Responsibilities of the SORC

[chicagopaul]

I was at the meeting. I felt the main point was that folks were burning up the 302's. If someone has found a way to avoid this at the current height, I sure do wish they would speak up. There was no one at the meeting that was able to expalin how to avoid it. So the new rule seemed only logical. I could not vote, but I did not disagree either. Posting on an Inernet forum is good for discussion. But to get things done I think it best to communicate directly with Commissioners or show up at the meeting if you can.

So, how do you make a 302 run at the current height without burning it up?

Chicago Paul

[csh2z]

Sam, It's not all about speed. Not all newcomers get the help they need to become competitive. I only hope that after you and I retire from racing, we are not the last of a dying breed.
Ed, I didn't vote in favor of the Merc 15 because the APBA BoD intervened in Stock Outboard business by shoving that motor down our throats. John 2-Z

[hydroplay]

Chicago Paul,

It is easy to run a 302 at maximim height. The most important factor is to have a boat that runs bow high to plant the rear, especially in the turns. A boat is a teeter-totter- if the front is up, the stern is down. You've got to have a boat that will carry the sponsons thru the turns, not some pig boat that drags along on the sponsons. Where the driver sits and moves is important. Extra weight goes as far aft as you can put it. Rockers aren't just for old people in rocking chairs anymore.

Some 302s have different spacing from the shear pin hole to the exhaust snout area. We have redrilled shear pin holes in props to get this distance smaller. Make absolutely sure you have a good seal on your exhaust cover. Many people will reuse this gasket because it looks good but at high speeds and with very low water pressure, any exhaust leaks will inhibit pumping. We have had numerous blocks and exhaust covers that needed to be milled flat to give a good seal here. A slight exhaust leak will not hurt performance and will be OK at lower speeds when the water pressure is higher. The 102 does not seem to have this problem as commonly. Route the water outlet hoses up to keep pressure in the motor. I like the way Pater does this with a giant hose to put some water volume there that can flow back into the block if the inlet pressure momentarily drops for some reason- but it looks ugly.

Guys think nothing of getting their powerheads blueprinted, you might consider doing the same for your towerhousing and gearcase. I've heard that some guys actually mill off the top of the gearcase to move the propshaft up higher. Or mill off the bottom mounting surface of your towerhousing to move the gearcase up. I bet some have done both. Use gel-seal instead of the lower unit gasket and save the thickness of the gasket. There are tolerances on all these dimensions you can play with and still be absolutely legal. Or you could do a bit more if you think the inspectors won't check these things. Have you ever seen an inspector check the towerhousing length or the gearcase hight at the Nationals or a record race?

That ought to be enough to get you thinking

[hydroplay]

Ryan,

Good hydros on Nationals sized turns don't slow down enough to give the 302 any advantage comming off the corners. You don't see 302s going around 102s in the corners now or out accelerating them just off the corner do you? So why would lowering both the same amount change anything.

The only obvious difference now is top speed. A good 102 has that last 1/2 mph or so that will get you enough to move over at the first turn and its over. Runabouts load the motor more with their heavier weight and dragging along in the corners so it helps the 302. Top speed in hydors is the issue not acceleration.

[NUT2F]

Chicago Paul,
Sam is right about one key is the proper boat, another factor is your propeller. If the SORC thinks that lowering the motor is changing anything, then none of them have tested both 102's and 302's together. I've run 302's and 102's without height restrictions and one of the best ways to improve water pick-up to the 302 is the easiest and cheapest way, change the shear pin hole in the prop. Some props pump better away fom the pick-up, some right up to it!! But no don't try this, just change the height and screw everyone!!!!!!!!! Thanks SORC

[14-H]

***
Ed, I didn't vote in favor of the Merc 15 because the APBA BoD intervened in Stock Outboard business by shoving that motor down our throats. John 2-Z

John: That is not a good reason, that is pride getting in the way; and perhaps you forgot that the SORC asked the BOD to produce that engine. This is the type of thing that would make me nervous if I were Ron Selewach. I know it already causes concern for Bass Machines and Dave Scott. Ed.

[14-H]

Chicago Paul,

***
you might consider doing the same for your towerhousing and gearcase. ***There are tolerances on all these dimensions you can play with and still be absolutely legal. Or you could do a bit more if you think the inspectors won't check these things. Have you ever seen an inspector check the towerhousing length or the gearcase hight at the Nationals or a record race?

***

This is EXACTLY why the rule needed to be passed. Ed Hearn.

[Dr. Thunder]

1 ... 2 ... or 3?

This is EXACTLY why the rule needed to be passed. Ed Hearn.

1. ... you might consider doing the same for your towerhousing and gearcase. There are tolerances on all these dimensions you can play with and still be absolutely legal.

2. ... Or you could do a bit more if you think the inspectors won't check these things.

3. ... Have you ever seen an inspector check the towerhousing length or the gearcase hight at the Nationals or a record race?


The rule needed to be passed because of number one, two, three ... or all of the above?

[14-H]

1. ... ***
2. ... ***
3. ... ***

The rule needed to be passed because of number one, two, three ... or all of the above?

Primarily #1. Ed.

[kws]

ED are you saying that lowering all heights negates what SAM said?
it seems to me the deeper the foot the more change Sams suggestions would make or am i all wet
while barely legal is LEGAL. and while i admit i learn towards Sams perspective that if something is not forbidden its legal (hope i am not putting words in your mouth Sam just thinking of something you said at the first r7 meeting i went to)
I allso want to make it perfectly clear i am not complaining about the rule change . I am only trying learn

[Dr. Thunder]

I was at the meeting. I felt the main point was that folks were burning up the 302's. If someone has found a way to avoid this at the current height, I sure do wish they would speak up. There was no one at the meeting that was able to expalin how to avoid it. So the new rule seemed only logical ...
<snip> So, how do you make a 302 run at the current height without burning it up?

Chicago Paul

Seems to me there is a world of difference between approving a technical change to avoid "burning up the 302's" and approving a technical change in order to avoid intentional efforts on the part of some, a few, or a lot of drivers to get around the rules (some might even call it cheating )

The SORC could have saved a whole lot of emotional posts here on HR by simply acknowledging the real intent of the proposed rule change. Or, am I missing something in your post Ed?

But then again, I wouldn't know ... I wasn't there.

[hydroplay]

The rules specifically allow blueprinting- within printed specs- of any internal machined surface that has printed specs. You people are hypocrites if you think it is legal to blueprint heads, ports, block heights, rod bearing openings, center main bearing, even the carburetor venturi but not to do simple milling on the towerhousing and/or gearcase. Those are internal machined surfaces and have dimensions. And then you want to cry because people actually read the rules and take them seriously?

[Dr. Thunder]

So ... what, exactly, does the proposed height rule have to do with the legal blueprinting of engine parts ...