Future of OMC A and Merc 15

[sam]

Not being able to win in a dozen or 2 dozen races isn't stopping me from running A. Having old brittle bones is. Compared to the bigger classes the ride in A is bone jarring rough ..... these old bones will leave it to young people with soft bones.

I might not be the only old foaggie that tried a ride in A and decided it wasn't for me.

My feeling is that in the greedy quest for speed during the past 50 years, A hydros have evolved to be too small and too light.

[kws]

The AXS class was not originally created to be a Novice A class. The reason it was created was to fi nd a place to put the Merc were it could be competitive. It has since become a long neede Novice A class. The need for a novice class actually as very little to do with the speed of the A class. It has more to do with the competitivness. There is a lot of hard driving and racing in the A class, and a lot of seasoned veterans. It's really not the place for new drivers and kids just out of J. The AXS class was actually created before there were any problems with A stock. These problems did not arise, for the most part, until this past season. Again, the rule change made for ASH this year has very little to do with the speed. It is a handling issue. Actually at full throttle there should be little to no problem. But it is when you back off of the throttle, especially in rough water, when this setup becomes dangerous.

so am i supposed to take this to mean that the tuck under set up doesnt affect speed ? is it just me? but i get the impression that is what you are implying here.
yes i understand that the rule was passed specificly because of handling issues. but i dont believe for a second that it wont have an effect on speed. if it didnt. why start using it in the first place?

[kws]

i want to make something clear im not against slowing down the A's, in fact it would be in my best interest. as our program has a long way to go to be anywhere near the front my biggest issue is that if they need to be slowed down. do it with boat design changes or foot depths not motor changes
i feel SOME of the people want changes for reasons that are not the ones given.
IF thats the case then i can't help but feel they want them for the wrong reasons ie. its better for them, not because its better for the sport

and i agree with you that if something can be done to reduce the amount of people quiting the sport after a short period of involvment. that is a very good thing. but please remember that with all sports, some people will get into it long enuff to find out they dont like it well enuff to continue investing more into it. be it time or money

[Dr. Thunder]

[QUOTE=ryan_4z] ... The AXS class was actually created before there were any problems with A stock. QUOTE]

I'm a bit confused by your statement Ryan ... if the SORC didn't think there was a problem with the "A" class then why was the Merc 15 approved in the first place?

[kws]

lol me too DR but thats ok.
i think the ad is a completely diff. issue . its an attempt to address the problem of a new racer not being able to buy a good off the shelf motor for a class (great plan)
but did it get hamstrung by the slowem down fraction so that mercury built a somewhat slower power plant instead one comparable to omc?
i dont claim this as fact im just asking.
or did mercury build a somewhat slow motor so the omc had to be replaced for the merc to be THE 'A' engine? witch then backfired on them cause no one wanted to run them?

[sam]

did mercury build a somewhat slow motor so the omc had to be replaced for the merc

No. Mercury has nothing to do with the motor being used in APBA racing.

There is no "backfire" in any plan from Mercury, because there is no plan from Mercury. Stock uses the motor because it is in production. The reason some other motors weren't chosen was because they were larger displacement than the old A motor and probably would have needed restrictors to slow them to current speeds.

[kws]

thank you Sam

shakes head in amazement: after all that then there still wasnt a good competitive (for those without a lot of experience *) off the shelf motor for the A class (not asx)

* basing this on
Originally Posted by hagerl8m
".. and by the way the merc isn't 5 slower its 1 maybe 2. i've done the testing and i can run third against some of the best ASR in the country."

i have to assume he tested alot found the sweetest spot in the power band then used it . or he has extra special mercs lol

[ryan_4z]

kws,

First, I never said that this setup didn't make the boats go faster, but the speed is not what makes it dangerous. It's having the motor tucked under 2" that makes it dangerous. This setup makes the boat react very wierd in certain situations. This is not something you can change with a boat design rule.

What people do you feel want changes for their own personal benefit. I really don't see how this rule change does benefit any one racer over another. Other people have said this too, but as I have said before, we are all still on a level playing field.

Dr. Thunder,

I was really kind of hoping not to have to get into all that again. The BOD felt it necessary to find a place in Stock Outboard for this motor. They forced the SORC to take this motor.

[kws]

Ryan the reason i feel that way has very little to do with the rule that was passed.(tuck under) in fact i supported it after discussions back in oct. of last year, at the region 7 meeting.

reread these threads and if you dont see it??? i dont know what to tell you.
but when someone says the reason for something is X so you ask about X and the same person says the reason is Y I have no recourse but to feel there is a hidden agenda
i will be the first to admit that I have been involved with boat racing for a very short time. i have tried very hard to educate my self on the sport. no not just how to go faster, of course i am trying to do that. but also the rules and the reasons behind the rules. now with that said i must also say that ANY group or orginazation by definition has agendas, there will allway be fractions inside of that group with diff. agendas this is not an inherently bad thing its how organizations work. but when people try to accomplish those agendas without being forthright in their actions. then it is rarely a good thing

[Dr. Thunder]

Dr. Thunder,

I was really kind of hoping not to have to get into all that again. The BOD felt it necessary to find a place in Stock Outboard for this motor. They forced the SORC to take this motor.

Ryan ... I know ... my comment was meant to be just a touch sarcastic and a bit tongue in cheek . We need to remind all again and be perfectly clear that the then APBA powers created the "find a place for the Merc" issue.

Regardless of that fact we still have to deal with the problem of now having the potential for too many motors and too many J/A/ASX/FA classes. This is an issue that affects all three (four if you count "J") outboard categories.

It should be addressed now by an ad hoc Mod/Stock/Pro/J committee (Hearn, Greaves, Read, Dawe and Wheeler) studying the matter during the current racing season so that a joint resolution can be taken to all of the affected membership for a vote at the 2006 Annual Meeting. These are all bright, knowledgeable and capable individuals that have the ability to provide a well reasoned set of solutions acceptable to the majority.

[ryan_4z]

kws,

I'm still not sure where you are coming from. I never thought that there was any confusion about why the rule was made. A lot of people have mentioned the speed of the A class, but that was not the issue. That is just a secondary thought. The issue has always been the extremity of the tuck, and the effect that has on handling. Sure some people may like the rule and some may not. But the fact of the matter is, the membership didn't vote on this one. So the only people that could have been trying to pass some sort of hidden agenda are the members of the SORC. And frankly I just don't believe for one second that that is the case here.

[Cameraboy]

Bingo

It should be addressed now by an ad hoc Mod/Stock/Pro/J committee (Hearn, Greaves, Read, Dawe and Wheeler) studying the matter during the current racing season so that a joint resolution can be taken to all of the affected membership for a vote at the 2006 Annual Meeting. These are all bright, knowledgeable and capable individuals that have the ability to provide a well reasoned set of solutions acceptable to the majority.

IMHO, that's how these type of issues should be addressed. In our current structure it will eventually be decided by the masses – but the categories can’t leave planning to the masses (see “physician, heal thyself”). Somebody has to step back and look at the big picture, consider past actions and how they played out, and consider potential future impacts. Otherwise, things get nickel & dimed into a mess because the changes are reactive instead of proactive, and individuals are looking at the issues from a narrow perspective. For example:

There have been many posts decrying the mods made to the OMC 15 over the years, that’s it’s no longer “stock”; yet this year we’re starting down the same path with the Merc 15.

The extreme tuck set up was banned for safety reasons in ASH and FAH. The same set up has been used in KPro and ASXH (and another much faster class), yet the ban does not appear to have been made in any other category/class (per what's on the APBA website).

I think Dr Thunder has a good starting point with his phase-in plan. It considers the need for time to work through the Hot Rod teething pains, and provides a home for the OMC motors.

[hagerl8m]

Phase in plan

I agree that there should be a phase plan for the A classes. But it shouldn't be a phase in plan, although the current stock commission has already set that up, there should be a phase out plan. Dr. Thunder said that the membership should vote, that should not happen, if that is the case we will be racing the OMC motor 10 more years down the line. Also people should look at the government regulations on engines. We might no longer be able to race a production motor unless it meets these regulations. And I’m pretty sure that the current Merc and OMC don't meet them. Watch these laws as they get passed. Maybe that will help decide on the motor we run. The law does say racing motors are excluded. But it’s hard to say that a production motor that can be converted back into fishing motor is a racing motor. SO look closer at the problem we face.

Chris 8m

Just spent 48 hours studying environmental issues for midterm exams.

[Dr. Thunder]

Good response!

I agree that there should be a phase plan for the A classes. But it shouldn't be a phase in plan, although the current stock commission has already set that up, there should be a phase out plan.

What are we talking about phasing out ... the AXS classes I hope.

Dr. Thunder said that the membership should vote, that should not happen ...

Yikes ... Stock/Mod/Pro membership not having the opportunity to vote on an APBA BOD resolution for a multi-category equipment and class restructuring of this magnitude ... (this thread already has had over 2000 views) would be extremely unwise given the recent history of BOD antics.

... if that is the case we will be racing the OMC motor 10 more years down the line.

I would hope that we are able to race the OMC "A" at least that much longer ... but in the Mod category as FAH/FAR

Also people should look at the government regulations on engines. We might no longer be able to race a production motor unless it meets these regulations.

And then again we just might ... plenty of governmental precedent for legislative "grandfathering".

But that having been said ... Chris ... the probability of environmental constraints is an entirely different and, yes, complex set of issues. The membership may have to deal with those matters in the not too distant future. For the forseeable future; and, if the Hot Rod is part of that future, then we may have reasonable solutions just on the horizon. Chris 8m

Just spent 48 hours studying environmental issues for midterm exams.

Keep on studying ... I enjoy your comments

[D_Allen_III]

what BOD antics?