Forum: Oklahomatidbits.com General Forum (go)
Moderators:  /  David Smith Jr

Below are a couple of links of a hot topic that was brought up on inthepits.net. It deals with the alteration of frame rails and are they, are they not illegal. What do you think?

http://forum.inthepits.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=32461&sid=bc5afbf9f840bd9af484d7cd541940f6

http://www.stlracing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126554

http://www.southwestmissouriracing.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=15473

David Smith Jr.
www.oklahomatidbits.com

This isnt hard to figure out if you move it your cheating....

This is a trick stolen from the latemodels and its exactly why the rules state you must you a stock stub.

JMO

Jayson Ellis

Ah hell JD, I personally think SFS should rid of the pro stocks and go to a late model division to bring life of that racing back to this general area. Then you could have four real track attractions: ASCS type sprints, modifieds, sport mods and late models. Then I had better watch myself of speaking such a thing so I don't get Beane mad at me on this topic - again. ;-)

David Smith Jr.
www.oklahomatidbits.com

Interesting. I wish they would publish more of the cars that were not legal. The only one they mentioned by name was the Dirt Works Genesis chassis not bein legal. Alot of speculation about the GRT's and Shaw's, but no one said that they had been tested. If this is true and IMCA and USMTS starts disqualifying people, it will be real interesting to say the least.

How could you run a Late Model for 500 to win? The motors cost a whole more, tires, wheels, shocks, frames, suspenions, and on and on. Right now I think the Pro Stocks is a pretty good class (20 to 30 cars). Leave the Pro Stocks alone. Wish they would leave the Sport Mods alone.

Its still simple

If your frame stub has been cut and moved its NOT LEGAL!!!!

I dont care what series you run, if the car is illegal then it should be DQ'd!!!!

I agree about the sportmods, leave the rules alone and you will have a class that stays competitive and strong in numbers!!!

Jayson Ellis

yeah but how would that affect the already fragile car count?

no implication or sarcasm....I mean that as a real question - what do you think would be the plus/minus to them allowing 4 links?

How much would could a wouldchuck chuck if a 
wouldchuck could chuck would

Heres my 2cents on the subject. Ive ran street and pro stock at Enid Motor Speedway for 10 years this year and been around it all my life. The rules at Okc are completely insane. I have seen the chassis that the guys run there and they are way behind time but they are always throwing a dumb ass rule in like aluminum spec head and Goodyears. I mean come on just say your affraid of other cars coming to your track and spanking the locals ass. The cars there look like they run fivestar 1990s bodies. Change the head rule to open cast iron heads like dart, world products ect and if a guy wants to run hoosier take offs let him run em against the race tires. I would love to run there but who wants to buy a set of aluminum heads and tires to run at one track.

And the funny part is most of the guys there dont even run an offset cages and run long bar set ups but you want a four link? Give me a break your crackin me up.

JD I agree with everything you have said except I think there were just as amny modifieds back when I drove them as there are now. So I don't know if they are growing and I think that is because they cost so damn much. I am paying more for a Sport Mod motor than I did for a modified motor back in the day but I usually went through 5 motors a year LOL One time I claimed a motor from Mark Noble at the first race of the year and it lasted the whole year (350 dollars)

They wont let me run dart or world products head. You gotta run double humps or vortec which is stupid as hell. Everytime ive seen any of the cars come from okc to enid they couldnt beat a drum. I would love to come battle it up with you boys if they would let me run my heads. I have tires i got from Gary, Steve Smiths car owner. I didnt see any of you boys at Clinton winternationals.

BobcatJD Is that a photo of your car this year?

JIMMY MINTER 'AKA'dirtrack234                  
Yesterday 
is history, 
tomorrow is a mystery, and today is a gift. That is 
why they call it the present.

They dont tech or cars anyways. Just get some scuffs and come on down. Do you have a quick change? if you do just dont say anything. Just show up. I wish they would let us run em anyways. Let me know if you have any Qs about our track

Just got off the phone with ORA president Stanley Reed, Jr. and he informs this is illegal for all SFS/USA modifieds as well.

David Smith Jr.
www.oklahomatidbits.com

I agree David,

I believe it will be illegal on a U.S.M.T.S. car and if its illegal there, then it probably isnt legal anywhere.

JMO

Jayson Ellis

J.D. I just found out that one of the other cars they found illegal and Thunderhill was a TRE. Sorry about your luck. No Genesis chassis's either. They still wont say if the other car was a GRT or Shaw.

i have heard that there have been around 20 cars believed to be racing like this in a small region, I just hope that the builders arent doing this without the knowledge of the car owners....

Either way, illegal is illegal and all should be called as such.

easy to tell if its been moved, tape measure and level... check left side and compare to right side...

As far as wrecked cars go, even a novice welder would have it closer than what they are talking about!!!

JMO

Jayson Ellis

I think you guys are way over reacting to this deal. IF you will go listen to the Todd Staley interview (USMTS Promotor) he even says this is not a big deal, but they are going to take some time and measure some cars and make a call.

Clark from Dirt Works has also been interviewed and shared the view of Staley that this is not a big deal. The Genisis has this modification made to it. This came straight from the horses mouth owner of DirtWorks.

Id be willing to bet that most manufactures that run upfront in USMTS have this done, Shaw, TRE, Skyrocket, Hughes, Impressive, so on so forth.

Staley admits the biggest mistake he has made with USMTS is making the spec head aluminum. He says if he could do it over he would make it a steel spec head.

Of the things that are detrimental to the modified class, tipping the frame rail up to gain some clearance is not a big deal (Maybe $100 to complete this modification). It's the $20,000 aluminium headed titanium valve train motors and the $4000 dollar shock packages. If you guys think this is the holy grain of cheating you need to look elsewhere for it. This by no means will make you a winner if you were last place to start with.

If they want to try and pull the reins back in on this class, Throw out rebuild-able shocks and coil-overs and put everyone back on welded bearing shocks ($250 for a set of 4). No aluminium heads or Titanium Valves (No more turning 9000 rpm). Try teching for fuel additives and tire softeners, or running two shocks in place of a 90-10. or hell check for moving the lower control arm mounts if you want to check the stub (something that will make a huge difference).

Here is a response to this subject to all that think this modification is/should be legal. I agree with all of this statement...

#8 03-24-2009, 12:11 PM

By Troy Harrison Well, if you're looking for controversy, the A-Modified class in this area is a good place to find it. For those who need to be caught up to speed (perhaps you've been vacationing in sunny Yemen for the last few weeks), Inthepits.net broke a story about how some Modified builders were raising the right front frame rail (the stock clip section, approximately 3 to 3-1/2" on their cars. Apparently, this all stemmed from a loose lipped racer at a racing banquet who didn't realize that he was speaking with an inspector present. A little checking by the inspector followed, and sure enough, a lot of the fast cars at his track were running this setup. Now, just to clarify something - this setup is illegal. It's illegal as hell. The frame rules for nearly every Modified track are cribbed from IMCA or UMP's rules in some form, and each set of rules says exactly where and how the OEM frame rails can be cut. You can't raise the right side rail without cutting the frame where it kicks up for the front stub. Enough said. It's illegal. The question is whether the tracks will, or should, enforce the rule. The reason that builders have started doing this modification is that the higher right rail allows the car to roll farther and quicker onto the right front, which indexes the left rear birdcage, which allows greater traction coming off the corner. Since the modern 4-link car hooks up based on physical leverage, a greater angle of indexing is a significant advantage, and might explain why certain builders' cars have become THE cars to have over the past couple of years. It's been done on dirt late models for quite a while - but dirt late models are already fully fabricated cars. The offended (illegal) racers who now are staring disqualification in the eye are running the normal playbook. For those who don't know, there is a defined sequence of claims and comments that happen whenever racers want to make something legal that was previously illegal. Whether it's beadlocks, quick changes, roller cams, dry sumps, or yes, raised right side frame rails, the playbook is the same. For the sake of clarity, let's just call the item the New Trick Part, or NTP for short. Play 1: Call the NTP a safety or reliability improvement. Yep, they're doing this. See, unbeknownst to us, race fans are in tremendous peril from flying dirt clods that happen when the right front rails of non-raised cars dig into the track. Nevermind, of course, that the section that isn't raised is actually rounded in such a way that flinging said clods over the fence with sufficient force to injure a fan is difficult to say the least. By God, according to these guys, not only should the modification be legal - the 20,000 or so Modifieds that aren't raised should be done so immediately. Do it for the fans. Hell, do it for the children. It's only right. Play 2: Since it only takes a second or two for anyone with a brain to spot Play 1 as BS, you've got to go to the second play. The second play is to claim that it's really not a performance advantage; it's just personal preference as to how some guys want to build their cars. Of course, it's also coincidence that the cars that have this modification are faster and behave differently on the racetrack. Here's the bottom line - chassis builders are in business to make money. One of the builders that does this can't even come up with a cage that won't collapse on a guy. Do you really think that he (and the others) would go to all the work to cut 3 inches out of the frame, splice it back together, weld it, then grind and dress the weld so it looks like it wasn't cut at all (because of course THEY know it's illegal) - if there were no advantage? Fact is that this is a significant advantage and allowing it nearly forces everyone else to spend the money to do so on their own cars. Play 3: Claim it's not an extra expense. Usually, the racers do this by comparing the NTP to the ultimate version of the old legal parts, using all variations, with a 2 year supply. In this case, even proponents can't claim this for long, since labor = money, and this modification = labor. Play 4: Get personal. Insult legal racers by saying "Well, this NTP isn't the reason you're getting beat, anyway." Sometimes, this works - racers tend to take things personally, and they'll vote to allow NTP out of basic honor. Play 5: Claim it's impossible to tech. This was the primary argument behind traction control, for instance, and I've even seen one racer using it here. Get real. This one is so easy to tech that you could have Stevie Wonder as your tech man, and he'd spot the raised rails. We've seen all five plays run in this instance with varying results. Some tracks (Thunderhill, Heartland Park, IMCA tracks, a few others) say they are ready to send racers home who show up with illegal frames. Others (Lakeside) are employing all the spine of a wounded jellyfish, and saying that "they'll decide when they have cars to tech." In other words, they need to figure out who is illegal before they send anyone home. Bottom line - more traction = more horsepower that can be hooked up. That means it takes more motor to win. In a class where $20,000 engines are becoming the norm, that's nuts. Modifieds were designed to be an everyman's race car; an alternative to expensive late models. Well, guess what? 20 years later, late model fans have been run off from Modified-only tracks, and the Modified guys want to make their cars into late models without the fan appeal. In the interest of full disclosure, I will point out that I do have a dog in the fight. I sponsor a Modified at Thunder Hill, and it's legal - no raised rail. The guy who runs it is a low-dollar driver, exactly the kind of driver that the Modifieds were supposed to be for. It's time for Modified promoters to grow a set and start protecting these guys from themselves; more importantly, to start protecting the integrity of the Modified class. This whole process starts down the slippery slope toward fully fabricated cars - which will obsolete about 20,000 race cars that are currently running (not to mention increase the cost of the front end pieces). What happens when the smoke clears is anyone's guess. But I'll put my money on the associations and the promoters who decide to keep the Modified class close to its purpose. JMO

Jayson Ellis

Posted By: jaydad37 on April 02 2009 at 11:28:45 AM Here is a response to this subject to all that think this modification is/should be legal. I agree with all of this statement... #8 03-24-2009, 12:11 PM By Troy Harrison Well, if you're looking for controversy, the A-Modified class in this area is a good place to find it. For those who need to be caught up to speed (perhaps you've been vacationing in sunny Yemen for the last few weeks), Inthepits.net broke a story about how some Modified builders were raising the right front frame rail (the stock clip section, approximately 3 to 3-1/2" on their cars. Apparently, this all stemmed from a loose lipped racer at a racing banquet who didn't realize that he was speaking with an inspector present. A little checking by the inspector followed, and sure enough, a lot of the fast cars at his track were running this setup. Now, just to clarify something - this setup is illegal. It's illegal as hell. The frame rules for nearly every Modified track are cribbed from IMCA or UMP's rules in some form, and each set of rules says exactly where and how the OEM frame rails can be cut. You can't raise the right side rail without cutting the frame where it kicks up for the front stub. Enough said. It's illegal. The question is whether the tracks will, or should, enforce the rule. The reason that builders have started doing this modification is that the higher right rail allows the car to roll farther and quicker onto the right front, which indexes the left rear birdcage, which allows greater traction coming off the corner. Since the modern 4-link car hooks up based on physical leverage, a greater angle of indexing is a significant advantage, and might explain why certain builders' cars have become THE cars to have over the past couple of years. It's been done on dirt late models for quite a while - but dirt late models are already fully fabricated cars. The offended (illegal) racers who now are staring disqualification in the eye are running the normal playbook. For those who don't know, there is a defined sequence of claims and comments that happen whenever racers want to make something legal that was previously illegal. Whether it's beadlocks, quick changes, roller cams, dry sumps, or yes, raised right side frame rails, the playbook is the same. For the sake of clarity, let's just call the item the New Trick Part, or NTP for short. Play 1: Call the NTP a safety or reliability improvement. Yep, they're doing this. See, unbeknownst to us, race fans are in tremendous peril from flying dirt clods that happen when the right front rails of non-raised cars dig into the track. Nevermind, of course, that the section that isn't raised is actually rounded in such a way that flinging said clods over the fence with sufficient force to injure a fan is difficult to say the least. By God, according to these guys, not only should the modification be legal - the 20,000 or so Modifieds that aren't raised should be done so immediately. Do it for the fans. Hell, do it for the children. It's only right. Play 2: Since it only takes a second or two for anyone with a brain to spot Play 1 as BS, you've got to go to the second play. The second play is to claim that it's really not a performance advantage; it's just personal preference as to how some guys want to build their cars. Of course, it's also coincidence that the cars that have this modification are faster and behave differently on the racetrack. Here's the bottom line - chassis builders are in business to make money. One of the builders that does this can't even come up with a cage that won't collapse on a guy. Do you really think that he (and the others) would go to all the work to cut 3 inches out of the frame, splice it back together, weld it, then grind and dress the weld so it looks like it wasn't cut at all (because of course THEY know it's illegal) - if there were no advantage? Fact is that this is a significant advantage and allowing it nearly forces everyone else to spend the money to do so on their own cars. Play 3: Claim it's not an extra expense. Usually, the racers do this by comparing the NTP to the ultimate version of the old legal parts, using all variations, with a 2 year supply. In this case, even proponents can't claim this for long, since labor = money, and this modification = labor. Play 4: Get personal. Insult legal racers by saying "Well, this NTP isn't the reason you're getting beat, anyway." Sometimes, this works - racers tend to take things personally, and they'll vote to allow NTP out of basic honor. Play 5: Claim it's impossible to tech. This was the primary argument behind traction control, for instance, and I've even seen one racer using it here. Get real. This one is so easy to tech that you could have Stevie Wonder as your tech man, and he'd spot the raised rails. We've seen all five plays run in this instance with varying results. Some tracks (Thunderhill, Heartland Park, IMCA tracks, a few others) say they are ready to send racers home who show up with illegal frames. Others (Lakeside) are employing all the spine of a wounded jellyfish, and saying that "they'll decide when they have cars to tech." In other words, they need to figure out who is illegal before they send anyone home. Bottom line - more traction = more horsepower that can be hooked up. That means it takes more motor to win. In a class where $20,000 engines are becoming the norm, that's nuts. Modifieds were designed to be an everyman's race car; an alternative to expensive late models. Well, guess what? 20 years later, late model fans have been run off from Modified-only tracks, and the Modified guys want to make their cars into late models without the fan appeal. In the interest of full disclosure, I will point out that I do have a dog in the fight. I sponsor a Modified at Thunder Hill, and it's legal - no raised rail. The guy who runs it is a low-dollar driver, exactly the kind of driver that the Modifieds were supposed to be for. It's time for Modified promoters to grow a set and start protecting these guys from themselves; more importantly, to start protecting the integrity of the Modified class. This whole process starts down the slippery slope toward fully fabricated cars - which will obsolete about 20,000 race cars that are currently running (not to mention increase the cost of the front end pieces). What happens when the smoke clears is anyone's guess. But I'll put my money on the associations and the promoters who decide to keep the Modified class close to its purpose. JMO

Thats your opinion and you are entitled to it.

My question to you is this:

If they deem this illegal will the guys that have been winning races stop winning races? No, the same group will still and always be fast. It may tighten up the field some, but you will still have the front runners up front.

Do i personally care either way what they decide? Not really, I don't have a horse in this fight.

You know this guys take is this is illegal and gives 5 plays or excuses as to why it should be legal. You know the guys getting out ran have a pretty short list of excuses as to why they are getting outran too. And you can normally call BS on some of them too.

#1 They have to be cheating.

#2 They spend all kinds of money.

So on so forth you get the idea. My point is no matter what you think are excuses the other side knows you have your own. Its kind of funny to see the bickering back and forth.

That guys opinion that you quoted says all rules are based off of IMCA or UMP frame rules. You know these cars in our are and the area that got this all started are neither IMCA or UMP as far as i know. They all allow roller cams, IMCA doesn't. So to me its kind of hard to say well IMCA says its illegal so it must be illegal. Quickchanges are not allowed in IMCA so there for it should be illegal for all. We are not racing IMCA so that just doesn't work with me. I think this is a case of where the cars have continued to advance and develope and the rules have not stayed caught up with the times. Around here we have opened up the engine rules more allowing aluminium heads, roller cams, titanium valve components and made big HP and cant hook it up, so being racers people went looking for ways to hook it up and the found the soft RF and getting the car on the bars.

What i am concerned with is the health of the modifieds. I would love to get out there and race with you guys, but the money is to big. Now i know there is going to be two thoughts on what is best to control the costs. Take away the bite from the 4 link cars with this modification and the guys with little motors will catch up. That would work in an ideal world, but those with money will still spend the money on the big HP motors.

What i would do is look at the cars and what is the major component costs? In my opinion to be competitive the engine and shocks and tires would be that area to cut back on to limit costs. We already have a limited tire size so i think that is taken care of. Now place rules to limit the motor, hell go all the way back to IMCA engine rules if you want, stock block flat tappet cams. Then limit the shocks to welded bearings no take apart shocks and that will help that. Leave the suspension open for ones who want tweak and get the most out of their cars and let them work to go faster in that area.

Anyways thats just my take. Sorry for the rambling and long post.