T850 Engine Rule "SUGGESTIONS" for 2013

LittleCharger · **Joined:** April 1st, 2012, 12:29 am **Posts:** 1445

DoktorC wrote:

Politics will kill the class faster than whatever label you choose to define "us"...ep, sst45, sst60 are all dead stock classes too. We're arguing over defining a class that is already operating reletively smoothly...let's try not to get too deep into this where we're scaring away new and old racers because of percieved infighting. Remember its 20 laps of racing in a weekend...we spend more time bitching about definition than we do racing...

Jezz still can't figure out why you drive a Yamaha...your a bright guy! :mrgreen:

Couldn't have said it any better...t boat racing is like pond hockey to me you show you throw your sticks in the middle you play and laugh all day that's it. Funny how my kids will hang out in the terrian park skiing or playing pond hockey all day in the freezing cold but soon as some parent shows up and tries to organize things so it will be more "exciting" the kids are cold! Lol

The class is not for everyone...some will leave if it has too many rules and some won't participate if there aren't enough rules....you can not accommodate everyone and sometimes you have to say to someone this might not be the class for you...there are other classes.

Hounddog · **Joined:** April 3rd, 2012, 1:52 pm **Posts:** 3124

I totally agree with both of you. The current rules work. They took years to get them to where they are to-day. They are not perfect. But to change to MOD will distory the class and trying to have more detail with special rules will make it more complex. We currently do not have any problem finding stock parts. DOC is the only one with a head issue. Cylinder head that is. DOC, I will sell you Jim 's PERFECT 70CES 150 lb stock head for $400.00. End of problem.

DoktorC · **Posted:** January 20th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Hounddog wrote:

I totally agree with both of you. The current rules work. They took years to get them to where they are to-day. They are not perfect. But to change to MOD will distory the class and trying to have more detail with special rules will make it more complex. We currently do not have any problem finding stock parts. DOC is the only one with a head issue. Cylinder head that is. DOC, I will sell you Jim 's PERFECT 70CES 150 lb stock head for $400.00. End of problem.

There is the issue I have with the stock rule Don...$400 for a used head that doesn't make the spec compression. A NEW G-tech head isn't any more money and I don't have to have it cut.....AND it has a stock style dome so jetting doesn't get wonky. It will make 160lbs and has no other crazy performance advantage so....where's the issue? Other than it looks cool and I can afford it.....

Hounddog · **Joined:** April 3rd, 2012, 1:52 pm **Posts:** 3124

DoktorC wrote:

There is the issue I have with the stock rule Don...$400 for a used head that doesn't make the spec compression. A NEW G-tech head isn't any more money and I don't have to have it cut.....AND it has a stock style dome so jetting doesn't get wonky. It will make 160lbs and has no other crazy performance advantage so....where's the issue? Other than it looks cool and I can afford it.....

The only issue is the G-tech head is a custom head and not the one that came with the motor . Others in T with other motor brands may? say. Why is the yamaha allowed a custom head and I have to run a cut stock head? I know what your talking about with the jetting, but that is the way CES heads are. So you could table a rule change to allow all motors in T850 to run custom 160 lb heads. I must admit I like the idea. We would have Gig make a spec 160 lb head for each different powerhead. That way we have one of the yamaha, one for each of the 3 56 blocks and one for the 49 OMC. If Gig would do that I am sure everyone will like your idea.

Hounddog · **Joined:** April 3rd, 2012, 1:52 pm **Posts:** 3124

Our T850 meeting at the TIBS to-day.
Erik organized a meeting with some of the T850 members to discuss the groups suggested rule changes for 2013. The suggestions will be posted on this site. Much of the discussion to-day involved the wording of the suggested rules and how these changes improve the class.
The goal of the rule changes is to limit inspections to a simple compression test and safety inspection. No motor would be torn down. A motor could be scoped for clarification, but, no motor would be disassembled unless there was a formal protest. To attain this objective the group has been looking at the things some current racers had been doing tech wise and making them legal. This removes the grey factor in the current rules and more clearly states what you can do. The group feels that not all the current and future T850 racers will do everything tech wise they will be allowed to do. It will depend on the individual racer's budget. By going with the complete legal package a racer may not gain any performance advantage. For other T850 racers it gives them the opportunity to do just the changes they what to do and know that it is OK to do them. The changes really eliminate the need to look inside the motor, since you can change or modify most things inside the motor. It was good to see the new 2013 racers included in the meeting.

Hydroid · **Joined:** April 5th, 2012, 6:58 pm **Posts:** 717

Hydroid wrote:

T MEETING - to reach consensus, OR agree to disagree

I have asked several T racers to meet F2F Sunday, 3pm @ TIBS, to discuss technical options, spec for the class. For the most part discussion will revolve around themes presented at top of this thread, and a few others. I will not post participant names, they can ID themselves. I want to emphasize all SO/T racers are welcome to join us and participate. This is your class.
This thread has prompted a great(civil) discussion. There will remain differences of opinion, but there is MUCH common ground.
The objective Sunday is for participants to find that common ground, establish consensus for proposed changes, hash out details NOW, prepare draft language to be presented at CBF SO meeting.
This is a pro-active approach, rather than waste time at CBF discussing minutia in circles, in a time restricted format.
Whatever suggestions bubble up Sunday, are widely accepted, I suggest be posted here for further review, scrutiny, justification.
Some ideas proposed Sunday will not gain wide acceptance. These can still be proposed or amended at CBF meeting by anyone who is compelled to do so, & is encouraged.
My own approach is one of moderate change, maintain class integrity, safety and scrutiny. If by the end of 2013 we have not made sufficient progress, we revisit in 12mo. My focus is to maintain class accessibility for new entries, promote growth of a larger base to ensure longevity, encourage and coach driving skill rather than technical wizardry. Reflect on larger aspects of class growth, rather than technical/mechanical extremes to which you are prepared to go to get an edge. I am one vote, support progress for the class.
ALL proposals brought forward at CBF meeting Feb 23, will be put to vote, either accepted or declined, majority rules.
As previously mentioned, all current CBF members are eligible to present new rules or amendments to current rules, with ONE PRE-CONDITION: YOU MUST BE CURRENT CBF MEMBER FOR THE RIGHT TO VOTE, HAVE YOUR SAY.
I am not driving any specific rule changes, will not take the lead to record or submit rule change proposals. I am pleased to facilitate individual racers coming together as a group, a team.
Thoughts to share? Do so here or contact me directly.
Cheers

POINT OF CLARIFICATION:

The February 23 2013 CBF convention is held to close out 2012 racing season. CBF Financial Statements, High Point Awards will be presented, and various racing categories(ie: SO, Tcat, Drag) will hold meetings to consider rule change proposals, put them to vote for acceptance/decline.
Per clarification from CBF, privilege to vote at this meeting is restricted to 2012 CBF membership card carrying members(excludes weekend racers). 2013 CBF membership provides voting privilege at subsequent year CBF Convention.

jake@elsey.ca · **Posted:** January 21st, 2013, 11:57 pm

Okay guys/girls, here is the main 'conclusions' we came to at the TIBS T meeting.
1- We want to propose that the required 8cuft of floatation for T850 be reduced to match the T750's 6cuft requirement. (It has been proven to be more than enough)
2- We want to propose that having a reverse gear become 'optional'.
3- We want to propose that stock aftermarket replacement parts or custom made stock replacement parts be allowed as long as they are direct replacement parts.
4- We want to propose that the balancing of an engines rotating assembly be allowed, even if that means lightening of a part, with no intent on HP gain, but just engine longevity.

Other wise, we just sorta agreed that if you have a 'compression relief port' on your 56ci you have to indicate that on your Tech-Spec sheet. Or you will get a spanking.

I think the wording might need some tinkering, but i think the gist of it is there.
Aaaaannnddd... ATTACK

jake@elsey.ca · **Posted:** January 22nd, 2013, 12:00 am

I'm not sure where the rule is that allows any 56ci engine to be brought up to SST60 specs. Or do we need to propose that still? (It wasn't one of our points at the meeting)

DoktorC · **Posted:** January 22nd, 2013, 12:03 am

I like it....

I figured out using the floatation formula last year that 5cuft would float an 850 boat...provided I was swimming or wearing a life jacket. Maybe I'm off on the calculations???

DoktorC · **Posted:** January 22nd, 2013, 12:07 am

Jake I think all 56's should just be considered SST60's so there's no point muddying the water with "porting" rules. We have the UIM specs for SST60, Stinger, Yamaha and the Merc 60 so if there ever is a tear-down then we would have to go to those specs anyway. IMO of course...but I think that's the conclusion we came to at the meeting.

HPBCANADA.COM

T850 Engine Rule "SUGGESTIONS" for 2013

Who is online