The U6SA meeting is September 10th. Here is a list of topics up for discussion and voting, feel free to post your opinion, I will throw a little of my own in there as well:

1. Bladders. Last year the vote was close but it was decided to make bladders mandatory in 2009. Since last year there has been a lot of talk both for and against bladders.

I think $1,300.00 is too much to make a team spend for the prevention of a condition that can be solved in other ways. I think we should make a strong hooped rear bumper will eliminate almost all tails that fall off a rule, or at least a suggestion to the tracks to write it into their rules. Also better track crew preparation for a fire is a better way to prevent fires than bladders. Even with the bladder rule, it will only eliminate a small percentage of fires.

2. The Kawasaki 636 engine is still a very dominate engine even with our rpm limit rule. Last year we thought the rpm rule would help to make the newer engines more competitive, although it helped, the Kawi still has an advantage. Here are some possible plans of action brought up by many different people.

-Make no changes to the rules.
-Allow the newer engines to be bored to 636, or only allow up to 07 to be bored to 636, 08 and up must be 600. We still need some data on the 08 engines; we are going to dyno them next week.
-Put restrictors in the Kawi 636 engines to equal the playing field.
-Add weight to the Kawi 636.

I am not sure what the right direction to go on this one is although I do know the Kawi 636 is getting harder to find and more expensive, so something should be done, i just don't know what. I am against the weight rule as it does not slow them down enough without adding so much weight that the car is unsafe.

3. Rev Limit. Although I think it is a no brainer, we need to keep the rev limit rule in place, there are a few who want to get rid of the rule. I do think we need to add a rule that states no gear shifter sensors can be used, that eliminates the possibility of changing the rev limit in different gears.

4. Specify a common mounting point for transponders. Apparently some tracks have different mount points for the transponders, making traveling more difficult.

5. Spec tire Rule. Make everyone a D50 or harder tire all the time.

I personally think this should be a track rule, not a U6SA thing. Some tracks would help car count be using a tire rule, others the track does not wear tires anyway.

6. Should the U6SA be involved in rules other than for the engine? Do we want to make a universal set of chassis rules as well as engine rules. Although most tracks have very similar rules, there are small differences that can make going to another track a little difficult.

Tracks in NJ are regulated by the government as to what the chassis rules need to be, so the U6SA would not be able to change that.

1. I agree. I have only see a couple of fires in eight years and I don't believe any were caused by a ruptured tank. I have seen people who push the bladder issue and don't have the tip over sensor hooked up on their car. Seems pretty pointless to spend $1,300 on a bladder if you don't take 5 minutes to hook up an extra wire to make sure the fuel pump shuts off if you're in a wreck and the injectors fall off and rip one of the fuel lines.

2. I say make no changes. The last thing this class needs is to go back to boring out 600 engines to 636. I saw an 07 Yamaha on ebay the other day for $1700 buy it now, not much cheaper than the Kawi's are going for. So you have the same engine costs, fuel system costs, and the same cost to do modifications similar to what we do with the Kawasaki's (ie Spar) but you're adding the cost to get the engine bored out. I think it will only add to the cost of a competitive motor.

I agree with a post that was posted somewhere on the board the other week. One reason that the 636's are so dominant is because that is what most people run. If 95% of 600 drivers run Kawasaki 636's, it would make sense that they win 95% of the races. Kenny Miller has been fast in recent weeks at Lanco with a Yamaha, and Luke Thomas finished 3rd at the Super 600 Showdown with a Yamaha that I believe was stock bore (but I could be wrong)

Restrictors may work, but I think a lot of dyno time would be needed for testing to ensure the HP and torque are decreased evenly across the RPM range.

3. Agree 100%. It seemed like last year (at least at Lanco) there was a blown motor almost every week. This year blown motors seem much more rare. The only place I noticed a lot of blown motors were Grandview and the Super 600 Showdown, where the rev boxes were allowed. Agree with removing the gear shifter sensor as well.

4. Not a bad idea. I know Airport and Lanco requires they be put on the back of the seat.

5. I'm in favor of a spec tire rule. We generally run a harder tire at Lanco than most anyway to get more races out of the tire. I don't see how this could do anything but lower cost for racers (as long as Hoosier and AR don't increase the cost of the spec tire)

6. It would be nice to get one inspection sticker and be legal for all tracks, but I don't think this would work very well. PA drivers, most of whom never run at Bridgeport, shouldn't be forced to follow the NJ rules, but having a set of U6SA PA Rules and U6SA NJ Rules kind of defeats the whole purpose of "universal rules".

I run a Yamaha R6 Stock Bore, Stock head, Stock everything. I'm being out horsepowered by 20 HP by the Spar Kawasaki's. That (in my opinion) a "micro sprint" ton. I can't afford to bore it out, or change over to Kawi. If nothing is going to be done to the Kawi's, let the 600 engines, since it is a 600 class, not 636, don't tech the cylinder head.

Keep the stock rev limiters in tact

The spec tire is good, but don't give a specific tire compound, set a durometer reading of 50 or whatever it comes to be.

Far as the chassis rules, I think New Jersey has the most strict rules far as safety. I don't think it's asking too much to make the U6SA rules like Jersey's. That way, racers can travel to all tracks and if they have a U6SA inspection sticker, they can race at all U6SA tracks with no addition inspection.

Stainless cover on fuel line inside of car, 2" square rock guard, panel between fuel cell and seat, seat belts two years old or newer, transponder behind seat, one way radio(a huge help), fire proof underwear

Fuel Bladder should not be mandatory

1. Bladders should be mandatory. They will not stop all fires but helmets do not stop all head injuries but they are the best things we got and you would not race without a helmet. Not sure where the cost $1300 is coming from? I can get a Fuel Safe 16 Gallon tank for around $800.00.
2. I was OK with the motor rules as they stand as long as we tech everyone the same. Each track should have their own tech so it can be more random and not just when one tech guy shows up.
3. KEEP THE REV LIMIT
4. Transponders A common place sounds like a great idea. Behind the seat was not good for us at Lanco. Was to hard to get to. We had to move it back and forth between 270 and 600.
5. SPEC TIRES SPEC TIRES SPEC TIRES SPEC TIRES!
6. U6SA common rules for chassis and engine sounds like a good idea.
I feel the U6SA is a step in the right direction and would like to thank everyone for their effort. No one is getting paid for this and are putting alot of time into it. Thanks DB

1. (bladder/fuel containment rules) i believe there should be a rule for additional fuel cell saftey in the manner of containment the differnet options should be looked at and made a rule weather it's a bladder or a fuel cell in a steel box something should be made as a safety rule.

2. (kawasaki 636) let the engine and rpm rule as they are, changing this will create more expense than anything else. if 95% of 600 cars are running kawasaki 636's there would never be enough of quality yamaha's, honda's, & suzuki's to go around. and (i'm NOT picking) but hyper and guhl will be the only winners in this deal just due to all of the new injection sales. when they where trying to get a restrictor class started a few years ago didn't they have problems with the restrictors being sized correctly? and who will be teching restrictor sizes each week at the tracks? let this current rule alone.

3. (rev limits) agin let this rule alone as well, it seems like what we currently have works.

4. (transponder locations) this would be good to have, it seemed at the showdown there was alot of people not sure where to mount it.

5. (spec tires) well this would be intresting just to see how it would be actually teched per track. we'll run specs if it's a rule if not then it'll be what the track requires for that evening.

6. (u6sa setting rules) it is needed but you can have all of the rules you want but if a track desides not to follow them there useless. if the tracks all follow the the guidelines and not drift to what is popular for there tracks racer's it'll work. the u6sa ruleing group i believe should apply their ruleing's to engine cc's (as in no boring from oem's origional bore size and stroke) , rev limits, enternal engine modifications, car safety, track safety, driver safety, car weight, & overall car configeration and deminsions

if there is a real concern with engine size maby there should be a sealed engine deal done such as safety wire hole drilled in the head bolts and safety wire and seal attached it'll be easy to tech. and could be a very minmal charge for the tech and seal, hyper, spar guhl, rts, stallard, all of the mfg. could perticipate with this a $20.00 dollar charge won't hurt anyone in this form of racing.

I'm just amazed at how most are so intent on penalizing the guys who are smart enough to run a Kawi 636. It was the cheapest motor to make a lot of HP. And now that the majority of racers are using them, the minority wants to penalize us. ????? For what, trying to save money? If someone wants to run a YAMAHA, I don't think we should penalize them. I'd watch them and if they seem to be making more power for less money I'd probably switch to YAMI. My point is, lets not try to screw a whole lot of racers out there who used their smarts and decided to run the KAWI. I think part of last years plan was that the Kawis would become extinct and the newer motors would replace them. Seems some posters have already said that they're getting harder to find. Seems the original plan is already working. JUST MY OPION.

let me adress the kawi 636 first how many yamahas have one races at your track this year? most tracks have a few with wins wich is great considering how many more 636 are in the feilds. i watch results and if i may use you as an example Mr. Sapp as i now know you run a yamaha i see your name up front a lot with numerous wins this eems as if the motors are pretty fair

as far as tires may make it easier for people to travel from lindas who run hard tires to say airport who run soft tire peoplewould only need one set but as a crew member on other types of race cars as well choosing tire compound makes it more fun watching people run strong with soft tires earlier and people with harder tires run better at the end with harder tires we cant make these cars into iroc cars

1. Bladders. First = expensive.
How about making sure the gas cap "Locks". The only fire i ever saw besides multiple Brake fires (due to chincy plastic bake lines) in a 600 was because the fuel cap came off, madate a clip or cam lock cap, and a bumper with a lower hoop, and proper assembly/attachment like dicely suggested.

I also think $1,300.00 is too much to make a team spend for the prevention of a condition that can be solved in other ways. Better track crew preparation for a fire is a better way to deal with fires.

2. The Kawasaki 636 engine:
Everyone has them! Sure they will look better percentage-wise. I agree with Hunterracing. If we change the rules to allow the over-bore on the 600, then many will be doling out cash for all new stuff (injection harness pwr cmdr etc), plus an over bore. The rules are headed in, and have already gone in the right direction. Let them die their natural death like the f3 had to, and let the people who made the smart decision (at the time) to switch to the 636remain able to run their stuf for a few more seasons with out the inordinate capital expenditure of the new injection etc.
-Make no changes to the rules. Maybe add 25 lb. to the 636.

3. Rev Limit. Agreed, no brainer, we need to keep the rev limit rule in place, I think you can lose the chain and tech in any gear you want, you could also add a rule that states no gear shifter sensors can be used, that may help reduce the possibility of changing the rev limit in different gears. Tech needs to get better though.

4. Specify a common mounting point for transponders. (Ya, below the rr shock on the frame rail, easy to get to, easy to tech, 2 tie wraps right to the frame rail, directly above the rear axle (within an inch) on all cars, i can post a pic if any one wants it.

5. Spec tire Rule. I diagree with this, ory think this should be a track rule, not a U6SA thing. Some tracks would help car count using a tire rule, other tracks does not wear tires anyway. (yes like bridgeport, trailway, and airport, spec tire not needed, pick the right tire) Lindas and other tracks, YES.

6. Should the U6SA be involved in rules other than for the engine?
Maybe with regard to adjusters, but not safety unless PA is willing to add the before-mentioned safetly items (cheap) to allign with NJ for continuity(Stainless cover on fuel line inside of cockpit (can be bought at NAPA Cheap), 2" square rock guard (i would run one anyway so nothing takes my head off), panel between fuel cell and seat (cheap aluminum you can make in an hour over winter), seat belts-two years old or newer(so they wont be frayed and tear when you do crash), transponder behind seat (ok?? why not, mount on rr frame rail beneath rr shock, 2 tie wraps, same spot and easy to spot for tech guy)), one way radio (a huge help (can't say i disagree), fire proof underwear(safety for the driver and lots cheaper than a bladder)

Things have come a long way, its very exciting, and nice to see so many concerned. Looking forward to 2009. :)

Bottom line is the U6SA can put rules on safety,motors,tires,chassis but unless the tracks enforce them it's all for not. when was the last time a track did a RANDOM inspection. i haven't been checked for months!!!! at the beginning of the year i was checked three times. Not that i'm inviting tech but it's gone back to just checking a couple cars after the feature once in a while. i think the Assoc has to either have an agreement and a commitment from the participating tracks to enforce the rules. Or be prepared to enforce the rules itself. If a track isn't Conscious to the fact that the track personel are in tee shirts and shorts do you really think they care if i have my rev box on or not?

As far as the restictor plates are concerned they worked fine. the reason the class didn't go was because no one was interested. The tech is very simple pull off the throttle bodies and have a go/no go gauge. that was it. the interesting thing was the stock suzuki 600 and the 04 636 we dynoed took the same size plate.

1. My vote would still be in favor of bladders. However, I do understand that $800 - $1300 (or whatever they cost) is a lot of money to ask teams to spend. I think bladders overall would make weekly racing safer for everyone.

2. Keep the engine rules as they are. Most of the teams are running the kawi 636. I agree with some of the other posts... if 95% of the teams are using a kawi 636, then 95% of the winning motors should be a kawi 636.

3. Keep the rev limit at stock. Last year it seemed there was a motor being blown up about every week. This year, with the rev limit in place, there were far less smoked motors.

4. I think a universal mounting point for transponders is a good idea. I wouldn't care were that it, as long as it is the same point for all the tracks.

5. My thoughts on a tire rule are this. Look how awesome the racing was during speedweek. Even on the tracks that are not hard on tires the racing was great. My vote is for spec tires. However, I think you should be able to choose between American Racer and Hoosier. As long as the tire durometers a preset amount, good to go. BRING ON THE SPEC TIRES!!!

6. I can go either way on this one. If the U6SA wants to set specific safety rules that is fine. If they don't want the extra work, that is fine as well. Most tracks already make you pass a safety inspection at the beginning of the year. I do, however, think you should have to go through another safety inspection if you are involved in an accident were you roll the car.


I think the U6SA is doing good for the sport. Keep up the good work guys!!!

You're right, my worst finish is third this year other than the 3 DNF's that I have. The rules are to make the engines even across the board. 20 HP is not even close, I would love to see what I could do with Kawi, but can't afford. Again, these rules are trying to make everything even.
20HP = not even

Hey Nick.
I had a 2001 Stock bore stock stroke, stock head (stock stock, well it had a 2 degree ignition advancer) carburated R6 (5 years ago) that made 119 hp. I am sure the 05 has to be better than that. Assuming its the same, most of the engines are around 124 to 134 (if they are running right). So thats 6-15 hp the way i see it, not 20. And the other consideration your not mentioning is the extra (14800 to 15500) 700 rpm that the 05 R6 has that the 636's do not. Thats 2.33 teeth on the back that can be pulled that a kawi cannot. That makes a big difference.
The Newer R6 can pull 4.33 more teeth of gear than a kawi.
You are running well this yr. Keep it up. :-)
See you tonight.

Thanks Rick,
wasn't thinking about the rpm difference. My R6 made 119.1 on Hyper's dyno and was told that the Spar engines can make up to 140. That's where I was getting the 20 HP difference, but still 15 HP is huge when the cars only weigh 750 lbs. It's all in the handling and driving anyway, no need to argue. If the track will provide good racing, the best will win, or finish second like last week. Just kidding.

I really want to just comment on 2 items.

The bladder for the tail tank is just to expensive. I realize safety is important but I really think we need to try another way to add safety to this area away from the bladder as Mike Dicely has brought up.

For the next comment, I will admit that we run a 2005 636cc Kawasaki before I go on. I really think the engine rules as they are now are about the best we can get them to keep an even competitive field. I have seen quite a few Yamaha's run fine with a packed field of Kawaskai 636cc's. Being I compete mostly at Lanco I can name Ken Miller who picked up 3 wins this year (the most of any 1 600 driver currently) and Tres Schnakenberg who led like 14 laps of the feature 2 weeks ago.

I might as well comment on the spec tire rule too. I'm not against it. I think I have heard that sometimes the harder tires can tear the track up but am not sure on that. Maybe someone can post on that later. If too many people are against a spec tire rule, maybe we could make it so that you have a choice in compound but can't go softer then say D15 for Hoosier and SD33 for American Racer? But if we establish a tire rule, we NEED to durometer atleast the top 5 finishers in every race.

I am all for the bladder with all the money we are spending what is 800 plus to keep you safe? but everyone got there own opinion. the spec tire has it good and bad points. I would rather have to choose threw out the nite it keeps every one thinking of what tire compound, but we will save money on tires. the tracks need to check the tires threw out the nite.

fuel bladder : I have been around racing for 32yrs and you can not put a pirce on safety thier many not have been a problem but lets look to the furture when it does happen you never know who it will be you or a friend what's $800.oo veruse being burned just think what hell is like and living thier for ever


motor rules : keep stock rev keep all other rules BUT add a compression rule example : 15 min cool down check compression in all 4 cyl and if any one cyl is over 225 lbs your DQ I feel this is a way to keep motor cost down and make the motors more equal when teams spend over $15,000.oo on motors then the sports out of control need to make it more affordable to help sport grow


rules: I feel that we need u6sa to be like urc u6sa would set the pace for fairness and unity and be the over seeing boby the class with voted in brd menbers I think it will help take some pressure off the track ours and start building 600 class on solid ground


Tire rule : I don't think this is a cost problem unless you race lindas but then cost does't mean much at that track I think it may help in some areas

Lets all kick in an extra $5 a night entry fee to cover having a fire truck and fire crew on hand at the race tracks. This would protect us a lot more in the event of a fire than a bladder could. Doesn't Lincoln and Williams Grove, etc. have fire trucks on hand? I definitely would be in favor of this.

And 3 layer SFI-8 race suits with nomex underwear and head sock, this buys a lot of extra time to get out of any fire.

Lets also make a skid plate mandatory under the engine. There are more fires caused by the oil igniting from oil pans breaking than by ruptured tanks.

For many teams $800-$1300 for a bladder will put a serious set back on their race plans for next season. Car counts will suffer. And fires will still happen.

mike yes you are right about having fire trucks at the track I would have no problem with that

skid plate under motor yes good ideal

yes the fire suit is important I see a lot of drivers wearing suits that are unsafe

fuel bladders are not cheap but should be highly recommed

My opinion on the bladder fuel cells: I don't care how close the vote was last year on the bladder issue. It passed and done in the right way. It gave everyone a year to prepare. Mike, the issues you bring up were there last year and are still here right now, the only thing that has changed is time and now people are going to have to spend the money.

What about those of us that thought ahead, saw the rule change and planned accordingly. I purchased a fuel cell this year in anticipation of the rules, now it is going to be challenged? Our car was on it's side two weeks in the racing line and no improved bumper assembly was going to protect it from getting hit from another car at the top of the tank.

I have heard more people this year say they have a bigger issue with trying to keep up with the Spar and other "built" engines. Take a poll, I think you have the potential to lose more teams over that than a fuel bladder.

Chuck,
That is a very good point about people already getting bladders in anticipation of the rule, and that definitely will be brought up. If anyone else has already installed a bladder and would not have done so had it not been for the rule, please let me know, by post, PM, or email.

I agree with the Spar problem as well. I am amazed that no other engine builder has stepped up. Or maybe they have, but everyone thinks they need a Spar. Scott will kill me for saying this, but you can get pretty close to his numbers on the dyno just by setting the valve lash and cam timing correctly, but again amazingly it seams no one has figured that out. If we could put a rule in effect to eliminate the Spar advantage we could consider it, but the little things he does you cant really stop.

A compression rule would never work, there are too many variables and gages are not consistent. Inevitably innocent people would be disqualified. Not to mention the tech guy would have twice the work to do.

These are all great points and ideas, keep 'em coming. The U6SA is a result of our collective minds. The more minds, the better the result.

I have heard more people this year say they have a bigger issue with trying to keep up with the Spar and other "built" engines.

I would have to agree with Mike on this one. Is it the fact that Spar has a better built engine and gets more horse power? Or could it be that people want an engine builder to make sure they have a good solid performing engine? I have heard that Scott does more work maintaining his customers engines and keeps them performing well. I think there are a hand full of engine builders not many people hear about. Spar does an excellent job of advertising and taking care of his customers that is why he is so prevalent in this area.

Scott is the prominent engine builder in this area and his motors are winning alot of races so of coarse he is in the cross hairs. Mike and Jason are right on the money with your comments. I belive what scott does is essentially making sure all the tolerances are close and i think he spends as much time on making sure the motor is reliable as he does with the performance. as far as fuel cel is concerned i did have one put on my new car in anticipation of the rule change but i am definitely NOT in favor of them with out concessions from the tracks. Lets not fall into a false sense of security about these bladders. When the tracks are so ill equiped to handle these situations in the first place. Mike, the Grove has what i would call a safety vehicle with suited personel manning the vehicle.

I don't see Spar, FTZ or any other engine builder as a problem. If I could get one of Scott's engines it would be in my car.

The intent of my earlier post was to express an opinion that the cost of trying to keep up with the competition ( as more teams are utilizing engine builder services) will affect car counts more than the cost of a fuel cell. It was a comparison, not at all meant to say let's pass rules this week to banish engine builders.

I really like the positions on safety in this thread. There are a lot of safety items that I didn't know existed, like the roll over sensor and the skid plate. I would like to know more about them.

I agree with Mike about an extra $5 at sign in to have the local fire/rescue squad on hand. I would think they could use the extra cash and would get to see the races for free. There also should be some type of firesuit standard. I sure do see alot of cheesey firesuits in the pits. Some of the suits people wear are covered with oil and grease. It doesn't hurt to wash them once in awhile.

Ok, on the engine builders. If Scott can do the things he does to an engine to help it perform, why can’t anyone else? For instance, you ‘ban’ his engines for the masses. Can he still build his own? Could I still set my own valve lash? These engine builders are NOT doing ANYTHING different than Mr. Joe Blow could himself on his own engine. The ‘engine builders’ have an advantage only in knowledge. If I had that knowledge, damn right I would be getting paid for it.

The edge is what everyone is paying for, whether it’s a gimmick or fact. This is not only engines, but sway bars, Ti components, carbon fiber bodies, cheater rev boxes, etc. I’m not suggesting that all should be legal or outlawed. I’m merely saying that it is absurd to say, ‘you can’t pay someone to build an engine for you’. What’s next, do we all have to build our own chassis’? Wings?

If you halt the advancement of technology in the class, it will become like any other stock car or sprint car class. The biggest appeal in the class is the forward thinking that can be used. Don’t stop this, it’s why most of us are here.

Mike, the Grove has what i would call a safety vehicle with suited personel manning the vehicle.

...and for the first time did i see a track safety team actually gathered by a race car to learn how they work. For example...how to shut off the fuel. Props to the Grove response team.

I think Mike has come up with a brilliant idea here that is being overlooked. The idea of the U6SA is to do what's best for THE SPORT (I'm assuming; not just get the rules passed that we as individuals would like to see passed.) If we all take a step back from our personal feelings on the bladder issue and examine what Mike suggested I think we find a better solution.

Earlier this year I was at Grandview and they had to cut a guy out of a car and airlift him out. They didn't have the equipment on hand necessary to cut the frame and it took 45 minutes to an hour to get him out of the car and into the chopper. This week at the Grove I was also there for a bad wreck and they had Westbrook cut out of the car in 15...20 minutes MAX. It was impressive to see the safety team work at Williams Grove.

The idea of paying $5 extra each week to have a trained team on hand at the track is better than bladders for several reasons:

1. Car counts are down everywhere, race teams can much easier swallow $5 a week than $1000 payed right now. We don't want to see a continued decline in car count, it's not good for our sport. If we don't get the cars, the tracks don't make money, if the tracks don't make money they close, and then no one gets to race.
2. A bladder only protects against ONE type of accident. A trained safety crew not only protects you in case of fire but a myriad of other accidents as well. For less money you get more protection.
3. A bladder isn't just an INITIAL expense. If you get into a wreck and your tank and bladder get punctured you now need to spend another 1000 for tank and bladder instead of just 200 for another tail tank...on the other hand the safety crew will be there each week regardless of what you destroy on your car, no need to pay to replace them as you would parts on your car.
4. The argument was made that teams have had time to prepare for this expense, however it is still a deterrent to attracting NEW teams and people looking to get into 600's.


I'm not sure the logistics of how this safety crew idea could be implemented, that would need to be worked out. However I think it is the best idea for the health of our sport, to keep car counts up and tracks open, and to continue to promote growth within the racing family so that more people can enjoy what we are so fortunate to get to do each week. And I think that is part of the spirit of what the U6SA is about.

Bruce and Hypermotive,.......I lift my mug in salute to you....Bravo well said!!!

I am one of the lowest budget teams out there on the track. I would like to see a tire rule. Some kind of level playing field. I also have a bladder in my car. I think everyone had a enough time to save money to purchase a bladder. We all knew that in 2009 bladder were suppose to be mandatory. I am not big fan of guys spending lots of money on spar motors either. i run a stock 05 r6. i wish everyone would just run stock engines right from the bike it would make the racing alot better. I don't have the extra $3000 to go to spar to get my engine done. If we had stock engines, spec tires and some limited on cockpit adjustments racing would be so much better, it would give the lower budget teams like myself a real shot. This sport is really all on who got the most money wins anymore. That's my opinion!

Doug Snyder

I'd just like to make the point that motor rules MUST be techable (is that a word?) Rampant cheating (or at least that's how it would be perceived if a bunch of rules are put in place that will never be teched) is just as damaging as high costs.

I think someone mentioned a compression rule earlier in this thread. If anyone is even having thoughts of suggesting that as a proposed rule, please do it the right way. Pumped compression is a meaningless number. There's just way too many variables. If you want to do compression testing, you need a non compressible liquid (preferably a light oil), a way to level the engine (we're talking lifting the front of the car several feet in the air and making sure everything is perfectly level in both horizontal axes), and something that will thread into the spark plug hole with a seal and that is of a known volume. From there you have to have specs on combustion chamber volume for every motor that could possibly be run and a precise method for placing the non compressible liquid into the hose/combustion chamber. Then you'd rotate the cylinder extremely slowly through top dead center and if the oil crested above a graduation mark you'd be illegal. I don't know about anyone else, but I think that sounds like an awful lot of work, considering most of the rules we have aren't getting checked on a regular basis.

I'd also like to make one more point. The U6SA is a rule making organization comprised of some very intelligent people that requests input from competitors to help advance the sport. I think going forward it would be advisable for the organization to attempt to educate the competitors and track tech inspectors so we don't have another instance of a tech inspector's actions knocking a competitor out of an event. A simple statement from the rule making organization could have prevented that incident and perhaps also quelled the speculation of a couple of people on witch hunts.

I still think the bladder rule is too costly for too little gain. A better way might be for the manufacturers (Hyper, Stallard, RTS etc.) to design the smaller tank that is availible into thier new cars (the tank like Lafler uses). This is a much better design than the current tank, and probably better than a bladder tank hanging out where it will constanly get hit. Your talking $150 to $350 for a much safer design. Cars being built from now on would have the newer design, and a retrofit kit could be availible. In a few years everyone would have one, and it would be fairly painless money wise. The rest of the system could be looked at, such as fuel line routing, and injection protection bars. More seperation from the cockpit etc.
As for engines, keep them as stock as possible, within reason. Spar type stuff is fine (after all, being a better tuner than the next guy is half the fun in this sport). Keep the rev limits. Find a way to even up the 600's with the 636's. We have a bad situation coming with the 636 out of production, and it has a 10 to 15 hp advantage over any 600 thats current. In a year or two, the low milage, low price Kawi's will dry up, and the rich guys that stock piled a garage full of them will hold all the cards. This needs to be figured out for the good of the sport. I'm not saying penalize the teams with 636's, but we need to find a way to make all the very nice, very cheap 600's out there competitive so that the sport continues to grow(adding weight will help, and is cheap, but will not make enough difference, I don"t know what else could be done, but I bet the guys with the dynos know). Cheap, high performance engines is what makes this class the best bang for your buck that there is. Lets keep it that way.
Spec tires could be good, but make it reasonable, and make it both rears. a hard rr does no good if you burn up a soft llr every night . Good luck policing tire softeners. JMO Thanks.

As a general principle rules will never "level the playing field" of any sport. Money will always win most of the time, that is a simple fact of life and sport. That said, I think the U6SA is a good way to keep our sport on at least common ground. The 600 class in this area has grown by leaps and bounds in the last 10 years under the rules already in place. Lets not through the baby out with the bath water.

Engine rules in PA have kept costs in check by not allowing head work and crank work. Keep this in place and you keep costs in reason. Keep these simple "techable" rules in place. Rev boxes up or down, I'll set my box where I know it will not damage the engine.

If bladders are maditory I'll have one but they are not a cost effective safty device. They protect against only one type of danger to the fuel supply on a race car and on our cars that danger is minimal due to the amount of fuel we carry. "Ruptures" to tail tanks are nearly impossible, "punctures" are a far greater danger and bladders do little or nothing to stop them. Adequate fire suits are a far better salution to fire protection. LANCO does not even require an SA rated helmet, thats dumb. Lets address these problems first before we all spend $1000.00.

I think the best thing we can do for our sport right now is nothing. Rule changes cost money for someone everytime. Racing divisions that have had the best longevity are the ones that do not mess with the rules everytime someone wins three in a row.

P.S. Are you serious about a transponder location rule? Kutztown is the only track I know that has it located differently, its a $5.00 clip and 2 zipties, put 2 on the car, no rule ,no problem. Give me a break!

As much as I would love to attend the meeting, I don't think there is anyone I can tag along with (send me a PM if I'm wrong :) ).

Here are some things I wanna throw out there.

Engines-What about 619cc? Would that get the other engines in line with the kawi? I have never seen any numbers, but I'm sure some have. The only problem with this is, you are stuck with the decision to allow it for at least the next 5 years.

Tires-1 RR per night, you choose which one. I know at least Lincoln does this with the sprints. Whatever you qualify on, you race on else you go to the rear. It won't fix the money problem, but it should help it. The tire would get marked at the scales after the heat.

Bladder- I could go either way, same as last year. If it sticks, we will still have to get one. If not, we'll spend the money on tires ;) I would suggest however that a list be generated of approved cells, at least having a choice makes it easier to swallow.

Rev limit-No brainer, leave it stock and CHECK it, somehow...

Transponders-We have never run them, but would like to. But yes, they should be consistant mounts. BOLTED somewhere very near to the driver would be ideal (front cage upright, seat, etc.)

The compression rule is not practical as far as a tech. enforcement stand point. The only acurate way to calculate is the fluid method that was described earlier in this post but way too time consuming. On the motor rule I say.
- let all motors go to 636cc regardless of the year
- allow open head modifications (porting, polishing, milling etc.)
- allow up to 1mm oversize valves
- allow aftermarket camshafts with more lift and duration!
- Cranks and rods must remain bone stock
- No aftermarket titanium valves
- No Surface treatments (only on piston skirts)
- Allow any carbs to be run
- Find a way to enforce the rev limit!!!

NPS.... out of curiosity and to keep things in perspective... what would an engine cost as you desrcibed ?

Say an 06-07 R6 @ 636 with everything above ?

It wouldn't be cheap with all the modifications done together..... but my point was to allow a variety of options to be done to the motors to even the playing field with the kawis.

Wow. i think 8k for all that would be giving it away. Are all those things really necessary to equal a kawi with pistons? I really don't think so...

Let the top ends alone. No reason to make the 600s a money pit contest by opening up the heads to thousands of dollars worth of work.

Either debore the 636s to a smaller cc or allow the other engines to be overbored or resleeved up to 636.

1. the bladder........ both our cars have them. i am on the fence with this one. i like them but i think 2-3 guys who are equipped to handle a fuel fire would be better spent.
i think 90% of the tracks are understaffed and most likley under trained or not even trained in fuel fires.
how about the us6a group get with a qualified fire company and have training with all track personnel, for fuel fires, driver extraction, emergency car dis-assembly.
2. leave the motors alone. we run one spar and one hyper motor. i like what scott does to his motors. if people can afford them fine. like one guy said if you cant afford it then learn how to do it yourself.
you can afford to buy a chassis, if you couldnt you could build your own.
dont see an difference with the motor.
i think with the pricing and availibility of the 636 's they will soon pass and there will be a new killer motor in town.
3. rev limiter, leave it as is this year. it worked
4. transponder location, i would hope that they can at least agree on that.
i think the transponders are the way to go, there are to many positioning errors.
i also like the one way radios, it can help with telling a driver of problems ahead. bridgeport seems to be on top of things.
5. please, please please. at least a RR tire this year. running 2 cars is a killer. if i still have to by as many LR as this year fine, but if i have to buy a third of RR tires i did this year that will financially help.
plus i thought speedweek was good racing.
6. just get a couple things done a year. we need simplicity. more rules just make higher dollar teams figure a way around them.
why make rules if they are not enforced. dont make rules, then enforce them every 8th race.
if your going to make all these rules enforce, if not dont make them up.
i just dont see these tracks having the time, money or personel to make sure all are within specs. never happen.
if you make a ton of rules it will just drive teams into another racing series.

like always, just my opinion

A weight rule is the only way I can see making everyone as even as possible. I feel that a weight rule is not being implemented because no top racer wants somebody to have an advantage over them, if you see a weight rule in that sense.

People spend the money to have the engine advantage, there is your problem right there. Should they have the right to? Sure I guess, but if you want to give everyone a chance, add a weight rule.

From the NYMM rules:
Stock 750lbs
Open 800lbs (up to 617cc)
2mm over/2007 Newer motors 830lbs (618cc-637cc)

F.44 For scaling purposes, your car will be given sticker noting the weight class it is in. If
the car changes its class it is the drivers responsibility to inform NYMM Management
and get the appropriate sticker. (POLICY: racing in an event with a open class or 2
over class motor with the lower weight marked on the car is illegal. Penalty will be
365 day suspension from date of infraction)(being underweight for your class is
forfeit of prize money and tour points for that race) The first set of stickers will be
provided by the NYMM Series. Each additional sticker will be $2.00/each.

You should have to register your engine with the track tech rep etc (I feel that's fair, no cheating around the weight)

I personally feel those weights are too close together and I don't see how they work for the NYMM considering they typically race on larger tracks, which I assume eliminates the weight difference when they are running at full speed but that's another story.

Just my opinion on the subject... and I have an 05 636 but I mainly race in a 250 stock class. I wish that was what everyone ran, instead of a costly 270, but oh well.

seems like this post has been taken over mainly on two issuses bladders and engines: i feel if you can afford to have a spar, ftz, dave orange, nps, walters, clifford or any other engine builder go through your engine you can afford a bladder. a bladder is a device to give the driver or drivers that are involved in a wreck with a possible fuel leak/fire few extra seconds to get out of the car before serious burns along with a multi layer sfi rated fire suit your chances of being safe in this perticular type of inccident go up. i seen on the old site of a fuel cell with a steel housing around it for $300-$400 did that ever get into production by the mfg. this could be a cost alternative to the $800.00 bladders.

ama has a hard time keeping up with engine technology, so will we. as far as all of the post on spar 636 engine dosen't he do the same for yamaha's with nearly the same dyno results? there an old saying you can put lipstic on a pig but it still a pig meaning that you could bore, port, grind, retool, rebuild any of the older engines and i still dont think they'll keep up with the (non touched) newer engines from the mfg. i had a bad speed week and didn't make any of the a mains but i got to watch the features run and one thing was very prevelent the cars that where in the a's where set up correctly and ran on rails i still believe that setup is still #1 secret to winning.

as far as the engines. if you want to buy a built motor do it.
brett arndt the year before last had like 20 2nd place finishes and all on stock out of ebay or wherever engines. yes they were 636's but none the less stock.
we have a bought motor and i know most of our problem isnt horse power it is getting it to the track. our inexperience has cost us the most.
driver wise i think we are close to the good guys, but our setups are what loses races for us.

to add weight to a car is stupid. i have lean drivers now you want to penalize me or having a 636. just what i need is more weight bouncing around on my car. safety wise dont think thats the way to go. there will be teams zip tying a 25 lb missle in their cars, dont need a 25 lb chunk of lead flying around in a crash.

whatever you have in racing, there is always teams out there that will have the latest motor, the best chassis, new tires every race, bla,bla,bla.
its that way from go carts to nascar.
we are already being penalized with the 750 lb rule so the fat older guys can compete. how many fat older guys are racing 410's.

1 Bladders: This should be optional not mandatory and I agree with Rick that having a bumper with the lower hoop and making sure they have a cam lock cap would be a better direction to go.

2 The Kaw 636 Engine: 95% of the people have them (Let it alone). There are other motors winning beside Spahr motors but you just do not here about them. A little bit of maint and and doing you homework goes a long way.
I agree with Mike and adding weight is not going to make enough of a difference versus the safety issues. There are some of us that already have to put weight in the car to make weight.

3 Rev Limit: Keep the rev limit rule in place (but what tracks have checked them this year). Would it help the guys enough that are running a 600 to allow them to run a rev box?

4 A common mounting point for transponders only makes sense.

5 Spec tire rule: I personally think this should be left alone. This is going to benefit the teams that run several tracks but not every track warrants a hard tire. We run Trailways and you can get plenty of life out of a 23 or 33. Running a hard tire there would not be a benefit but make for some boring racing(This should be a track rule). On a side note Trailways has done a good job all season with the track surface.

6 U6SA should work on enforcing the current rules and training track personel on safety and tech inspection.
No form of racing is cheap and everyonre knows that going into it(At least they should). A lot can still be learned from 270's they are still one of the most competitive classes to watch and have endured a lot of years of racing and I wander why that is?
Some things are better left alone.

Wow. i think 8k for all that would be giving it away. Are all those things really necessary to equal a kawi with pistons? I really don't think so...

Did I say you had to do all of the mods together to equal a Kawi...NO you don't have to do all of it. One or two of the mods on a newer 07-08 CBR, R6 or GSXR will get it even.
Its ok to spend three grand on a injection system!
But its not ok to spend $ on your engine??????

to add weight to a car is stupid. i have lean drivers now you want to penalize me or having a 636. just what i need is more weight bouncing around on my car.

Well either way you're going to get penalized, considering that there is a section on 636 engines in the first post of this thread.

I figured weight is the most worthwhile way? You guys rave about safety so I'm sure whoever is checking the cars during inspection will check to see if the weight is secured or not. If you're going to run the weight in your car all year why would somebody just throw it in there?

Did I say you had to do all of the mods together to equal a Kawi...NO you don't have to do all of it. One or two of the mods on a newer 07-08 CBR, R6 or GSXR will get it even.
Its ok to spend three grand on a injection system!
But its not ok to spend $ on your engine??????

3k is a little steep. I built our first one for @$500. It's not hard. And we spend money on our engines, just not in the head. that just so happens to be your bread and butter as I understand it. i can see, and respect why you want to open it up.

But I think its pretty fair right now that you only have to spend $2.5k in an engine to be very competitive with all teams. I wouldn't want to spend 3x that to be competitive.

This is the east coast, we don't need 15k mid-west problems.

I decided to put my two cents into this as I am planning on joining the 600cc class next year.

Bladders: How much is your safety worth? I know not everyone looks at safety this way but I feel alot of people over look the safety aspect in racing. People buy the lightest up to date parts for their car but then strap on a 5 year old helmet thats been dropped a million times, put on their favorite gloves witha million holes in them not to mention the cheapest firesuit they could find cuz they need the money for tires. For those type of people I guess their life and ability to function doesn't mean much to them. Mr Dicely states a VERY good point about the lack of safety personal and equipment at many of the tracks we race at. If anyone read the Doug Wolfgang book they will know that he is also one who would like to see better safety at all local racetracks as I think we would all feel alot safer with improved safety personal at the tracks we race at. I personally feel it would be realllly hard to organize an extra 5 dollar fee at every racetrack and make sure it got into the proper hands(safety personal). Its not that I don't like the idea as I would be all for it. I guess what I'm trying to say here is we should do everything within our own power to protect ourselves. This bladder issue won't only protect yourself but everyone else out on the racetrack with you as well. I tried knocking the flag stand down at Linda's back in 99 I believe it was. Back bumper went thru the tail tank and sprayed gas all over the frontstretch. YES GAS. Now I think the majority run alcohol these days which isn't as flammable as gas. BUT! With a bladder I don't think there would have been a drop of anything on the track. I am all for making bladders or something similar mandatory. The fuel cell type tank that Henchcraft has on their site would be a cheaper alternative that I feel should be allowed as well. Bottom line if you can't afford to spend the money to be safe you shouldn't be racing.

Motors: I really like the current rules as they are right now. It really has helped attract me back to the 600 class. I can see the concern within the next few years with the 636 Kawi not being in production anymore. I believe that in the next few years there will be technology advancements by at least one of the major brands in the market that will come out with something that is better then the 636. I'm seriously considering an R6 for next year just because of the few extra RPMS you can get out of them. Plus its more fun beating people with something diffrent. PLEASE don't allow head or bottom end work. Something else to remember is that every time you change a rule its going to cost the racer more money.

Tires: I like the idea of a spec tire. I can appreciate wanting to have the option of outguessing people on tire selection. But not everyone has the money for 3 different tire selections just sitting in the trailer.

One other thing I would like to suggest is limiting the amount of cockpit adjustments. We all know that adjustable shocks aren't as cheap as non adjustable ones. When you have 4 adjustable shocks, adjustable wing, weight jacker, and a panhard bar adjustment isn't that a bit much? If you limited it to only 2 adjustments I believe it would help reduce the costs and level the playing field a bit more. The fine art of hitting the setup when you roll out onto the racetrack seems to have faded away with Kark Kinser.

Just my two cents worth....

Look forward to putting some faces with the names you see around here next year.

Dave Brown

If you have a bumper go through your tank because you flipped into the flagstand I doubt that a bladder is going to hold up the piece of sheared metal that punctured your tank. No doubt alcohol is still going to get all over the track. These things aren't infallable. It's just a piece of rubber. And even with gas, you didn't catch fire.

The less expensive "bladder" cells that are available are a great option, however alot of them only hold 3-4 gallons so now are you going to be looking at fuel stops for even a moderately long race (say 30-35 laps at linda's) or even a regular 25 lap race with a ton of cautions? So now are you going to make guys buy the bigger more expensive bladder so you don't have to stop for fuel?

Throughout this thread, people seem very intent on keeping the motor work rules to a minimum so they can stay competitive on a smaller budget and the guys 'with the most money don't win' (agree or disagree as you wish :) ). However, making the smaller budget teams buy thousand dollar bladders has the same effect, gives the advantage to the money guys, because they can still afford the extras while the little guy is buying a bladder. Now imagine if the little guy then goes and get holes in two or three of the bladders in a season and has to replace them......down go the car counts again.

Let's find a better solution before we make these things mandatory. (See my previous post.) We don't need 1000 dollar band-aids.

And guys who want the bladders, I'm not trying to step on your toes, nor look down on safety, I'm as unhappy about fire as the next guy. I guarantee you though I'm going to feel much safer with a trained and PREPARED safety crew on hand than I am with a tail bladder in my car. I just want to see the best option for our sport that includes everyone (those with unlimited funds and those with a budget) and encourages new people to join. This shouldn't just become a wealthy man's game, there's enough of that crap in the world as it is. Let's let everyone have fun.

As always my humble and very unimportant opinion. :)

Hope the meeting goes well tomorrow!!

I figured weight is the most worthwhile way? You guys rave about safety so I'm sure whoever is checking the cars during inspection will check to see if the weight is secured or not. If you're going to run the weight in your car all year why would somebody just throw it in there?


alex,
in 2 1/2 years we havnt been inspected yet except for bridgeport. they checks suits, helmets, firewall, and generally looked the car all over.
i have yet to be checked in pa once other than tire durometer during speedweek.
my point is, why bother with the rules if they are not even randomly enforced.
i have yet to see a engine teched.
as far as securing the weight, my point was that some drivers take alot of short cuts to get on the track, however they are endangering other drivers as well as themselves.

Son, why do think the weight rule would be for us fat old guys? Your inexperience is going to get you in trouble. A few of us so called old fat guys will spank you all the way around the track. Untill you understand all parts of racing, I suggest keeping your lips zipped unless you have an intelligent idea to share.

why do the 410 sprinters try to be as light as possible, uh.... to go faster.
i dont see how you go faster by adding weight. its a poor way to penalize a race team.
teams spend money on titanium and carbon fiber parts to be lighter.
if we are checking in at 750-780 lbs, and your at 810-830 that gives us a big advantage. lose weight and you have the same advantage.

pretty soon well have all the 600's to a 800 lb min. so all the big boys can compete. adding weight for no reason other than to slow a car down makes no sense.
and lowerslower, i can see why you got that name now, dont challenge what you cant handle.

If you have a bumper go through your tank because you flipped into the flagstand I doubt that a bladder is going to hold up the piece of sheared metal that punctured your tank. No doubt alcohol is still going to get all over the track. These things aren't infallable. It's just a piece of rubber. And even with gas, you didn't catch fire.

The less expensive "bladder" cells that are available are a great option, however alot of them only hold 3-4 gallons so now are you going to be looking at fuel stops for even a moderately long race (say 30-35 laps at linda's) or even a regular 25 lap race with a ton of cautions? So now are you going to make guys buy the bigger more expensive bladder so you don't have to stop for fuel?

Throughout this thread, people seem very intent on keeping the motor work rules to a minimum so they can stay competitive on a smaller budget and the guys 'with the most money don't win' (agree or disagree as you wish :) ). However, making the smaller budget teams buy thousand dollar bladders has the same effect, gives the advantage to the money guys, because they can still afford the extras while the little guy is buying a bladder. Now imagine if the little guy then goes and get holes in two or three of the bladders in a season and has to replace them......down go the car counts again.

Let's find a better solution before we make these things mandatory. (See my previous post.) We don't need 1000 dollar band-aids.

And guys who want the bladders, I'm not trying to step on your toes, nor look down on safety, I'm as unhappy about fire as the next guy. I guarantee you though I'm going to feel much safer with a trained and PREPARED safety crew on hand than I am with a tail bladder in my car. I just want to see the best option for our sport that includes everyone (those with unlimited funds and those with a budget) and encourages new people to join. This shouldn't just become a wealthy man's game, there's enough of that crap in the world as it is. Let's let everyone have fun.

As always my humble and very unimportant opinion. :)

Hope the meeting goes well tomorrow!!

If bladders don't do anything why are they mandatory in sprint cars and in USAC? You'd be amazed how hard it is to puncture one. We have guys doing 100 something in a micro at The Grove now. Try backing a 600 into the fence their without a bladder versus with a bladder. Coming from sprint cars its amazing what kind of abuse those bladders can go thru and still hold fuel. And yes I believe that if there was a bladder in the tank back in 99 their wouldn't have been any fuel spilled at all.

There is always going to be someone trying to out spend you no matter what the rules are. Unfortunately thats the way racing is today. How would you like to be the guy who spent extra money on something that you knew was going to be mandatory only to find out that it wasn't going to be now? I'm not one of those people, but I'm sure there are alot of guys out there who already bought a bladder. I will be sure to have one in my car when it hits the track in 09.

I'm not knocking the improved safety crews at all. I am all for it! I just don't really see that happening as easily as it is to make bladders mandatory.

pretty soon well have all the 600's to a 800 lb min. so all the big boys can compete. adding weight for no reason other than to slow a car down makes no sense.
and lowerslower, i can see why you got that name now, dont challenge what you cant handle.

Just so you know, the weight was raised last year in an effort to help promote safety, beleive it or not. To allow for full containment seats, bladders, driver safety devices etc. This was so the skinny punks didn't feel the need to remove even more weight from the car, and possibly make the car unsafe. Sorry, but we aren't racing on a 410 budget (yet). It costs lots of money to go that fast. And I think Rahmer would definitely have a problem with the fat old guy reference. Like to see ya out handle him...

i have no problem with you adding a full containment seat, go for it.
i have one and a bladder too and im just above the min. weight.

as far as the rahmer comment, a little off the mark bud. we are talking about adding weight and you want me to race rahmer. im talking about 600's only. i see dicely making comments about ways to make the car lighter, like his new wheels. so dont tell me that it isnt important, we want to keep raising the min weight and the meantime dicely and company is coming out with newer lighter more expensive parts all the time which the teams with money will buy.
plus if you want to put rahmer in your car go for it. we would love to race him.
racing the best makes everybody a better racer.

I'm not knocking the improved safety crews at all. I am all for it! I just don't really see that happening as easily as it is to make bladders mandatory.

Dave I don't disagree that making bladders mandatory is easier...(and if they were 100 or 200 bucks we wouldn't even need to discuss it) but I don't think we should choose to make rules based on ease, thats the lazy way out. I think we should make rules based on whats best for the sport. Keeping costs down encourages and allows more teams to keep racing, especially in this economy, and that is what is best for our sport.

we are already being penalized with the 750 lb rule so the fat older guys can compete. how many fat older guys are racing 410's.


Thats your quote. You brought it up, I answered it, bud.

I really don't think there is a conspiracy like you are implying. The minimum weights were raised to allow racers, no matter what their mass is, to use safer components in their cars without having to shave weight from other areas to compensate. And constantly having newer, lighter, stronger components is called evolution, and Hyper is the best in the business at it. No one is telling you to buy new front hubs. And I don't think anyone in their right mind is arguing that more weight equals better acceleration.

BTW, we consistantly scale at @830, so go ahead and tag us with an extra 50 lbs for a 636, doesn't bother us in the least...

alex,
in 2 1/2 years we havnt been inspected yet except for bridgeport. they checks suits, helmets, firewall, and generally looked the car all over.
i have yet to be checked in pa once other than tire durometer during speedweek.
my point is, why bother with the rules if they are not even randomly enforced.
i have yet to see a engine teched.
as far as securing the weight, my point was that some drivers take alot of short cuts to get on the track, however they are endangering other drivers as well as themselves.


I understand your point. I just see that if the weight rule would be enforced and checked, I figured that's the best way to go. I also understand that there probably is no solution the level the playing field so it'll be interesting to see how this all works out in a few years.

3k is a little steep. I built our first one for @$500. It's not hard. And we spend money on our engines, just not in the head. that just so happens to be your bread and butter as I understand it. i can see, and respect why you want to open it up.

But I think its pretty fair right now that you only have to spend $2.5k in an engine to be very competitive with all teams. I wouldn't want to spend 3x that to be competitive.

This is the east coast, we don't need 15k mid-west problems.

At the least the rules should allow the newer motors to go up to 636cc regardless of the year. Engine technology hasn’t changed that much since 06 and the 36cc displacement difference is still an advantage. I was really surprised when the ZX6R 636 was let in the micro sprint’s rulebook (AMA said no) but I guess when someone can make extra money on stock engine kits and fuel injection when selling a car it makes good business sense. I personally don’t really care from my business stance on the rules...since we will still be building more motors (including 636’s), machining heads and selling more engine parts from our online store than we can handle….But for a competition stand point it would be nice to se some closer racing between different engine manufactures.

I do agree with that. But I don't want to see the floodgates opened up to do it. I also don't think allowing the 2mm over on current engines is good. Only from the standpoint that we are trying to get away from that. To allow it now will stick us with it, again, for many years to come. It wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for the 636 to begin with.

honestly, the more people that buy the kawi, the shorter its life will be. Engines are getting scarce, and soon factory parts(cranks) will do the same. AMA has outlawed the engine and our sport won't keep it profitable enough for the manufacturers to keep it alive.

Only one way imho to get rid of high dollar engines ...... CLAIMER ...... Just my .02 ..... Jimmy

So all the high dollar teams can buy out the competition. Great idea…

Maybe so I could get one of them high dollar teams motors ...... Sounds like a great idea to me comming from a very limited budget team. The only reason I'm running a stock kawi is the local dealer sponsored me one..... if not for that I'd still be running my old f-3. Do I have x amount of dollars for x engine builder to work his magic on my 636...... hell no .... so I'm still at a disadvantage to the guys with built motors. So mr hypermotive what do you suggest should be done to get the other motors on a more even playing field without spending a ton of money. Say a good stock motor off of e-junk is @1500 and the injection conversion is @1500 set the claimer @$3500.

i love the idea of a claimer rule. but wouldnt that penalize 2 groups.
1. engine builders, let say spar for example. first you buy the kawi for 1500-2000.00 , then send it to spar who adds anoth 2000.00.
so we have 4000.00 into it, and someone can claim it for 3500.00

plus with the scarcity if the 05-06 kawis youll see the money teams just claim your motor.
we would just have to come up with a better number. i dont think its fair to put the engine builders out of business.

2nd group would be teams like us. they dont want to tear apart motors and work on them. for one, we dont have the time in our schedules to do so.
we are not motor heads in the motorcyle world. so it makes sense for me to have someone set the motor up right and then im golden.

like i said, i like the idea.

Maybe so I could get one of them high dollar teams motors ...... Sounds like a great idea to me comming from a very limited budget team. The only reason I'm running a stock kawi is the local dealer sponsored me one..... if not for that I'd still be running my old f-3. Do I have x amount of dollars for x engine builder to work his magic on my 636...... hell no .... so I'm still at a disadvantage to the guys with built motors. So mr hypermotive what do you suggest should be done to get the other motors on a more even playing field without spending a ton of money. Say a good stock motor off of e-junk is @1500 and the injection conversion is @1500 set the claimer @$3500.

You don't have to call me MR., I'm not your pappy :)

The claimer thing won't work, and no way would you get my injection with it anyway! and if you can afford to claim a motor at $3500-$4000, you can afford to have yours built, especially considering you didn't even pay for yours to start.

This is the way I see it:

1-Gonna have a very hard time outlawing an engine that the vast majority are running.

2-If they were outlawed, you aren't going to be racing sealed engines, because they aren't teching the motors now anyway. And I'm not pulling my motor apart in a dirt lot risking geting abrasive material into my engine, which will kill it very fast at 15k rpm.

3-there is nothing illegal about modifying cam timing, changing camshafts, shaving heads or the like. EVERYONE COULD DO IT!

4-you can still run an overbored engine, just nothing newer than 07.

There are a wide array of choices with engines. to pick one, and then complain about it being underpowered? sounds like somone made an un-wise decision. No one says you have to run on alcohol. Run the engine on gas, with a bladder then. You are not down more than 1 or 2 hp.

What is being done now with engines is no more expensive than a year ago, maybe even cheaper. We have run stock engines, and way down on HP. You have to live with racing within your means. This is a hobby that people willingly chose to do. You can't complain that others, with more money, have an advantage just because they may happen to have a larger budget! You chose to race in this division. If you can't afford to race at the level it takes to accomplish your goals, one of three things must happen:

1-you accept what you can afford to buy, and have fun.
2-Find a more affordable form of racing
3-quit

We do not have an open or stock class. this is a modified class and I personally think its a great thing. Being able to race is a privilege, not a right. I think alot of people tend to forget that.

2nd group would be teams like us. they dont want to tear apart motors and work on them. for one, we dont have the time in our schedules to do so.
we are not motor heads in the motorcyle world. so it makes sense for me to have someone set the motor up right and then im golden.

like i said, i like the idea.

Take no offense- Accept what you have and do the best job you can. Have fun for shit's sake. Thats what racing is SUPPOSED to be about in the first place!

i agree, we are here to have fun and we do.

i like putting a certain amount of rules, i just dont want to many especially if they are not enforced.

like congress, whats the point of making all the laws and not abiding by them.

hopefully all of us are smarter than the us congress.

LOL .... Sorry pappy:). All I was trying to do ws figure a way for more of the smaller teams to be competitive. The problem is, is that more guys are opting out for #3 and quitting. Its not just in our class but across the racing board. I remember going to big car shows as a kid and having consi's in all classes. Now just for example we are lucky to have a dozen asphalt mod's at our local track. One track shut his doors this year because car count was so bad. Claiming did work for car count alittle but the best thing was the sealed crate motors. Problem is that I don't see any of the big jap companies making us a spec motor. Yes hyper I am having fun but the problem is, is that car count is going down and we need to find a way to make/keep it an affordable racing class. Comming from go-karts where a stock bluprinted briggs back in the late 80's cost around $500/600 .... now the damn things are almost $1800 for a stock engine and they are suffering the same fate as the rest of the racing community. I guess all im getting at is why cant we just take the damn motors off of the bike and run 'em.

Car count-It's a testament to the economy, not our rules...

what a opinionated fellow we have here. maybe less time telling people how/what to feel on a computer would relax him some. isn't there much better things to do each day then jump online and whine? spend money, don't spend money. quit or race. do what you want and where you want and let guys that think they know everything on here, live in there wonderful computer keyboard world. just do your own thing and let everyone else have their own choice, and don't make them feel any different then content with the choices fellow racers make. i'm done. continue as if i was not here....

There is also a big difference Pa and NY....We've done over 75 different car techs this season, and only 58% of our drivers in NY had Kawi motors. If anyone from a PA track that has access to your tech sheets, see what your Kawi count is. I know we've talked to a few big names down in Pa and they seem to think the Kawi ratio is more in the upper 80%-90%....

Well if your crying about spending money on Bladders because you have not seen fires in years then why do you guys spend the same amount of money on nomex fire suits and approved helmets. What your stating is I could race with a 50 dollar helmet and tshirt and jeans because there is no reason to think there might be a fire.

What is wrong with placing a fuel tank in a well protected area that only holds 5 to 7 gallons? Does this not achieve the same outcome? Safely?

A fuel bladder within the existing tail tank structure still has an exposure area not within the rear frame and nerf bar. It is still subject to being damaged is my point.

The Spike fuel tank does address that issue by placing the bladder within the confines of the car frame above the rear axle. The other area within the tank is apparently foam filled to absorb energy from an impact. It also has a smaller fuel volume like 7 gallons.

Most racing fuel bladder cells have an outer metal shell which should also be allowed provided they are located in a well protected area.