2018 fastrak rules update – new shock/suspension rules

[Matt49]

Matt bob pierce who has been around racing for 50 years and put a a car on the track that won 3 Crown Jewels in the last 2 years along with dozens of races basically folded his team because he felt that even with a world class wheel man they couldn't stay competitive with the new technology. Bobby is 2-3 times the driver of most of the people he races against ... this tells me a problem exists. If tracks were perfectly smooth and consistent with no holes , no cushions , no weather changes , no BS inverts etc etc I agree narrowing the parameters could cause a problem but those conditions simply don't exist, the cars still have an insane amount of adjustments they aren't talking about limiting.

So you're telling me that engineering will never take over the sport but then on the other hand the reason that Bobby isn't winning everything is because he's being out-engineered. You're stating a problem already exists but it's not something you ever see being a problem. Makes no sense.

And all of these variables you speak of (including weather) are well within the ability to predict and manage. F1 engineers know what a 1 degree change in track temperature will do to change grip in every corner. They account for drivers running over curbs on the track and a million other variables that go way beyond things we even think about on dirt. So this notion that dirt racing provides some smoke and magic that engineering can't overcome is pretty weak. The reason that these upper classes of racing have become so expensive is BECAUSE of restrictive rules that require more and more engineering to squeeze speed out of less than desirable regulations.

[fastford]

huck , you and I agree on a lot of things , but , I,m in line with matt49 on this one , there is already a presence of nascar type engineers involved in the sport of dirt racing , and most will tell you the more rules the better because most engineers thrive on coming up with ways to manipulate the rules , which in turn , cost the average racer more money in the long run . I see the good intent of all these rules and they do need some adjustments concerning the lower or limited class , but just cant see the benefit of going backwards in the supers...JMO....

[Swedge]

I agree with Matt. Engineering is taking over the sport, an example is the XR1's. Engineers can predict or manage every situation but in the case of NASCAR or F1 there is a team of engineers with thousands of hours of data and unlimited computing power to get the scenarios mapped. Top that off with an unlimited budget and you have a recipe for success. The caviot is that in dirt racing most of the teams dont have the budget to that of F1 so you can only afford one engineer on a team. That shrinks your knowledge and idea base down quite a bit. BUT, they have hours and hours of data they can refer back to. Engineering is taking over this sport and as an engineer ,with a very expensive hobby, I love it. Now if i could only get my hands on some of that sweet sweet data....

[CageFaraday]

If you want to race a street stock, buy a street stock. And the comparisons to NASCAR are quite valid. It's already happening yet many are just too blind to see it. Follow the money.
The minute you get people that have never owned or built race cars making the rules, you're on your way to a sad excuse for racing. And that is exactly what is happening to dirt late models at almost every level.

^^^^^^^ You hit the nail on the head, on all points. Best post of this thread. ^^^^^^^^

[hucktyson]

They didn't have shock rules and Bloomquist put inerters on the car and completely decimated the field almost every time he raced with them. 10's of thousands in shocks so they made them illegal ... should they be legal ?? If we could make a deck hike to 80" should that be legal ?? This concept that more rules adds cost is absurd. If you make it
Impossible to put power to the ground costs will go down. People won't build 900hp if they can't use it. You guys claim if they make everyone run 100 dollar shock they will make birdcages that costs 500k .... seems pretty tough with the bird cage rules ... you can move Chassis mounts almost anywhere with a sawzall and welder , plenty of room to make adjustments there's no need for F1 shocks or any exotic spring set ups. Im done with this assanine argument I'm going to get back to making money

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

They didn't have shock rules and Bloomquist put inerters on the car and completely decimated the field almost every time he raced with them. 10's of thousands in shocks so they made them illegal ... should they be legal ?? If we could make a deck hike to 80" should that be legal ?? This concept that more rules adds cost is absurd. If you make it
Impossible to put power to the ground costs will go down. People won't build 900hp if they can't use it. You guys claim if they make everyone run 100 dollar shock they will make birdcages that costs 500k .... seems pretty tough with the bird cage rules ... you can move Chassis mounts almost anywhere with a sawzall and welder , plenty of room to make adjustments there's no need for F1 shocks or any exotic spring set ups. Im done with this assanine argument I'm going to get back to making money

You are advocating removing cheap items. Not inerters.

[DV8]

Cheap is relative. The thread is about crates. An unlimited super would be a 1000HP slot car, fun for some I guess.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Cheap is relative. The thread is about crates. An unlimited super would be a 1000HP slot car, fun for some I guess.

Can't afford a $20 bumpstop? To save bottoming your $500 shock and damaging the body?

A crate is a 430 hp slot car.

[DV8]

A better question is if I can afford a $500 shock. You’re correct, crates are SLM cars with “affordable” engines, thus the problem. The large payouts caused it, so the blame lies with them.

[tb1545]

So, why would a nascar engineer want any part of "engineering" on a limited late model? These engineers get into dirt racing for a change of pace and a break from their normal work. the limitless rules is why these guys want to dabble into dirt track racing. Rumley device is the perfect example of this. Now while I believe the lucas oil and WOO series should be somewhat more open on rules (as long as they are enforced) , crate rules or limited rules have no business running a similar cost rules package. When you have to spend the same amount on a crate car as a fully super late model minus the engine cost difference, you aren't going to help grow the sport or class. You can build an imca modified for $15000 less than a Nesmith crate car. Has dirt track stock cars seen an influx of engineers because their rules are so strict these engineers can come in and dominate and rake in the side cash? Even the nascar guys that get into modifieds haven't out engineered the rest of the builders into oblivion. So why then does everyone think an engineer is going to give two f*cks to come in and "engineer" a limited late model or have such an impact that they will stink up the competition? Its just not realistic in my eyes.

[blncfn57]

Can't afford a $20 bumpstop? To save bottoming your $500 shock and damaging the body?

A crate is a 430 hp slot car.

Usually you have some pretty good, knowledgeable posts, but if you believe a bump stops purpose is to protect the shock I'll have to disagree with you.

[blncfn57]

"The large payouts caused it, so the blame lies with them. "

I completely agree and was about to say something similar before I read your post.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Usually you have some pretty good, knowledgeable posts, but if you believe a bump stops purpose is to protect the shock I'll have to disagree with you.

Yes. Plus change the wheel rate. And define the end of the travel. Something is going to define the end of travel no matter what you do.

[Kromulous]

Huck's point isn't lost, but it also highlights the problem. You can dumb down the cars with rules like this, but if you allow the bodies to remain the way they are currently your only compounding the problem further at the end of the day.

Rules are needed, see Wedge cars of the mid 80's, but smart rules are hard to come bu currently. Anytime to deal with a "Limited" class of any kind you invite manipulation of some sort, it is what it is to some point.

Supers are a beast of there own, any sort of specific limiting of items can lead to expenses increasing, but you still need to keep a lid on it. Otherwise you end up with NHRA, overpriced mega machines that eat $$ by the dumb truck loads. Biggest impact i still believe is Aero, cut the spoilers down!!!

[blncfn57]

Yes. Plus change the wheel rate. And define the end of the travel. Something is going to define the end of travel no matter what you do.

ok, but rest assured, nobody is running a bump-stop because they don't know how to keep a shock from bottoming out.... as your earlier post suggested.

[a25rjr]

They didn't have shock rules and Bloomquist put inerters on the car and completely decimated the field almost every time he raced with them. 10's of thousands in shocks so they made them illegal ... should they be legal ?? If we could make a deck hike to 80" should that be legal ?? This concept that more rules adds cost is absurd. If you make it
Impossible to put power to the ground costs will go down. People won't build 900hp if they can't use it. You guys claim if they make everyone run 100 dollar shock they will make birdcages that costs 500k .... seems pretty tough with the bird cage rules ... you can move Chassis mounts almost anywhere with a sawzall and welder , plenty of room to make adjustments there's no need for F1 shocks or any exotic spring set ups. Im done with this assanine argument I'm going to get back to making money

Who needs more rules? (sarcasm)

Im all for bolting on those sheets of plexiglass on to the decks. Then we can evaluate in a year or two and see where we're at! (sarcasm)

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

ok, but rest assured, nobody is running a bump-stop because they don't know how to keep a shock from bottoming out.... as your earlier post suggested.

The original purpose of a bump stop on a vehicle was just that. It is a dumb piece of rubber. It gets progressively stiffer and ends suspension travel. This is preferred to crashing pieces of steel together. There is no magic.

[blncfn57]

The original purpose of a bump stop on a vehicle was just that. It is a dumb piece of rubber. It gets progressively stiffer and ends suspension travel. This is preferred to crashing pieces of steel together. There is no magic.

Lol, I'm fully aware of the intended purpose preventing shock damage isn't the purpose in the 21st century.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Lol, I'm fully aware of the intended purpose preventing shock damage isn't the purpose in the 21st century.

It operates exactly as I described above even in the 21st century. Explain where the physics are different than I described? Still a dumb piece of rubber. Still progressive rate, still stops travel.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Or better yet, what is the hoped result from outlawing this rubber donut?