Post by Bob Vehring on May 14, 2013 8:50:51 GMT -5
Sorry for the delay, I'll give some hi lights from the meeting, but remember, wait for the official wording to come out . The big news, and this is great news Todd Acterberg formerly of Eagle River fame is developing a new site for ISR. Their will no longer be a printed version of the rule book but you will be able to download and print it for free. Each ISR affiliate will also have a section for them on the site to post their schedule, race results, series news etc. Another big plus here is the rule book can now easily be expanded and updated. For us, 120 rules will now be broken up with separate sections for oval, snow x and drag. This will take alot of the confusion out of it, especially for new people.
Some of the bigger high lights
Testing will be done on a rev limiter system for the stock classes, This is a first step in equaling out the speeds in the stock class. This would come in for the 14-15 season
Some changes ( again) to the tail light rule, OEM rear light must work
Some changes and clarifications on age, wait for the book because it varies by class.
Slide rail lubers will be allowed in both Briggs classes and Pro St.
Gear changes for Briggs Semi pro, again wait for the book
SKI Doo Mini z will be allowed some changes to the front suspension puck in
In Briggs Semi pro a rear shock will be allowed in Snow X
Very long discussion on the problems with the Briggs track driver issues. It will remain under review for next season while a better option is found.
The proposed class that allowed the Briggs engine in the Champ chassis failed
Thats the high lights for 120, There where alot more discussions involving both the Kitty Kat classes and the Jr. Transition classes which seam to be headed to the restricted 600 based OEM sleds
If there's any 120 questions or comments, please ask them here, and I will do my best to get you answers.
If you are going to report the ISR updates, you might want to record the facts correctly. Even better, if you (the reader) wants to know what actually goes on at a meeting, show up and support your club.
The Open 206 class (Briggs motor in a Champ chassis), was proposed as a Specialty class, not as a core class, and is up to the individual groups to offer. This was in fact allowed to be run as a Specialty class, and MMSRA in Winnipeg will be running it next season as we already have 3 sleds ready to go. As of right now, there are also 2 other clubs who will consider offering it at a few of their races as well so that their members can see what the class is about.
There was never any proposal to allow Briggs motors to race with Champ motors. The class we proposed (Open 206) very clearly stated that they were to NOT compete with Champ sleds, and that Champ was to remain the elite class as that is where the builders and tuners are able to show off their talent.
If you have any questions, feel free to email me directly through our website www.mmsra.ca.
Post by Bob Vehring on May 14, 2013 22:10:36 GMT -5
Well Dave I take it your still upset, sorry I have to vote as I see fit for the sport, and that was based on many racers comments as was presented. My facts are correct. Above it says,
"The proposed class that allowed the Briggs engine in the Champ chassis failed"
Notice it says chassis, not class.
You are correct that you, or anyone can put together any class you choose. For years down here we had a class called Outlaw, two engine rules, must be under 220cc, 4 stroke, and must run on gas. These were 25-28 HP open Animals in a champ chassis. Thats 10-12 HP more then a good champ engine, pretty exciting class. It was popular here for a while but all of the racers eventually moved back into Champ because of the prestige it offers running ISR's top class. We still build about 20 of these a season because their are pockets all over where racers just want to go fast. Non of these classes ever asked, or were intended to be, ISR core classes. Series everywhere run Specialty class to fit what their racers want, no one suggested you can't do that. There are allready 8, 120 classes in the book, as of now, ISOC only has time to offer Stock and Champ. Everyone wants their class in, and theres too many now, how much more do you want to dilute the National level? If you have interest in your group, it should work well for you. I truely wish you luck with your class in your series, I hope everyone has fun with it.
Post by Bob Vehring on May 15, 2013 12:55:33 GMT -5
The short answer is, not at this time. There is a long answer, and I will give it to you latter tonight, in the middle of a job right now. Before anyone goes off on this, it was one of the longer topic's and the available fixes brought alot of other issues in.
Post by Bob Vehring on May 15, 2013 16:29:51 GMT -5
Ok, so heres where this got sideways. The proposal was;
"Driver modification/replacement. Track drive sprockets may be modified or changed. FINAL DRIVESHAFT CENTERLINE MAY BE CHANGED"
On some sleds the shaft must be moved for clearance with bigger drivers. It is not legal to move the mounting points of the rear skid like it is in Champ class so now you have no way to make up the distance from moving the shaft. You will not be able to get the track tight enough.
Everyone in the room understands how serious this is, and we understand it is mostly a clearance issue on one brand, however, if the rules were opened to allow relocating the track, people would site performance gain, and everyone would feel the need to do it adding greatly to the cost of the class.
It was not clear how widespread the issue is, one person reported trashing 5 tracks. Afew others said they had the problem, others said they had no issues at all. It was decided to table the issue to see hao big the problem is, and hope that there might be alternative ideas to fix it. If you have any ideas or have the problem, please post your thoughts here.
Post by Bob Vehring on May 15, 2013 21:21:02 GMT -5
Oly, To be sure we better wait until the book comes out on the new site, should be July. Not sure how the rule will be written. What was talked about was like the kit Eric ( Midwest Mini) offered, not sure if anyone else makes a kit. My bet is someone will.
With regards to the drivers. I think the gain is having the extrovert drive vs driving off the rubber lugs on the track. Not the larger diameter. Can't a smaller driver be manufactured?
Is there a performance gained by running a larger driver? I'm more concerned about the life of the track.
As for track issues...I started the season with a brand new track and it was failing by the 5th race. We just kept tightening the track to keep it going through the season. If one of the goals is to keep the costs down this needs to be addressed. Going though a track or two a year just adds to the cost.
Post by Bob Vehring on May 16, 2013 13:32:46 GMT -5
" Can't a smaller driver be manufactured?" Of course the answer is yes, but the problems is, Will someone do it, and thats one of the things were waiting to see. In the over all picture of marketing, the 120 race world is small, add to this, the issue is only one class. Now, I have no idea what it would take to make these up, hopefully someone will look into it.
I agree it will have to be addressed because of the cost of wrecking tracks, the hope was a cheaper "fix" will come along without adding the costs of moving the shaft and the skid