Is it ever too early to start talking about rules…
I don’t think so. I am not trying to stir the pot here, I mean we are a few weeks into the 2010 season. HAHA! Here in the East with the U6SA Rules set, we all know where the big hiccup is and I assure you it will be addressed at the meeting in the fall. However, this is what we have to work with, so as the saying goes, it is what it is for the year. That being said, I would like to put some ideas out there and will make some of these proposals for this year’s meeting.
Let’s start with common ground. The rules are only as good as the enforcement and as we are all well aware, the ‘enforcement’ part is a little more than lacking. Allow me to restate; it is a dichotomy, on one hand you have tracks that are very diligent about tech and do it on a regular basis and you have other tracks where there is no tech at all, ever. The threat doesn’t even exist of it. That is a huge problem for everyone. However, I think we need to recognize why that is; and in talking to track owners, competitors and people involved in the sport, intimidation of the unknown is the biggest culprit. We have been trying diligently to train track personnel on how to tech properly, but I still think what they are looking at, the procedure and what has to be done is very complicated and extremely time consuming. In other words, we need to simplify the rules and make them easy, so they can be enforced regularly, able to be checked in a timely fashion and simple for the person who is not familiar with the engines to understand. That should be the foundation or commonality the rules are built around. The road to failure is paved with good intentions and I believe presently that is the road we are headed down. Now I am not saying we need to fully open it up and have a free for all, cause that will chase the heart and soul of the class away. But the rules should be limited and as I previously stated made tech feasible and easy to understand. Let’s face it, the more rules you have the more room there is for cheating or the impression that people are. Right, wrong or indifferent that is the fact of the matter. Look at all the classes where cheating is found, the ones with the most rules is where it is rampant. Therefore, we all need to step back and re-examine where we are at and where we need to go.
I site an example of this in our current rules. Included in our rules is that very little can be done to the head of the engine. Now I ask all of you in sincerity, how many people out there have ever seen a head pulled off and teched properly at the track? I am going to say very, very, very few if any; and if it were, honestly, how many people there even knew what they are looking at and or for. The reality of the situation is it doesn’t happen and is not going to happen, for complexity, cost and time reasons. So why do we have rules regulating what can be done to the head? The logic I get when I bring it up is “Just so it’s in there. So people won’t do anything.” That makes zero sense and is just laughable. Hell, just ask some of the engine builders they will tell you what is being done. If you think guys are racing and don’t have their heads ported beyond the ‘massage’ rules that are “allowed”, Tattoo is anxiously awaiting your arrival on Fantasy Island.
With that being said, some rules that I would propose and ask you to think about consist of but are not limited to the following: ECU/REV Boxes, Compression Ratio and Cams.
It is my opinion that everyone should have to run a Power Commander (PC). No modified ECU’s of any kind, recalibrated ones, racing boxes, tricked up ones or anything of that nature. Now before you get all up in roars allow me to explain. With the hot topic of “Traction Control and RPM’s (still even with it in the rules, imagine that)” being talked about at every trailer you walk up to, here is how this can be enforced. Now I am not an electronics engineer by any stretch of the imagination, but by only running an ECU and no PC you can do all kinds of things that allow Traction Control and REV’s. If everyone has a PC and their fuel map is contained therein, a touring series or track could have a set of stock ECU’s on hand and before the start of the feature, hand competitors a stock ECU to put in their car. Yes, they would have to have several ECU’s for the engine manufacturers, however, they are cheap for the tracks and series to have and would not be hard to come by. The whole field does not need to get one, just a random selection of competitors prior to the feature. What competitor would object to this unless they have something to hide? I know this will cost some people money up front if they are not presently running a PC, but it will be good for the class in the long run. Obviously some running changes would have to be made to this rule as bike engine technology advances, but it’s an addition to the starting point we already have with no gear position sensor, etc.
Cams – Cams need to remain stock period. Cams are expensive, not to mention all the perks that come with having them like lift, valve float, duration, timing and many other things. PLUS, they are easy to tech. Pull the valve cover off the engine and there they are. Not only are they easy to tech but guess what, with stock cams it will limit, to an extent what can be done to the head of the engine, the valves, timing, etc. for performance gains.
Compression Ratio – Why on Earth this is not ever brought up is completely beyond me. It is one of the easiest things in the world to tech. I am not sure of a class out there that does not have a compression limit rule in place with the exception of ours. It’s never even been discussed. Now some research needs to be done in order to find a working ratio to fit the needs of the class, but I am quite sure we have the people and the know how to get this done. With a compression rule it will limit a lot of what can and cannot be done to the inside of an engine, saving the class competitors money in the near term and the long run. Isn’t that what the rules were originally intended for in the first place???
The rules need to be setup as a framework for guidance as to what you can and cannot do. I could write about ten more things that need to be looked at as well, but Rome wasn’t built in a day. I would like to say that this article is not intended to discredit what the U6SA is doing or what we have accomplished so far. To the contrary, without taking the steps that we as an organization have taken so far we would be at the Free for All stage. These thoughts are just building blocks that need some consideration. Thanks for reading, hope you like the new look to 600scene.com and as always, I love to hear the good and the bad. Let’s hope it doesn’t Rayne on weekends this year. Whoops I mean rain. My bad haha!
