SO Yamato Rule Changes

[drbyrne55]

Height restriction?

Ed you say - "One reason that CSR has had an increase in participation over the last decade and has bucked the trend of decreasing participation that all other SO Classes have is that the 302, which is currently available AND competitive is used in that class. For whatever reason, the 302 simply cannot compete at the important tracks like the 102 in the Hydro class, however, and I hear people telling new potential racers this all the time: "You have to buy a 102 if you want to win in C Hydro."



Ed - You are forgetting a very important factor. The CSR class grew not only for the reason you state but another very important factor is that a CSR rig could be used for the 25ssr class AND be competitive UNTIL last year. A person could buy a 302, run CSR and 25ssr and be competitive in both with the same boat.

One of the reasons people do not get into stock outboard racing is the seat time is extremely short. With the scenario above, you could get 4 heats per day on a weekend. New people want to race, not just sit on the shoreline.

Another item that could be considered is to structure the racing day so people could run more than two heats per class. Of course, because of time limitations, it would probably be necessary to drop a couple of classes for the race day but again new people want to be able to get in as many heats (primarily starts) of racing as possible on a given weekend. This is why it is extremely important to reduce the number of classes run at our races. My son is a very good example of this limited seat time problem. He is a very competitive person but does not want to spend tons of time in preparation without having the opportunity to spent more time racing. So rather than race boats he does snowmobiles. He builds up very fast machines and does grudge matches in the winter and grass drags in the summer.

Now, back to the CSH class. Currently, a 302 rig can be run in both 20ssh and CSH. You claim the 302 is not competitive in CSH. I believe the 302 can be competitive in both CSH and 20ssh and that is based on the FACTS generated from our testing. I have all three engines - 302s, 102s, and 80s. Right now it is a tough to decide which combination of boat and engine to work on for next season because all combinations have the potential to win any race, including the nationals in each class. It is very tempting to go to a race with a 302, one boat, and two propellers to run CSH and 20ssh.

Charlie

Ed,
As a newbie, maybe you could shed light on the height restriction of 1/2 inch in CSH and 20. I understand overtucking can be more dangerous than just raising the prop 1/4 or 1/2 inch. Then you hear about cooling issues. If running prop height higher was legal, one is not mandated to do so.

So, if a racer was able to run a 302 at 1/4 to 0 prop depth and gain 2-4 mph, maybe think about throwing out the height restriction as in OSY.

[propnuts]

Got it right

Even winning Go Kart racers stick their motors because they keep running them too lean in the more competitive classes -- so what's so different about CSH owners running their engines at setup conditions where they can't keep cooling water at a reasonable flow for the water conditions? Let them waste their beer or soda money on stupid engine rebuilds!

Al Peffley
15-R/R-25

This was the same as my point with the ASH tuck rule, we shouldn't be making rules to save racers from themselves.

[14-H]

Did you? ***?

Brian: No I did not. I base my belief that people look for the 102 in CSH upon the observations like seeing Miskerik buy one when he gets into the class; seeing Billy Allen race the 302 for only one or two years and then going back to the 102 and scads of stories like the one posted here by Mr. Weber from Georgia. I DO NOT give much weight to those who participate in the class and express their strong opinions about the equipment they stand to have slowed down a mile-an-hour when trying to figure out what is in the best interests in the overall healthiness of the class.

I do not believe that it is healthy to build a class around absolete engines. That is what MOD is for and MOD serves a very good purpose in catering to those types of racers who want to look for old parts and make them run. But Stock Outboard is the home of NEW equipment. I have never, however, believed that the old stuff should be eliminated, just made equal to the new stuff, like in the AXS class where this has been a success.

And to answer your question about the other classes: I have always supported making the Merc competitive in the A Classes. But those who have a vested interest in working on the older stuff have blocked those efforts. I have always supported a new engine in the B Class; I just threw out some old notes I had in preparation for the 1993 Annual meeting where I proposed we legalize the OMC B that Ed Runne was working on at the time; I have always supported new engines in C; I chastized the SORC when they putzed around in the early 90's and never legalized the 202 and I did the same thing when it took the SORC 10 years to approve the 302. Now I am still pushing for the new engine to have a chance in CSH; I agree it's close, but it has still never won the nationals and that is a significant shortcoming; And finally, I have pushed and will continue to push to make the Tohatsu competitive in DSH; even though the members of the class who are so blind that they cannot see that their class is almost dead, do not want the Tohatsu.

Now I've answered your question. I guess the person to whom I asked the question is going to duck it. Later, Ed.

BTW: 25SSR is a special exception. The Yamatos were put in that class to allow the Merc and HR guys a place to still run. The old engines need to be cometitive in that class. But if 25R is only going to be a second class to run your Yamato in and for no other purpose, then we should eliminate the class.

[14-H]

you win Ed, I am completely off base and wrong with all my statements and have no evidence or proof to support my case. I retract everything I have said and will let you continue to control our destiny............after all, you are the lawyer and i am just a lowely boat mechanic with no real knowledge of the subject matter. Do as you wish.......

sincerely,
Daren Goehring

Does this mean you're not going to answer the question?

[14-H]

I think the $3000 figure is correct, considering:

new 302- $2200+ tax and shipping
mods- $800..........blueprint, shave head, gearcase shaped and prop shaft swapped to 9/16.

This is a bunch of BS in a Stock class, if you ask me, especially in a class that uses a racing engine from the get-go.

[14-H]

Ed,
As a newbie, maybe you could shed light on the height restriction of 1/2 inch in CSH and 20. ***.

I'd be happy to. The height restriction was put into place primarily to stop people from shaping the gearcase to direct water up to the water pick up. You see, a few people had figured out how to shape the gear box to force the water to the engine to allow them to run the engine jacked to the moon and thereby run bigger props. The extreme tuck under does the same thing in the A class. The height restriction was put into place to stop the racers from needing to do so much work to conture their gearcases to have this result. But as you can see from one of Darren's posts, it is still necessary to do this even at 1/2 somewhat.

The SORC really screwed up when it allowed the bulge to be taken off of the bottom of that gear case. It has opened a Pandora's Box that can probably never be closed. Ed.

[bill boyes]

ED, I have tried to stay out of this debate. Gezz 16 pages!!!
I'am the owner of 2ea 102's and 2ea 302's.
You seem to have a problem with the gear case reworking on these motors. If you would go and test a 102/302 on a hydro without the gearcase being shaped and one shaped you would never run a non shaped gear case again on a Yamato. Night and day the way the boat handles with a shaped gearcase. A speed gain? Not that we could see on the speedo. Improved water flow to the pickup? Maybe, But mostly BS. Are you going to promote a gear case from Japan as raced? Then we will not be able to change the prop shaft either. Why try to fix something that is not broke? The 102 motors will eliminate themsleves in a few more years anyway. Keep it up and the 102 owners will just run them as C MOD. I will agree with that the SORC has made many mistakes in the past. I.E blueprinting of the OMC 15. Plugging the water outlet on the pipe etc. etc.

[Joe J]

If you trully believe this, why not instutute a "claimer" rule on all new engines? This would stop someone from spending more money than the engine costs.

Joe

This is a bunch of BS in a Stock class, if you ask me, especially in a class that uses a racing engine from the get-go.

[14-H]

***Night and day the way the boat handles with a shaped gearcase. A speed gain? Not that we could see on the speedo. Improved water flow to the pickup? Maybe, But mostly BS. **.

Bill: I'm not advocating going back. Pandora's Box is open; I guess the 1/2" height rule was the second opening that released the trait of hope.

But I will say this: the contouring of the gear case has created all kinds of problems not the least of which is that it must be done with a new gearcase from the factory. BTW: Did you ever run the centerline of the propshaft on your 102 in CSH even with the bottom of the boat? If not, you didn't figure out how to properly contour the gearcase and you weren't pulling a big enough prop. Ed.

[Tom Cronk]

Lower Units

I have been doing Yamato lower units for 30 years now.With out them
being done you will be breaking lose and out of control.As far as the
1/2 rule goes ,most commissioners voted for it so we won't be burning
up motors and running out of parts.Let the Yamato classes (20SSH,CSH
CSR )have the water pickup and everybody will be happy.

Leave the Yamato classes alone, they have been the biggest classes in
SO for years now.Go see what can be done to save the old 25SS's and the
Hot Rods with out the Yamatos

Yamatos LIVE ON
Tom Cronk
P.S. There are 80,102 and 302 motors and parts out there,just look and ask

[les]

BTW: Did you ever run the centerline of the propshaft on your 102 in CSH even with the bottom of the boat? If not, you didn't figure out how to properly contour the gearcase and you weren't pulling a big enough prop. Ed.

Ed,
Did You? Do You have some data on this? I am "legalizing" a foot now and would be interested in your "discovery" files...

Joe J,
Don't you think the claimer rule should be on the entire rig? It is a stock class, after all.

And most important, To me anyway, Is, When will this be resolved? If I'm running Y102/ C MOD next year, I need to get a boat on the jig now!

Thanks,
Larry Spencer

[Brian10s]

[QUOTE=14-H;68772]Brian: No I did not. I base my belief that people look for the 102 in CSH upon the observations like seeing Miskerik buy one when he gets into the class; seeing Billy Allen race the 302 for only one or two years and then going back to the 102

Ed, can't disagree with that but Mr Miskerik & Mr Allen are not what anyone would call rookies. Both have won multiple national championships between them and are looking to add more, quickly. As I said before, a new driver isn't in the same class as these 2 and should not be compaired with them. Like comparing the guy who drives a bumper car at the local fair with a Indy, Champ, F1 or Nascar champ. The main reason the 302 has not won a nationals yet is because the Studs have worked too long on the 102 and have every last bit of speed out of it. You want a 302 to win, put some incentive on it (a couple K bounty on the 1st 302 1-US would do it), change the National course layout to not include the 1500ft run to the chute, whatever. Give those top guns a reason to put the effort into the 302 that they did with the 102 and you will have your results.

And to answer your question about the other classes: I have always supported making the Merc competitive in the A Classes. But those who have a vested interest in working on the older stuff have blocked those efforts. I have always supported a new engine in the B Class; I just threw out some old notes I had in preparation for the 1993 Annual meeting where I proposed we legalize the OMC B that Ed Runne was working on at the time; I have always supported new engines in C; I chastized the SORC when they putzed around in the early 90's and never legalized the 202 and I did the same thing when it took the SORC 10 years to approve the 302. Now I am still pushing for the new engine to have a chance in CSH; I agree it's close, but it has still never won the nationals and that is a significant shortcoming; And finally, I have pushed and will continue to push to make the Tohatsu competitive in DSH; even though the members of the class who are so blind that they cannot see that their class is almost dead, do not want the Tohatsu.

Was not putting the blame for all missed oppurtunities over the last 15yrs, on you (of course it would be fun if we could - maybe a poll to decide? Who wants the blaim Ed for everything? Maybe not - a poll that size would blow up Dan's server with too many hits .) But we all can see that parity has not been high up on the SORC's agenda. And I still feel that if you want new motors out front, we need to do it across the board, not just in one class. Run down the list of every stock class that a new motor is not in the hunt or has not won a Nationals and give the new motors something extra. Get pick a couple guys who run/ are willing to run that motor every weekend and have them collect data (where they ran, lap times, lap times of those that beat them, speed, temp, etc). Give that data to your engine guru's and figure out what needs to be done. But to focus on just one class/ motor combo is bush league. Either do it all the way or let the natural progression take it's course.

Now I've answered your question. I guess the person to whom I asked the question is going to duck it. Later, Ed.

Yes you did and you get a gold star for the today. Wear it proudly .
QUOTE]

[csh2z]

Brian, Are you suggesting modifications to the new motors in order to make them dominant? I don't think that is the answer in S.O. John 2-Z

[Brian10s]

Brian, Are you suggesting modifications to the new motors in order to make them dominant? I don't think that is the answer in S.O. John 2-Z

Personally, I don't think anything needs to be done, at least in C. The 302 is knocking on the door and it won't be long before it is through. However, for the basis of this discussion with Ed, if the objective of the SORC is for all production motors to be out front, then they should look in all classes, not just certain ones picked at randon or personal bais. And whither the SORC does it with giving some speed to the new motors or taking some speed away from the existing motors, either choice will end up with the same result.
The million dollar question is does SO want/ need the production motors to be dominant or just in the hunt? Is it parity that we are looking for in the long term or is there a time line where the production motors need to over take the existing motors? Should there be a (insert year) time line from when a new motor is intoduced to where it is the dominant engine in the class?
These are the questions we need to answer before messing with any one class.

[race4kaos]

That Is Not Accurate, Mr Chairman...

When Mark Miskerik moved into 20SSH, which engine did he buy?

When Mark Miskerik moved into CSH, which engine did he buy?

I rest my case.

MARK did not buy any engines if I recall correctly. GARY bought the old motors in each case because they found a couple steals.

Mark doesn't ever test. He knows he would not be a good candidate to up the 302 curve.

Set something up to dangle a carrot to the first 302 Nationals CSH winner. Or take up a collection for Pater to retire his 102's. That would be a better way to make the 302 win than changing the rules...