Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

A few years ago, I blasted a local track promoter for failing to convert his rule package from "open", to ASCS. I suggested that ASCS was a universal, cost efficient package. I honestly believed that adopting the ASCS rule book was the right thing to do. I was an ASCS advocate!

I still believe in "universal", but I'm starting to worry about the cost of 360 engines. ASCS isn't keeping up! When they first introduced the spec head, it seemed like a practical solution, but over the years, the engine builders have figured out how to make the engines better/faster. The engine builders have also figured out how to make the engines more expensive.

A new, ASCS engine platform now starts at $35,000. That's a lot of money and I'm willing to bet that $35,000 wasn't the figure the ASCS leadership team had in mind, when they first introduced spec heads, so many years ago.

The ASCS engine rules are falling behind, they have failed to keep up with the engine builders quest for more power and ultimately more cost.

Now, I realize that controlling costs isn't easy, but it seems like ASCS is "basking in the sun", rather than taking on the $35,000 gorilla!

The same thing is going to happen to the 305 class, only the 305's are going to reach the point of no return much quicker than the 360's. Engine builders are already using super hard cam billets, etc.

I probably won't push the ASCS "package" again, until they take a serious look at skyrocketing costs and their luck of the draw race night format.

I couldnt agree more , thankfully my racing organizeation allows a varity of sprint mills to compete with, basicall,y run what youve brung, car counts in the these parts can be difficult ,I simply ditched the 360 ASCS effort and went onto a semi outdated 410 type mill (-12 heads that is), I proubly belong in a ASCS type car ,but the move was the best Ive made for competitiveness and my wallet ..

Agreed. A guy can be a little "off" in the hp department with a 410 and still be very competitive (except on a heavy and/or big track). Nowadays if you're 20-30 hp short with a 360, it means a LOT. It seems getting that last bit of hp you need to be competitive is where the exponential cost lies.

I think the key factor you are missing is what does someone have to spend to be competitive. There are alot of $10-$20,000 ASCS motors winning races or in the hunt every weekend, maybe not on the ASCS National Tour but when you get to the ASCS regions you find very few $35,000 motors. I think the ASCS package has saved the weekly competitor quite a bit as there are many engine builders (outside of the big guys Kistler, Wesmar, etc) building competitive and reliable ASCS motors well below the $35k mark.

I do agree ASCS should investigate how to get the engine costs inline instead of turning their back that there is not a potential long term issue that needs to be addressed. ASCS was the first to narrow the RR tire to 16" to loosen up the cars.

a set of ASCS heads alone with all todays variations and machining is just about (similar)the cost of a All Pro set, matched with the current Injection that is most desired, and the "Voo Doo" engine builders findings it will cost you $$$ dearly, maybe a purse increase is in store ? I see the snowball rolling..Oe, too late .

Some additional thoughts;

It seems like it's relatively easy to reach the 630-650 mark, but to go from 650 to 700, you better be prepared to spend some money. Maybe ASCS needs to take a look at the additional $15,000 required to get from 650-700.

Life isn't fair, there will always be teams that can out spend another, but that's the purpose of the spec head. It was supposed to help level the playing field. Now you have pistons that last 10 shows, 4 stage pumps, CNC ported heads, expensive intakes, etc. Like I said, the engine builders are way ahead of ASCS.

While ASCS is enjoying good car counts, they seem to have lost their way a little, in my opinion. There commitment to cost efficiency seems to be on the "back burner" at the moment.

I've yet to see a sprint series that didn't eventually price itself out of "joe average" racer!

leon

TSA...It's not a GROPE...it's a Freedom Pat!

This gives the LS spec engine another valid argument. Why in the hell would someone spend $30k to $37k for 700 or so horsepower, when you can get it for $15k?

The more I think about the LS, the more I see that it could save ALL of sprint car racing. A $15k engine that makes as much HP as a top 360 and a little less torque than a top 410, it will run 25 to 30 nights, and costs less than half as much as a top shelf 360 and 1/3 of the cost of a top shelf 410.

So this raises the question. What in the hell are people waiting for? It wasn't long ago that the best 410's were putting out the same numbers as this LS. Are people really this stupid?

I would jump on the LS motor in a heartbeat. Even-though I have spent a ton of $$$ on my motor program. As I tried to explain my point in the cutting cost thread. I believe it would put every one, especially the lower budget teams on the same level playing field as the well funded teams. Is it going to be the only solution, no, buts its a hell of a good starting point.

IMO there are only two types of people that would not see this;

1. big spenders that want to keep the little guys in check, so they can appear to be the rock stars.

2. People that are not drivers/car owners and therefore, truly do not understand the true costs of trying to allow the smartest and the most talented to rise to the top.

I like the ASCS system, it has worked to make the competition very close. It's not so much the horsepower that costs money, it's reliability. You need the best of everything to be able to run the snot out of the engine night after night. And then you need to replace those parts frequently. Rods, rod bolts, pistons all fatigue. With that 35 to 40,000 $ engine you can get 20 to 25 nights and be competitive on night 25. I spent a lot of years trying to "save money" by running things longer than I should have, or buying one level down from the top. Saving $500 on a cheaper crank or rods or whatever, that leads to a blow up which takes out the crank, cam and maybe the block is not saving money. It has always cost a lot to go racing and someone will always spend the money to go faster. In general, rules to save money just cost money - someone will spend extra to push the rule to the limit. Back when we ran a super hard McCreary D3B - to save us money - the fast guys were bolting a new one on every night, they bought a durometer and checked them on the truck to find the softest one, etc. How did that tire rule save us money? By extension, how will a narrow hard tire save money now? I don't care how skinny you make it thinking it will make everyone need less horsepower, horsepower has always been king and someone will spend hours and hours on the dyno to figure out a torque curve or camshaft or injector that will give the magic combination to kick everyone's butt. Just stand in the infield of a track and listen to a small block screaming into the corner flat out (because that big tire and wing will let it) and all that money will seem worth it.

The other challenge I see with 360's is the promoter can drop 410's and add 360's for half the purse (which has happened the past 10 years). They usually run for $1,500 to win while the motor still costs $30,000+. The regional ASCS purses are extremely low. The promotor & fans are happy but the drivers/car owners get hosed with the low purse. Hell, they were paying $1,500 to in in the 80's.

Completely on the money. The cost of a 360 engine is marginally cheaper than a 410, yet the purses are peanuts. The proliferation of 360 racing is an excuse to drive down purses and not pay drivers what they are worth.

About 18 months ago, give or take, Circle Track magazine had an article about Ron Shaver and the low cost LS type sprint car motor he was working on. He was extremely optimistic about power output and especially the reduced cost and the extended durability. Doubt if I could notice the difference between 25 or 30 sprints all with the 750 HP low cost motor and 25 or 30 sprints with the 900 HP high cost motor. The HP numbers given by Dick Bergren during the Charlotte finals were astounding. 467 c.i. Big Block dirt mods with 850 HP, 410 c.i. sprint cars with 900+ HP and unlimited cubic inch late models with 950+ HP. Had never heard that 950+ number before but the graphic was on the tv screen comparing the 3 divisions.

Adding $6 trillion of debt in his 1st term and now if 
elected again he wouldn't have to worry about an 
electorate in 2016 so the sky is the limit.And his EPA 
would continue to put the screws to oil drilling and 
mining for coal.Can you say bankruptcy.

The standard ASCS regional purse is $1,200-1500 to win and $250 to start plus $100 if you don't make the show. Where has promoters cut the purse in half? Looking at weekly 410 purses KC, Mercer, Sharon, Skyline, Jacksonville, Skagit all have purses right in line with what an ASCS regional purse is and in some case worse if you look at the payout in the back. I can tell you in the state of MI where the ASCS SOD purse above is far better than the 410 weekly purse at Butler which only pays $1000 to win at $150 to start. If you look at Attica and Fremont they pay more for the first 5 positions but then the pay back is right inline with the ASCS region purse.

You can't just look at the weekly 410 purses at Knoxville and Williams Grove which are far better compared to the majority of 410 weekly tracks. Heck look at Knoxville that pays $600 to start a weekly show and they had many nights with only 22 410's but then 35 360's running for $150 to start.

Do I think purses should be higher compared to the 80's, hell yes, but I don't think 360's has brought purses down.

See above about your purse comment.

As for the cost, the biggest cost savings with a 360 vs a 410 comes down to rebuilds. Top of the line 410 is getting rebuild every 8-15 shows or some cases sooner where I have worked with top of the line 360 motors that have ran a full 30 race season with standard maintenance and no rebuild. That is your cost savings with a 360.

Then you have 305's, with a 7-10k pricetag and 4 full seasons between rebuilds. At least, that's now mine is.

Why can't you look at purses at places like Knoxville, Williams Grove and Lincoln? Those are what the top weekly 410 shows pay. Seems really misleading IMO to exclude the best paying tracks and only cherrypick lower paying tracks. That is akin to saying the best paying special shows in the country are all 360 races -- if you don't include the Knoxville Nationals, the King's Royal, the Williams Grove National Open or the Chico Gold Cup.

If 360 racing doesn't drive down purses, then where are these weekly 360 tracks paying $3,500 to win or $3,000 to win or $2,500 to win?

As far as the part about Knoxville having 22 410s and 35 360s, it is a quality vs. quantity argument. That argument that the 360 proponents on here always make is," Look at how many cars we have." And yet, when top notch 410 drivers drop down for easy money, the results are always the same. There were crickets chirping on this board from the 360 fans after the recent STN at Little Rock, as well as when Steve Kinser won in New Mexico on Saturday night.

The most significant problem with rule packages, be it ASCS, These LS motors, or the 305's is enforcement begins to get soft.

You have to realize business and economics in this situation.

Where there is a demand, the supply will be met. You can have ANY rules you want for your sprint car engine. As soon as you have the market for a few hundred engines a year of the same type, the engine companies will start to build them. If there was a nationwide 305 sprint car class using the same engine rules, then Wesmar, Mopar, Roush, and anybdy else you can name will start offering $25,000 305 engines.

I really have to wonder if we will see mandatory crate engines in most series like ASCS 5-10 years from now.

OR... do what IMCA modifieds do. Run insanely skinny tires to minimize the horsepower advantage gained by teams with money.