Fall rule proposals September 03, 2024 06:28AM
Anyone have the list of proposed rule changes to be reviewed at the Enderle? It is usually posted at some point before the meeting.
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 03, 2024 07:01AM
2024 NTPA Annual Meeting
New Rules and Procedures Submitted Super Farm – submitted by Division Committee On behalf of the NTPA Super Farm membership the divisional committee recommends- 1. Recommendation- We ask for adjustments to be made to our class “day of event” schedule, to allow time for Full Technical Inspections to take place on a regular interval prior to an event. This desire is being written as a way to encourage a more comprehensive “Full Tech” inspection and a marking, stickering, or sealing process. We ask WPI & NTPA continue to be consistent and diligent in making this class a top tier professional group 2. Recommendation- Specify the Maximum measurement of the allowable Turbo Charger with exact specific measurements in every aspect as technologically possible. A place to start is maximum exterior measurements for the Intake and Exhaust housing. Possibly implementing a sealing process back into the inspection process. Reason: Currently the Turbo Charger has gained, power making capabilities, rapidly across this sport and others. Keeping some of these things contained should become a priority to keep costs manageable. Similar to the Fuel pump advancements recently, the Turbo Charger is also needing contained as some of the housing manufacturers developed, do not even fit under the Hood any longer because the increase in housing and bearing chambers and such. 3. Recommendation- Require all submissions for rules proposals to the Sanctioning body be submitted and accepted only through the 3 Divisional committee members for the class. The assurance this adds to the class, is that the 3 committee members have vetted the ideas and the proposals. That they are openly talked about amongst the paying Super Farm membership and checked for support or lack there of, within the class, prior to submission. Proposals not vetted by the committee can be, and have been, self serving and a detriment to the class in the past and this process. 4. Recommendation- Unifying the Safety requirements for the Super Farm class & pulling tractors across the whole country as a leader in the industry. 5. Recommendation- We propose a 2 year or 3 year “lock-in” on the rules. Unless a factor unknown at this time changes, such as safety improvements. Super Farm – submitted by Competitor I would like to propose to allow intercoolers for 2025. The purpose of this is to unify the rules such as pro stock and other classes to allow better numbers and hopefully encourage new builds. This change would also help increase horsepower and torque making our class more appealing to fans. I would also recommend leaving the rest of the rules the same and encourage working with NFMS to make the same change for Superfarm. I am 100% against box turbos. After watching the decline of nascar which took out all innovation it will only drive up expense for our sport. After talking with many competitors we need to keep costs under control and unify the rules like other classes. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions please feel free to give me call.
Diesel Super Stock – submitted by Division Committee 8/15 Another SS puller wanted turbo limits discussed. 8/19 The points payout needs to be addressed again. Only pay those that make at least 75% of the events and hook at least the first night of the event. All other class sponsorship money should be divided up to those that make all events. 8/3 When has the purse money been increased? "We hear at every drivers meeting that we have all this new sponsorship money. Where do those dollars go? "The class is appreciative of the year end money sponsors, but the pullers put on a great show and get very little to show for it." 7/29 All GN pulls need to use Bauer sleds. Minimum injection line length 24” This will deter the class from setting the injection pump back to gain HP The setback system typically will use approx. 16” lines Semis – submitted by Division Committee Fuel testing - if you’re going to test fuel, it should be with equipment that we are able to duplicate your test. We both should be able to have the same answer after testing. Not having the ability to purchase the unique tester that the NTPA is currently using is a disadvantage to us. I do not believe that the lubrication additives should be something that should throw off the tester. I have heard from others if oxygen enhancers are utilized, that would be the great power advantage. We should figure out a way to test for oxygen enhancers and be held accountable for that. I have had a couple semi pullers mentioned to me regarding a statement that Marvin was under the opinion that we were falsely raising our hitch height because we are allowed to utilize our front drive axle with either Air or hydraulic push down. The rule states that we need to keep the rear axle in contact with the ground when we are in competition. I think if this was enforced, it would address the issue satisfactorily. If anything is done regarding not being allowed to push down on the drive axles, we would suffer a lot of drive line and traction issues Mini – submitted by Competitor 1. Change GN Mini to an Unlimited class: basically anything goes: screws, 18-71 chargers, no cubic inch or overdrive limits, EFI, etc 2. Allow EFI for all classes 3. Increase weight for minis.
Mini – submitted by Competitor I feel mini rod drivers should be able to place brake pedals, and their feet , outside of the main frame rails if they are surrounded by a tubular rail to keep them restrained. This, in my opinion, is safer than wedging the feet inside the frame rails, confined next to the transmission. Mini – submitted by Competitor 1. Mini Division-ALL fuel tanks shall be completely full of fuel and checked at weigh in. 2. Mini Division-Allow multiple mini tire manufacturers-reasoning is in the event of a catastrophic event to a manufacturer, there will still be tires available from another supplier/source. Light Limited Super Stock – submitted by Competitor The first I would like to propose is to allow individuals to remove the cast bell housings and replace them with a standard SFI clutch can like I have on my Oliver , makes life a lot easier when adjusting clutches. Secondly, is to allow component chassis’s in the class . Reason this is number 1 is safety, 2 is cost ,3 is a nice upgrade , 4 parts availability. Submitted by Technical Services and Region Director
The following proposed rules and procedures are based on suggestions and recommendations brought to the attention of NTPA Technical Services during the 2024 pulling season.
1. B. General Rules, sub-section 9. Drawbars, letter a. Drawbar Construction, pg.48
Recommend the following revisions to current drawbar rules:
 All drawbars at all levels of NTPA competition must be constructed from billet steel as a single piece design and machined to dimensions required for each division. No L -shaped or stepped drawbars allowed.
 No obstruction or interference of anti-unhook device on hook allowed either when hook is being installed into drawbar opening or during the competition run.
 Drawbar pivot pin must be located on the same plane as the point of hook. Minimum square inches of material must be maintained around any opening in drawbar. Material rearward of the point of hook not to exceed maximum thickness stated by division.
 Measuring Drawbar Angle (diagram needed in rule book) Drawbar angle can only be determined by use of measuring devices to determine distance from level surface to point of hook and to center of drawbar attaching pin or bolt. Measurements are then used to calculate the drawbar angle. An angle protractor is not considered an accurate means of determining drawbar angle by NTPA.
2. Pro Stock 5.0 and 4.1 27. Tires, c. Tires by Size, 2) 24.5 x 32, edit 3. and 4. Pg. 81 Recommend allowing Mitas brand tires in the Pro Stock 5.0 and 4.1 divisions at Regional National level and eliminate the maximum 48 lug tire rule in these two divisions.
3. Modified FWD Trucks 27. Tires, c. Tires by Size, 6) 34 x 18.00 x 15, add rule b) – pg. 82 Recommend limiting measured tire circumference to 112 inches and maximum tread width to 18 inches after cutting. Tire to be measured as installed on pulling vehicle in ready to compete condition.
4. Turbo Blanket 28. Turbocharger, f. Turbocharger Containment, pg. 84 Recommend a turbo safety blanket from an approved manufacturer be required on all turbochargers used in NTPA competition regardless of competition division, level, or turbo size. Require approved manufacturers of turbo safety blankets be listed in the rule book based on manufacturers standard. Add descriptive rules and diagrams showing correct blanket installation over housing and location of retaining straps.
5. Access to SFI Identification Recommend that any component that is SFI certified and required by NTPA Pulling Rules must have the SFI certification tag or decal along with any manufacturer’s identification and expiration tag or decal easily accessible and openly visible for inspection at any time. Components such as bellhousings, tractor blankets, automatic transmission blankets, and etc. are examples of this requirement. Removal of a panel or shield for visibility would be acceptable.
6. Test Puller Options B. Contest Operations, sub-section 4. Test Puller Options, letter a.
Recommend changing Test Puller option so vehicle must travel a minimum distance of at least 200ft. in order to have the option to drop to last. If breakage occurs prior to hooking to the sled the Test Puller has the same option as all other pullers in the lineup which is to drop 6 positions with one attempt remaining.
7. Hypermax Injection Pump 12. Engines, d. Diesel Injection Pump, 5) Hypermax Pump – pg. 54 The Hypermax pump was approved for 2024 season and allowed in classes where Bosch P8600 series pump is legal. The Hypermax pump housing is dimensionally smaller than the Bosch P7100 pump. Recommend Hypermax pump be deemed a legal pump in any division where a P7100 Bosch pump is allowed except Light Pro Stock where rules are frozen for 3 years until 2026. Hypermax also requests the Hypermax Mark 2 pump be considered a legal replacement for the P8600 series pump and is dimensionally smaller than the Bosch P8600 series housing.
8. Breakage and Points A. Pulling Contest, sub-section 9. Breakage, letter b. pg.28 Clarify – new rule for 2024 season was intended to apply only to the second hook when competitor broke during first hook at a multi-session event. This rule does not apply to breakage before making a measurable hook in the first session or to single session events. Edit - Competitor is not required to bump sled if breakage occurs during competition run in first session of competition of a multi-session event and is not able to compete in a session scheduled later for the same division at the same event. Competitor must make a measureable distance in the first session of competition to qualify for this rule to apply. Add letter c. Any competition vehicle that qualifies to receive points due to breakage under conditions explained in letter b. is not eligible to receive purse money under any circumstance where there is no measured distance.
9. SFI 4.2 Tractor Blanket 22. Shielding, add Pro Street Diesel Trucks – 2.6 to pg. 74 Recommend adding SFI 4.2 tractor blanket required in any application where a mechanical clutch is used and competitor is limited by rules to retain all stock OEM clutch and transmission housings. Blanket must be pulled up tight to engine block and securely fastened with straps going forward and blanket extend rearward to start of tail housing.
10. SFI Aluminum Bellhousings 3. Bellhousings, d. Bellhousing Certification and Renewal, edit 1) and 2). - pg.41 As of May, 2024, all SFI bellhousings are now required to be certified using a steel flywheel during explosion test. Prior to this update, some bellhousing manufacturers used a cast iron flywheel to test and certify aluminum bellhousings which was acceptable by the previous standard. This revision is not retro-active to existing aluminum bellhousings already in use regardless of SFI certification status. Recommend that all aluminum bellhousings be removed from NTPA competition by Jan. 1, 2026. Only steel or titanium bellhousings would be allowed after that date.
11. Flywheels – rule b. – pg.61 – delete rule Recommend Non-SFI certified flywheels previously identified with a NTPA stamp are no longer acceptable in NTPA competition.
12. Diesel Super Stock – Crankcase pressure relief device – pg. 75, letter h. Recommend to determine acceptable designs and add to rules for this division. Require that any oil released by relief device be contained.
13. Burst Panel Shield – B. General Rules, 22.Shielding, i. Burst Panel Shielding – pg.75 Add 2) Recommend all automotive engines equipped with a supercharger must have a deflection shield ahead of the burst panel in a way that when intake manifold pressure is released the shield
diverts the panel and contents of the intake manifold away from any fuel system component including the fuel lines, fuel diversion valve, fuel tank, and any fuel system vent.
14. Division Committee Representation Recommend that any division that is recognized as a national competition class with rules for that division in the NTPA Pulling Rules have representation on a Division Committee to benefit all involved with the rules process. Divisions not currently represented are Classic Super Stock, Limited Light Super Stock, Pro Farm, SSFWD, Pro Street Diesel Trucks – 2.6
Other topics to be considered
 Cab over semis – safety concerns – discontinue in NTPA competition
 Scales and Drawbars – Check drawbar height and re-weigh vehicles after run
 Turbocharger Failures – exotic compressor wheel designs and high failure rate
Drawbars and Weigh in – submitted by Competitor Check hitches and weight right after the run!! Have a scale to check before if the puller wants to!! Drawbar Adjusting – submitted by Competitor Looks like we need to discuss an approved method of adjusting draw bar after it is checked at weigh in, not to raise it but only to lower it. Also if someone has a bad air leak on a tire how to address the problem. Tech Inspection / Drawbar Measuring – submitted by Competitor All vehicles needs to be Super Teched 1 time in the season. You have way to much talk about puller cheating. NTPA is the top form of pulling and it needs to have the top reputation in the sport to keep its top place in the sport . Rain out rules need to change : If 2/3 of the class pulls it should be considered a class . Remaining pullers that didn’t get to pull will get rainout points only Either enforce the rules or take them out of the rule book: Rasing or Lower the hitch after you cross the scales. Yes everyone does it but that doesn’t make it correct. This make pullers look like they are cheating which I don’t think they are but it looks bad for the sport. Excessive loss of liquid onto the track by a pulling vehicle, while hooked to the sled. Way to many, maybe all of them leave larger than 8” diameter on the track . Its time for that rule to either be enforced
or removed . I watched a 4x4 diesel pickup put 5 gallons of water on the track at the end of his run . It seems normal No crew on the track during a green flag. PS class Friday night crew came out on the track and sprayed ETHER while building boost. That was unsafe and that should be a DQ Rule Book / Points – submitted by Competitor 1. Rule book is still confusing. I appreciate this may be time and cost consuming but there are sections that refer to other classes and other sections and some of those rules apply to some classes and some don't. Suggestion: Rewrite the rule book to have general rules that all apply to all classes and rules that are specific to each class. Don't have class sections that refer to other classes. Consider a technical writer to re-write the rule book. On two occasions the tech officials could not find a rule in the rule book because it was in another classes rules that were supposed to be followed by another class. 2. If new rules are implemented during the season, issue an official rules supplement.
3. Each year have a section in the rule book that clearly states new or modified rules.
4. Class Weight-Either stick to the weights listed in the rule book or if weights will change because of a scale that is "off" make sure this is clearly communicated during the driver's meeting and there is enough time to make vehicle adjustments. On one specific occasion the weight was changed halfway through the scaling process and competitors that already scaled were not told.
5. Some competition rules such as adjusters, hitch heights and adjusting tire air pressure after measuring hitch heights are not followed because "it's always been that way" but not everyone knows that and may appear someone is "cheating" or given an unfair advantage. So, I suggest the rules be modified to allow for those instances or make sure everyone knows the rules will be enforced as written regardless of what was allowed in the past.
6. Fuel-Specifically Diesel Classes-Consider a single or multiple certified suppliers that everyone has to use. Testing fuel may still be required but if a competitor uses only a fuel mixture (including any lubrication additives) from an approved supplier, it should be known to the competitor that it is within NTPA limits.
7. Consider re-vamping the points system to neither unduly reward or penalize a competitor when an unusually high number of competitors attend an event (i.e. Bowling Green).
8. Move all pull-offs to the end of the session-This gives time for competitors to come back around, doesn't penalize late hooks that make the pull off, and creates an end of show best of the best for the fans.
Lineup / Draw Number – submitted by Competitor When a pulling team has multiple entries in the same class with back to back hooks in the lineup, discuss a system to split entries one hook apart. Rule Proposals – submitted by Competitor All single turbocharger classes: - To have smooth bore on inlet compressor cover. - have a known distance from turbocharger back face plate to front face of compressor wheel. Reasons- tech and safety as well as slowing cost of new turbo designs.  In classes that lower drawbars for safety reasons, a second top hold down must be installed with a provision for a seal to ensure that the maximum drawbar height is set and can’t be raised past that point. Only lowered.  If test puller does not make a measurable distance equal or greater than 2/3 length of track length the sled will automatically be reset to make next puller test option puller. Other topics that need to be discussed but not necessarily under the criteria of rules.  Time length of shows. Classes and size of classes  Rule packages to preserve the integrity of classes and/or complete overhaul of rules packages to keep certain classes alive or kill them  Fix website issues and or App  Sled ramps and the effects of distances and quality of show  Change wording of rule book page 32 #6 letter C to something like: In any class in which all competitors that have a license for that particular class (GN license at a GN/SN hook) have made a measurable attempt will receive place points as class would be deemed official. Track Length / Points – submitted by Competitor Set max track length to 320 the track lengths are getting out of hand Points race if you miss 2 hooks or more you no longer receive points for that season Drawbar Lowering – submitted by Competitor In regards to the Light Supers adjustment after going through scale and drawbar stand. Require two hold down bolts one to right of center and one to the left of center. One should be used to get the 20” max. and other to be used to hold down drawbar after lowering. 20” max hold down will have a hole drilled with nylon tie strap like the TWD use.
SSFWD Trucks – submitted by Competitor (RN 3) With today being the last day of the rules submission, I would like to suggest that R2 and R4 use a 35x12.5 or a 315/75 D.O.T. approved tires. We need to get the super stock trucks closer to being on the same page so it makes it a more level playing field. There is an engine difference in size, but when it comes to power, they are only 100 or so hp less than ours and there is a lot more power difference in the mod 4wd class. Mike O can confirm that. This could also help NTPA get more trucks like I stated in the letter that I sent in December (see below). The ssfwd drive trucks could still run other organizations with bar tires and switch to D.O.T.s for NTPA. This would make it worth chasing the points for Enderle as well. Where we’re located, a lot of pullers don’t want to drive 13 hours one way to Ohio to pull against someone the pull against all the time. We want to go and pull against the best of the best. One thing that we may need to look at in the future and NOT for rules submission this year is allowing some kind of different front axle as we are past the hp limit of the D60/70. I’m still interested in being a divisional committee person if NTPA is going to put a person in that position. SSFWD – submitted by Competitor (RN 2) 1) Our rules are attached and would like to be placed into the rulebook for the 2025 season and beyond. When Tom and Larry accepted our class for the 2019 season, these rules were adopted by them, but not put into the rulebook. We would like our rules to be visible to all, that way we'll have a better chance to get new vehicles into our class. 2) Move the B purse from $2,750 to $3,000, for not just our class, but that entire group of classes (HF, PSD 3.0, CSS, LLSS) to ensure that no purse is below the $3,000 mark. 3) After much deliberation, we would be interested in seeing a 10 vehicle pay structure for both the A and B purse, but would want to visit this yearly if we start to get 11 or 12 vehicles as we certainly don't want anyone to not get paid with how much costs are. We do like the current model, which evenly distributes the money throughout the field.
NTPA-Region II: Super Stock FWD Truck Rules
1. Maximum weight of competition vehicle is 6200#.
2. Maximum cubic inch of naturally-aspirated engine is 410 with 2% variance.
3. Any automotive type engine must be limited to a single (4) barrel or 2 (2) barrels of carburetion with mechanical linkage, with only two valves per cylinder and must accept a stock automotive crankshaft. Aluminum aftermarket engine blocks permitted.
4. Fuel injection or any air compressing devices are not permitted. Acceptable fuels are gasoline and alcohol.
5. Rear of engine block if moved must be a minimum of twelve (12) inches behind the centerline of the front axle.
6. OEM bore spacing must be retained in engine.
7. Grill must be in original position.
8. Truck bodies permitted and must have complete firewall, no fiberglass or plastic bodies unless OEM. OEM frame rails same as manufacturer as truck only permitted.
9. Axle shields are required. Shield to be .060” thickness steel or aluminum. Shield not to be mounted to axle ends or hub bolts. A single hole may be cut in one to allow locking of hubs.
10. Maximum wheelbase is 134 inches on all Super Stock 4X4 trucks.
11. Bar tires are permitted, with a maximum pulling tire size of 34x18.00-15. Maximum tire size to be 112 inches in circumference once tire is inflated to 30psi. The outside edge of the narrow axle must overlap the centerline of the tire on the wide axle by at least one inch.
12. Clear plexi-glass or factory tint glass permitted.
13. No mud flaps or dirt deflectors will be permitted.
14. No fuel tanks, fuel lines, pressure gauges or pups allowed in cabs. All hydraulic lines in cab must be shielded top and sides with a minimum of .060 aluminum.
15. All air or hydraulic suspension systems cannot have hydraulic, air, or electric lines attached to these devices during competition.
16. Hitch height maximum is to be 26” at point of hook before, during, and after pull. Hitch must be rigid in all directions and solidly mounted. Pulling point can be no more than 1 ½ inches from back edge of drawbar. No clevis, chains, or cables permitted in hitching device. If drawbar is attached to rear differential housing, the attaching point must be at the centerline or below. The hitch bar can extend past the centerline of rear axle, but from point of hook to centerline of rear axle shall be no less than 27% of truck wheelbase.
17. Electronic timing delay devices or programmable ignition boxes prohibited.
18. Read only engine and chassis monitoring functions will be permitted.
19. Region II SS FWD trucks may participate against RIII trucks in a combined SS FWD event (i.e., Enderle), but must follow their own regions’ rules. 20. All other rules not stated will fall under the Modified FWD truck category.
SSFWD, PSD 4X4 2.6, PF – submitted by Member State (WTPA)  SS 4x4 Trucks: We have an engine location rule that needs clarification. This came up from a competitor that is building a new truck using a late model chassis vs an older chassis like most of us use. It states from stock location, but stock location is not specified, so we would like to clarify this rule with the attached. Currently this would only affect one truck to move their engine but they have agreed and signed the sheet. All other current competitors fall within this rule.  2.6 class - allow an open driveline rather than the OE driveline that we are now limited to. This would remove rules 5.c. and 5.d.. This would also remove the first sentence of 5.e.. We would be adding in the wording from the 3.0 class, which is written as "Drivetrain will consist of any front axle, transmission, transfer case, rear axle permitted. No planetaries permitted.”  Pro Farm - propose a rule change to allow recast head. Oem bolt pattern style must be stock dimensions height, width and length. No billet head. Benefits of a recast head are the cost and longevity making it a good investment for this group. PF, SSFWD – submitted by Member State (UPM) The members of the UPM (United Pullers of Minnesota) and WTPA (Wisconsin Tractor Pulling Association) Pro Farm Class would like to propose a rule change to allow recast head. OEM Style must be stock dimensions (ie height, width and length). Intake and Exhaust manifolds must bolt on OEM overall measurement and bolt pattern. No billet heads. Benefits of a recast head are the cost and longevity making it a good investment for this group. SSFWD Engine Placement – clarification of engine location
Previous verbiage: plus or minus 3 inches from factory location New verbiage: Engine location will be measured from the center of the front axle to the back of the engine block. The measurement will be no less than 12 inches. Super Stock Diesel 4X4 Truck – submitted by Div. Committee
1. Class Weight/Scales:
a. Have the first Pre-commit vehicle in line up go across scales first, document weight. Rest of class will weigh this NUMBER. We want to emphasize that it is just a number and we don’t care what that number is, only that we all weigh the same. (In most cases without ice.)
i. These are TEMPORARY scales and are carried around on semi-trailers being bumped, banged and bounced up and down the road from event to event. In most cases, they are not the same as at the last event or calibrated to exact accuracy
ii. Reason, most all vehicles came from last event together. Vehicles are already set up for this weight.
1. Better SHOW 2. Quicker across the scales
Four Wheel Drive Trucks:
Unlike a tractor, we cannot move weight front to back. If we have to remove 200lbs from weight box this completely unbalances the suspension of our trucks. We have to adjust the shocks and springs accordingly and, in most cases, there is not time, equipment or surface available to this before going down the track, especially for first few in line. This is what happened at Tomah 2024 to the SSD4x4 Class all had to pull a significant amount of weight and we put on a terrible show; 2/3 of the class bounced and did not make it down the track.
2. Diesel Fuel Legality Issue
a. NTPA owns 3 testers that are used to determine the legality of diesel fuel. Marvin and tech guys have worked very hard to keep everyone legal. However, the testers you own are not available to us for purchase. Many of us have purchased testers in an effort to ensure we are legal.
b. In most cases, pullers are making every effort to have legal fuel while also providing enough lubrication for our costly fuel systems.
c. If NTPA determines a pullers diesel fuel is illegal, test it further to determine that is diesel fuel.
i. Cast iron skillet is a good vessel, pour fuel sample in skillet, light with grill lighter. Take lighter away. If fuel goes “whoof” or continues to burn, it has oxygenators. If fire goes out when fire is removed, it is diesel fuel.
ii. Do Not Penalize pullers for extra lubrication or threaten to ban them for “X” amount time if after a 2nd test it is deemed diesel fuel and there was an honest mistake.
iii. In actuality, oxygenators should be the only concern. Not how much lube has been added to the diesel fuel especially since straight B100 is allowed.
3. Monday noon Registration for non Free Entry pullers:
a. This should be voluntary and not mandatory.
i. Many pullers have very busy day jobs and often time forget to do so. Or vehicle is broken and they are spending every minute to make repairs to be able to attend next event. Then all a sudden it’s Tuesday and not we can’t go pulling with NTPA. Very disappointing.
ii. If the entire season was available, it could be a one stop shop, but it is not.
iii. For the NON-COMPUTER literate pullers, this is a very confusing process “Buy a ticket” (Crazy phrase to enter yourself for a pulling competition.) Some pullers have to
depend on another person to enter for them and there appears to me NO GRACE PERIOD or NO MARGIN FOR ERROR. Just sorry, entry is closed. Too bad, so sad. Terrible attitude to have toward the folks that put on the show.
iv. We inquired as to the reason for the ONLINE Monday noon deadline by NTPA. We were told that the promoters wanted an advance head count and it would improve wait time at the registration trailer. We were told that numbers were up and better than ever. Clearly this is not taking to account all the NS and Scratch entries.
v. We found the same or longer wait at events where Melissa was not in the trailer this year…… trying to find if the puller was PAID or not.
1. If the list is complete by Monday noon and it is now Thursday, Friday or Saturday, the pullers name should be on a pre-registered list, therefore He/She had to have paid. Correct? Pullers now fumbling through phone trying to find confirmation. This needs some fine tuning.
vi. NTPA could be receiving more revenue from entry fees if pullers were allowed to sign up online until day before or pay/sign up at event. Not sure what the true issue is. We are not sending a “welcome, thank you for coming message” to the pullers. Even if online is open until day before, promoters could still have lineup prior to event start.
1. Some pullers are tech savvy and would prefer online registration. Pullers still have to go to trailer to sign waiver and receive wristband, so not much time actually saved for a regular.
2. Four (4) more SSD4x4 pullers would have been at Fort Recovery if not for the Monday Noon deadline. This would have replaced those who were a “NS” in the lineup. Not sure why NTPA/WPI would want to turn down their entry fee monies and put on a better show with a class of 14 and not 10???????
3. If this is for the betting thing …… We can’t seem to get a straight answer.
a. What if anything is in it for NTPA? b. What if anything is in it for the pullers?
4. Starting Line Ramps
a. No starting line ramps for sleds Reason: Common Sense
5. Rule Book Housekeeping
a. Would like to see rules that apply to each particular class listed in General Rules (that apply to all) and the specific class rules for all applies to this class. Currently, for the SSD4X4 Class, there are rules that apply to the class in General Rules, FWD, various tractors and SSD4x4. New pullers aren’t always aware they have to look around to find all the rules that apply.
THIS IS LETTER #2. Sorry we forgot these 2 items
6. RECOMMENDATION ON LINE UP
a. HAVE SOMEONE (NTPA PERSON) THERE TO COME AND GET THE PULLERS WHEN IT THEIR TURN TO GET LINED UP. AS IT IS CURRENTLY, IT IS NOT VERY EFFICIENT. OUR CLASS IS PRETTY GOOD MOST OF THE TIME, BUT SOME OF THE VENUES ARE PRETTY BIG AND WE ARE NOT ALWAYS PARKED TOGETHER.
b. BOWLING GREEN IS THE HARDEST, NOT SURE IF A TEXT SYSTEM WOULD WORK??
7.POINTS AT BOWLING GREEN
a. PROPOSE THAT ALL VEHICLES WITH NTPA LICENSE BE GIVEN 15 SHOW UP POINTS AND NO OTHER POINTS BE AWARDED.
b. POSSIBLY AWARD POINTS TO THE PRECOMMIT PULLERS IN THE ORDER OF FINISH.
i.FOR INSTANCE TOM JONES FINISHES 3RD, TIM SMITH FINISHES 5TH, RICK SMITH FINISHED 8TH. POINTS WOULD BE AWARDED TOM JONES 30, TIM SMITH 29, RICK SMITH 28 AND SO ON.
REASON: TOO MANY TIMES THE RESULTS AT BOWLING GREEN CHANGE OR DECIDE A CHAMPIONSHIP. PRECOMMITTED PULLERS HAVE TRAVELED TO ALL THE EVENTS WITH THE OTHER (I.E.) 10 PRE-COMMITTED COMPETITORS AND AT BG THE CLASS IS NOW 25 THAT HOLD AN NTPA LICENSE. THE LEADERS COULD HAVE A BAD BG.
AT NO OTHER EVENT DO WE HAVE AS MANY COMPETITORS IN EACH CLASS AND THOSE THAT HAVE NOT ATTENDED ALL THE OTHER CLASS HOOKS SHOULD NOT DECIDE A CHAMPIONSHIP.
Light Modified – submitted by Competitor I would like to submit to the rule committee for the Light Modifieds: The sled that is being used will have a weight block be put in the front of the sled, either in the pan or rail to keep the pan more stable. I would like to also consider adding one Industrial engine Ex. DT466 to the engine combinations. RN Modified – submitted by Competitor Pro National/Regional National Level a Modified -7500 lbs. 2. Big Chief or any wedge head without a stock OEM intake bolt pattern are limited to 42% maximum overdrive. Change to: Big Chief wedge heads limited to 42 % maximum overdrive, Any other wedge head without a stock OEM intake bolt pattern are limited to 60% maximum overdrive.
Intent: In a Hemi and turbine dominated class, "Allow a wedge head competitor a better chance to compete. "Not ALL wedge heads without OEM pattern FLOW like the Big Chief heads. It is unfair to lump all wedge heads into one group. This rule is old and needs updated, Rll needs modified tractors !!!! This change might help RN Modified – submitted by Owners
The Radial Reactor Pulling Team out of Bel Air, Maryland, which uses the 18-cylinder radial Wright R-3350 engine as a power plant has run in the NTPA 7500# Modified State/Regional class under a variance in previous years. We are requesting to be added to the NTPA Competition and Safety rules as a recognized engine in the 7500# Modified State/Regional class. By being added to the NTPA Competition and Safety rules we would be eligible to support NTPA pulling in regions 2 and 4 in the upcoming years.
The Tech Services requirements under the variance (cable around each row of engine cylinders) are still in place.
We appreciate WPI/Executive Board, Divisional Committee Members and Tech Services taking time to review the request. Any other information or questions are more than welcome.
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 03, 2024 07:47PM
Bring on the unlimited minis and EFI. Can’t wait to watch those turbo minis finally run more consistently.
Reply Quote

Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 04:29AM
One of the LLSS proposals is to allow components. "Light Limited Super Stock – submitted by Competitor The first I would like to propose is to allow individuals to remove the cast bell housings and replace them with a standard SFI clutch can like I have on my Oliver , makes life a lot easier when adjusting clutches. Secondly, is to allow component chassis’s in the class . Reason this is number 1 is safety, 2 is cost ,3 is a nice upgrade , 4 parts availability. Submitted by Technical Services and Region Director."

3 questions-

1) What is the best argument against allowing them? If allowed in LLSS, why not Light Pro, Limited Pro, Super Farm, and Hot Farm also?

2) Is that argument against allowing them based on accurate information? For example, if someone mentions cost, there have been multiple pullers who run components actually say they are no more expensive and perhaps less expensive.

3) If a valid argument for components could be made on the basis of safety, then what is the argument against allowing (not mandating) them if a puller feels it will make for a safer vehicle?
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 05:09AM
There is no good argument against them aside from "I don't have one, so you can't have one either". It's fear and lack of common sense that keeps them out of the remaining tractor classes. If a person is starting form scratch, or wants to upgrade for durability and ease of maintenance, why deny what is the most sensible option available?

The list of benefits is large.

The list of detriments is........"you'll turn the class on its ear". Caveman thinking right there.

Ask some current Light Pro guys if they want one and see what the response is.
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 05:48AM
I like the idea of allowing components in LLSS, that way if someone wanted to move up from LLSS to LSS they don't need a whole different tractor.
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 07:18AM
Well said. This makes perfect sense!!! This is called progressive thinking, something that doesn't happen often enough in these circumstances anymore. Many people involved in their respective classes today are often out to protect themselves, not look at the good of the class/org/sport.

But I will probably be accused of only looking at my own interests as well.

Is what it is.
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 07:36AM
No it doesn’t there’s no gosh damn reason we need fing components in Llss at all ever there’s not one safety reason there’s no good reason besides ppl don’t like adjusting there clutch this @#$%& getting old non of you pull in the llss so keep your fing mouth shut
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal. ALLOW THEM IN ALL TRACTOR CLASSES! September 04, 2024 08:13AM
I hope the photo attaches properly. Using 55-60 year old cast makes sense no-where! This is a motorsport, aftermarket is the name of the game! Long term the component is cheaper. By the time you shorten the axle housings, turn them down, shorten the axles and drill them out it’s asinine to expect them to keep living. We haven’t done anything to slow down head technology (heard some aftermarket 5.9 heads being used by some in Llss), not slowing down turbo technology, not slowing down pump technology, cam design, tire technology. So we have allowed all these gains in all the places except the area that is suppose to withstand all the technological advances of the last 60 years. Throwing 27x more horsepower to something than what it was designed for is crazy. So who accepts the liability? Do durability and safety not go hand in hand? If a sanctioning body knows more durable options exist in which a machine is less likely to break a hub or axle housing are they then not liable? I believe the legal term is willful negligence.

I compile that list a year ago, so add a year to all those ages!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2024 08:16AM by OH1979er.


Reply Quote

Trigger Warning September 04, 2024 08:13AM
Quote
Cc
No it doesn’t there’s no gosh damn reason we need fing components in Llss at all ever there’s not one safety reason there’s no good reason besides ppl don’t like adjusting there clutch this @#$%& getting old non of you pull in the llss so keep your fing mouth shut

You may have heard of a condition known as TDS. The above post is an example of CDS (Component Derangement Syndrome).

It's always amusing when people go onto a pulling message board (the existence of which is to discuss pulling issues) and try to order people to not discuss a pulling topic... and on top of that, to play the "if you don't pull in the clsss you don't get to have an opinion" card.

Maybe Jake and Richard should put trigger warnings on threads where components are discussed. Cross dressing, too.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2024 08:25AM by The Original Michael.
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 08:44AM
I’ll bet if you ask current light pro guys, most of the ones wanting to go component are green that didnt build their trans to go with the horsepower. Atlas is capable of doing it, so is Lemke and Doug Roberts. But why would we do the logical thing and update what we have, lets build a whole new chassis instead!
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 11:13AM
I'll give this a try. Let's look at history, look at the number of lss from 1998-1999, not on the national level but regional and state, then around 2000 components were allowed....do we have more lss now or less? My guess is 3/4 of the class got parked. Now we have similar numbers in llss and you are wanting history to repeat itself. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same things expecting different results.
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 11:37AM
What you’re saying couldn’t be farther from the truth. We were pulling LSS in 2003 and they still weren’t allowed. It wasn’t until 05-06 that they were allowed in the LSS class. I can tell you that most of the guys who had cast chassis back then have since made the switch. So try again! I’ll do you one better, tell me what class components have been allowed in that it did ruin? The answer is NONE. Heard this same non sense every time a class went component. The only exception to your rule would be HSTSP and I was in Indianapolis when the club voted to allow components at the state level. Of guys who ran the whole HSTPA circuit Shawn Peetz moved to Missouri and has since built a component. Sandefur, Kuhn, Esteb, Lewis all component. Koch and Lancaster had a component built but have since learned to enjoy the less stressful things in life. Matt Rausch bought the Happy Deere of Roger Buss and now runs 2 cast light supers with IPL. George Everett and Anthony Hart continued to run their cast tractors in the LSS as well as Ken McKillip. Lee Peetz ran a cast Moline. That leaves Tom Morphet and Donnie Bush off the top of my head and I haven’t seen those guys in years. You picked up 5 in Ohio since components were allowed. Weilnau, Karlen, Irvin, Payne and Yantes. Your argument simply doesn’t fly. The expense of technology in HP has been the determining factor in a lot of guys leaving the game but not component chassis. Heard the same garbage when Pro-stocks allowed them, they aren’t hurting for numbers. History tells me guys will make the switch and be thankful that they did.
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 04:37PM
Oh1979er -- Anthony Hart, George Everett, and Ken McKillip's tractor ( Jim Roger's running it now ) are All light limited super stocks now !
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 04, 2024 01:11PM
Who’s going to build all these component chassis’s? There’s already a waiting list. If building a new tractor from ground up it does make sense but what about everyone else who has already invested a lot of money lighting and installing billet everything in they’re ag chassis. Everything is too expensive already, now those guys have to spend even more money. And don’t say they don’t have to if they don’t want to, that’s BS, if they want to win they will have to. If it’s a true safety issue then it should be mandated. When has a component chassis ever been mandated? The safety thing is a smoke screen for the guys who want one because they thinks it’s going to give them an advantage. Like said in a previous thread, the guys winning with ag tractors are still going to be winning with components
Reply Quote

Re: Thought on LLSS component proposal September 05, 2024 01:12AM
Quote
MG1206
Who’s going to build all these component chassis’s? The companies that do chassis building.

There’s already a waiting list. If building a new tractor from ground up it does make sense but what about everyone else who has already invested a lot of money lighting and installing billet everything in they’re ag chassis. Everything is too expensive already, now those guys have to spend even more money.

Allowing does not equal mandating. Newsflash- the way to grow the sport is for new vehicles to get built. Yes, existing can be sold. If a guy is comfortable with his 65 year old Farmall 460 LLSS, he can keep running it. You are aware that these old tractors will eventually get impossible to find.

And don’t say they don’t have to if they don’t want to, that’s BS, if they want to win they will have to.

Nobody is forcing them to do anything. Their choice.

If it’s a true safety issue then it should be mandated. When has a component chassis ever been mandated? The safety thing is a smoke screen for the guys who want one because they thinks it’s going to give them an advantage. Like said in a previous thread, the guys winning with ag tractors are still going to be winning with components

If a puller feels it is safer, why do you want to prohibit him from having one? Which is more dangerous, a LLSS tractor or a top fuel dragster? Some Top Fuel teams have gone to an enclosed cockpit because they feel it's safer, yet NHRA does not mandate them and allows the traditional open cockpit. The team is allowed a choice in what they feel.is a safer option.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2024 05:06PM by The Original Michael.
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals (easier to read version) Pt.1 September 04, 2024 05:12AM
Since I see people are getting their undies in a wad about the way TAP posted the rules proposals I'll post seperate screen shots of each page from the email I received. This'll take 3 posts


Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals (easier to read version) Pt.2 September 04, 2024 05:14AM
Pt. 2


Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals (easier to read version) Pt.3 September 04, 2024 05:34AM
Pt. 3


Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 04, 2024 02:59PM
Why would they outlaw step hitches? They are all 1 piece steel from engler and the IH guys normally need them to make 20in hitch…. Why fix something that isn’t broken
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 04, 2024 11:57PM
Agreed, as long as cross sectional thickness is there, it doesnt matter. And a protractor is an accurate way to measure hitch angle unless physics changed, as long as the front step and rear step are machined parallel to eachother.
Reply Quote

This is painful to read September 04, 2024 07:44AM
If the LLSS class goes component, the weight needs to be brought back to 6000lb. The whole class was meant to be a relevant place for old LSS tractors to compete but that has been shot to heck. There never should have been De-cubing allowed. There never should have been 3.4 turbos allowed. The only thing keeping the class from becoming another 466-diesel dominated class is the lack of movable weight. There's already 1/2 as many LLSS on the track now as there were 10 years ago, so just keep beating the class to death with turbos & tires & weight. Some guys think that if they can have a component chassis, they can automatically win. When in reality, everyone is gonna spent $30k on a new chassis & the same guys whining about wanting a component will be getting beat again. It's a vicious cycle that plagues all pulling classes.
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 04, 2024 02:15PM
99% of the LLSS pullers DO NOT. DO NOT want component we have our tractors built and why would we want to throw that away and start over



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2024 12:51AM by mh49.
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 04, 2024 04:07PM
Quote
LLSS. PULLER
99% of the LLSS pullers DO NOT. DO NOT went component we have are tractors built and why would we went to throw that away and start over

I can totally see your point!!!!
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 05, 2024 04:39AM
For all these classes with “limited” in the title (and a few others), why can’t the answer to “to much power for the old chassis” just be cut the power with smaller turbo or something similar? It’s suppose to be a limited class and not a GN class. Whole lot cheaper to put on a smaller turbo than a whole new chassis. For those people that want to push forward, there are a multitude of classes for that.
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 05, 2024 08:12AM
The rules we have now are working so let’s leave them alone we don’t need to be spending any more money
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 05, 2024 02:17PM
Quote
LLSS. PULLER
The rules we have now are working so let’s leave them alone we don’t need to be spending any more money

Again I see your point. Just like the rules in lss were working years ago. But for some reason, many didn't that they were working at that time.
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 05, 2024 02:18PM
Quote
LLSS. PULLER
99% of the LLSS pullers DO NOT. DO NOT want component we have our tractors built and why would we want to throw that away and start over

What?? Why would you have to start over? You can keep right on running what you've got. But for what it's worth a fully built to the hilt cast rear end costs quite a bit more than a component rear end. I know that only applies to people building new tractors but your attitude is basically like was stated earlier in the post "I don't have one so you can't either even if it saves the class money"
Reply Quote

Re: This is painful to read September 05, 2024 02:43PM
Quote
what??

99% of the LLSS pullers DO NOT. DO NOT want component we have our tractors built and why would we want to throw that away and start over

What?? Why would you have to start over? You can keep right on running what you've got. But for what it's worth a fully built to the hilt cast rear end costs quite a bit more than a component rear end. I know that only applies to people building new tractors but your attitude is basically like was stated earlier in the post "I don't have one so you can't either even if it saves the class money"


BWAHAHHAHAHA Yeah it's that simple isn't it?
Reply Quote

LLSS Class Rep. September 05, 2024 09:33AM
The first issue is; The class itself is built around the smaller ag OEM chassis. The limitation of the OEM chassis or the tractor you chose to use should be part of the limitation in the class. Going component would go against all that the class was started for. As far as (OLD CHASSIS) there are plenty of newer chassis that would work quite well. I have been researching them for a while now. Deere, AGCO, And IH all have new (less than 25 years old) chassis that will work as good or better than the 4010, 560, 180, 1850. If one wishes to run component chassis there are plenty of classes to do that in now. Like: Light Super, Heavy Super, Pro Stock and 5.0 Pro.

Please dont try to ruin another class in the name of I cant keep up with the big boys,or heavy hitters.

If durability becomes an issue then we should just pull a little power away, or maybe some slightly smaller tires to ease the torque load on the transmissions.

The second issue would be that: If The rule passes, over half the pullers in the class would quit and it will take a long time for the class to recover. If it ever did. Example the Light Super Stock class never realy recovered in Wisconsin.

If your looking at the technology end of the class then the sky is the limit, For instance why not run components? Why not run EFI? Why not run electric motors with batterys? Why not have traction control? Why not just have self driving or an auto steer system? You see where I'm going with this. Technology is not always the answer.

There are only a few reasons to make rules. #1 is Safety, and safety is not an issue if the power levels are down to an acceptable limit. #2 is Competition, what rules are needed to keep all tractors and pullers on an even field and keep the tractors competitve with each other. #3 is Economics, this rule ties into #1 and #2, there has to be enough pullers in the class to justify booking the class and paying for it, and the pullers have to be able to afford to keep going.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2024 11:04AM by jeremyroff.
Reply Quote

Re: LLSS Class Rep. September 05, 2024 12:05PM
Quote
jeremyroff
The first issue is; The class itself is built around the smaller ag OEM chassis. The limitation of the OEM chassis or the tractor you chose to use should be part of the limitation in the class. Going component would go against all that the class was started for. As far as (OLD CHASSIS) there are plenty of newer chassis that would work quite well. I have been researching them for a while now. Deere, AGCO, And IH all have new (less than 25 years old) chassis that will work as good or better than the 4010, 560, 180, 1850. If one wishes to run component chassis there are plenty of classes to do that in now. Like: Light Super, Heavy Super, Pro Stock and 5.0 Pro.

Please dont try to ruin another class in the name of I cant keep up with the big boys,or heavy hitters.

If durability becomes an issue then we should just pull a little power away, or maybe some slightly smaller tires to ease the torque load on the transmissions.

The second issue would be that: If The rule passes, over half the pullers in the class would quit and it will take a long time for the class to recover. If it ever did. Example the Light Super Stock class never realy recovered in Wisconsin.

If your looking at the technology end of the class then the sky is the limit, For instance why not run components? Why not run EFI? Why not run electric motors with batterys? Why not have traction control? Why not just have self driving or an auto steer system? You see where I'm going with this. Technology is not always the answer.
This makes too much sense! These guys won’t go for it!

There are only a few reasons to make rules. #1 is Safety, and safety is not an issue if the power levels are down to an acceptable limit. #2 is Competition, what rules are needed to keep all tractors and pullers on an even field and keep the tractors competitve with each other. #3 is Economics, this rule ties into #1 and #2, there has to be enough pullers in the class to justify booking the class and paying for it, and the pullers have to be able to afford to keep going.
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 05, 2024 09:40AM
back in the day, my discontent with components in the LSS was the engine, all the 301s and small 400s were done. Already most of the AC are gone from LLSS, and some want bigger engines yet . cross dressing next ?
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 05, 2024 10:55AM
We are using basically the same tractor that super farm and some others are with a lot smaller motor so don’t say the rearends won’t hold up you can spend a money there and it is a hold lot cheaper than throwing what you already have a way and start over you change the rules know and the class will die
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 05, 2024 12:10PM
I hope they dont pass the component crap ! just put the class back to 24.5 tires and it would be easier on the whole driveline just plain and simple ! dont try to kill the class.
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 05, 2024 04:02PM
Lol 24.5 - it's a super stock class, all super stock tractor classes have 30.5 tires
Reply Quote

Re: Fall rule proposals September 08, 2024 02:44PM
Well it shouldnt cost much to build a component chassis for a llss nothing says it would have to be a copy of a 4 thousand horse super mod lots of combines and junk trucks around sounds great and let alcohhol have 470 cubes it would save a lot of money trying to make a big engine small
Reply Quote

Newer Topic Older Topic

Author:

Your Email:


Subject:
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically. If the code is hard to read, then just try to guess it right. If you enter the wrong code, a new image is created and you get another chance to enter it right.
Message:
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 39,005, Posts: 234,112, Members: 3,484.
This forum: Topics: 37,792, Posts: 230,502.

Website Daily and Monthy Hits: http://pulloff.com/webalizer

Our newest member Smokedout