CSH 3/4 inch height rule

[bill boyes]

I refer to the April Propeller "Stock Outboard 2007 rule changes Page 5 Safety Rule 4"
You should know John since you are the one who made the 3/4 inch motion that it was not safety motivated. But that is were it was placed in the rule book under Safety Rule 4 "Engine Mounting Heights" Now that it is a Safety Rule how does the SORC justify leaving 20ssh at 1/2 inch?
Maybe I'am being nit-picky here but it was never Safety related at all. It was motivated by 102 vs 302 parity. And it is strange most 302 owners did not want a change from 1/2 inch but got it anyway.

[ian]

Testing ???? What is this testing ?????

[ryan_4z]

I refer to the April Propeller "Stock Outboard 2007 rule changes Page 5 Safety Rule 4"
You should know John since you are the one who made the 3/4 inch motion that it was not safety motivated. But that is were it was placed in the rule book under Safety Rule 4 "Engine Mounting Heights" Now that it is a Safety Rule how does the SORC justify leaving 20ssh at 1/2 inch?
Maybe I'am being nit-picky here but it was never Safety related at all. It was motivated by 102 vs 302 parity. And it is strange most 302 owners did not want a change from 1/2 inch but got it anyway.

As a driver in both CSH and 20ssH, I can say the two are not comparable in this aspect. 20ssH is a boring CSH. It is not the same thing as a CSH. They don't have the horsepower, or the punch. That being said, I thought they should have lowered 20ssH as well, to help save motors, and for ease of inspection.

[seanp3]

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'm not trying to stir this up again. Just trying to understand all this as I haven't even been at it a year yet. Help me understand how this qualifies as technical. If you want to send me a PM please do. Thanks

[drbyrne55]

Kazakhstan .....

Ed - I'm not trying to stir this up again. Just trying to understand all this as I haven't even been at it a year yet. Help me understand how this qualifies as technical. If you want to send me a PM please do. Thanks

Sean, I think it just comes down to ....word got out from region 10 to the east coast last December that the
new propellers from Kazakhstan for the 302's were doing 72mph in CSH at 1/2in. and cooling..... ....... so a new rule was needed

Hopefully, Ryan R will at least show up to Nationals this summer .... with any luck the new "special" 3/4" props from Uzbekistan will be in

[14-H]

Safety

Bill: That is where all of the height restrictions are located in the rules. That is why the new rule will be placed there. Ed Hearn.

[L. Allen]

Ed, I think this is the post you remember posting (from "Live from LA January 2007").

"Mr. VS: Maybe you can run for the position and show us how it should be done correctly. The position is open as of the end of this year. I did my best to get as much information out in between meetings that lasted all day and into the evenings every day. If fact, I skipped lunch and dinner several times to make this information available. Sorry it wasn't sufficient for your purposes.

Everyone Else: The CSH height rule will NOT go to ballot; it qualifies both as a safety and a technical rule. According to APBA By Laws and SO rules, neither of these matters go to membership ballot. The SORC did, however, direct the SO Chairman to propose that this rule, along with all other technical and safety rules passed by the SORC, be presented to the APBA BOD for implementation in 2007. The only exception was the impact material in the life jackets; that will go into effect Nov 1st. The APBA BOD will be holding a meeting within the next 30days. If approved by the APBA BOD, those rules would become effective 30days after approval by the Board.

None of these changes will be effective at the Winternationals. Ed Hearn.
__________________
14-H

America is all about speed; Hot, nasty, bad-ass speed.

-Eleanor Roosevelt"

[Charlie Pater]

Ed You said "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."

ED - Now I understand your ignorance about Yamato classes. You just do not understand how different setups work with the Yamato lower units. The discussion in this thread by the people that enacted the rule are attempts to justify their actions. We just have to accept the fact that a 3/4 inch rule was made and we must now live by it. It is unlikely the rule can be changed so it is back to testing, propeller, and boat work.

Charlie Pater

[hydroplay]

Ah, boatwork. You mean to say that boats might actually evolve to work with this new rule?

[Ron Hill]

I Asked Ernie Dawe The Exact Same Question...

As a driver in both CSH and 20ssH, I can say the two are not comparable in this aspect. 20ssH is a boring CSH. It is not the same thing as a CSH. They don't have the horsepower, or the punch. That being said, I thought they should have lowered 20ssH as well, to help save motors, and for ease of inspection.

1. Why is 20 SS Hydro safe a 1/2?

2. Now, if I put a restrictor in my 302, I can jack it up 1/2? Readjust my steering...

3. Then for C Hydro, pull the restrictor, lower motor, readjust the steering...

This doesn't make sense....Maybe we need a GOVERNMENT PROGRAM to solve our problem..

[Richard K.C. Mo.]

Nbra????

Why , as someone said want to not do certain things, anyways???
RichardKCMo

[22W]

Ron,

I understand that you are just trying to stir things up a bit, but please be reasonable. 1/4 inch difference at the transom is not going to make you have to change your steering. The difference is a shim stick, loosen two bolts to pull the restrictor, maybe a couple of clicks of mixture and presto chango you have it done. Thie only thing this changed for people running the 302 for 20 is to loosen the tiedown rope and the clamps and add/remove a shim. The rest of the process is the same.

[race4kaos]

20 vs. C

i think the 2 classes are VERY similar. the only difference is the C weighs more making it harder for me (155#) to drive. a good Y80 rig has all the feel [punch] of a Y102. i'm sure a restricted Y302 doesn't feel like it has the punch of a Y302 unrestricted. but a top notch 20 rig will ET right with a C rig on a 3/4 - 1 mile course. proof: only 3 and 4 CSH times were better than Pater's winning 20SSH times at the Dayton and Wakefield Nationals, respectively.

there is NO good reason the heights shouldn't be the same in both classes - regardless of what it is. but now we have a mis-match that won't easily be resolved...

ed, you can't argue with any data that running at 3/4" on a straightaway vs. 1/2" is safer than the tradeoff of creating bigger holes with that club foot running 1/4" deeper in the turns does. and deeper might not always be better - see DSH debacle p. 24.

any way, there is more merit to having the 2 classes at the same height vs. 2 different heights. (thank goodness the palmquists don't run these classes anymore or race committees everywhere would be waiting the extra 5 minutes it'll take to make the extra changes...)

[csh2z]

I ran my restricted 302 at Ocoee at 1" below the bottom and won both days in 20SSH including the SE Divisionals. You can debate the level of competition, but not with me! Qualified! John 2-Z

[race4kaos]

Congrats...

I ran my restricted 302 at Ocoee at 1" below the bottom and won both days in 20SSH including the SE Divisionals. You can debate the level of competition, but not with me! Qualified! John 2-Z

So you could agree both classes could easily be at 3/4" instead of wasting more time at races changing set-ups and inspection variables. Why weren't BOTH classes changed? OR NEITHER?

PS. You have a good chance of winning the Nationals this year as well. See you in 2008. I'm not that worried about qualifying...