12 thousand DOLLAR CRANCK and so on You no maybe it did because you wouldn't have had to spend all that extra cash when the rear woulnt have held up |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
LLSSpuller
|
Well said Lewis |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
Components might be cheaper if you do all the fabrication yourself but everything in this sport isn't always about cost. Components are fine for some classes but not this class. The LLSS needs to stay with a stock rearends. If cost was the only deciding factor we should ban aluminum rims, aluminum and carbon fiber hoods, etc... It's nice to keep cost down when possible and where it's beneficial but I don't think components will help the class, rather I think allowing components will have a huge negative impact on the class. This class is also at a horsepower and weight where a component chassis is completely unnecessary. 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. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
There has been so much discussion about these rules. This club has this and club don't allow this, but will there ever be a set of rules that everyone will agree to? Maybe ? . At least we as tractor pullers have place to these smaller tractors sometimes on a big stage. Check with your local clubs with what rules fit and build and have fun. Don't expect clubs to change rules just because your tractor doesn't fit |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 11/22/2008 Posts: 181 |
I really like the idea of the outlaws thinking about of adding this class! I hope they can come up with a rule package similar to what is already out there to help draw in more tractors quickly. It would also be nice if the east central Iowa guys would think about allowing alky tractors pull with them. A little color of tractors and spark fire never hurt anyone so let's all get along! |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Face in crowd
|
I agree with the retarded puller. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Just glad one organization is dumping SuperFarms for another class. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
OSTPA
|
They are not the first big organization to dump SF. Ohio state did years ago. Much better show now with less whining. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Pllnfn
|
Outlaws are getting rid of the Superfarm class? |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Kurt VB
|
No |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Did you talk to Doug |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
Registered: 03/11/2015 Posts: 95 |
I did not write the post above, however I was sent a message this AM that Doug was asked to change the name of the class. If Doug isn't too set on ideals for this class perhaps he will pull the PDF file that was released this AM and consider? If not I will have some light parts to sale for this class. |
|
Re: Outlaw LLSS ???
|
I think it is great outlaws are adding them they are probably the best class here in Kentucky no question |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,615, Posts: 229,671, Members: 3,325.
This forum: Topics: 37,064, Posts: 225,890.
Global: Topics: 38,615, Posts: 229,671, Members: 3,325.
This forum: Topics: 37,064, Posts: 225,890.
Our newest member JD_8520
