Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

I'm not any kind of engine expert but from the posts in that thread it seems like he was clearly within the rule book. Someone with a more intimate knowledge care to explain what the issue is?

The rules I read say stock crank  and under 360ci and it sounds like they used a stock 327 crank to make a very common short stroke engine. I don't see how this could be considered  not within the spirit or intent of the rule. It doesn't cost any more to build this combination than it does to use a 350 crank.
Reading this line in the rules also shows that the intended to allow other combinations "Flat top pistons only. No pistons above the deck. Domed pistons allowed in engines that are 292 c.i.d. or smaller"
Sounds like someone is playing favorites to me and the drivers that protested are sore losers.

Stock crank to the block, no stroker cranks and No after market blocks.  If it doesn't say you can do it, then you can't.

I'm going from memory from the last rule book I read.

The older I get the faster I was

The rules I read didn't say anything about not using an aftermarket block. It can also be built using a stock 400 block and a 327 crank. Probably with the same results lol. Some drivers are just sore losers.

I don't know if you are familiar with the beginings of the sportsman sprint class or Wesco before Fred Brownfield came in as the promoter . The 292 cid reference in the rules was from leftover Super modifed engines. Most everyone ran a chev 350 bored .030 over. but those that chose to run the 292's were allowed to run high compression pistons.  The 350's have always been stock GM block, Stock crank, stock 3.48 stroke.      

The older I get the faster I was

Show me where is says production block? Show me where is says no short stroke engines?

18.6 Sportsman Sprint Class

18.6.1 Chevrolet engines only. Maximum cubic inch 360.

18.6.2 Stock production style crankshaft only. For balancing purpose, cross drilling of the rod journal permitted. No altering of the throws or counter weights.

18.6.3 Steel connecting rods only.

18.6.4 Stock production straight plug steel heads or Dart head #10120010 only. No angle milling or milling off the intake side of the heads.

18.6.5 No porting, polishing or port matching of heads allowed.

18.6.6 If carbureted, a maximum of one 4 barrel @ 850 CFM allowed.

18.6.7 Injector stacks may not be larger than 1 ½" I.D. If larger stacks are used, they must be reduced to 1 ½" I.D. Restrictor opening shall be a maximum of 1 ½ "I.D. round, and centered and in the stacks. Maximum thickness is .250 (1/4") flat design. Maximum radius or chamfer is .050. No blending above restrictors. Maximum blending below restrictors is ¾". No alterations to the restrictors or stacks to enhance air flow. It is recommended the restrictors be moved up the stacks far enough to allow three 1/8" pop rivets to be inserted directly below restrictors equally spaced before blending to prevent slippage.

18.6.8 No electric fuel pumps.

18.6.9 Roller rockers allowed. Stud mount only, no pedestal or shaft mount.

18.6.10 Flat tappet or solid cams only. No mushroom or roller cams. No Stellate, nitride or specialty hardening of the camshaft allowed. Stock style lifters only, no hardened or lightweight lifters allowed.

Their sore losers because they follow the rules and expect others to as well ? 

The older I get the faster I was

But the rules do not state 3.48 stroke only!!!!!!!!

I guess you didn't read the rules that I posted right from the tracks website before you made this stupid comment.

Stock Crank  a stock 350 crank is 3.48 right.    Look for the part before the engine rules where it say if it doesn't say you can do it then you can't. 

The older I get the faster I was

Get the rule book itself not a brief synopsis from the website.  I'm not going to argue it.  I don't have a dog in this fight I just know from running that class for 13 years what the intent and spirit of the rules are and understand and agree with the decision the officials made.  End of story.

The older I get the faster I was

As a casual fan this is all a little confusing to me.  Its my understanding that the team in question is new to the class this season.  How are they supposed to know the intent of a rule that was created 13+ years ago unless it's in writing.  It looks to me their motor is legal as per the written rules.  Telling someone to call the track for clarification is just a cop out for a poorly written/outdated rules package.  Seems like the morebsensible thing to do would be to let them run and update the rules for next season.  Skagit is having a tough time with car counts as it is and they just lost 2 more.

"Stock Production style crank" with no mention of stroke is the rule. They should have been legal!

Sprints rule

BINGO! What he said...

This thread is highlighting 1 thing that's wrong with economical sprint classes in general.  Know this - I support economical sprint classes.  My family wouldn't have gotten into sprint cars without it. 

These classes get developed with very good intention of keeping costs down.  Rule books get created to govern costs.  I don't know anybody looking to get into one of these economical classes with the intent of ruining the class.  But when a rulebook is written vague, innovators begin to get creative.  When innovators perform well (key here is do well - i.e., win), the people who don't like innovation (i.e. - people who are getting beat) come up with the biggest bullshit excuse - "if the rulebook doesn't say you can do it, don't assume you can do it".  Stupid people use that excuse.  Stupid people should leave rulebook adaptation to smart people.  If you want everyone to run the same engine, go to a frickin crate package for christ's sake.  Otherwise, accept the fact that no matter how good the intent is, innovators and thinkers will find ways to build an engine or a chassis that doesn't look or run like yours does...and still be within the written rules.  Tell me you've never heard this in sprint cars - "I've got 15 grand in this 'economical' engine that I built with the best parts money can buy within the rules.  I'm getting beat every week by an engine built for less than 10 grand.  That 10 grand engine can't be legal!  I think we should protest him next week."  And thus, the innovators get run out of the sport because we get sick of the drama.

I speak from experience on this subject - I was in this sport for 15 years and had my fair share of naysayers think what we were doing was breaking the rules.  We were winning, our car was different, our engine was different, and yes, we got protested often - always with the same result I am proud to add - we were always within the rules, we just did things a little different than everyone else.  Rulebook in our class was re-written on more than one occasion due to things we did.  So yeah, this subject gets me a bit twitchy.

There....off my soapbox now....

They were not new to Skagit. Otto raced in that class in it's early years. 

The older I get the faster I was

Ok lets forget the stroke of the crank.

18.6.1 Chevrolet engines only. Maximum cubic inch 360.

Chevrolet engines only....... that eliminates aftermarket blocks.

He had a Dart Block in the Sportsman Class, the officials were just doing there job and rightly so in my humble opinion.  

The older I get the faster I was

Still grasping dude.  The organization I ran with had similar verbiage about Chevrolet blocks only, but allowed Dart blocks as long as it was based on Chevrolet design.  Finding good stock Chevrolet blocks with the good quality serial numbers is getting harder today than it was 10, 15 or 20 years ago.  If the intent is to not allow a Dart block, the rule should say - NO DART BLOCKS ALLOWED.

 I'm not grasping at anything, it is what it is. I'm sure they will get it resolved in the off season.

The older I get the faster I was

That's the problems. It isn't what it is as you say, You can't say they weren't playing by the rules because they were. You are saying they weren't playing by the "implied" rules... It isn't in the rules So it is what it isn't lol .
Again the drivers who protested are sore losers and the promoter needs to define the rules or get a different job. Enforcing rules that aren't in writing causes to many problems.

Agreed.  As long as it's the same deck height with no roller can bearings etc then there isn't anything wrong with using an aftermarket block.  Blocks aren't what make you horsepower/cost serious money. Using an aftermarket block actually usually saves you money.  They aren't as likely to split, crack, warp, and generally puking their guts out as a factory piece would once you start pushing the power.