The Future of the Alcohol Super Stock Class (originally posted on September 23, 2003)
Published January 26, 2009 01:06AM, by Jake Morgan
1 Step Back, Before We Can Go Forward
The Future of the Alcohol Super Stock Class
(originally posted on September 23, 2003)
After 5 years the Super Stock class still stands head and shoulders above the rest of the classes in one category; controversy. The class and it’s all too numerous variations remain the sports most hotly contested topic. It’s hard to believe that nothing has changed in this class since I started this page back in the late summer of 1997. It’s also easy to see why the class hasn’t evolved in that time. Sure there have been some changes, mainly the names but the same problems still remain: too few tractors, and very confusing rules.
It’s interesting that a few years back fans were promised by pullers promoters and organizations that the Alcohol class and the Diesel class will both grow independently of each other. Now it’s years later and the growth has been at a snails pace if any, this is especially true for the alcohol (Open/Unlimited) super stock.
Sometimes the best thing to do is take a step back before you think about moving forward. I’m not a huge NASCAR fan and this may be common knowledge to some people but read this summary that I borrowed/modified from a few NASCAR websites:
NASCAR allowed big block engines in their car for a number of years. The big block Ford and Dodge hemis became dominate on the circuit. For awhile, NASCAR toyed with the idea of a 396 cu in engine limit. This brought about a wave of protest from Ford and Dodge, it was clear that this rule was meant to benefit GM cars only.NASCAR quickly abandoned the idea when it learned that the rival USAC series would stick with a 427 cu in limit. NASCAR feared losing most of their top teams to a rival organization.
Eventually, the 1971 season brought about serious change in the NASCAR rule book. NASCAR effectively eliminated the big blocks from competition by requiring that cars be powered by nothing larger than a 305 cubic inch small block motor.
Bill France did not want "exotic" cars running in his "stock" car series. "Big Bill" would simply change the rules again to penalize them further. The new rules addressed a safety concern as much as they were designed to level the playing field for General Motors. These consistent and strict regulations have kept the competition close and have helped NASCAR grow to become the nation’s premier spectator sport.
Now you may be thinking to yourselves who cares what NASCAR did, this is tractor pulling and the two motorsports are not at all similar. Yes and No. The only similarity between the two is the fact that they are both motor sports. NASCAR is the most successful example of motorsports management and marketing in the modern era, so while the competition on the track is dissimilar the management and marketing is similar and should be used as a guideline.
We are all well aware that truck and tractor pulling appeals to a much smaller audience than stock car racing. Most of America own cars while only a vast minority own tractors. However, pulling has not made the decisions that would promote any growth, especially in one of its most powerful classes.
If you haven’t figured it out yet the problem was, is, and will continue to be; engine size. This is especially prevalent among the methanol powered Super Stocks.
NASCAR has provided a playing field in which all manufactures can put a car together that has the potential to be competitive. The core of the rules are solid, and there is never any discussion whether a car is legal or not.
Maybe it’s time for the Super Stock class to take a step backwards, and the organizations to take a play from the NASCAR playbook. The majority of new alcohol tractors that have been built in the last few years are 504 cubic inches. This allows the tractors to be legal at state events as well as regional and national events. This also allows all brands to be able to compete on a level field.
The current rules are at the other end of the spectrum, 650 cubic inch tractors are only legal in a few states and on a dwindling National circuit. Very few 650 cubic inch tractors are being built. The national circuits have seen a fair share of brands picking up wins this summer with Agco, Deere, and IH. The class also has its fair share of variety but has not experienced any growth over the past few years. Tractors are getting new names and new owners but it is still the same iron on the track, and the willingness for many teams to follow the circuit seems to be dwindling.
As most fans and pullers know, the turnout of alcohol tractors on the national level is less that spectacular to say the least. Both organizations are struggling to get five or six tractor to make all their hooks.
The NTPA has run a limited schedule for the Open Super Stock class this summer because of promoter disinterest due to poor turnout. Even with the limited schedule they have only had 6 regulars on the prestigious Grand National circuit. A top five finish in points doesn’t have the mystique that it once did.
The ATPA has had similar problems in the alcohol Super Stock class. There are less than half a dozen regulars at most of the events.
The Open/Unlimited Super Stock class continues to put on good shows all around the US and Canada but would there be a much larger turnout if one, or both, organizations made a drastic rule change and lower the cubic inch limit to 504-540?
The obvious negative with changing the rules back to 504 would be the cost to the competitors. As most people that have opened their wallets to bankroll a tractor already know, pulling isn’t a cheap sport. It’s very difficult to tell someone that has spent the money already on an engine that they are going to have to spend more to de-cube their engine to 504-540.
Unfortunately the classes’ survival is still in question and if spending money to make motors a little smaller would assure survival it seems like a small price to pay. A dwindling national circuit and numerous states not allowing big cubic inch tractors would make a 650 cubic inch motor a very expensive piece of machinery to park in the shop.
I have the following questions:
- Is it time to put a reasonable limit on the alcohol (unlimited/open) Super Stock class?
- Would the long-term growth of the class benefit from de-cubing?
- How many 650 cubic inch alcohol tractors would comply and de-cube?
- What would the turnout be for 2004 national events?
- How could the rule be implemented to cause the least immediate expense to the pullers?
- What are the negatives, if any, for de-cubing?
Jake Morgan
Owner, PULLOFF.COM
Independent Pulling News
This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated.
Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal.
Comments
Post A Comment
Global: Topics: 38,718, Posts: 229,828, Members: 3,330.
This forum: Topics: 59, Posts: 59.
Our newest member LT Limited Pro
