Forum Replies Created
- AuthorPosts
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantDoug,
I couldn’t agree more with your suggestion of complying with a national organization. On the other hand, what are all the four-stroke guys to do if go with SKUSA? Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t SKUSA for two-strokes only? If so, then maybe we could use SKUSA for all of our two-stroke classes and maybe the WKA or IKF for our four-stroke classes. I don’t know if this is feasible but it’s worth looking at. :idn:Taylor Broekemeier
Participant14 Classes!?!?!?! 😯 Shnikes
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantThere is a lot of good points to take into consideration here, I feel for the head-honchos having to decide.
On the other hand, I still think it is priority to keep the ladder system of the shifters, even if we have to have a seperate stock moto class from the Novice class. There is just too much difference from Pros to Novices and it could be dangerous throwing in the first timers with the pros.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantI think it’s crucial to have the shifter ladder and not get rid of novice or S2. There is too much of a jump in experience/lap times/expense from novice straight to pro. I do agree with Kyle on the rules for novice though, the novice class should be limited to stock ICC’s and maybe slightly modified motos to level the playing field and keep cost down from the likes of the pro class. The average lap time of the novice class this year was a low 53 and the pros pull high 51’s pretty consistently so we need the S2 class. With all the talk of the stock moto class, I think that the shifter classes will be taking center stage and the classes will be needed to accomodate the rush of shifter drivers. If it means having 9 classes instead of 8, I’d say it’s worth it.
I don’t think we need to focus on revising the shifter classes as much as we need to get rid of other classes.Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantStacey,
Do you mean stock motos in 125 novice or just spec engines either ICC or moto? I hope it’s the latter because I just bought my new kart with a TM and plan on running novice.My wish list would favor the 2-cycle classes and get rid of four strokes but I know that’s not going to happen. The one thing that I do wish for though, is to cut some weak classes so we can have 8-10 classes and not 13 like we do now. That way I believe we can grow the local scene so the Joe Schmoe coming into karting can understand it like Alan said in KS.
One plausible suggestion IMO, would be to get rid of the junior class(es) and restrict the engines in TaG junior so there is a difference in the TaG classes rather than age. The junior kids could have that much needed bridge from lower HP karts to the high HP TaG senior karts.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantI’ll be racing 125 Novice with an RBI chassis and a TM K9b for Billet Performance Karting.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantAJ Noud is no “crew guy.” He’s a national driver for RBI Racing and the best (IMO) driver in the state aside from his teammate Alan Rudolph.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantMy apologies. It was intended at you, but rather to explain my opinion on how the engines are made equal.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantTaG is about driving skill Ben. That’s why your leopard has to weigh in at 355 lbs and my Sonik weighs in at 375 lbs. Sanctioning bodies with alot more info and skills than we could ever muster have dynoed all the TaG engines and made weight adjustments accordingly. In my mind, all the engines in the class are equals at the end of the day because the higher HP engines carry more weight and the lower HP engines carry a little less.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantKyle,
Your not wrong in the sense that the TaG class is a stock class. This is still true. Modifications are NOT allowed, but when something happens to your engine like blowing the bottom end then there is a need to rebuild it (with OEM parts, not aftermarket bearings, etc…). You have to disassemble the crank to replace a rod bearing and put it back together (as in my case). It is impossible to return the crank back to that exact spec that it came from the factory with after you reassemble it. You simply want the crank to run as true as possible. Making a crank run true has nothing to do with modifications, there is no modifying involved, it is just rebuilding it so it doesn’t wobble and come apart at 18,000 rpm. Wobble could also blow your main bearings again and you’d have to start the whole process over again.Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantI go about 6-9 hours before I do a top end on my Sonik. As for the bottom end, I won’t go past 400 miles because it let go once at 560 miles. It took me a few bills before I got the hang of it but now it is just as reliable as any other engine along as you take care of it like you would change the oil on your car.
Dane, you wouldn’t be talking about me now would you? 😆
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantCouldberacin,
I see the concern you have about our class, and your right, it most definetly is a STOCK class. I didn’t think about it when i posted that my crank had been trued to run within 1/4 thou. Marc is right; I did a bottom end rebuild after blowing the main bearings and replaced the rod bearing and pin, main bearings and case seals. When the crank was reassembled, my motor builder was able to true the crank within a 1/4 of a thou. which turns out to be better than stock. There was no “machining” to the crank to achieve this runout, it was simply a replacement of broken parts with OEM parts.
Hope this clears it up for you and we’d love to have you racing here in CO!Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantI think we finally found who the real Scott Umbright is!!!!!!!!!! :jump
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantI would suggest running the chain pretty loose. Alot looser than 1/2″. Early this year when I was new to the scene, i was conscious about how loose the chain was. I tried to keep it pretty tight; for some reason I thought that running it loose was bad until I pulled my engine’s main bearings from it being too tight. Now I run about 1 1/4″ of slack and my chains last alot longer and seem to run cooler.
Taylor Broekemeier
ParticipantI’m pretty sure that Brad is correct. The RM1 isn’t allowed because of its gearbox which when it all comes down to it, it’s technically a shifter (it would be pretty funny to see it in a shifter race!) But I would advise against the RM1 due to its odd axle/engine setup. The axle actually goes straight through the gearbox and probably requires a specialty axle for just that kart. It seems like it would be a lot more of a hassle to change axles and especially extract a bent axle, and a bent axle could do a lot more damage to that gearbox than it’s worth. My advice would be to set up your Rotax on another chassis and not worry about that gearbox or if your kart’s legal. I bet you can build one for about the same price as an RM1.
- AuthorPosts