02:59:29pm, Sunday, April 28, 2024
|
NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Bye bye 903
|
Just seen Jeff Hirt post on FB NTPA pushed the rule through outlawing the 903 Cummins |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
LSS Fan
|
Not sure why they were ever allowed, but that’s pretty rough on people that invested the time and money on them. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Leon
|
Should have never allowed them to begin with. Time will tell, either they will pick up several from ppl, or it will continue like it is. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Team one
|
So has anyone else heard of this change? Or is Jeff’s page the only place it has been broadcast yet ? |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Amen! Like a lot of things that they have allowed. Now my question is why did they allow many things that they have allowed over the years in the first place? |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
I agree
|
I couldn’t agree with you more, especially from Hirts stand point, he got his running great then decided to go with EFI and got it running decent again with it... he was trying outside the box ideas.. kudos to him... looks like it’ll be a Brent Long and Blackborun in-line 6 class again.... everyone complains about the Deere block in the PS class... what about the IH block in the UNLSS class?? Don’t see many top runners running anything else but the IH Block in that class. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Emod
|
Time for Hirt to pull the hood off and run limited modified. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 02/23/2012 Posts: 542 |
That’s a good idea but how about leaving the sheet metal on and let them run, that’s what needs to happen to mix things up |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Curious
|
Jeff seems upset about this alleged rule change, given the fact that he rarely runs with NTPA is it because he would like to run with them here and there or because there are a couple of tractors he doesn’t want to see pulling in what would be their only option the PPL? (for now) |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
PPL please follow suit and keep rules as close as possible |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
They were allowed because someone with deep pockets paid the NTPA enough to allow them. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 07/06/2017 Posts: 369 |
That’s not true at all. When the OSS was created, they took a vote to allow the Crazy Canuck in. I’m pretty sure they were looking for numbers in the class but it also opened a door. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 02/05/2010 Posts: 55 |
NTPA did not change the rule to accommodate us. The 4WD engine was legal with NTPA when we built it. There was discussion at the NTPA meeting that year but the rule stayed as it had been for a while. The vote thing was PPL at Louisville a year or two later and that made the rules the same between the two clubs. And those who know us know we don't have deep enough pockets to "orient" the rule making process !!!! One last thing. I don't think the 903 in the OSS/USS is any different from the BBJD in the PS class. Or the hemi in the other classes. We didn't have the means and the smarts to make that engine make all that power and live but I'm sure glad to see Jeff and then Terry take it to another level. Very impressive!
pb |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
So you just isolated half of the class and made them illegal? I love the fact that the motor is in the class. It's called UNLIMITED Super Stock. All you "purists" have every other tractor class to watch the regular motors. EVERY OTHER CLASS!! Why can't one class truly be different? Blackbourn proved it isn't just the power plant, so why ban them? This is just a last ditch effort by NTPA to stop the bleeding for their entire series. Can't compete with PPL head-to head so they have to change the rules now? Glad you folks all like it, but it doesn't change the fact that the only reason this class died in the NTPA was because the pullers chose to go to PPL instead. Why do you think they only have 8 hooks a year for the LSS class? Because they are afraid of the pullers choosing PPL over them just like the heavies did this year. And there is also a ton of bitching on here about how all the sanctions need to get the same rules. Well, you just took one of the few classes that had cross sanction rules and trashed it. Is that really going to help the sport? |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Big John
|
Where are the new rules posted? |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,347 |
"Half" the class? We're talking about 2 Chizek vehicles, Jeff Hirt 1 or 2 ( not sure if both are 903s), of which Runnin Bare ran only at BG and Wellington. Fast Lane did not hook much this year. Who else? Beaudry, who hasn't ran NTPA in several years. David Jones, who also hasn't ran at all in recent years. That's it.
Btw, Chizek/Blackbourn actually signed a contract to precommit with NTPA, they violated that contract at the first event of the year. Their is logic to the rule change. Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 09/17/2018 12:47AM by The Original Michael. |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
AndreasR
|
Fast Lane has an electronic fuel injection and is therefore not ntpa legal |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Registered: 03/19/2018 Posts: 664 |
There were 2 SSO agenda items and both of them were about this exact issue.
CP |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,347 |
Thanks for the clarification CPR. |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
More clarification...
|
Divisional Committee submitted rule changes are ONLY RECOMMENDATIONS to the NTPA & WPI boards. The joint boards make the official decisions on all the competition rule making. So... the joint boards can follow the recommendations of the Divisional Committees or not... and can adopt any competition rule changes they deem fit (regardless, if those rules were submitted by Divisional Committees). |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Registered: 10/18/2011 Posts: 262 |
Actually Jeff Hirt bought Patrice's 903 cummins engine years ago ! Crazy Canook has an inline 6 cylinder engine in his tractor now. |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Lustik is running it too I believe. |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,446 |
The Silver Bullet is a Cat engine that came in a TWD tractor. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 1,522 |
which should be legal in lss too |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Didn't realize the 3208 came in a TWD. My mistake. |
|
Re: Truth about 903s and concern with NTPA process
|
Since no matter what I say will always be wrong in your opinion, I will agree I was wrong in my previous statement. Half the class would actually only be one vehicle. Feel free to pick one. At your most esteemed discretion of course. |
|
Haugs V-8 Case
|
????
|
Another V-8 was the Haugs Scania powered Case...Did they decide to shelve this idea after ruining a block? I think one reason the 903 Cummins was allowed was because a certain V-8 Cat was pretty dominant... |
|
Re: Haugs V-8 Case
|
Team one
|
I believe haugs Scania engine is a big 6 cylinder, I only saw it run once and that was in a modified class. |
|
Re: Any other rule changes?
|
new rules
|
Were there any other rule changes made in OSS, LSS or DSS? |
|
Re: Any other rule changes?
|
someone could use the V-8 block that was put in the IH 1468 if they wanted to |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 08/29/2009 Posts: 22 |
Did the price of my V8 perkins just go up 
|
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
It’s not the V8’s that killed the SSO class, it’s two teams with large check books. It’s hard to compete against them week in and week out. Yeah the V8’s make a lot of power, but they have minimal weight to set up tractors. Since the engines are so heavy. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Pull Fan
|
Just curious, what does one of those 903's weigh? Be awesome to see Terry take those 2 engines and put in a MOD and run unlimited. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Posts: 1,161 |
Not up to Terry rather than Mike. I heard Jeff Hirt say that they are rather heavy, but doesn't mean that would ever be out of the picture. Brent Yaron Hooked Up Pulling Productions hookeduppullingproductions@gmail.com |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 06/30/2008 Posts: 186 |
Pull Fan....I agree, I always liked the Double Stuff mod set-up with the two in-line 6 engines, and for that matter, Texas Bullwhip with his in-line 6 and 2 V8s. I always wondered how 2 903 V8s would compete. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
EAB
|
How the rule for the 903 being legal doesn't matter. What does matter is the effect, where it basically makes all other, lesser expensive and more common drivetrains obsolete. Which, if you care to think about it, can open a can of worms.
Imagine a modified class that demanded only engines of lesser cost, say, supercharged SBC and such. Imagine how many modifieds you would have if one could run a collection of blown 350 Chevy's. How many competitors would jump on that wagon? Enough of that. i think that NTPA and PPL both thought that the competition would move towards the 903, making the USS an 903 class and the DSS the six cyl class. That didn't happen, for whatever reason, so they just ended up having to outlaw it. The question I always had was why didn't anyone else throw a 903 together and give it a go. Instead, we had two competitors using the engine. That stumped me. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 630 |
To EAB, one reason that I heard was that the people that have them figured out would not build for anyone else. I have a friend that told me that he went to them to have them do just that and they said no. So he started building his own and has hit road block after road block. He is still trying to get cams made with no luck. Starting from scratch building new heads for a 903 is no small task and I would assume that not many people are up for the challenge.
S'no Farmer |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
EAB
|
Thanks, Todd. So my other question, which seems right up your alley, what of a modified class that used more economical engines like blown small block Chevys and such. Seems like someone that competes yet keeps an eye on the pocketbook may go for something like that. Thoughts? |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 630 |
Personally I think that there should be more single blown classes around the country as a place for guys to start. They have a class like this in Illinois as well as the thumb of Michigan. I'd like to see more of that.
S'no Farmer |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
SNo Farmer hit on a point there I've been wondering about. Says his buddy wanted them to build him a motor and they wouldn't. So is that why this rule is now in place? If you can't do your own engine work and R & D you should ban those that can? Why are other pullers supposed to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and countless hours in labor and then just sell you the results of their effort? This is supposed to be GRAND NATIONAL level competition, not the "everyone gets a medal class", but the BEST OF THE BEST. I'm personally sick and tired of seeing all green in the Pro Stock class, we should probably ban them. I'm also seeing way too many Miner Bros. engines in the Unlimited class, we should probably ban them too. How you can tell some pullers that have invested this kind of money into the sport that they are no longer legal completely blows my mind. This rule change won't save this class. Pullers aren't going to come running back to the class. NTPA will end up combining the two fuels in a year or two so all the Diesel vs Alky guys can get off their soapboxes. And then we'll see even more stupid rules changes. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 630 |
First, the short answer is that the guys with the six cylinder tractors have people to go to if they want an engine. Evidently the guys that might want the v-8 might not have that opportunity. My friend decided to build his,he is a very expirianced puller and has been building tractors for many many years. He is spending a LOT of money and still can't seem to finish the project. He is not calling for anyone to be outlawed.
S'no Farmer |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 09/23/2008 Posts: 632 |
until they banned the v8 in the light class there was some talk from some folks about the any ag engine rule, personally I wanted to use a 350 chevy from a gleaner combine and thought that would be a lot of fun and not unreasonable to get parts and run. I don't think there are enough cubes available to run the heavy class but it sure would have been fun in the light. Before someone blows it up look up a "g" gleaner and tell me if that is ag or not. |
|
Re: NTPA UNLIMITED SUPER STOCK
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
It would just catch on fire anyway 
|
|
NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
ChevyB21
|
I don't have a dog in the fight as far as these tractors go but it all boils down to this.This rule change outlawing the 903s is like any other association in the country. If you cant beat em outlaw em. Its like the DRCE controversy in pro stock 4x4 in Missouri. it was a legal engine and they dominated now some pullers that didn't run them wanted to bar em. They spent a lot of money getting their setup right and now theyre not allowed so they have to run a different association or change engines all because some puller got their shorts in a knot and got scared. You chose the motor you decided to run and the v8 guys did too by rules. they didn't call the super stock open(unlimited)class that for nothing. Run what you brung and if you get beat so be it! |
|
Re: Fundamental question: What is "super stock"?
|
Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,347 |
Your post brings up an interesting and relevant question:
What is a Super Stock tractor? How do we define it? Depending on the definition, a 903 motor may or may not fit. NTPA never used the term "unlimited" SS. That name was adopted by ATPA and kept by PPL. I actually like it better than SS Open. But.... what should "unlimited" mean? If I can put an allison with tractor sheet metal, is that an "unlimited" super stock? If Larry Roberts put IH sheet metal on his twin IH engine mod, would that be an "unlimited" SS? This brings me back to the question: what do we mean by "Super Stock," and also what do we mean by "unlimited" Super Stock? If we can agree on the definition, the rule making should in theory become less complicated. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2018 04:09AM by The Original Michael. |
|
Re: Fundamental question: What is "super stock"?
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 1,522 |
ntpa brought this all on themselves,the ntpa had to approve the use of the 903,it was not legal till ntpa approved it.how can these decisions be made to improve the sport. |
|
Re: Fundamental question: What is "super stock"?
|
Registered: 04/06/2008 Posts: 974 |
I completely agree patches! I love watching them engines run as much as the next does too! |
|
Re: Fundamental question: What is "super stock"?
|
Leon
|
i wonder if most of the 6 cylinder tractors left ntpa years ago because they knew that they would have to run against those 903's? Jeff has strong tractors too but he hasn't found the pass after pass consistency that the chizek tractors have. Given time I'm sure he will. I don't blame those who built them, they only done what the rule book allowed at that time. |
|
Re: Fundamental question: What is "super stock"?
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Go back to when NTPA started the superstock class and that will tell you what a superstock is! Now I know I will get more thumbs down on this, but that's ok. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2018 12:30AM by Jake Morgan. |
|
Re: Fundamental question: What is "super stock"?
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Yep, I was right! lol |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
Registered: 03/26/2008 Posts: 494 |
Actually, it was not a rule "change". The class has always had a specification that the powerplant had to be offered in a two wheel drive tractor. Unfortunately, that specification was inadvertently missed in a rewrite and you could say a grey area of rule interpretation was wrongly allowed. This 2019 "change" takes the class to its original intent. JW |
|
Re: Is this what you are saying?
|
Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,347 |
Just want to make sure I understand what you're saying- So, is it correct that the 903s were never truly legal and only ran because someone forgot to clarify in the rulebook the 2wd wording? That sounds odd... Mainly because I cannot see the other pullers in the class sitting idly by for, what has it been, at least 5 or more years, without bringing this to NTPA's attention, and it seems NTPA would have not waited this many years to clarify. Not saying this isn't correct, just that if it is correct, that seems like gross incompetence. Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2018 05:05AM by The Original Michael. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
Registered: 02/05/2010 Posts: 55 |
Not so. The rule clearly said at the time that ANY ag engine was allowed in the SSO class at the GN level only, which was irrelevant since SSO was only offered there. And if I remember correctly, it was also allowed in DSS at the GN level only. We didn't play in a grey area. Anyone who was around at the time knows this.
pb |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
wrong
|
It was legal! ONLY in Grand National with a component Chassis! |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
thinking
|
The whole idea that classes can be labeled as unlimited I just dont like it. I think a super stock run whut you brung and hope you brung enuff class should be limited only by weight, hitch height, number of drive axles which would be 1, engine must match brand of sheetmetal and no nitro! Safety rules have to be in line but beyond that let pullers get creative! Can you imagine what would end up on the track? Its all expensive but with so few rules other than safety rules you would think creativity not a blank check could go a long way. A 903 cummins punched to 1000 cubes with a screw blower on top with LSW tires on the back with CIH, MF, or FNH sheetmetal of any sort, because all three brands carried that engine in some articulated tractor, that would be cool. I want to see people read the rules for what they don't say, not for what they say. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
Registered: 01/29/2011 Posts: 95 |
The use of any agricultural engine at the grand national level only has been in place in the rule book for a very long time. I cannot speak for pb as to when they exactly opened the door to the use of the rule( early 2000s) but i went that route myself starting in 2007 and took till bg 2009 to make it out in competition. I worked with terry to get the 903 going and he came out over a year later with their first 903 tractor. Since then there has been 4 ntpa championships won with the 903. We did in 2012 followed by 3 for terry. Since then the galot team has made significant improvements and have won the last few years.
There is a few misconceptions that are common in this topic. Money has bought the wins/ or you cant complete aginst teams like mike or earl has. This is completely false. I even bought into it myself. The reason we went forward with the 903 development was that i did not think i could complete strait up with larry roberts money at the time with just another 6 cyl. Terry had a lot of reservations about even doing it. I just was convinced that i could not do the same thing as someone with a seemingly unlimited budget. I felt the 903 had good promise and thats why I personally went forward with it. In the end i realzed that was completely false. You obviously need some money to do this but it could be done with a reasonable budget vs others and win. You have to work harder than others. Smarter than others, and it can happen. Anyone that is trying to make a case for that is making an excuse for poor effort. The 903 has killed the class When we ran with ntpa the numbers that ran for points at the time were hardly any better than today. I think in 2012 it was about 6 that ran for points. There is no real good reason to do so other than a personal goal. The payout is a loosing proposition even if you win. Its kinda hard to get someone interested in spending a large amount of money to go and not even be able to cover expenses for the weekend if you WIN. Thats a fact and it does not keep motivation very high if you realize thats the case. This is if you look past the expense of the vehicle and tow equipment. Just the cost of fuel and other expenses to get there and back. Changing the rules will help numbers It would have been easy for anyone to figure out this year. Terry cant be in two places at once. Since the first ntpa hook overlapped fort ppl. A person that was worried about it could have easily asked terry where he was going and went the other way chasing the ntpa points series. Since that easy to figure out fact was not used, it’s reasonable to think that it will not help numbers in the future. Final thought The fact is that it is not easy to properly run, maintain, tune or develop in this class. You have to be very sharp and passionate about what you are doing to make it work. There is very few people that make parts for this class. Every move forward in power is a new level that has not been done before. There is no one to ask questions because it has not been done before. There is no baseline to make good decisions. You just habe to try and hope that the best guess is correct. There is little to no market for a builder to sell too. Not lots of incentive to build new or change for financial gain. There is not much of a market to sell used parts too because the parts are specific for the class. Cant sell parts down the line to other lower level competitors because of this. You have to be all in with it. I have been told by competitors in other classes that it seems complicated or difficult to work on or get correct and that keeps people out of the class because of fear of it. These are people that own vehicles in other classes and chose to stay away from the class because of the seemingly high difficulty level. Add that all up and no matter what is allowed to be used, there will never be many of these tractors around. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
A sanction that is already bleeding members decides to ban what is arguably the most popular team in the sport? Where exactly are all these other SS that will now come flocking back to the class now that the 903 is banned? NTPA is just butt-hurt because Chizek/Blackbourn chose PPL over them. Plain and simple. Just another chance to watch the NTPA's arrogance cost them pullers and fans. I'd love it if Chizek boycotted both SS classes next year. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
clebrate!
|
You're not the only one that would love it if Chizek boycotted both SS classes next year........but I suspect we are looking at it from oppositte ends of the spectrum, LOL!.
While Terry has built incredibly impressive machines in both light and heavy, he (and Chizek) has at the same time essentially ruined both SS classes with their ignorance and greed. Having one dominant tractor is one thing, and gets old all on its own. But having 3 dominant tractors in 2 different classes is absolute greed and ignorance. That, my friend, is what ruins a class. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
I agree, I think their move to PPL was partly due to not having success against the Galot Team. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
Let the numbers speak for themselves in 2018.
Here Are the Standings From Lucas Oil PPL for their Unlimited Super Stock-- 1.Extremely Armed & Dangerous- 675 2.Armed & Dangerous International Threat- 639 3.Taking Care of Business- 625 4.Considered A&D HD- 611 5.MMG 1000- 577 6.Out of Time- 539 7.Crazy Chaos- 518 8.Blaster/Napa Auto Parts Fully Loaded- 514 9.Lessons Learned- 407 10.Dad's Toy- 370 11.Silver Bullet- 271 12.Full Tilt- 230 13.Runin Bare- 181 14.Bambi- 137 15.Fast Lane- 99 16.Cash in the Trash- 58 Here Are the Standing From NTPA Super Stock Open Class 1.GALOT II- 248 2.Get a Load of That- 242 3.Silver Bullet- 184 4.Desperado-176 5.International Threat- 45 6.Extremely Armed & Dangerous- 44 7.Considered Armed & Dangerous HD- 41 8.Bad Blood- 26 9.High Tech Red Neck- 25 |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
chip42
|
They ran the PPL Circuit because they didn't get A&D HD back together in time to make it down to Benson from what I heard. They stopped in at the Fort and the 2nd day A&D HD flexed its muscles after having problems the first day. It was impressive to see it put a whooping on the V8s. I do not think that Chizek and Blackbourn are afraid of competition on the NTPA circuit at all. |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
5288
|
So you are saying just 10 hours of travel time was the deciding factor on competing with PPL rather than NTPA for the season and NOT the GALOT team winning the title the 2 previous seasons? I'm not buying it. |
|
Wrong!
|
Registered: 04/04/2016 Posts: 110 |
I'd say the payout being close to Double had more to do with it than that! |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
5288
|
If that was the case the light supers probably would have followed suit, don't ya think. And maybe Chizek would still have a driver for them? |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
LSS Fan
|
Couldn't beat Galot, went PPL. If it were about the money they would have been pulling PPL the last several years. |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
Team one
|
In the points , sure but the only time galot beat them this year was when they weren’t there. |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
LSS Fan
|
Well it is kinda hard to beat someone when they aren't there....they pulled against each other once on the GN circuit this year. However, last year when they both ran the full circuit, GALOT 2 won the points and had the same amount of wins as either of the A&D tractors. |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
LSS Fan
|
Oh, and the year before that, GALOT 2 wont the points and had MORE wins then either of the A&D tractors. |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
Blackbourn isn't scared of anyone. And as far as the LSS class goes, why do you think NTPA only has 4 pulls/8 hooks for the entire season? Because they know if they scheduled a pull that over-lapped with PPL, the pullers would choose PPL. Just like they ALL did this year. It wasn't just chizek that bailed on the heavy class, every other pre-commit did too. But I'm sure it has nothing to do with the NTPA, they were all just scared. |
|
Re: Wrong!
|
LSS Fan
|
Who said anything about Blackbourn being scared? They are not his tractors and he does not decide where they pull... |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
LEWIS
|
This shows how rules get made for the spur of the moment without any thoughts of the future .The 903 was stupid to start with Its no telling how many teams has been parked or not built SINCE START A SUPER UNLIMITED CLASS AND LET THEM GO |
|
Re: NTPA Unlimited Supers
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Lewis, EXACTLY! Now you need to register so I can give you a thumbs up for your comment since I know I am going to get a thumbs down on my response to your comment! |
|
its just a block
|
Another thought
|
Outside of extra cost, time and development this change really doesn't stop them from running a V-8. With billet blocks being allowed and 3 different 2twd V-8 choices, they can take what they have developed from the 903 and apply it to a billet block version of the 1468 engine. At the end of the day wouldn't the two run about the same? Not sure what they would face with durability due to smaller bearings and such. For most of us this would be cost prohibitive, but that doesn't appear to be an issue with this team. |
|
Re: its just a block
|
Just curious I wonder where the engine in a fixed frame track tractor would fall in this |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,639, Posts: 229,705, Members: 3,325.
This forum: Topics: 37,067, Posts: 225,903.
Global: Topics: 38,639, Posts: 229,705, Members: 3,325.
This forum: Topics: 37,067, Posts: 225,903.
Our newest member JD_8520
