|
USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
According to rule book on full pull production next year components are allowed in light pro/limited pro/super farm? Is this correct. Watching butler Friday night I noticed it seamed to go from 20 hooks down to 8 by bringing the light pros in. Is this to bring more new tractors in and get numbers up? It seamsl like the full pull regulars aren’t running this year? Are they all sitting out while there components are getting built? |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Everyone
|
Almost all other org's other than NTPA have switched. I know several lt pros being built right now. Should see numbers get better shortly. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Careful
|
More numbers for who? Ntpa? More super farms? More hot farms? And who are the these new component lt pros |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Jd 4020 hot farm
|
I heard they were running hot farms and super farms together now. I knew the super farms numbers were down but why would they throw them in with the hot farms.
I thought the hot farms for full pull was doing great? |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Glad to see full pull keeping up with the times of modern pulling, the power level of light pros is beyond the power level the big pros was making when they made the switch to component years ago |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Jdpuller44
|
So wait. The low numbers are because components arent allowed? |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
usa east fan
|
Components are in,lt pro,lim pro,and super farm.i see recast heads and block are allowed in all 3 too.this should bring in lots of new designs,since it doesn't state that engine and hood doesn't need to match.sonce fpp has been known to have thier own niche classes just slightly different than all others ,with catchy names,Richard should get in the lead on this and rename the class diesel mod,since he has no mod tractor class,here's a golden opportunity |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Badgerfan
|
Will components help with numbers or eventually hurt numbers? Like anything else it will take a bit for them to gain traction but once they do will they push out the guys that did the leg work and spent the money making the class what it is? How many in the class can't afford to completely rebuild a new chassis to compete? Not to mention they won't have an outlet to sell there existing tractor because no one will want it not being component. So far in the pulling world added cost doesn't mean added competitors and tractors. How many big pros will drop back into these classes because it would be cheaper up keep hurting the big pro numbers? Is this just for a few guys that want an edge for a couple years until the rest catch up or get out?
The club I pull with is always looking at how can we open it up to others to gain numbers and changing rules but forget who you may be pushing out in the process because they can't afford to upgrade to compete. Most of which are the guys that started the club/class and stuck with it through thick and thin. They also forget when you make these changes you have no one to sell your old parts to when you upgrade or refresh because they are now obsolete. Just my opinion you have to make it work within the rules you have and stop changing rules to benefit one person or one group. If they are making more power than the tractor can handle its your decision to run it on kill and blow it up every week or find the happy medium where you can compete but your not constantly rebuilding it, the fun part of pulling figuring out how to make it work. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Thank you
|
Thank u. keyboard warriors tend to forget this the guys that spent years doing the leg work and spent the money building abd supporting the classes are now out priced In the class so now u have an over priced pro stock class a 5.0 pro stock class because you out priced the pro stock class and now u want to out price the light pro class so what’s next a component light pro and what a limited light pro class? |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 1,559 |
Says component superfarm too. I do get the hp issue and breakage,I do get it's easier to work on,and I do get the availability of other chassis.
But as a old fan I think doing away with the ag chassis in all classes hurts,and I know I'm in the minority. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2024 03:43AM by patches. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Registered: 06/16/2017 Posts: 273 |
I’d venture to say you are not in the minority! Whenever a class goes component, seems 2 more ag chassis classes develop |
|
The anti-component argument is mind boggling
|
Registered: 01/07/2022 Posts: 120 |
First question:
1. Name one class that has allowed components that it has killed the class? I’ve heard that argument for 25 years, components will kill the class. Name one in which that has happened? 2. Name one class that has allowed components and the vast majority of competitors in that class regret making the switch? Nothing has been done to slow down technology in turbos, pumps, tires, ignition systems, cam designs, head technology, injectors etc. We allow all these aftermarket parts and technology advances everywhere but the rearend? It’s ludicrous thinking to expect cast 60+ years old to withstand the horsepower modern technology has provided. If you are running to win at some point that cast is going to fail. Whether it be the transmission housing, axle housing, welded on hubs it’s going to fail. Then you’re going to have to spend that money 2,3,4 times to put a cast tractor back together, why, cause we haven’t slowed technology down anywhere else. Long term over the course of a pulling career the component chassis that is designed to keep up with technology is your most durable option. Most of the cast rear ends were designed for 60-100hp back in the 60s. So we are now throwing 2-3000hp at it (depending on the class) with new tire designs that are grabbing hold of the track far better than their predecessors and still expect cast to survive? Glad to see an organization that has seen the writing on the wall and is forward thinking. Hopefully others follow suit soon. |
|
Analogy for anti-component people
|
Moderator Registered: 07/06/2008 Posts: 1,412 |
People who do not want to allow components in classes where tractors are making much more power than designed to make, are like militant PETA types who don't want to eat meat, but also don't want YOU to be allowed to eat meat either.
People who do not want to allow components in classes where tractors are making much more power than designed to make, are like climate alarmists who drive electric cars, but also don't want YOU to be able to drive your gas or diesel car or pickup. Nobody cares if someone doesn't eat meat or pats themselves on the back for driving a $100,000 electric car that can't go more than 100 miles on a cold day..... it's that they want YOU to have to live by THEIR lifestyle choices. Allow components. . |
|
Re: The anti-component argument is mind boggling
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,534 |
I don't believe that component chassis are driving pullers out of certain classes, in fact in the long run it will actually save the pullers money. It should reduce breakage and overall maintenance should be easier and less costly. The one part that I don't like is the " any sheet metal any engine " rule. That rule has NOT helped the growth in any class, and the one thing that the rule did was the one thing that the sport had going for it was of great interest to the fans was, BRAND LOYALTY. Today's fans are well aware of the engine that is powering the tractor down the track and the sheet metal that is just going down the track. NASCAR did the same and take a look at attendance at their events, they are removing seats, not adding them. Once again it all comes down to poorly written rules that were put in place with no thought to the harm that it would bring. In most hooded classes the outrageous cubic inch limitations have in actuality driven more pullers out than brought new pullers in. The one truth that alot of people in the sport don't see or won't see is the vehicles still go down a 330' track and they still go almost the same speed. Every time a puller or a class find more HP the sled operator finds more weight to put on the sled. More HP more breakage, more expense, less vehicles. But what the heck let's keep going down the road that has zero gain. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,534 |
I may have missed this question, however do the component pull at the same weight as the OEM tractors? Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Components
|
I know of at least 8 component light pros in the process of being built. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
bri_n15
|
THIS is the simple answer… Allow the guys in these classes to go component if they wish… But give the guys that don’t want to rebuild and stay OEM a weight and/or drawbar advantage. 250-300lbs?? 1 inch on the drawbar? I dunno…someone more plugged in than me can decide what’s enough to make it an incentive to feel like you can still compete without upgrading chassis… Just seems like an easy answer to keep everyone happy, not feel pressure to HAVE to upgrade to compete, and keep numbers up. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Registered: 03/31/2008 Posts: 779 |
Figuring out the golden number is the problem. It’s going to differ depending upon the class and there will probably always be someone who thinks the number is unfair. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
It was said At the pull last week they dropped the p pump down an inch drawbar to 19” I see the p pump guys still ran away with it, also I believe there’s a 500 pound weight difference now. I don’t see many other ways to keep them competitive.
Right now I believe it’s -8500 p pump 19” drawbar -9000 a pump 20” drawbar -10,000 super farm -Component a pump-??? -Component p pump-??? That’s a lot for tech officials plus scales/drawbar to keep straight and usually scales are someone from fairboard. Have to wonder if it was worth ruining ur most sought after class to appease to pullers that showed up on the scene just a few years ago and repeatedly say they want to go west and run with the big guys. Then who do you have left? You went from Averaging 20 tractors just a few years ago to 5-6 tractors;by throwing super farm with hot farm now you got another class that’s got problems keeping them competitive. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
.
|
The chassis isn’t what’s causing your number issues |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Friends in low places
|
You’re absolutely right. The low numbers in that sanction is not because of components. It is the reasoning how they decided to let it go components. That and a lot of other decisions made for people is why the low numbers. Not picking on anyone. But maybe when all the calls are being made to offer fuel money to come. He should ask why they really are not. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Jd fan
|
100% right on chassis not being the problem there. The tractors are out there all of which filled the class 20 deep not but a few years ago. only so many favors u can call in to put on a show |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,534 |
Couldn't agree more with the majority of your post. However to many classes is an interesting situation. I think that with the low numbers in certain national classes the organizations need to fill the numbers with 4.1, Lt. PS, LLSS, HF and on and on. The real problem [ that won't ever be solved] is the insane cubic inches that are legal in some classes. This rule has driven so many pullers into other, lower budget classes. The ironic thing is none of this has improved the show. Another example is that there never ever should have been multi chargers in any Diesel truck class, no improvement to the show. All diesel trucks should have been single charger with different size turbos for each class. To many time rules are made with no thought to potential future problems. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Badgerfan
|
That's most of our problems. Too many classes, too many options, too many combinations, and the pullers have too much say in the rule making. Tech inspectors have to keep track of it and announcers need to be able to tell everyone the difference when most there don't care and can't tell the difference between any of the classes. Classes get to big so we give them more options to break up the class. Then the class is too small so we need to make changes to get more participation. We change rules to make 1 or 2 happy but it pushes out half the class, now we need to change it again to get more guys to jump in. Pro stock is too big and expensive so now we have 4 different variations of it. Super farm is to big numbers wise so now we have Light pro and limited pro. Super farm gaining in popularity power, and rule changes now we have to fill the entry level void with hot farm. Hot farm is now bigger than what super farm was so we have too hot to farm.
Where does it stop. When will we realize we need to regulate what we have and stick with it. What other motorsport changes rules as much as we do and has to figure out how to combine classes together to put on a show. Then if you build for one club that is the only one you can run with because the 50 other clubs with the same class each have different rules because they don't like Joe from the other club so they want to keep him out or they want 10 more horse power then Joe and add a bigger turbo then complain about low numbers, or that they can't pull with anyone else? |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,534 |
Couldn't agree more with the majority of your post. However to many classes is an interesting situation. I think that with the low numbers in certain national classes the organizations need to fill the numbers with 4.1, Lt. PS, LLSS, HF and on and on. The real problem [ that won't ever be solved] is the insane cubic inches that are legal in some classes. This rule has driven so many pullers into other, lower budget classes. The ironic thing is none of this has improved the show. Another example is that there never ever should have been multi chargers in any Diesel truck class, no improvement to the show. All diesel trucks should have been single charger with different size turbos for each class. To many time rules are made with no thought to potential future problems. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Registered: 06/16/2017 Posts: 273 |
The insane cubic inches aren’t going anywhere. Without it the big block Deeres have no advantage which in turn will upset the green guys even more then they already are in all the other classes. Too many red tractors. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Pathetic
|
Exactly! The low numbers are NOT because of components or lack of tractors for sure. When the class was changed this season to light pro & limited pro together it was not because the pullers wanted it ! The powers to be decided it and a vote in the matter was NOT a option. The class was railroaded ! Now fuel money comes out in a scramble to hope to have more tractors to make a show !! Just stating the facts ….. FACTS!! |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Real facts
|
The fuel money was actually a program started last year for guys who signed up for the pre commit and paid the years fee has nothing to do with rule changes, that came out in 2022 for the 23 season the class rules changed in 2024, do your research |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Pathetic
|
So the class change was what the majority of guys / members in the class wanted?? Do your research!! |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Factchecked
|
There wasn’t any tractors last year showing up. McFarland 2, park, Donnie H, Riggins, Weakland and Ferringer. Were the only ones showing up last year so they had to make changes to try an get more tractors. Can’t go to a fair board trying to get a pull with 6 tractors. The Sf couldn’t run anymore with the A pumps anymore, so that leaves 3-5 A pump guys that ran consistently. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Hummm
|
Better check your results and numbers. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
I agree with factcheck, the numbers were horrendous but you also had barnburner waiting on parts, I believe Nathan g waiting on parts on his two, plus a few others. At the meetings this winter both were said to be back this year. That’s 4 tractors right there, it was said Merle was bringing his two out this year, there’s 6 right there, I’m
Not saying clarion would have had 9 tractors instead of 3 but I can guarantee they would have had more than three…at what point do we step back and say p pump are awesome but changing rules for two tractors that want to go run with the big guys out west was the best decision..is there any chance the a pump class come back with full pull? It was said last year fairs aren’t happy with 6 tractor classes now we are looking at 3 tractor classes and we are only half way through season. Let’s salvage the class and quite trying to combine the classes and go back to a pump noncomponent 540 cubic inch limited pro that has been around for last 20 years with great numbers.. components and p pumps are not popular in the area and events of western pa and Ohio. Besides the component p pumps have the dual fuel class they can run and are more competitive in there than the a pumps are with the p pump which caused the a pumps to park and wait on ppp to start. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 1,559 |
Dick,if 40 years ago the leadership on the national association could have seen the future and made all tractor classes under 7500 lbs 410 cubes and all classes over 7501 lbs 540 cubes,not 1 brand of manufacturer would have been left out,all blocks and hoods would have matchef,there would be no need for component chassis,the sport would be thriving..the difference in classes from bottom to top would be turbo and head..gn,reg,and state levels would be loaded with tractors |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Posts: 359 |
I agree with all of your statements.......except this one:
"there would be no need for component chassis" Completely disagree. HP would still be huge and driveline failures would have still driven this issue. In addition to that a component chassis is desirable for many service and parts availability related reasons. A component chassis is not the main issue with pulling today, and there should be no class that they are outlawed in. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,534 |
Patches, I couldn't agree more, cubic inches have been way to big from the start. And if the cubic inches were in line with Patches idea would there even be a need for component chassis. Certainly not in lower HP classes. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Posts: 359 |
It's not necessarily about NEED.....it's about desire to have something that isn't a nightmare to work on. Why does everyone go so sideways about a component chassis? If you've had the pleasure of working with a component tractor, you already know what I am saying. Why penalize someone for wanting something that is designed for service? Just because we have always done something a given way for many years doesn't mean that's the only way to do it. If that were the case we'd still be using horses......
That being said ask some 540 Light Pro guys how they are liking the OE chassis stuff lately. HP is causing driveline failures. I would not dispute the cubic inches argument for one moment. They probably all should have been lower for the big classes long ago. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2024 03:39AM by FarmersFun. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,534 |
I'm not saying anyone or everyone should or shouldn't have a component chassis. I'm asking if there's a need for them in lower HP classes. Yes in the world that we live in that's a different story. So really it's a mute point anyway. Pulling and pullers are not going to go down in engine limits. The non growth of the sport is directly related to poorly written rules. Pulling and pullers have this missception that more HP means a better show, nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact it's done nothing to improve the show on the track. The statement that rules to limits engine/turbo limits drives up the cost to the pullers, by that logic it more expensive to run a SF than a DSS. And every class has limits, even those we call " unlimited " have limits. The only thing that seems to be unlimited is the amount a puller can spend. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2024 04:39AM by Dick Morgan. |
|
Re: USA East full pull component in limited pro/super farm
|
Posts: 359 |
To answer you properly Dick, there is not a need for them in lower HP classes. But after 17 years working on this Ag chassis, I'd sure love the option to make it easier to deal with!!
You are spot on that more HP does not necessarily make for better show, it is the puller who generally wants more power (we are all guilty). |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,343, Posts: 231,005, Members: 3,445.
This forum: Topics: 37,377, Posts: 227,755.
Global: Topics: 38,343, Posts: 231,005, Members: 3,445.
This forum: Topics: 37,377, Posts: 227,755.
Our newest member John S
