CSH 3/4 inch height rule

[bill boyes]

Question for the SORC. How did the CSH 3/4 height rule get passed as a safety rule? Safety was not discussed. 102 vs 302 parity was the issue. Safety was never discussed. If safety is the issue then the same should apply to the 20ssh and OSY. Please explain.

[ian]

Typical. Take the most populous class we have, and screw with it. Anybody want to buy some props ?????

[seanp3]

Its not a safety issue. It think it was more of a parity issue with the 102, the notion that the 302 has more torque and with the added drag the 302 will finally overcome the 102 in CSH. That is yet to be seen. I do believe underneath all the discussion the main reason for this rule change is the thought it will be saving motors, and less frustration with the newby - to protect him from the frustration of burning up motors. And for the new guy, which I am, it will save them a lot of grief (cost) rebuilding their motor. I don't really agree with it, but accept it and am working on the setup to run at the 3/4" depth.

[mercguy]

parity????

Its not a safety issue. It think it was more of a parity issue with the 102, the notion that the 302 has more torque and with the added drag the 302 will finally overcome the 102 in CSH. That is yet to be seen. I do believe underneath all the discussion the main reason for this rule change is the thought it will be saving motors, and less frustration with the newby - to protect him from the frustration of burning up motors. And for the new guy, which I am, it will save them a lot of grief (cost) rebuilding their motor. I don't really agree with it, but accept it and am working on the setup to run at the 3/4" depth.

the rule change ain't parity either..........as it slows both motors down.......

[ryan_4z]

At the Ocoee race, the height was still 1/2". My setup for the first heat of the day was 3/4" below the bottom. By the last heat of the day I was running 1-1/4" below the bottom to make sure I could pump, and drive my boat safely. I didn't change props. I didn't do anything but pull shim sticks. I ran competitve in every heat I was in. In CSH I took a 4th in the Divisionals and a 2nd on Sunday. Running 1-1/4" below the bottom. That's 3/4" below the rule. Oh, and I was running that big long course wheel that everyone thinks is going to be junk now. I just wanted to illustrate how meaningless this really is on the race course. Go testing before you think all you props will be junk.

[Cameraboy]

Great post, Sean. And Daren, our 102 on the black boat performs better at 3/4" anyway (with and without a restrictor) - go figure.

Don't go by "what everybody says". Test for yourself.

Bill does raise an interesting point, though. I've heard a discussion recently on what rules go to whom, and I still get confused. Glad I took notes...now if I can find them

[hydroracer25]

Running 1-1/4" below the bottom. That's 3/4" below the rule.

Ryan,

I think they tought fractions in 4th or 5th grade. You may want to go back and brush up. Even with the math error, your point was that you ran signifcantly below the new 3/4" height restriction.

Mark

[ryan_4z]

Ryan,

I think they tought fractions in 4th or 5th grade. You may want to go back and brush up. Even with the math error, your point was that you ran signifcantly below the new 3/4" height restriction.

Mark

Sorry Mark, I meant 3/4" below the 1/2" rule, which was the rule at Ocoee. In any case, I ran the new rule plus the old rule.

[Dave M]

Competitive ?

4th or 5th place in the Divsionals... Competitive means you were in the hunt racing for 1st and second deck to deck, swapping positions. I hear how 1MPH can be a ton in CSH... So is it safe to assume that the lower heights caused you to slow down enough to be 4th or 5th ?

[bill boyes]

I'am not questioning 3/4 inch vs 1/2 inch. Frankly,I really do not care as it is the same for everybody in CSH.
What I'am questioning is how did the rule get passed as a SAFETY RULE? The SORC disquised the rule as a safety rule to the BOD so as not to have to take it to the membership. We were hoodwinked. So lets see I'am running my CSH 102/302 at 3/4 in and now I will run 20ssh. I install the restrictor and a 1/4 inch rev stick. And the SORC calls it a SAFETY RULE. If it is a SAFETY RULE why does it not also apply to 20ssh and OSY

[Brian10s]

I have no problem with the 3/4 rule but think that the line between safety and parity has been blurred over the years. Height rules were created in the name of safety and should have never been able to be adjusted higher - they are supposed to be the ceiling. However, we are now to believe that you can run safer in C now that it is down 1/4 but the same boat/motor/driver combo (add a restrictor) is safe to run in 20. Kinda like the height differece between 25SSR & CSR. I guess if it is the best thing in one class, it should be in others.

The SORC should have called it a parity rule from the beginning instead of bring "safety" into the discussion.

[14-H]

Safety?

The height restriction rules have always been safety rules. That is the way that they are listed in the rule book. I agree with you that the reason for the change in this case was not motivated by safety. That in no way diminishes the fact that the lower the skeg and prop are placed into the water, the more stable the ride and less likelihood of breaking loose.

All of this aside, however, the rule does qualify as a technical rule. In SO, technical rules are also not sent to ballot. I explained this once before in a different thread, but I'm not sure what happened to that thread or which one it was, quite frankly.

Ed Hearn.

[Brian10s]

The height restriction rules have always been safety rules. That is the way that they are listed in the rule book. I agree with you that the reason for the change in this case was not motivated by safety. That in no way diminishes the fact that the lower the skeg and prop are placed into the water, the more stable the ride and less likelihood of breaking loose.

All of this aside, however, the rule does qualify as a technical rule. In SO, technical rules are also not sent to ballot. I explained this once before in a different thread, but I'm not sure what happened to that thread or which one it was, quite frankly.

Ed Hearn.

Ed,
I don't disagree with the fact it did not go to ballot - that is the SO rules and is life - I only think it should have been called a tech rule from the beginning and not under safety.

As for the lower of the skeg statement - while many agree, your D guys seem to be split on the issue.

[ryan_4z]

4th or 5th place in the Divsionals... Competitive means you were in the hunt racing for 1st and second deck to deck, swapping positions. I hear how 1MPH can be a ton in CSH... So is it safe to assume that the lower heights caused you to slow down enough to be 4th or 5th ?

I would say I fell to 4th because I was 10 seconds late on the start the second heat. I was milling around in La-La Land and never saw the white flag go up. On Sunday I ran deck-to-deck for first place for three laps, ended up second, took second overall. The only place I might have seen a performance difference is on the run to the first turn. Granted that is a pretty **** important part of the race. Drivability is also worth miles an hour, and my rig was more drivable at the lower height.

[csh2z]

Safety - Was not even a consideration for passing this rule at the National meeting. Safety was not the reason for this rule change. John 2-Z