North Country Race Talk

Steve, I like the NAPA idea. Sorry I haven't been around I just woke up myself.

Randy, I was hoping it would get a rise out of you!! Glad to hear from you and hope all is well.

Steve Burton, AIS SS #10

yes I think there should be a weight minimum on the flywheels. I know you can buy light weight steel ones..

What about crankshafts there is a minimum weight but how can the tech guy in spect that without out tearing the entire motor apart...you can't.. i think we should run stock cranks??

another 2cents

what about the 2 wa radios are they gonna be legal next year?

heres an idea.....I think I said this before someplace, ENFORCE THE RULES WE HAVE! WITH NO EXCEPTIONS! Didn't we have a minimum crank weight last year ? without looking 48 or 49 lbs? not once did they check anyones crank that I know of, They sure as hell arent going to pull someones flywheel and weigh it. they are going to crawl under the car with a light and see if it looks stock, so make all stock appearing clutches 10 1/2 diameter legal , thats probably what the majority are running anyway, no mini clutches, ram, quarter master,button clutches , that way they can get us in , let us race and get us out with a quick tech to the top 5 or whatever, they can come over before i put my motors together for next year and weigh whatever they want, then seal it when Im done, ...there my motor is teched until I freshen it or change it. then they will only have to worry about tire soaking, traction control, gold trac differentials, carbs, ported intake and heads,ride heightsand back windows , I will buy Rob a see snake so he can look inside your top end without tearing it apart, PROBLEM SOLVED LETS GO RACING . I dont really think the problem was with the rules as much as the ability of the people in the tech dept to do their job without interferance of the higher up management, also want to keep cost down and see more different winners, TIRE SCHEDULE, FACE IT , NEW TIRES MEANS FASTER LAP TIMES,LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF TIRES YOU CAN PURCHASE ? JUST A THOUGHT

Gee Wiz Scott that all sounded good to me where the hell have you been ? get on here more often and keep us straightened out would you !! You absolutly right - enforce the rules is the biggest thing !!

EXACTLY!!! Leave the rules alone. They get changed every year for the last 3 years and all it does is cost everyone a bunch of $$. Gunner, the spoiler rule was changed because to run the Race of champions or any other track the rule is 4". The idea is to make these cars compatible with other tracks. I too bought a 6" spoiler and had to cut it down, but once it was cut it was done. ENFORCE THE RULES WE HAVE, then we can start tweeking them. The gray areas are to be cleared up by the tech man as he has the final say if the big dummy upstairs would stay out of it. Randy, could you email me themadman09@yahoo.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false i have some questions for you. AS for the lightweight clutches and junk im willing to put $$ on the fact that i had the heaviest one in the class and i found the front. Stock Steel flywheel and clutch, tech man deciphers. done. It is very obvious if someone is running a 5" triple disc or a 1/8" thick flywheel. Look in at it and DQ. Not that difficult but TECH is needed. When something is in the rules and you want it checked and the tech guy says "I can't i dont have that tool" thats pathetic. Good luck to everyone there next year!!! I am willing to help with the rules if you guys want but my days at AIS are over. I personally can only handle taking it in the rear so many times before i walk funny PS I know where there is a pretty good Super Stock for sale!
Mike

Folks,

Please….the purpose of this thread is to develop a more concise set of Super Stock rules in a timely fashion and hope they will be adopted by AIS so folks can start working on their cars. To expedite this matter, I thought it would be better to utilize (I think another term is plagiarize!) other track’s rules to try to eliminate the majority of the grey areas our current rules have. These grey areas are the source of a lot of problems – the latest grey area that needed interpretation ALLOWED the management to call it “the way they saw it” and has just about killed the Lite Truck class if not the whole track with its decision. The point – without a concise set of rules as a foundation, we force the tech inspector and management to make interpretations that invariably infuriates many of us. Surely, concise rules help the technical staff do their job and avoid much of controversy, too.

Now, we all agree the rules absolutely have to be enforced, but the logistics of how-when-why they are enforced are the subject of the General Rules, not these class rules. So let's hold that discussion on another thread.

I tried to be careful in “editing” to make sure that no team would have to spend a penny on their cars to bring them in compliance with the latest revision of the rules (if you were legal by the 2009 SS rules.) But trying doesn’t mean I got it right – so please help if I went astray.

Please, we aren’t even sure there will even be an AIS next year, so don’t get so twisted in your knickers over any of this stuff, but rest assured that since the rules include many of those instituted at other local tracks, you’ll have a place to race following the revision as opposed to an unusable race car taking up space in your garage.

Mike, on a personal note, you definitely do your homework, drive with surgical precision, and your ranting makes me laugh. I’ll miss you if you need to leave AIS. Given the right support, (and a few anger management courses – LOL) you have a bright racing future. Good luck my friend!

Steve Burton, AIS SS #10

Gang,

I got a PM accusing me of using nitrous oxide in my car this year. Technically, the rules didn't say I couldn't (LOL!) Josh and I would swap the bottle around. You can see how well it worked for us!

Any way, I edited the fuels section to say: "No nitrous oxide permitted!" Darn!!!

Now you know why Josh and I always had a smile on our face!!!

Steve Burton, AIS SS #10.

It was not allowed on the car but we used it for personal use!!! I don't think people realize how hard it is to negotiate corners other cars etc. when your laughing your ass off in the car!!! maybe we shouldn't do that anymore.....LOL

The best part iswhen you get out of the car and it still feels like your going in a circle......

Steve, I didn't mean to hijack your thread , just thought I had some valid points to throw out there to keep from reinventing the wheel!

You are 100% correct Steve. I went on one of my rants and diverted from my point. The initial idea was to clarify the reasoning for the 4" spoiler rule. YOU are dead on with what you are trying to do. The problem that i do not want to see is having everyone else try to slant the rules to fit their car (which may or may not have been legal before). Keep doing what you are doing and don't let the evil powers above hinder your thoughts. I will try to keep up and help you out when i can if needed. As Scott said "I didnt mean to hijack your thread". On that note, back to the 2010 Super Stock Rules. No tangents allowed.
PS The only fair set of rules are at Can AM where you have to run a Chevy Crate....Everyone knows running a FORD is an unfair advantage!
Mike

Scott & Mike,

No problem. This whole thing is very frustrating, making it very easy to stray from the original intent. Besides, if you guys don't straighten up I'll have to use my empty nitrous bottle to knock some sense back into you.

"The only fair set of rules are at Can AM where you have to run a Chevy Crate....Everyone knows running a FORD is an unfair advantage!" See what I mean about making me laugh!

To All,

In all seriousness, try punching holes in the revised rules. Beat this thing up to see if it will stand up to the true test. If something isn't worded right, needs to be expanded on, or is just plain wrong, let's tackle it now. For instance, how should rules 5.1, 7.1, and 7.2 be reworded? Should we add a definition OEM Stock and OEM Stock Specification to to Section 1?

If we can get this thing pounded out, let's hand it over to Paul and Rob soon. (Hurry up, if this revision goes through, I'm going to need a lot of time to take all that cheating stuff off my car!!!!) Maybe next week? Again, no promises this revision will even stand a snowball's chance in hell, but I feel we've got nothing to lose! If it gets a favorable response from Tech and Management, I'll gladly work on the General Rules if you folks want me to otherwise I'll have to devote my time to making sure NO ONE buys Mike's car so he has no choice but come back to AIS.....He's shrivel up like a prune if he couldn't race!!!!!!

Steve Burton, AIS SS #10

Mike,

I forgot, I agree 100% about keeping folks from trying to slant the rules in their favor. Do you think there is any thing the Ford folks could see as slanted the wrong way in the revised rules? (Besides everyone being able to run a Ford rearend and the crate engines.)

I've got an idea for a solution to the Ford Crate Engine issue, so you know it's off the wall. We know that the '602 crate SHOULD produce 350 HP with a particular carb and headers. If you had access to a dyno, could you build (or arrange to be built) say a half dozen identical Ford engines that weigh the same as a '602 and put out 350 horses with that same carb and headers? If you could, we could check them on the dyno and seal them right there for the Ford folks at AIS that would like to run a crate. There's no way any Chevy guy that would have a problem with our own AIS sealed Ford crate engine. Love to hear Tommy take on that one!!!

Steve Burton, AIS SS #10