Are the Super's too expensive?

[fastford]

the more rules you impose on a super late model class , the less it becomes a super and then becomes a crate class , which we have plenty of , I say leave them alone , if they survive , and I dont think nothing will help on the local level , they will ....JMO

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

the more rules you impose on a super late model class , the less it becomes a super and then becomes a crate class , which we have plenty of , I say leave them alone , if they survive , and I dont think nothing will help on the local level , they will ....JMO

I don't think many here are asking for new rules. I am asking for remembrance of those forgotten. And if anything, removal of all the dumb new ones from the last 8 years.

I don't want spec wedge cars. I want late models. I want freedom to be creative underneath. I want to be able to follow a guy into the corner, out-brake him, and pull off a pass on exit. I want late models back.

[fastford]

I don't think many here are asking for new rules. I am asking for remembrance of those forgotten. And if anything, removal of all the dumb new ones from the last 8 years.

I don't want spec wedge cars. I want late models. I want freedom to be creative underneath. I want to be able to follow a guy into the corner, out-brake him, and pull off a pass on exit. I want late models back.

seems to me , because of the title " are late models to expensive " that the only answer is to increase rules to decrease expense , which has never really worked , as far as " freedom underneath "decreasing expense , it want , as soon as you or some one else discovers something , it will eventually be marketed and is usually expensive to start with , I had to be innovative to compete because of lack of budget , but a lot of stuff I figured out 20 years ago is now available to be bought , I think our situations are probably very similar , but I still say , let supers be supers , the less rules the beter ....JMO,,,

[Jerky]

The reason you're getting 15 cars at the Grove is that they don't race Supers, Hagerstown doesn't race Supers weekly, Winchesters doesn't race Supers weekly, Lincoln doesn't race Supers, PPMS doesn't race Supers....where do you expect them to get the cars from?

Everyone gave the hobby racer who would be a field filler the option to throw a crate in the car and lose less money weekly, and lots of them took it. So this is what we're left with - 6-8 well funded regional guys like Eckert, Satterlee, Ziegler etc., some local good teams like Yoder and Rine, and a few guys left to fill the field.

The days of 40-50 cars for a regional race are long gone because cars 25-50 race crates instead.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

seems to me , because of the title " are late models to expensive " that the only answer is to increase rules to decrease expense , which has never really worked , as far as " freedom underneath "decreasing expense , it want , as soon as you or some one else discovers something , it will eventually be marketed and is usually expensive to start with , I had to be innovative to compete because of lack of budget , but a lot of stuff I figured out 20 years ago is now available to be bought , I think our situations are probably very similar , but I still say , let supers be supers , the less rules the beter ....JMO,,,

Taking 1000# of downforce can be done with resetting the bodies. That's not ticky tack rules. It's getting them back where they should be. It's back to a 2 page rule book. I agree with less rules. It is less rules. We don't need Rumley rules. We don't need droop rules.

Our situations are similar, but it sounds like you think going back to a car less dependent on aero is even less appealing than our current NASCAR-lite rulebook? That confuses me to no end.

I think maybe you don't understand me. I want the 2008 rulebook restored and the 2008 noses and roofs. That is much less rules. That is a super late model. That is a car that can race in traffic. I'd consider maybe reducing the spoiler as well, but that's it. If I want to make my birdcage 5 pieces and it makes my car faster, I can. That is not expensive at all. I can make it myself. I can't build some of the stuff guys are using to maximize the droop rule. It's beyond the tools I have in my shop.

The engine is the most expensive part. You need much less of it if we aren't racing Indy cars anymore. We also don't need new rules every winter making us throw simple parts away, while guys are building exotic stuff to duck the new rule. What I propose is going back to "leaving them alone". They sure as hell aren't doing that now, and they are accomplishing nothing.

[fastford]

i do under stand what you are saying , I just dont think it will matter money wise , which is what this thread is about even if you institute oil non adjustable shocks , there will be some one out there selling the trickest shock of this description that WILL provide an advantage and will be expensive , just like every other piece mandated in those 2008 rules , now if your talking about amending those 2008 rules , well thats a different thing , which is still adding rules which makes cookie cutter cars , I do agree about the engines , but all this still spells crate or spec to me .

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

i do under stand what you are saying , I just dont think it will matter money wise , which is what this thread is about even if you institute oil non adjustable shocks , there will be some one out there selling the trickest shock of this description that WILL provide an advantage and will be expensive , just like every other piece mandated in those 2008 rules , now if your talking about amending those 2008 rules , well thats a different thing , which is still adding rules which makes cookie cutter cars , I do agree about the engines , but all this still spells crate or spec to me .

Those rules do not mandate oil shocks. They mandated very little. Wheel base, body dimensions enforceable by tape measure, weight, one carb, 2 valves per cylinder, very simple rules back then. I also don't care about trick shocks. Short of inerters, they can run whatever they want. And technically, an inerter is not a shock by definition. Shocks don't make the speed that downforce does. Shocks are very misunderstood and credited with WAY too much of the speed increases over the last 10 years. My 18 degree engine will be competitive again, with downforce removed, no matter what shock they bolt on. Shock guys have been very successful selling snake oil. There is zero reason to change brands from year to year. The technology in them is on par. There may be a new damping curve, but it can be done in any of them.

I want the exact opposite of spec. I also want the cars to race each other better, without severe aero push. If the car needs less engine to win, it is possible for it to be cheaper racing. That choice is still in the hands of the owner/racer however. We have gone so far with bodies, beyond the original rules, that today's car to 2008 is like comparing winged 410 sprints to non-wing.

[fastford]

Those rules do not mandate oil shocks. They mandated very little. Wheel base, body dimensions enforceable by tape measure, weight, one carb, 2 valves per cylinder, very simple rules back then. I also don't care about trick shocks. Short of inerters, they can run whatever they want. And technically, an inerter is not a shock by definition. Shocks don't make the speed that downforce does. Shocks are very misunderstood and credited with WAY too much of the speed increases over the last 10 years. My 18 degree engine will be competitive again, with downforce removed, no matter what shock they bolt on. Shock guys have been very successful selling snake oil. There is zero reason to change brands from year to year. The technology in them is on par. There may be a new damping curve, but it can be done in any of them.

I want the exact opposite of spec. I also want the cars to race each other better, without severe aero push. If the car needs less engine to win, it is possible for it to be cheaper racing. That choice is still in the hands of the owner/racer however. We have gone so far with bodies, beyond the original rules, that today's car to 2008 is like comparing winged 410 sprints to non-wing.

all I am saying is its not just the bodies that have gotten us to where were at , you take the car of today , do nothing but put an 08 body on it and the expensive trick parts will still have a huge advantage , you cant hold back technology and its expensive now days , but I am with you on the wishful thinking though ....

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

all I am saying is its not just the bodies that have gotten us to where were at , you take the car of today , do nothing but put an 08 body on it and the expensive trick parts will still have a huge advantage , you cant hold back technology and its expensive now days , but I am with you on the wishful thinking though ....

I couldn't disagree more strongly. Unlike most, I have some first hand experience to go with more than just a theory.

What makes a car faster is really pretty simple. More power to the ground.

That comes from more actual load on the tires without too much extra weight or drag, better load distribution at key points in the lap, less parasitic loss from any mechanical or aero contribution that can't be more than overcome by the engine performance.

Most of the "trick stuff" that exists today is because a new rule painted you into a box , you aren't allowed to make a simple geometry fix, or you simply sacrificed suspension function to load the hell out of the huge body with air. There isn't any real magic.

[fastford]

I couldn't disagree more strongly. Unlike most, I have some first hand experience to go with more than just a theory.

What makes a car faster is really pretty simple. More power to the ground.

That comes from more actual load on the tires without too much extra weight or drag, better load distribution at key points in the lap, less parasitic loss from any mechanical or aero contribution that can't be more than overcome by the engine performance.

Most of the "trick stuff" that exists today is because a new rule painted you into a box , you aren't allowed to make a simple geometry fix, or you simply sacrificed suspension function to load the hell out of the huge body with air. There isn't any real magic.

so the only way you can get extra load on a 2008 car is to add down force ??? I dont think so , maybe figuring out how to use these modern trick shocks on it could put force in a particular direction to get more traction where needed ..... either way , we will have to agree to disagree on this one MSR , and I have been doing this a good while my self......

[Rajflyboy]

MasterSbilt = great post. By chance have you seen the new F1 cars with the mini fairings on the inside of the front wheels? I’m purely guessing that they are there because of exactly what you are saying (parasitic drag)

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

so the only way you can get extra load on a 2008 car is to add down force ??? I dont think so , maybe figuring out how to use these modern trick shocks on it could put force in a particular direction to get more traction where needed ..... either way , we will have to agree to disagree on this one MSR , and I have been doing this a good while my self......

Have you ever brought a car forward many years (body only) and put it directly back on the track? I have. It's quite eye opening. I've never owned a "trick shock". I've run some trick geometry that was pretty good. I understood exactly why it was too.

No, you can't add load without making it heavier or adding aero load. You can redistribute the load to a more even balance. You can also reduce load oscillations that shock tires loose.

[dirtcrazy4u]

Shocks, I started this using the word technology. How much tech has gone into shocks ? Ever look inside some trailers and see the shocks they carry.

The bodies today on a slm are all the same. These shapes, these noses, they all create downforce to the point of getting as much air to that rear spoiler as possible, and guess what ? That RF shock just pins that nose to the ground

I hate hearing the words come out of a drivers mouth when he says, we couldn't get in clean air or dirty air. That's nascrap talk, not slm. Remember the term, keep it simple stupid, slm has gone way beyond that.

[EvelB7]

Have driven Late Models since 1986 (although not as often over the last 10 years), Mastersbuilt is right-aero is the biggest key to unhooking these cars (not the only, but the most effective). If you want to create better racing, it is all about making more 'off throttle' time (which means less grip). More horsepower, less body, and less tire in my opinion will create the type of racing everyone seems to strive for. As horsepower cost money, best case scenario is take away body and tire....

[fastford]

Have you ever brought a car forward many years (body only) and put it directly back on the track? I have. It's quite eye opening. I've never owned a "trick shock". I've run some trick geometry that was pretty good. I understood exactly why it was too.

No, you can't add load without making it heavier or adding aero load. You can redistribute the load to a more even balance. You can also reduce load oscillations that shock tires loose.

no I have not , and hard for me to believe you have either , but I will make a bet with you , take an 08 car and suspension and a 22 car and suspension , take the body off and that 22 car will be faster , now with that said , I wish you were right , I wish a 08 body alone alone would fix the expense problem , but it want , and im not talking about static weight , I am talking about weight going to the most useful place in a dynamic state , but I,m done arguing with you , have a good day.....

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

no I have not , and hard for me to believe you have either , but I will make a bet with you , take an 08 car and suspension and a 22 car and suspension , take the body off and that 22 car will be faster , now with that said , I wish you were right , I wish a 08 body alone alone would fix the expense problem , but it want , and im not talking about static weight , I am talking about weight going to the most useful place in a dynamic state , but I,m done arguing with you , have a good day.....

We race two old cars. We took an 03 with a body so narrow the left side tire was outside the body and made it as good as what a current Lucas guy has. I gained nearly a half second. That is fact.

Justadddirt did the work. It was quite a project. That car suddenly took off.

Air is huge. Drill 2 6" diameter holes in your filler panel and try to race.

Now, list the suspension changes from 2008 until now. From geometry standpoint, besides zero index, there isn't a whole lot on the back. Stuff been moved up front to gain ground clearance. That soft rf helps load up the rr on entry, but more than anything, it gets the deck and spoiler loaded up.

[fastford]

We race two old cars. We took an 03 with a body so narrow the left side tire was outside the body and made it as good as what a current Lucas guy has. I gained nearly a half second. That is fact.

Justadddirt did the work. It was quite a project. That car suddenly took off.

Air is huge. Drill 2 6" diameter holes in your filler panel and try to race.

Now, list the suspension changes from 2008 until now. From geometry standpoint, besides zero index, there isn't a whole lot on the back. Stuff been moved up front to gain ground clearance. That soft rf helps load up the rr on entry, but more than anything, it gets the deck and spoiler loaded up.

I dont have to list it , the ones that know , know , I was through with this thread but I think I know where your coming from , and your screen name tells it all , mastersbuilt has not won very much since before 08 so I understand .....now I,m through

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

I dont have to list it , the ones that know , know , I was through with this thread but I think I know where your coming from , and your screen name tells it all , mastersbuilt has not won very much since before 08 so I understand .....now I,m through

I am in no way affiliated with mastersbilt, my cars no longer share much of any geometry with a current Crothersville product, and they work just fine. I've fixed plenty of them. Those that know, know, as you say. I've had the same username for 20+ years. Way to deflect from a fact-based discussion.

Wear a mask to keep the sand out of your lungs when your head is well below ground.

[King1]

I had a 2002 TNT car that was used mastersbilt stuff on the rear and black front rocket stuff on the front.

We hung a body on that car in 2004 that looked like a 2007 nascar cup car, and looked as close to todays dirt late models as possible with the noses that were available at the time.

The roof was slanted to the right, the deck was super low and level, the back was shifted to the right, the front deck bar was shifted to the left, the right door and quarter was caved in, and the nose off center.

The car won 116 races from 2002 to 2013 when we finally retired it. The car was a rocket ship and Im thoroughly convinced the body made the biggest difference.

We did it to look cool and discounted the positive effects it had. I had the most success by not cutting windows out in the sail panels.

[fastford]

I am in no way affiliated with mastersbilt, my cars no longer share much of any geometry with a current Crothersville product, and they work just fine. I've fixed plenty of them. Those that know, know, as you say. I've had the same username for 20+ years. Way to deflect from a fact-based discussion.

Wear a mask to keep the sand out of your lungs when your head is well below ground.

get your panties out of a wad , I was just going on with you , I have had the same and only name as well since the beginning in 99 , like I said , body alone will not reduce cost , I wish it would because I could build that 08 body myself a lot easier , I updated my older chassis my self , but a lot of people cant , so they have to spend upwards of 3 times as much today for a modern chassis that works with modern day set ups , the few of us that can do this work can avoid a lot of the expense however these very few can not control over all expense ....the title is " are supers to expensive? " the answer is yes , but unfortunately nothing said in this thread will reverse the trend .....