2007 Jr-1 Yes or No?

Update & Further Clarification
Wow, where do we begin? First, I am just the messenger. This information, the meetings, the conversations, emails, phone calls, etc have all gone into this statement of unification. I was just foolish enough to volunteer to organize and publish it. Let me update those of you that are interested because we have had a lot happen over the past few months with this topic and even a lot since this post went up. I do apologize for the stuffy formal way in which the original post was written, our intension was to be very clear. As the significant Dennis Prager says ?I prefer clarity to agreement?. It?s ok to disagree but let?s not disagree because one is talking about apples and the other oranges. Although I thought it was pretty straight forward, let me try and further simplify the information and add some addition things that may help fill in some of the gaps, misunderstandings, perceptions, etc. that were brought up.

A. As of 9:pm on 11-16-06 here is how the lists break down in their simplest form:
The following names have directly responded with a ?YES? position.
1. Nial Irwin
2. Takoda Chaney
3. Rick Draudt
4. Luc Freiburg
5. Taylor Clifton
6. Colby Meek
7. Brandon Moore
8. Landon Smith
9. Anthony Jacobellis
10. Evan Hannum
11. Lindsey Freier
12. Jake Graser
13. Alexis Charette
14. Brian Robson

The following additional names represent racers that already own & race Jr-1 K-80?s
within our market area. If provided with an opportunity to race in an organized and
structured class, they may choose to participate?
15. Pete Rosse
16. Grant Copple
17. James M. Sullivan
18. Tynnette Lowe
19. Colby Yardley
20. Maria Yardley
21. Austin Schimmel
22. Sena Kline
23. Vinny Cucuzza
24. Angie Cucuzza
25. Tommy Hensley
26. Others we may not know of?

The following names represent racers that are, or will be within the age range of the Jr-1 class in ?07 and may have raced in Jr-1 in the past, (possibly with a different motor) who could participate if they so chose to do so?
27. Wyatt MacEwen
28. Courtney MacEwen
29. Flinn Lazier
30. Connor Wogrin
31. Colin Wogrin
32. Cameron Wogrin
33. Conner New
34. Xavier Romero
35. Others we may not know of?

Last but not least, the following names have responded with a ?no? for the K-80.
36. Tyler Prins
37. Taylor Bezanson

There?s no smoke and mirrors. This does not mean that there will be a guaranteed 25 to 35 entries at every race but it does illustrate the realistic potential of this class right now let alone future growth encouraged by a unified class under a consistent set of rules.

B. Were all of the people polled K-80 owners? No. A mater of fact there was a variety of engine owners represented as well as industry consultants both within our market and outside our market. Please read the criteria again, it should help explain much of the questions and curiosities . For Example, ?Participation? was part of the criteria, meaning how many of each package already exists within our geographic area? If the greatest number of existing engines in our area would have been Singer, that would have had a big effect on our outcome.
C. The meetings were public. The first was held on July 12th. Approx. 12 or more were present. The group was very diverse, the meeting was an open discussion of pros and cons and general ?principle based? concerns regarding the class over all. Although there may have been bias within the group, there was no bias of the group. The second meeting was even posted by Kurt Freiburg on the Karter on Oct. 1st and took place Oct. 5th. Anyone interested in attending and sharing ideas about this class was invited. Free pizza and beer were also provided. Not all interested parties could attend in person to either meeting so many called, emailed, etc. their opinions and ideas to Kurt and me.
D. The following engines were discussed and evaluated using the already mentioned criteria throughout the process.
1. Animal
2. K-80
3. Micro-Max
4. Gazelle
5. HPV
6. Honda GX160
7. World Formula
8. KT 100
9. Comer 60, WTP, Swift TAGs

Obviously not all of the criteria was weighted the same. For example: ?Cost? factors carried more weight than ?Starting Methods?. A few of the choices were so far outside the important, heavily weighted criteria that they were almost immediately eliminated i.e. the Gazelle, Micro Max and Comer 60 TAG due to excessive cost. Some of the others looked very good initially but after further research with organizations and racers that use them, they lost their surface appeal i.e. the Honda for example. This motor is raced in Canada, the UK and even her in the U.S. in ? midgets for example. A couple of major issues came up. True, good initial cost but very limited reliability in a true racing environment without blueprinting and the addition of stronger valve train components on a regular basis. We have over twenty pages of research on the Honda. Another was the sustained competition RPM range and track size of our tracks. For example the ? midgets run on 1/10 mile oval. The New Brunswick Kart Club in Toronto, Canada runs the Honda with modifications but on a 2/10 of a mile track not 9/10 with 900 ft straight-a-ways. Personally I am a huge Honda Motor Co. fan. However, the research would suggest that we are making a huge false assumption. That being that the same quality, engineering and control measures that go into their Cars and Motorcycles also go into their 5.5 hp generator motors. They are of excellent quality for their given purpose and price point. How good could a 4-stoke be (with all of it?s components) for a retail price of $364.95 (from the latest Northern Tool & Equip. catalog). You can find a lot of info online regarding the Honda motors. Here are just a few of them: http://www.nr-racing.com. http://www.ukpollards.com http://www.gx160parts.com http://www.karting.co.uk/notice/ One of the major issues you will find is fitting it on a European chassis, cutting, relocating frame-rails, seat strut location, etc. all seem to be common when you really check into it. You can also just Google (Honda GX160 Karting) and come up with a weeks worth of reading material.

The point is that anyone and everyone that was interested in contributing were notified, invited and welcome. The process has already occurred, the debate has already happened. Furthermore, our group started talking prior to any plans for a town hall meeting. We are all in favor of the meeting by the way and ounce the town hall meeting was brought up, we did not feel like it would be productive to force everyone else to listen to our issues. Better then to focus among those effected, come to a consensus and simply present our united and/or majorities recommendations.

E. Let?s be truthful about the cost issue. ?Could? someone spend a fortune on any engine, of course they ?could?. Must they, no. Here are the actual numbers, lets stop scaring everybody by saying that you can?t be competitive without a $2500 motor. You can call any shop or go on line and see for yourself.
– Used stock K-80 $ 150.- 500.
– New stock K-80 795.
– Used blueprinted K-80 600.-1100.
– New blueprinted K-80 1200.-1500. (Includes motor)

Additional FYI?s. Personally we paid $150 for our stock K-80 and put a piston, ring and a spark plug in it, ($85. total) we ran it all year qualifying on occasion in the middle of the field, (even among the animals) have not had any maintenance issues and have no hang-ups running against blueprinted motors. Until my son can get everything out of that motor & chassis as a driver he can and I can get every bit out of it as a tuner, I have no reason to invest in a blueprint. I got the rolling chassis for $500. Right now you can buy this year?s WKA State Champion?s JR-1 Arrow with a blueprinted K-80 for a little over $2000 complete and ready to race. My friend just bought a complete Cadet for $1100. including a stock K-80. There?s a stock K-80 on line right now, it?s new and was raced three times for $550. Doug will tell you, he has a customer that runs ?off the shelf? Fleming motors, ($1500) and runs in the top 4-5 in STARS. It seems odd that for a bunch of drivers nobody wants to give the driver any credit. Many of you sat next to me at Doug?s excellent chassis seminar and either you didn?t believe him or you?ve just forgotten what we learned?

F. Regarding ?Most of the people in this class do not even know about the engine choices?. Is there a choice that was missed in the list? We have never heard that the purpose of this meeting is to ?Introduce all of the possibilities? and if, ?The discussion has just begun? for any of them, then they are way behind the curve.
G. This strikes at the heart of what frustrates a lot of the participants, (all classes). No planning, no communication, no dialog and then two weeks before the season opener ?somebody? manufactures the rules. Our group started talking in July about this and we?ve had a steady dialog ever since. We understand this to be an open forum and a way by which to suggest, share, test and give constructive feedback to ideas and opportunities to advance the sport of Karting. Our group doesn?t have a monopoly on opportunities to suggest and consider creative ideas. Yet when any of our Karting community suggests an idea, an alternate approach or asks for some leadership they are beaten with a stick? The untapped resources within our community are staggering! Constructive criticism is encouraged but it should be followed by an intellectually honest alternative idea. Publicly we have seen none.