09:23:12am, Tuesday, April 16, 2024
|
LLSS vs LSS
|
Observer
|
After reading the countless LLSS threads over the years debating changing this rule or that rule (component, heads, CID, turbo, etc.), it got me to thinking about what the real issue here is. Its mentioned that if you want to “go faster”, as some put it, then just jump up to LSS. The way things have evolved in LSS over the last 5 plus years, that is a huge jump. We aren’t talking about making a few upgrades, it’s a completely different machine and a big cost difference (cost might be irrelevant since all this stuff is expensive). For a diesel pulling vehicle there are countess classes now that are approaching a combination break for every 500 hp. For an alcohol powered machine this jump is at least 2000 hp, if not more. On one hand there are WAY too many classes these days. On the other hand, this big jump may be what fuels all these LLSS debates?
If there was another class (It’s tough to even type that) maybe that would help? This would be a class for those that want to move up from LLSS that allows them to “go faster” but doesn’t require a completely new build or a “somewhat” new build that could later be upgraded to LSS, if desired. It might even be attractive to some current LSS’s that don’t want to keep chasing that any longer. Limits could possibly be multiple charger 360’s or small turbo 504’s, (whatever makes comparable hp for each). I’m sure whatever the limits were made to, there is a diesel combination that would fit in as well. This way your not messing with good classes but still gives someone a stepping stone if they want to move up (or down). In the south it appears there are more than enough tractors to support something like this. That is likely debatable in other areas, though there might already be classes somewhat like this in central Mo and northern IL, not sure about those rules?. Of course this would be some type of “limited” class, as such should only be part of state and possibly regional levels (as all “limited” classes should be, but that is a whole other debate). |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Registered: 02/19/2009 Posts: 526 |
The first rules for the LLSS in my area was the intent for the small chassis tractor. 3 by 4 charger , no decuding of big motors . I know classes are to be allowed to grow, but the the original intent of the rules were not enforced. So this is and always will a discussion on what is best for the class or why everyone's rules aren't the same . To start another class in not smart , just because there are so many now. What's best into in force the rules we have now and not get carried away that this class has to be changed. |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Registered: 01/10/2016 Posts: 183 |
If you want the class to go faster just set the sled up to let you run for the first 280 to 300 feet and then nail them. I have see speed range for my LLSS from as low as 22 mph to 31 mph all depends on how the sled is set up. Just my observations. |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Observer
|
Sorry for the slang, "go faster" doesn't mean actual speed, just the desire to make more hp, i.e. open the limit up a bit. |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Unfortunately no matter what class you have or create, there will always be someone who wants it changed to fit their agenda. History has shown time and time again that every new entry level class started out to be economical but, turned into a money pit !!! Your concept is a good middle of the road compromise, but is there enough pullers willing to jump on board to support it ??? Then two or tree years down the road will they want larger engines or bigger turbo's ??? |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Observer
|
That is for sure true about cost escalation, but then again they all cost a barrel, some just more than others.
Enough pullers to fill a class would definably be a concern. In many areas there likely are not enough, in others there likely are. So something like this might only work in a few areas, like the South? Maybe the root of these debates does just boil down to rules enforcement and uniformity like mentioned above. It still seems more like some what to move up, but not all the way up to LSS? Maybe its some of both? |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Registered: 06/16/2017 Posts: 95 |
Part of your thought is in reality what my cast LSS was. Single turbo 504 cu cast tractor. (could swap same combo to a component) this tractor is a blast to drive, quite capable of winning where ever I took it. In Nebraska Bush and Outlaw it is a legal entry ran as the cast LSS which is different than regular LSS class.
I have since changed my setup to a 3 charger setup because its allowed and I wanted it to appeal to more people since its now for sale as I'm moving up to the LSS class with a new component. I will say I really liked the Cast LSS class .... its a step between LLSS and the true LSS class as you say. Why isnt it embraced by more pullers? Dont know There are however probably 10-12 good ones in the state of Nebraska alone |
|
Let me just tell you....
|
Registered: 07/06/2017 Posts: 369 |
If anyone believes that the cost of building & running a LLSS has become comparable to a LSS, they are kidding themselves |
|
Re: Let me just tell you....
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Maybe what should be started is a HEAVY limited superstock class instead of trying to put a class in between llss and lss. Just saying. |
|
Re: Let me just tell you....
|
Cc
|
What are you referring to? What is a heavy limited ss? And what class are you talking about between llss lss?? |
|
Re: Let me just tell you....
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
Cc, go back and read Observers first post that started this thread. He was talking about a class in between llss and lss. As David said, the llss class intent was for smaller framed tractors. And the hlss was just an idea that I said just to get away from another app. 6000lb. class. Now with that said, that would also be adding another class which probably isn't a good idea either as there are enough classes already. |
|
Re: Let me just tell you....
|
Registered: 10/30/2018 Posts: 749 |
It may not be comparable to the lss but its getting out of hand. I helped start the class and it has became what it wasnt meant to be just like every other class its sad to say eventually it will go component bigger turbos and bigger cubes Now that im out i could se where the component chassis would be the logical way to go with a new build considering i have hade 3 built from scratch there would be lots of options that would handle the single turbo and save a lot of money .we already have proffabs that shouldnt have been allowed so really a ring and pinion in closed in a different housing at this point whats the big deal |
|
Re: Let me just tell you....
|
Registered: 04/03/2016 Posts: 772 |
"jackme" has a good point.
Here is a question that never gets asked, what about the cost for the people who have been in the class and already have a very good setup? What’s that going to cost the class in numbers of tractors? It seems to me that lately there have been changes made to accommodate a few and the word “safety” and “reliability” get thrown out there to justify it so that a new competitor can build what he wants. We all know pulling is very expensivse and pullers are their own worst enemy when it comes to this. I don’t have a llss or ever plan to build one, but in a case like this class from the outside looking in, components would kill this class. There is still a lot of guys who build their own and run dang good, and I believe a lot of that would go away.. just my thoughts |
|
Re: LLSS vs LSS
|
Wheeler
|
Lss originates from the former 5500 super stock. The 5500 super class was an awesome class and boy do i miss it. It was a class for the small chassis tractor and it gave those tractors a place to shine on the gn circuit. Then that class turned into lss and that went component and make crazy hp and now a spectator cant tell the difference between a lss and a heavy super. But llss fills that spot of bringing back the legendary 5500 super stock. Thats why i believe llss belongs on the gn circuit.
Here is a link of a video of the old 5500 super stock: [youtu.be] Notice the color variety of tractors, this would be a crowd pleaser at a gn event. |
|
Light and heavy
|
Moderator Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,347 |
Back in the day, when there was 5-7-9-12, there was less specialization.
Yes, some guys ran only the 5, but a number ran 5-7, 7-9. or 9-12. I suppose a few guys ran only the 7, especially on the SS side. Several mods ran 3 of the 4 classes in the early 70s. On the mod side, Bob Bussey was the first I'm aware of to run all 4 in 1976 when he built the Blue Angel turbine. When other pullers started adding/subtracting v8s, guys could run all 4 easily. On the SS side, as pulling moved into the 80s, guys ran 3 classes often, especially 7-9-12. Now, in 2020, the SS class has specialized to the point that there are fewer classes (2 vs 4), but no jumping. The LSS and Open/ USS class rules are divergent enough that no one does both. A couple DSS guys have run light and heavy, but Degenhardt is the only one I can think of that does both, at least on a national level. The irony is more pullers ran multiple weights with 4 classes years ago than run 2 classes now. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/16/2021 10:13AM by The Original Michael. |
|
Re: Light and heavy
|
Registered: 10/30/2018 Posts: 749 |
I watched the video Wheeler posted a lot of those tractors are now llss several of them ive worked on.Now when we started the llss class the original weight was 5700 pounds to allow the 466 engines some extra weight and it was a 24.5 tire limit later that rule was changed to 30.5 tires so the weight was raised to 6000 in the video a lot of those tractors most were single turbo at that time a 4lhs or f switzer was a popular turbo some ran twinns my first tractor was a cockshutt 570 with twinns called fowl play that pulled the farm show a couple times i converted it to the llss class as a 5500 ss in that vidieo a 28 to one gear was a fast gear most alcohol tractors ran a 30 singel or twinn today gears are from 19 to 22 to one and double the horse power lots of things has changed Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2021 01:49AM by Lewis Conner. |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,563, Posts: 229,575, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,055, Posts: 225,837.
Global: Topics: 38,563, Posts: 229,575, Members: 3,319.
This forum: Topics: 37,055, Posts: 225,837.
Our newest member BadHabit2
