Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

YAMATO COOLING UPDATE..........TIS THE SEASON.

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #16
    Deano!

    The currently illegal towers, one was modified accordingly to last year's rules, one is a stock 321 and one is a stock 302; another stock 302 did not drop below 1.4".

    There was a similar height rule for the 2017 inlet modification rule and we found the same issue. I'm asking the team what the conclusion was, but ultimately we were told the 1.4" measurement was non-relevant as there are many stock, unmodified towers that were originally drilled in Japan already below the 1.4".

    I really don't care one way or another - I'll just weld and re-drill them.
    http://vitalire.com/

    Comment

    • guedo499
      #16.1
      guedo499 commented
      12-18-2017, 11:58 AM
      Editing a comment
      I'd also like to publicly apologize to my Region 10 Commissioners: the opportunity to properly deal with the measurement was when the vote occurred, not now. Our Commissioners sent out an email requesting input on the proposed rule update. I had written a response which partially refereed to the 1.4" measurement but found it not ever sent and still in my draft folder. Sorry Ron and Matt.
    • Hydro doc
      #16.2
      Hydro doc commented
      12-20-2017, 09:00 AM
      Editing a comment
      We will go to the garage and we will measure our hole. I believe the 1.4 distance may have to be adjusted.
  • #17
    So then, are we saying that this 1.4" rule might be problematic as it appears the holes aren't too precisely drilled at the factory?
    Dane Lance
    700-P
    CSH/500Mod

    Comment

    • #18
      Originally posted by guedo499 View Post
      Deano!

      The currently illegal towers, one was modified accordingly to last year's rules, one is a stock 321 and one is a stock 302; another stock 302 did not drop below 1.4".

      There was a similar height rule for the 2017 inlet modification rule and we found the same issue. I'm asking the team what the conclusion was, but ultimately we were told the 1.4" measurement was non-relevant as there are many stock, unmodified towers that were originally drilled in Japan already below the 1.4".

      I really don't care one way or another - I'll just weld and re-drill them.
      John,

      Thanks for the reply and explanation....... 10-4 on all of that.

      Best Regards,

      Deano...............
      sigpic

      Dean F. Hobart



      Comment

      • #19
        The intent and simplicity of this rule is great, thank you SORC. The actual measurement is kind of hard to do with any precision because of the radius between the cavitation plate and the snout. The actual number may need to be tweaked a bit just to avoid any issues and keep with the spirit of this good new rule!



        • 3 likes

        Comment

        • #20
          What is the intent and spirit of the 1.4" rule? Inane inspection calls and DQ's seem likely results.

          Comment

          • GrandpaRacer
            #20.1
            GrandpaRacer commented
            12-19-2017, 08:56 AM
            Editing a comment
            I think the intent is to make every one legal except the guy that purposely moves the hole to 1/4 inch from the bottom of the snout which I have seen!
          • Matt Dagostino
            #20.2
            Matt Dagostino commented
            12-19-2017, 08:57 AM
            Editing a comment
            The dimension of 1.4 inch depth maximum was designed to create a 'window' for the hole to be located within! As long as you keep the hole within the 'window' you will be fine. The new drill guide will be posted soon to show you how to mark the 1.4 depth. A picture is worth a thousand words as you will see when the guide is posted. The Stock Outboard Cataglory is basically 'SPEC' racing and specs are necessary to maintain a level of consistency. Stay within the 1.4 window and life will be good...
        • #21
          This is a VERY positive measure taken, hopefully no more Yamato's overheating. In my mind, a window infers a range, this spec seems an absolute 1.4" maximum depth as written. I don't envision people attempting to move their hole up? In light of Guedo's measurements on multiple towers, it may be prudent to have inspectors measure depths of pee holes throughout the year, then provide a reasonable +/- tolerance height spec based on sound data. I learned a hard lesson regarding a technical spec rule at a very big event this year over .508 millimeters of tolerance. Minimizing these potentials are important from my perspective.

          Comment

          • stockc
            #21.2
            stockc commented
            12-19-2017, 03:26 PM
            Editing a comment
            How does the absolute 1.4 inch" measurement facilitate the goal of making sure cooling is never an issue again with Yamato race engines? I'm unable to make that connection. I view it to be unnecessary and adds yet another spec for drivers to take responsibility for legality. I don't recall any comparable spec in the cool tool proposition, nor the adoption of the inadequate drilling method. Remember the motto... its just water!
          • Matt Dagostino
            #21.3
            Matt Dagostino commented
            12-19-2017, 04:39 PM
            Editing a comment
            ?...........please reread the rule from last years initial drilling. There were several specs on that drilling. There is now just ONE spec which allows a driver to basically make the hole whatever size you wish as long as it stays above 1.4 inches. That's the best we could do. Best of luck to you. The drill guide will be done soon and will be helpful.
            Last edited by Matt Dagostino; 12-19-2017, 04:51 PM.
          • stockc
            #21.4
            stockc commented
            12-20-2017, 10:45 AM
            Editing a comment
            ?......Please reread my post(--: I suggested that there was no "comparable" spec. meaning no height spec. provision with the last years drilling or the cool tool. I was attempting to understand why it has been determined needed in drilling round 2. The new rule states 2) It is permissible to create a groove from the forward side entrance of the "original" hole location thru the leading edge of the exhaust snout. This seems restrict anyone from relocating the hole as John suggested as the intent of the spec. previously. Again, this is a VERY positive step with great potential to fix the problem. Question retracted and Merry Xmas.
        • #22
          Not knocking anyone's efforts, I appreciate them all, but was any testing done to determine if a really "cool" engine runs slower? I believe you may take care of one issue, but now add an additional dimension to have to test. Will it be a mandate that everyone has to do it? For this reason I am not sure I would make it legal in 300. If its optional, you introduce "choice" and testing into a class that is designed to eliminate both of those dimensions.



          Comment

          • Matt Dagostino
            #22.2
            Matt Dagostino commented
            12-19-2017, 12:50 PM
            Editing a comment
            Dean...........the 'Enhanced Drilling' is optional for all Yamato engines except 300ssh for now. The 300ssh issue is on the table with the SORC this week and will be decided upon soon. As far as a Yamato engine now running to cool? What a great issue to now banter over after 40 years of burning them up! Merry Christmas.
          • Big Don
            #22.3
            Big Don commented
            12-19-2017, 01:29 PM
            Editing a comment
            While I can't say they were testing to see how the engine performs, maybe the Team that was testing in November when it was 34 degrees with 40 degree water temps can share what they found.
          • DtwSailor
            #22.4
            DtwSailor commented
            12-20-2017, 06:51 AM
            Editing a comment
            Dean, as you know, I have been actively involved in promoting the 300 class, and working to grab data based the last 2 years. Last year at Big Rapids I unsealed my 321 to keep cool in 20ssh, which did not work. I have data that shows in rough race conditions, even in 300, the 321 does not keep cool. Saturday, Tabor City, 300SSH, watch for yourself. I blew the start so went wide and tested at different RPM and speeds, 392 is not in my range of comfort before shutting down... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byRCLoodAng. I have written all SORC commissioners to please consider this as well as the fact that the 300 class was to be a stepping stone for new drivers to get into CSH/20SSH, etc... not allowing the drilling in 300 severely limits them. I have mounds of data that proves we have heating problem, even with the drilling rules from last year. So as to not to appear to protect my own investments, I will be focusing on 45 next year.
        • #23
          Would a more accurate measure be from the propshaft, rather from the cavitation plate. John's motors being all over the place shows the down housing holes were not drilled very standard. They ran the motor so deep that the hole was not critical or accurate.

          Comment

          • #24
            Why have a measurement if the purpose is to cool the motors? I'm still perplexed why the "cool tool" didn't pass last year as a solution. Easy fix to the problem. Should have made it mandatory on ALL Yamatos at a fixed depth so that everyone's engine was the same. Would have been of minimal cost, easy to install and would not have affected anyone's prop box.
            Last edited by jsilvestri; 12-20-2017, 10:26 AM.
            Joe Silvestri
            CSH/500MH

            Dominic Silvestri
            JH/JR
            • 3 likes

            Comment

            • DiGia54D
              #24.2
              DiGia54D commented
              12-20-2017, 01:00 PM
              Editing a comment
              Matt, Just a question here...If the cool tool was approved....Wasn't it supposed to help cool the motor at the Legal set ups for the Yamato class's . Why would anyone try a radical set up when the class's have height restrictions.
              Last edited by DiGia54D; 12-21-2017, 04:44 AM.
            • Matt Dagostino
              #24.3
              Matt Dagostino commented
              12-20-2017, 03:25 PM
              Editing a comment
              Wayne.........radical tuck was the comment being made and potentially exotic boats with super inset transoms were in the Kool -Aid mix being passed out. Yes we have height limits in our Yamato classes but no tuck rules 'yet'.
            • DiGia54D
              #24.4
              DiGia54D commented
              12-21-2017, 04:43 AM
              Editing a comment
              OK, Thanks for the responce
          • #25
            With the existing system the engine will not over cool.

            Comment

            • #26
              Originally posted by jsilvestri View Post
              Why have a measurement if the purpose is to cool the motors? I'm still perplexed why the "cool tool" didn't pass last year as a solution. Easy fix to the problem. Should have made it mandatory on ALL Yamatos at a fixed depth so that everyone's engine was the same. Would have been of minimal cost, easy to install and would not have affected anyone's prop box.
              ​eliminate the spec and let them drill all they want...................you can already shape the foot and remove material, so the box is already open..............let them drill the hole as big as they want or need to keep the motors cool.................no need to tax the inspectors anymore than they already are.............
              Daren

              ​DSH/750ccmh/850ccmh

              Team Darneille


              sigpic
              • 3 likes

              Comment

              • Matt Dagostino
                #26.1
                Matt Dagostino commented
                12-20-2017, 03:28 PM
                Editing a comment
                Darren...........with the 1.4 inch max depth rule you can drill the hole as big and wide as you want .....just don't let any part of it go below 1.4 inches. I know it seems silly but being Stock Outboarder's many feel we need 'specs' on everything. Guess that's why you like MOD so much. No rules, just fun...Merry Christmas.
            • #27
              Matt, thanks for the explanation and thanks to you and your "cool" team for all you've done! I understand this has not been an easy process for you guys but at least we are moving in the right direction. Happy Holidays to you and your family as well.
              Joe Silvestri
              CSH/500MH

              Dominic Silvestri
              JH/JR
              • 1 like

              Comment

              • #28
                I made a little 1.400 checker. Here it is checking one snout with minor 2017 mods (2nd one) and one stock. Both these appear to be ok, need to check our others. If any did not pass it would be easy to fix. You can see how the radius would make it hard to accurately check with a caliper. I am just happy something this simple was approved, it is much better than last year for inspectors, if they check it at all.
                John
                2 Photos



                • 2 likes

                Comment

                • #29
                  I love the idea of measuring off the cavitation (sorry, anti-ventilation) plate. Simple to inspect!
                  • 1 like

                  Comment

                  • Fastjack
                    #29.1
                    Fastjack commented
                    12-22-2017, 07:32 AM
                    Editing a comment
                    I think you are the only person to all the plate by the correct name-Thank you
                • #30
                  Originally posted by GrandpaRacer View Post
                  I made a little 1.400 checker. Here it is checking one snout with minor 2017 mods (2nd one) and one stock. Both these appear to be ok, need to check our others. If any did not pass it would be easy to fix. You can see how the radius would make it hard to accurately check with a caliper. I am just happy something this simple was approved, it is much better than last year for inspectors, if they check it at all.
                  John
                  John,

                  Great job....Perfect
                  sigpic

                  Dean F. Hobart



                  Comment

                  Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                  Working...
                  X