Subscribe Today

future of ice oval racing

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby titanium » March 25th, 2017, 10:34 am

Hi guys, I just wanted to put my 2 cents in.I agree with John on the engine change and other changes to champ.However in regards to eliminating classes and such I don't agree.At Beausejour in march,there was a great racer turnout as well as spectator turnout.I feel that having the diversity of all the classes brings more racers to the sport because there's a class for almost anyone to start racing in.All of the classes provide a full day of racing,if we try to eliminate a bunch of classes,the remaining one will need a lot of entries to make a full day of racing.I realize to some people that the classes with 3 or 4 entries may seem like a snooze ,but I think they're still necessary to keep people racing.One of the classes that got lots of attention at Beausejour was the 500 fan ifs x class,that was new for this year.I am relatively new to the ovals having only raced for 4 years,but as a long time drag racer I've seen what happens when you start losing the "little guys" there isn't enough "big guys" to make a full show.

Wes
titanium
 
Posts: 1
Joined: March 25th, 2017, 10:05 am

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby Mr.Pipe » March 25th, 2017, 12:17 pm

The grass looks greener over there?
I'm not against changes that will make Champ racing, or the entire weekend show better. But today, i'd like to point out a few problems with changing the Champ engine rules. It's no secret that rule changes often lead to racers retiring. Why?
Not long ago, I was asked by a Champ race team to inspect their parts, and help them pick the best cylinders to run for the weekend, and also suitable pairs of cylinders to have me update for them. They had more than a dozen cylinders in their trailer. How do you think they'd react if a new rule made them all worthless. I've heard that some think that there is going to be a shortage of 440 parts. Yes, a few parts are getting hard to find...like new crankshafts...so we have to start rebuilding used ones. No problem there, as all the crankshaft parts are available as far as I’m aware. For those that think a stock 440 cylinder rule is a good idea. I’d like to suggest that finding mint condition stock cylinders (new or used) in the quantities needed to satisfy all of the Champ teams (replacing their "would be" worthless modified ones)might not be that easy. And then the show would include constant engine tear-downs to check that cylinders are legal. That’s just a bad idea. I would suspect that trying stock cylinders on Champ engines might also make the Champ 440 class a one brand show…again, not a step forward at all.
What about the 600’s?
Trading the 440’s for 600’s presents many more problems. After one sorts out how to slow them down with minuscule carburetors, then we would have to deal with what 600’s are allowed, and what ones would not be. With the 600 being used as the premier snow-cross class, the 600 engines have been quite rapidly improving every year. What engines would be allowed? Would the teams all need to be buying the current year engines to be competitive? Or maybe you think that just putting small carbs on them will even them all up? I don’t think so! The current engines would be required if it was to be a stock engine class. It would likely open up an entire new group of complications. Not a good plan IMHO
To those that feel the need to make a change to slow them down and make them safer, then maybe a smaller carb rule applied to the 440’s makes the most sense. It is a small enough change to not cost much money or time to the teams. All of their current parts would still be used, and it might in fact tighten up the HP gap from the strongest to the weakest engines of the field.
I guess I’ll touch on my thoughts regarding carbide length as well. If the goal is to slow the Champs down for safety reasons, then a shorter carbide is a reasonable change as well. It would cost almost nothing to the teams, as the existing parts could just be reworked to meet the new rule. The shorter carbide would also make the sleds easier to drive, and reduce the arm fatigue that many racers not only have problems with, but may have contributed to many late race crashes.
Changing rules is fine, but be careful what you wish for!

Darcy
Mr.Pipe
Member
 
Posts: 50
Joined: December 17th, 2002, 8:45 am
Location: Winnipeg

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby Flatout » March 25th, 2017, 8:52 pm

Darcy you make some very valid points. However we are talking about the long term future of the premier class. It is not a secret that the class is dying. I have heard of many of the top teams that are ready to throw in the towel because they can't afford to compete any more. Engine costs are out of control. If you look at other forms of motors port like 250 super kart for instance it has died out due to engine cost and a new 250 cc single cylinder class has been introduced to cut costs. Most kart clubs have a spec engine class that makes it affordable and levels the playing field. I appreciate the fact that you have devoted a ton of research and money developing engines but it has put the cost out of reach for most teams. Maybe a way to level it out is to spec 30 mm carbs for mod motors and 34 mm for stock motors. That way the existing equipment will not be obsolete and teams can choose which way to go.
I totally agree that going to 6" carbide is a good thing. The F500 class and the outlaws use 6" with no issues. You can only drive as fast as the carbide will allow. It will not mean everyone drives into the bales in turn one.
I think outlawing boost bottles will even the gap between brands and is an easy "no cost" rule change that makes sense. As for 600 engines maybe announce a rule change that will take effect in 2 or 3 years so teams can use up their existing inventory of 440 stuff and gear up for 600. The 600 rule should specify stock cylinders without any modifications. Nip it in the bud to keep costs down. I also think the 600 should have a spec carb and a minimum spec diameter for the exhaust orifice. That would keep hp from exceeding current 440 numbers.
Darcy and John I want what is best for the sport just like both of you. Keeping costs down while keeping a good show is tough but it can be done.
H
Flatout
Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: November 20th, 2001, 5:05 am
Location: Ottawa Ont.


Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby FmrCrew » March 28th, 2017, 6:31 am

All this discussion is mute unless Tommy Liper decides to re-up for next season...I don't know how many will race for entry fees, but not many...Lets start a Tommy Liper for the Hall of Fame bid...You can't define anyone who has done as much for the sport financially and personally than Tommy!!

He has donated/sponsored the series for how long?? His love of snowmobile racing is above and beyond!!

lets put his name in for this years induction!!

TJ
FmrCrew
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: March 20th, 2017, 12:09 pm

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby watcher » March 28th, 2017, 9:25 am

one thing to remember is that Champ is Rules are Frozen till 2020
unless you want to create a new class all together??
do what you like, but from the past we will loose driver again and how many can you lose (be careful)

Watcher
terry k
watcher
Member
 
Posts: 248
Joined: October 8th, 2002, 1:29 am
Location: where is waldo

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby CHAMP53 » March 30th, 2017, 11:05 am

Slow them down - Why? I don't think the drivers think they are too fast - slow them down to "pro-lite" speed and then slow down the rest of the classes??? As for carbides , with the shock packages now and chassis setup we don't run full carbides now. You know the drivers that are fit and can run 20-30-more laps without getting
tired and that is part of any sport, the fitter you are the better, it segregates the drivers as the laps go on and as the weekend goes on and the track gets rougher and rougher Colt likes it because he knows how much he works out to stay in shape.
My biggest concern is the snow dust not the speed - One thing that we really liked was the blue dye in the ice at Fargo, and Colt said that Really helped him see the corner - l feel that it should be a requirement at all track's for driver safety.
Just my thoughts.
Wayne Dellandrea
Pro-Formance Racing
CHAMP53
Team Mechanic-Owner-etc-you name it
Lana Dellandrea
Team Support-cook
CHAMP53
Member
 
Posts: 22
Joined: November 19th, 2013, 3:10 pm
Location: Sundridge, Ontaio

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby TopTier98 » March 30th, 2017, 6:45 pm

I agree, the snow dust is something we need to look into, The speed isn't an issue it's the visibility that makes it tough in my opinion.
Cody Knutson
Top Tier Motorsports
TopTier98
 
Posts: 8
Joined: December 9th, 2014, 7:58 pm

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby Fontaine Racing » April 3rd, 2017, 11:51 am

back to the topic, I have stayed in the loop a bit since we parked the champer, things I heard lately,tough to get motors built. smaller builders having trouble getting boxes remapped from some mfgs. cant get spare parts, motor guys , few as they are , very busy. Wahls you are still great! John I do agree with most of your proposal, I believe a higher weight rule would eliminate 600 speeds,exotic metals and carbon fiber needs ,maybe combined wt. rule with a sled min. right now you need a jockey to run your stuff let the big guys compete . maybe more drivers ? as a small family team money was allways an issue, and one of the things most carefully guarded was the track. yes it is a big expense but could also maybe be expensive to retrofit some machines , if you are looking to recycle used equipment hope I didn't offend anyone ,just throwing out a couple opinions.
Fontaine Racing
Member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: March 18th, 2005, 10:01 am
Location: webster wisconsin

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby jhooper/HRE » April 3rd, 2017, 1:04 pm

Darcy,
Very good points made and I agree with most of them.
The biggest reason I suggested we start discussing the 600 engines is that I believe it will happen in a few years anyway and we need to put our heads together and figure out the best package.
I personally think that stock engines are boring and don't belong in the premier class BUT I know there are quite a few racers leaning this way so it's up to guys like you and me to come up with ways to control costs while maintaining a somewhat level playing field before it's too late.
How about if you and I both did some testing with stock 600's with twin pipes and cut heads to determine what size carbs would be needed to make similar power to the current 440's ?
Then we could have 2 engine options and a racer could choose whichever package suited his tuning ability best.
The shorter carbides would be the best and easiest way to reduce corner speeds slightly and make these sleds a little safer and easier to drive which might help increase entries.
It is a proven FACT that understeer is the most stable condition for racing vehicles, it only takes a driver a few laps to figure out that he needs to let off a little earlier for each corner. John Hooper
jhooper/HRE
Member
 
Posts: 269
Joined: March 24th, 2005, 12:52 am
Location: goshen,nh

Re: future of ice oval racing

Postby FmrCrew » April 4th, 2017, 3:37 pm

I agree the vision of the driver is the most dangerous part of snowmobile racing....I tried and spent a couple Gs of my own money to try and work on lowering the snow dust...I made 5-6 kits for the ski and the tunnel, sent to 4-5 different Champ teams....Zero response no one ever tried them, thought I was crazy!!! let me enlighten you guys, to make this a larger sport and to have more purse money you need sponsors!!!! Sponsors want to see bang for there buck, and TV is the KEY....Guess what?? Hard to see the racing when it is nothing but snow dust!!! Ditch banger does a good job, but can you make out the sleds and sponsors??? If you wanted to see your name on that sled for 10K could you see it on TV?? Just looking at it from a big picture....

Talking with Dan Devault he asked me why can't we put a manditory gear on Champ sleds??? Eliminate the belt drive go to a chain drive with chain case??? Saves money there ( how much does a belt drive system cost? weight savings too) ...do the math and see what it takes for a gear to only allow 100 MPH...can that be done??? don't tell me the chains won't hold up, mountain sleds have 240 HP with no issue..Good thought, any reason why not??
FmrCrew
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: March 20th, 2017, 12:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ovals & Enduros

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron