SO Yamato Rule Changes

[14-H]

John: Does this mean that you do not support the Sidewinder being introduced (let alone being made the replacement) in the A classes, our second biggest ones? Ed.

John: Still waiting for an answer here.

Why do we continue to allow the 102 to dominate in the CSH class when the 302 is readily available and the 102 is starting to run low on replacement parts?

The difficult part of administering the category is to look beyond one's own equipment to accept what is best for the sport. Is allowing the obsolete 102 to continue to dominate the 302 in this class good for the sport? I don't believe that it is.

You should know however, that I do NOT support obsoleting older engines. I just believe that the new engines (in this case, the 302) should be given the opportunity to win since survival of the sport depends on this.

Ed.

[les]

102/302

Ed,
What would you do to make the 302 more competitive?
I would love to have a shiny new motor, but rumor has it that finding a prop that pumps and is fast can take much time and money... I only have a little of each.
Larry

[csh2z]

Ed, I absolutely support the Sidewinder for the A classes. The OMC is out of production and parts are getting more difficult to find (which means we have to work harder find them). The time is right. I don't know about any where else but participation in ASR-ASH seemed very weak at most of the races I've been to this year. Our second biggest class is in a much different situation than our biggest class.

[14-H]

John: I went to at least two races this year where we had to beg people to run CSH in order to have enough to race. No matter how you stack it up, CSH is SO's biggest class and ASH is its second biggest one.

Do you not see that your position is inconsistent? You support ZERO changes to CSH which would allow the obsolete, hard-to-find, scarce-parts 102 to remain the dominant (absent the 1000' straight-a-way) engine, but yet you will apparently support making the Sidewinder the engine of choice (I think your term was: replacement) in the A class?

How can the OMC have scarce parts if so many are available, as you say?

This is a simple philosophy: the engine that is currently produced and is currently available should be the one that every one wants, whether its in the C Class or the A class.

Your participation in the C class should not alter the analysis, theoretically. Ed.

[14-H]

Ed,
What would you do to make the 302 more competitive?
I would love to have a shiny new motor, but rumor has it that finding a prop that pumps and is fast can take much time and money... I only have a little of each.
Larry

Larry: your perspective is that of most others. I would put the 102's at 3/4 of an inch and leave the 302's at 1/2 an inch. This would be in CSH only. CSR does not seem to have the same disparity between engines.

[14J]

Larry: your perspective is that of most others. I would put the 102's at 3/4 of an inch and leave the 302's at 1/2 an inch. This would be in CSH only. CSR does not seem to have the same disparity between engines.

Ed-

I’m all for helping the 302 if that is what needs to happen. What I don’t agree with is the idea of rule changes specific to the 102. For me another height change means more money (props). Who's to say we won't change the rules again in '08. This is the stuff that frustrates people. At this point I'd rather you obsolete the 102 in three years. This is what we did with the 30H. At least than I know where to spend my money.

Johns point on course size is relevant to the debate. On the east coast the good running 302’s can beat the best of 102’s any weekend.

For the 302 guys with pumping issues. Design a boat for the motor. Don't throw it on the back of your 102 hydro and expect it to work the same. Guys like Runne and Hemp had these things running there fastest at parallel.

Troy Gladkowski

[pav225]

Don't mess with CSH!

Don't mess with CSH! You can run well with a Y102 or a Y302. If a new driver wants to join, they can look for a Y102 or easily purchase a new Y302. Don't penalize guys with Y102s or make them have to buy a new motor to compete. That's not going to do anything to help the sport grow. Leave the class the way it is and take Steve Johnson's approach to getting people into racing -put complete rigs together and take people testing. Then, if they like the ride, they can buy it and start racing without having to do all the work to find their own equipment. I know Steve just sold a CSH rig recently -with a Y102!

[les]

102 Vs. 302

We must be the only racing organization in the world that does not give incentive to innovators and pioneers.
Instead of penalizing existing setups to allow new technology to work, Let the new engines have 'Safe, but otherwise un-restricted' status?
If they smoke the existing racers, THEN we talk about restricting the 'new' setups in order to phase in the new equipment.
If they find a solution that works, Why would I want to run an obsolete setup?

Larry

[stu_racing]

The Y302 is pretty close to the Y102 in speed. I believe we just need to make sure the Y302 is getting enough water and being able to race at the 1/2" height restriction. If we can run a separate water intake into the the tube on the tower (that can be used to connect a water pump to so the Yamatos can use a test wheel) then everyone can pump water and all be at the height restriction, putting us all on an even playing field. I know I can go higher with my Y302 set-up if i wasn't afraid of overheating it. By making sure our engines are not running too hot we can make the Y302 parts last longer than the Y102 parts.

I also believe Scott Reed has stated in the past (I hope my interpretation is correct in his eyes and he can correct me if not) that all our 20ssh and CSH rigs will be be able to pump water if we have transom designs that place the motor farther back from the boat. But not all of us have those boat designs, so why not allow for an external water pick-up so that all of us 20ssdh and CSH guys can pump water at 1/2" under and not invest in a new hull that does have this feature.

Those are my two cents, hopefully they help.

[Tad Olson]

An Opinion

I realize everyone has their own personal opinion in this matter; a lot of it has to do with what kind of motor they have or their aversion to change. However if you take a step back and listen to what Ed is saying you will see there is definitely not parity between the 2 motors in the final heat of the nationals. At local races where the people that make the final heat at nationals are not running their “nationals” equipment you see more parity.

If you do not think there is a difference remember what Dean Sutherland had done. Based on conversations I had with him he worked hard trying to get a 302 running, he spent weekends with 2 different motor rebuilders that I am aware of. Then after all that knowledge and effort it appears that he switched, quite running his 302 and now owns more 102s then I have kids.

Ed – If people are worried that the 102 may be unfairly penalized an alternative would be to just remove the height restriction for the 302. That would give everyone incentive to try new setup and props. It would achieve what is necessary which is testing, testing, testing. Then those that have the ability to make the 302 perform better will and those who do not will continue to complain about pumping issues.

Tad.

[14-H]

***

Ed – If people are worried that the 102 may be unfairly penalized an alternative would be to just remove the height restriction for the 302. ***
Tad.

I don't like that solution because it will encourage shaving on the gearcases and the 302 guys will burn up motors.

[seanp3]

I don't like that solution because it will encourage shaving on the gearcases and the 302 guys will burn up motors.

I don't get it??? What's shaving the gearcase got to do with engine heights? I know I'm fairly new to this sport, but I don't get it. Ed, can you explain what you're talking about?

[mercguy]

comparisons.............horse****!!

if you guys do not think the 302's are competitive against the 102's, then ya outta come race in Reg10 where mainly 302's dominate. Hell, I would switch over to 302's myself, if I did not have so much invested in my 102 program. There is no reason to start handicapping the 102's, which are still the majority motor in CSH. OSY is also being dominated by 302's out here also and one set the OSY record in LA.......in other words DO NOT SCREW with CSH.

[drbyrne55]

302 .... 102 ....

I am a complete newbie .... will be racing first race spring 2007. I would say I am TOTALLY unbiased.....


QUESTION .... I read a old thread about a racer running 302's at "0" depth in CSH when it was legal and was challegening 102's..... maybe beating them? Then the next season the 1/2 inch rule was placed in CSH. How does 1/2 depth make 'racers' safer? Why not allow less than 1/2 inch? Overheating is a choice, it depends on set-up achieved through testing. You would not obligated to run "0" inch depth if it were legal?

Dan

[csh2z]

I see nothing wrong with an external water pick-up installed on the boat with a hose to the back of the tower. That and the 1000' straightaway at the nationals would level the playing field, maybe even advantage the 302.
John 2-Z