APBA please send me a check!!!

[99R]

Dear Mr. APBA,

Please send me a check for my Tohatsu gearcase that is no longer legal.

99R

[sponsonhead]

A Different Tactic May be Needed

Dear Mr. APBA,

Please send me a check for my Tohatsu gearcase that is no longer legal.

99R

HomeBoy:

Maybe you should try THESE collection tactics:

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/74

R-19

[ryan_4z]

A couple points need to be raised on this issue.

1) Your gearfoot can probably be sold for what you paid for it. You aren't stuck with it.

2) Why is no one asking Bass Machines for a check. If I were told by the D Class Tech. Committee Chairman, who was a representative of the SORC, that the only legal gears were 1:1, then I wouldn't have sold any other gears with this motor. Then the Tech Manual comes out with different information, why didn't they get clarification? If I were Bass Machines, and had been given contradicting information, I would have gotten clarification before I sold someone a $1500 gearfoot that may not be legal. This whole thing could have been prevented if they had brought this to light when the Tech Manual came out.


Pat, That video is hilarious!!

[nbass]

Not so simple

Ryan, it is not quite that simple. If you have been reading the other thread you will see that because there was conflict between what Mark Wheeler was telling me and what our representative heard, I asked Mr. Hearn for something in writing. He referred my request to Mike Ross. Mike Ross referred me to the published minutes. If you carefully read the 2005 national meeting minutes you will see that there are two significant but different paragraphs. Read the below.

From the published 2005 national meeting minutes

i. D Classes

1. Approval of Bass/Tohatsu Engine

MOTION TO APPROVE NEW BASS/TAHATSU MOTOR WITH AN ADVISERY COMMITTEE TO MONITER THE PROGRESS AND PAIRITY PASSED

MOTION TO HAVE NEIL BASS SEND JERRY WEINETTE A NEW BASS/TAHATSU MOTOR FOR DYNO TESTING SO THE SO COMMISION HAS DATA TO REVIEW. TESTING TO BE DONE WITHIN 6 MONTHS. SHIPPING COSTS TO BE INCURED BY SORC
PASSED.

Chairman appointed a committee to review all data on this new D motor.

Mark Wheeler
John Runne
Brian Palmquist
Neil Bass

2. Approval of the Thunderbolt 44 on a Bass or 55H lower unit

MOTION TO ACCEPT THE SUPER THUNDER BOLT D MOTOR WITH THE ADDITION OF THE 44XS TOWER HOUSING AND GEAR CASE. ALSO ALL GEAR RATIOS WILL BE 1 to 1 PASSED

End of minutes quote

I did read the 1:1 statement under par 2 to apply to par 2 approval of the Thunderbolt 44. That would mean that 1:1 gears are required for either the Bass lower unit or the 55H lower unit when run with a Thunderbolt 44.

I thought it quite clear that par 1, Approval of the Tohatsu, stood on its own. There is no reason to assume that rules for the Thunderbolt should apply to the Tohatsu. Obviously the rules committee also assumed from reading the minutes that the two engines were dealt with separately as did most others.

There are 1:1 gears available, there are numerous 1:1 units already set up and out there. That is not the point. This whole thing is way too late to be raised as a rule clarification. Especially as I read the minutes, there should be no rule clarifications. I blame no one for the minutes or the rules, but a two-year late clarification is strange. I believe Mr. Hearn is under great pressure from some 44xs racers to see that the Tohatsu does not win a national event, and does not set any records. I think Mr. Hearn is in a loose-loose position. There will be no changes to what Mr. Hearn published, so let’s get on with racing.

Respectfully,
Neil Bass

[99R]

Ed,

I'll have my gearcase for ya in Moses Lake, please have a check in hand. Congrats on your new gearcase your going to own.

99R

[csh2z]

99R, Could you please sign your name on your posts so we know who you are? Thank You

[ryan_4z]

Neil, Your representative was not speaking on behalf of the SORC, Mark Wheeler was. I agree, the minutes are not as clear as they should be. So you disregarded the official word of the SORC as given to you by Mr. Wheeler? That doesn't make sense. You must also remember, minutes are simply a summarization of motions made and passed. They are not intended to include new rules in their entirety. As far as Ed holding the Tohatsu back at the bequest of the 44xs drivers, that is ludicrous. I would imagine that the 44xs drivers would prefer the Tohatsus run the underdrive gears since the 1:1 gears should be faster!! It makes me wonder why anyone would even purchase the 16:17 gears. Thanks to you again, for all your hard work. I hope that the D class can once again flourish in the future with your engine.

[nbass]

Let's move on!

I do think it reasonable to rely on the written word verses oral word and hearsay. The trouble with oral word is that everything sounds good until you hear the other side. That is why we have published meeting minutes and published rules. Ed Hearn fixed the conflict between the oral word and the published word; he published the a rule in the Propeller. That was not to my satisfaction, but it is over and done.

Hey, I am as sick of all this as is Ed Hearn, I am sure. If the 44xs drivers want to have a class, and if Tohatsu is to be a viable product, we need to change the way things are done. The parity committee process has been super frustrating, and this last rule change has added to that frustration. I am sure Ed is exasperated with all of us as well. Let’s just drop all the fussing and find a better way.

Neil Bass

[ryan_4z]

From what I hear, the Tohatsu was very viable at Depue. With no testing, against very fast competition, and using 1:1 gears.

[nbass]

Great!!

Competitive out of the box is our goal. Engines that are not competitive do not sell. If Tohatsu does not sell, the D-stock class will go away. If Sidewinder can not compete out of the box, it will not sell. If any new product can not compete it will not sell. New engines must be able to win national races and set records!

Maybe what we need to have is a better way of structuring the classes so everyone can race and new engines are encouraged. That is kind of how I read the plan lead by John Runnie. Let's get on with it. Even Ed and I can get along under something other than what we have for D-stock. I think Mike Ross and John Runnie have great potential for improving APBA Stock Outboard Racing. Ed Hearn had grate insights as to what is needed, but seemed to get caught up in the 44xs politics. I think there is a way of implementing the new plan without offending the 44xs builders or owners or the Yamahato 80 builders or owners.

Neil Bass

[99R]

99R=Troy Holmberg

[ryan_4z]

Competitive out of the box is our goal. Engines that are not competitive do not sell. If Tohatsu does not sell, the D-stock class will go away. If Sidewinder can not compete out of the box, it will not sell. If any new product can not compete it will not sell. New engines must be able to win national races and set records! Neil Bass

I agree 100%. Wouldn't you agree then, that since the Tohatsu IS competitive out of the box, that the parity committee has been a success?

[nbass]

Parity at the cost of safety?

I agree 100%. Wouldn't you agree then, that since the Tohatsu IS competitive out of the box, that the parity committee has been a success?

No, we strongly disagree with setting the lower unit depth for parity. The driver needs to setup his ride for the characteristics of the lower unit, propeller, and the boat. What we have now is a potential safety issue for being too deep for some boats, props, and drivers. We strongly recommend setting maximum timing as a parity plan. We made the timing proposal in good faith but it was rejected with what I see as little consideration. The lower unit depth issue was tested by a safety committee member and their report is consistent with the purpose and design of the lower unit. The depth ruling needs to change!

Neil Bass