Stock Chairman's Long Term Plan

[14-H]

*** I applaud his efforts, until it's time to go after the OMC Tony

Tony: Thanks. At least you're honest. I appreciate that. Ed.

[mercguy]

nope.......

Darren, I think you need to back off on Ed and how the Tohatsu was handled. I have heard from many credible sources that without Ed's backing, and at the cost of some political capitol on Ed's part, the Tohatsu would have been DOA with the SORC. Whatever else you can say about Ed, I think his commitment to new, available motors for Stock outboard racing has been steadfast. I applaud his efforts, until it's time to go after the OMC Tony

when and where did I say it was all Ed's fault? I know he got the Tohatsu approved. I am a paying member of APBA and have a right to my questions........

[mercguy]

1) Which motor should we have used? That was the only one anyone offered and Wheeler advised the SORC it was not his best but very good as he had beaten Palmquist and Sweeney at Big Rapids the fall before with it. Besides, the Tohatsu was box stock with no blue printing (not that anyone would do that when it isn't legal).

2) The answer to this would have been that the motor would never have been approved. There were many members on the SORC who were very upset that Bass Machines would not pay for an engine to be delivered to the Nationals to be tested. This was a compromise to get the engine put into the class.

You can say that it was mishandled. The alternative would have been no Tohatsu in D Stock. Pick your poison, as they say. Ed.

it makes no sense to me why the members of the SORC commission would be upset for Bass Machines NOT paying to have the engine delivered. If it was such a big issue, then the SORC should have payed for it. Did not the SORC fund and support the 44XS tower project?

now, the Bass Tohatsu did show up to compete at the Winter Nat's, but certain people got all pissy and banned the motor.......would that have happened at the Nat's.......probably so............

[mercguy]

I think all the motors Mark Wheeler have are better than average. The Tahatsu that was tested had to be tweeked a little just to make it run clean and clear. The Mercury I am sure had all the latest and greatest things done and weather it was his very best only he could tell you that. My thoughts here is we need the factory to be as pro active with this motor. We by no way are going to trash any equipment given for test purposes. The idea is to have the motor heads that John talked about get a chance to help develope a fair playing field. The original deal when we started the approval process was for the factory to provide a motor to dyno test. I know the importing of the engine caused this delay. I have heard thru the grapevine that you were running the Tahatsu higher when it was raced last year anyway. Lets all work as a team to make this transition work. This pairity issue is new to all of us so all the imput is important so we can move forward in a positive way. Whats been done till now is over the dam and down the river. Have there been any other issues besides the motor needing to run higher to make it safer? How about some info on new motor availibility. We have tried to make the Bass brothers part of this process and they always seem to pass on being part of the commitee. The factory has got to be a part in making this thing sucsessful. Darren get you commisioner to send me all the proposals you are thinking of so they can be reviewed by both Ed and the D parity commitee. They will be put on the agenda that will be posted before we go to LA. I know one is the height issue which I think everyone is in favor of. Mike

Mike, " I believe" the reason Bass machines does not get into this political crap is because they feel they are getting **** on and not getting a fair shake. The only issues right now, that I am aware of is the "height restriction" and the reed valves. That info has been provided and is typed out and will be presented to the SORC and Mod Commission at the meeting. The testing info has been provided by Troy Holmberg to the Parity Committee and Ed Hern, as requested. I am sure Bass Machines will import more motors, once they know they are given a fair chance. As to the "grapevine rumor" you have heard, that is not me, as I did not run a Tohatsu last year. It might have been done in MOD though, where it is allowed. Thanks for your time Mike, as you do seem to want to make this thing work.

PS: these statements reflect my views and are not directly related to Bass Machines........

[mercguy]

Darren-

He has @ least 4 & they all have won a National Title! You guys do your homework w/the Tohatsu & we will see how DSH shakes out @ the Nationals!

we are goona try Brent if given a fair chance!

[14-H]

it makes no sense to me why the members of the SORC commission would be upset ***.........

Darren: You're a big boy. APBA government is politics, like it or not. If you want to get things done, you have to accept the playing field as it is and learn to manuever through what is on the field. If you spend all of your time griping about the players on the field and whining about things being unfair, you'll never get anything accomplished.

You could have come to that annual meeting and led the attack charge against those members of the SORC who were upset. Know what you'd've gotten? NO TOHATSU IN D STOCK. And let me just add here that there are plenty of people watching this discussion who would have liked just that.

So go ahead and continue to gripe. You're correct: you have every right to do that. But if you think your methods would have resulted in a better situation for the D Stock classes in having new equipment available in them like the Tohatsu, well, you're all wet.

I guess what I'm saying is that if my methods were "mishandling", yours would properly be called "failure." I hope you're coming to LA so you can see what I mean. Ed.

[14-H]

Add

BTW: regarding your points about loosening some of the restrictions on the Tohatsu, when directed to me, that is in the nature of preaching to the choir, so to speak. Ed.

[kws]

it just seems to me that if they had been ran often and hard this summer . Then this winter some kind of parity could have been found
alas im simple i quess

[mercguy]

I understand Ed........

Darren: You're a big boy. APBA government is politics, like it or not. If you want to get things done, you have to accept the playing field as it is and learn to manuever through what is on the field. If you spend all of your time griping about the players on the field and whining about things being unfair, you'll never get anything accomplished.

You could have come to that annual meeting and led the attack charge against those members of the SORC who were upset. Know what you'd've gotten? NO TOHATSU IN D STOCK. And let me just add here that there are plenty of people watching this discussion who would have liked just that.

So go ahead and continue to gripe. You're correct: you have every right to do that. But if you think your methods would have resulted in a better situation for the D Stock classes in having new equipment available in them like the Tohatsu, well, you're all wet.

I guess what I'm saying is that if my methods were "mishandling", yours would properly be called "failure." I hope you're coming to LA so you can see what I mean. Ed.

just for my curiosity, WHY would the SORC NOT want a NEW engine in a class that needed the most help? I undertsnad and hear you are the one that stood up for the Tohatsu and know it is appreciated, but who are these other members that had the "stick up their ass" about the motor? I know you are going to say the elected commissioners right? I will apologize to YOU and any of the other members that stood up for allowing the Tohatsu into DSH, but the others........well............

so, I assume these "other people" are going to try and disallow the new Sidewinders?

[14-H]

**
so, I assume these "other people" are going to try and disallow the new Sidewinders?

Maybe they won't disallow it. Maybe they'll let it into the existing class and then, after a decade of it never having won the nationals, they'll tell the Stock Chairman that he shouldn't "mess with the biggest class."

Darren: are you hearing me??? Good night. Ed.

[mercguy]

going back for a sec.......

Maybe they won't disallow it. Maybe they'll let it into the existing class and then, after a decade of it never having won the nationals, they'll tell the Stock Chairman that he shouldn't "mess with the biggest class."

Darren: are you hearing me??? Good night. Ed.

let me turn up my hearing aid.............

PS: I thought the reason for the C2H class was that the 302 was faster than the 102 and was not wanted to obsolete the 102 from the CSH class........or am I way off base........never mind.............

anyways, the Tohatsu is part of the DSH class now and should be allowed fair treatment, which is all I am asking for...not some biased results................nighty night Ed!

[Dave M]

Test Data

Why not come run your Tahatsu at some NBRA races, keep the test data and provide it to the parity comittee. In NBRA there are no restrictions on height. It is a highly competitive D engine. In NBRA D is still the 40CI Mod motor. Makes for an exciting race watching this stocker keeping up with the Mod. Fans like it too. The boat that is currently racing is a Ropp hydro, older design, seems to work okay. I am sure new technology could provide a faster ride.

Also, Darren, were I you, I would set that engine wherever you want to height wise at an APBA race. Despite what the rules say, the engine needs to be given a fair chance. Make it competitive, and then you can show the results to them. Sure, you will not get points, DQ in inspection, but if you want it to advance, then I say go for it.

[Cameraboy]

maybe stating the obvious...

just for my curiosity, WHY would the SORC NOT want a NEW engine in a class that needed the most help? I undertsnad and hear you are the one that stood up for the Tohatsu and know it is appreciated, but who are these other members that had the "stick up their ass" about the motor? I know you are going to say the elected commissioners right? I will apologize to YOU and any of the other members that stood up for allowing the Tohatsu into DSH, but the others........well............

so, I assume these "other people" are going to try and disallow the new Sidewinders?

Daren, the real myopia in stock is that we as individuals can't see past our investment in our current equipment. We spend money on a boat, motor, and props, get the rig fast, and then want nothing to change. Heck, I'm as guilty of that as anybody. But that desire to not change gets taken to the extreme that nobody even wants to plan for change.

I have a decent 102, at least as decent as yours. We're fast with it, and I'd like to hang on to it. If I knew there was a point at which it won't be used in C, and knew there was a market for it (say, in Mod) to still sell it, I could plan my next investment in a year or two, maybe Sidewinder B. But I have no idea where the 102 will have a home in the future, don't know if the work we've done to learn the 102 will go out the window in favor of "helping" the 302 at Nationals, and don't have enough information on the Sidewinder program (cost or future home(s) for the motors). So my instinct is to hang on to what I have and not want things to change.

This is where a plan would help. Let's be semi-hypothetical. In two years, Yamato switches to a 402 (let's say it's a 4-stroke, just to be interesting). The year after that, importers have a couple available, with more on the way. They still has 50-60 302s sitting in their shop, but Yamato isn't making spare parts anymore. What does the stock category do?

Status Quo: Do nothing. There are dozens of 302s out there. Look at all of the motors still available. We can re-sleeve the old ones. The class(es) is healthy, don't mess with it. 402 is slower, it will never win Nationals. It's a 4-stroke, they suck. It's not an American motor. I haven't seen it run.

Sound familiar?

Something New: 402s become a probationary motor the first year they are available and a Parity Committee is established. SORC and the importer(s) subsidize a handful of 402s to encourage development (i.e. sell them cheap to people who will race and develop them). When data is collected, and there are a sufficient number of 402s available in this country (let's say 20), then the Parity Committee makes some recommendations and the the 402 comes off probation and the 302 and 402 co-exist. A five year clock starts, after which the 402 becomes the only legal motor. SORC identifies a class(es) where a 302 will be legal until they disappear. Nonbody fusses about how fast the 402 is, where it was built, etc. 302s still have a home for those that can't go to a 402. The point is, there is a plan, and everyone knows what is going to happen when. As a new racer, I know what is coming and can make choices. As an existing racer, I have the same information. The importers need to be involved in this process - they have to back their dog in the fight (if it comes to that), and as a category we need to provide them some respect for providng racing engines.

[14-H]

Mr. Johnson

... all excellent points. Ed Hearn.

[14-H]

***

PS: I thought the reason for the C2H class was that the 302 was faster than the 102 and was not wanted to obsolete the 102 from the CSH class........or am I way off base........never mind.............

***!

Darren: You are exactly right about the reason for the C2 classes. The membership at the time was petrified that the new engine would beat the old. The plan was for C2 for three years with the 302 and 102 in that class and then merge C (which only had the 102 as a legal engine) and C2 at the fourth year. Then, after it became apparent that the 302 was slower, we still played hell trying to get rid of the C2 classes and keep the plan. There was nearly a war at the annual meeting since the SORC voted to keep the C2 classes separate from C even after the 3 years was up. I was able to convince the APBA new class committee that this should not happen since the new class committee had only granted permission for the C2 classes to exist for 3 years, not indefinitely. Ultimately the APBA BOD forced the SORC to stick to the plan. But this was a classic example of people protecting their turf. They wanted to keep more classes for the Yamatos to run in.

The problem is that, 10 years later, the old engine still has a slight edge in the CSH class and we can't do anything about it because people are protecting their stuff.

BTW: I don't need analytical data to know that the 102 has a slight edge in CSH. All's I have to see is Miskerik buy 102s (and I've never discussed this matter with him) and see Billy Allen stop running his 302s to know that the disparity still exists.

The cry for data is always lodged by those who want to keep the status quo since they know we have little resources to get this information. Then, if we are lucky to get some data, we hear cries like you have made that it is not reliable for whatever the reason.

The best information comes from what we see on the race course. Ed.