03:31:52pm, Saturday, May 18, 2024
|
Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,449 |
I keep hearing the argument that limits drive up the cost of pulling. Nothing could be farther from the truth. If we take the theory to it's final conclusion then it would stand to reason that a PS is cheaper to run than a SF, or a LSS cost more to build, own and run than a Open SS. The growth in tractor pulling is in the classes with tighter limits. The LLSS or the Light PS are the classes that are growing, DSS, Open SS are dying. And the reason is simple, cost, to costly to build, maintain and repair. Pulling in the big HP tractor classes start this slow death spiral when each and every one of these classes crossed into the 3000 HP territory. The cost of building and maintaining the 3000+ HP tractors killed these classes, very few if any of new builds are taking place in any of these classes. And I dare say the numbers have seen steady decline every time there's a jump in HP. And the sad reality is the every jump in HP makes the show worse, not better. Fewer tractors, more breakage and less color. The last NTPA DSS hook had 4 tractors that were able to put on any type of a show, 4 that's it. Pulling in big dollar classes is dying because of rules that were never thought out, no one ever said, gee I wonder what this class will look like in 5 to 10 years. Pulling keeps going down the same road, class after class, year after year. However if pullers want these type of rules that encourage big dollar, low tractor numbers, more breakage and longer wait time for parts then have at it. If you want the "country club" class then realize that numbers will keep shrinking and cost will keep raising. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 03/27/2008 Posts: 1,152 |
I guess it depends "what limits".
Limiting the number of engines hasn't done it. Limiting airflow in combination with rpms and engine size does seem to work at times. I got a good example at home where we restricted to 68mm inlet and there are guys running from HX55 to HX60s - some tried HX80s (didn't work) and the HX55s still win at times. It has now turned into a tire war, but for luck, being on 38 inch wheels and the 24.5s not really being the trick, the 20.8 Pro Puller and used Michelins are not that expensive. Same limits with "open turbo" has lead to teams blowing up 5000 $ regularly and by the end of the season the guys who can afford the most chargers or run a smaller charger and don't break it win the points and the class is half the numbers than at the beginning of the season. Stuff really get's out of hand if you can't police tor you have loop holes. Maybe it's cheaper to tell what is allowed and not what is forbidden?! Floating Finish - the German Tractor Pulling Web Show and EU Live Streams: [www.youtube.com] |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
just an observation
|
Dick,
You are right and wrong all at the same time. Limits are intended to save money and in certain instances they do. However the reason you are hearing that they cost money is this: When you limit a major power producing part (in this example for instance, a pump, turbo or cylinder head) to some sort of restriction that in turn leads to modification of these components to achieve results sometimes surpassing the capabilities of the component the rules were put in place to restrict. With countless hours of R&D and dyno time these modified to meet the new rule components that become a requirement to be contender for top spots in any respective division become a necessary purchase for the competitor. This allows whoever comes up with the latest breakthrough to basically name their price for this new component. This is what drives up the cost of participation in a class with limits. On the flip side no limits allows the very same thing, money spending is still going to occur just the limits aren't defined as such and breakage is typically when you find the next limit to conquer. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 06/16/2017 Posts: 66 |
Dick, I agree with you that limits do not by themselves make a class more expensive.
Limits also do not necessarily make a class cheaper. Using SF as a example. The original rules for the class required the use of factory heads, and manifolds, with a inlet and exhaust limit on the turbo. This created a challenge to the pullers to find the "best" manifold (often something rare, and expensive), and a challenge to the builders to develop the optimal combination of cam, port work in the head (often done by hand, and expensive), port work on the cast manifolds (again, often done by hand and expensive) and turbo. Had the rule allowed aftermarket manifolds from the beginning, some cost could have been avoided, in that it cost less to fabricate the optimal manifold to work with the head, cam and turbo, than it is to port a factory casting to do the same thing. That would not necessarily have make the SF class cheaper overall, however. A puller who has a budget of $xxx,xxx isn't likely to spend less because the engine costs less. They actually will simply move the funds around to find a better tire, better turbo, better injection pump, etc. The same amount of money is spent, just on a different part of the pulling vehicle. New classes with limits often give the impression that good limits can keep pulling "cheaper". Most new classes are started with an eye on budgets. After a year, or a few, rules are tweaked, often to allow the class to "progress" or grow. Say for example that a diesel class is started that does not allow water injection. That limit would help curb costs, in that engines could not be pushed as hard, without failing. After a few years, the class petitions to allow water injection, so that they can push their engines harder, and the class can "grow". It is allowed, but the class becomes more expensive, because with the addition of water injection, more horsepower can be produced, and soon drivelines must be upgraded to compensate. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Amen, look what happened to prostock. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 06/16/2017 Posts: 90 |
In my opinion, limits on any class have absolutely nothing to do with the cost of competing, it is all about maintaining the viability of the class and keeping the competition close. Limits should NOT be put on a class so that everybody can play and get a ribbon. Limits are nothing more than competition rules that all other motorsports have. NASCAR juggles the rules (with varying degrees of success) in attempts to make better racing and if you remember they put limits on (restrictor plates) so that speeds were sub 200 mph on big tracks. Why, better competition and a better product to offer fans and sponsors. NHRA changed the rules to slow their cars down, both for safety reasons and for the benefit of the show. The big money teams still win, no doubt about that but again that isn’t the point, the point is putting the best product on the track.
For pulling, take a look at what the current Lt Pro class is and what will it become. Today, it is a VERY good class. On any given night, most any tractor can win; it has sensible cubic inch limits so all brands have the potential to play; it has brand recognition for both the expert and casual fan and no matter what is on the inside, it is still a tractor. Now the hp has increased at a rapid pace where we hear things like component chassis; billet blocks; any sheet metal and chassis. Why? That is not what this class was for! So in the interest of keeping the class true to its roots, you have to consider limits (competition rules.) The argument that it will become a dyno class doesn’t hold water, the top teams are already on the dyno busting their butt to find more power; it won’t prevent people from spending the money on the latest and greatest widget to get 10 hp. What is will do is slow the horsepower war down and make it more of a competition on the track. The competition will better; tractors should be a little more reliable and the overall show with be better from beginning of the season to the end. From the outside looking in, everybody wants to be Conner Bros and Tim Engler in their hay day when they just flat dominated the competition. Those days are over because more people have better access to better parts. So again, limits are not about saving money, they are about keeping everyone competitive; having a good product to sell to the promoters and ultimately the fans; and keeping a class true to its roots. And, at the end of the day, you are still going 300, 320 or maybe 350 ft. |
|
Re: All about safety
|
Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,350 |
NASCAR implemented restrictor plates after Bobby Allison nearly went into the crowd at Talladega in 1987. The Cup cars were within 5 mph of the pole winning speed at the Indy 500 {Elliott ran 212 at Talladega and the pole at Indy was 216). NHRA shortened the length of the track for the nitro classes after Scott Kalitta was killed in Englishtown in 2008 in an effort to show the cars, which are now going as fast in 1000 feet now as in the full quarter mile then. In both cases, safety was the reason for the changes. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/2018 09:44PM by The Original Michael. |
|
Re: All about safety
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
If the shut down area and sand trap were longer at Englishtown, Scott Kalitta MIGHT still be with us today. But no one from NHRA wanted to talk about that issue. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 07/27/2017 Posts: 184 |
I'll just say this, it's Motorsports. Every motorsport I have been a part of, can be expensive. You can put rules in place, but there is always going to be somebody with money there to research and develop better parts that fit those rules. You can't legislate spending. A fat check book doesn't always make them a winner, but it sure helps their chances. If you restrict turbos, they will dump a ton of cash to get the best one or try to find power somewhere else. Just how it goes in all motorsports. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Didn't Adam Vaske say that he had less money in turbo's on his super stock diesel than a "built to the rules" super farm's turbo? Sometimes, we make rules that make parts that are worthless in an other motorsport, extremely valuable because of the rules. Just my opinion. I don't know what the answer is, because if somebody wants to win that has money, they probably will rules or not. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Not Really
|
I just talked to a guy this week that bought the best turbo for his class (at the moment) $6500.00. That is about $300. higher than the best 4.5 G-Trim LPS charger. Have you priced the turbos that the heavy Pro's run? They should really be cheap since they don't have a turbo limit in that class. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Yea but
|
If you go buy a used turbo. Especially an old Columbus for say 2500 put newer cut down air wheel and bearings. Be less then that and a better turbo. Just saying more options out there than people think. Again not always check book. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
|
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Oh I got a thumbs down on my post. I am really scared. NOT!!!! |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
longtimer
|
I am responding initially to "just an observation". Every class has limits. Yes, even the so-called Unlimited classes have limits. I agree with what you said. However, your statements do apply to every pulling class. Not just the so called 'limited' classes.
As other posters have stated and I agree, anybody with the desire and the wallet to back it up, will find a way to increase performance, regardless if it is a class with so called 'limits' or 'unlimited'. Examples abound in every class without having to look very far, whether it is past respected legends that have made their mark upon the pulling sport and those that are working on building their legend currently. Bottom line is, today's pulling, literally at any level of organization, is expensive, if not very expensive. Increasing technology pushes that envelope, whether it is really for the better or not of a class' longevity. |
|
Re: Do limits really drive up the cost of pulling?
|
just an observation
|
longtimer you are right and what you posted is what I meant to a degree. I guess my main point is sometimes limits put in place drive the cost of a rules compliant part past that of a non compliant part of which could be attained at less expense and likely greater performance. But yes all classes are expensive. |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,778, Posts: 229,950, Members: 3,338.
This forum: Topics: 37,098, Posts: 226,034.
Global: Topics: 38,778, Posts: 229,950, Members: 3,338.
This forum: Topics: 37,098, Posts: 226,034.
Our newest member Jacklovik2009
