Animal BP again

It wouldn't take much to revive the Animal BP engine for kart racing again! I don't think there's any cost difference now when your comparing the animal to the clone! Just needs a few rule revisions and the right people / organizations involved. The WKA #704 Animal engine rules never were right from the beginning and they still aren't even today, but it could be very easy with the right guys involved in some revisions.Not taking anything away from the LO206 program, its definitely been a jewel for Briggs and the karting world, but it might be time to go beyond that, mainly for dirt / pavement oval racing.
In fact blending in some of the LO206 engine specs would be a good start on some revisions to reduce cost and help to level the playing field.

Steve
Still could work ! Just needs the right organization with good leadership.
 
It is understandable on the tech side where this can be costly. We all complain about how many classes there are and how long it takes for 1 night of racing. I wouldn't even let those engines on the track until there is a rule set for them by a sanctioning body personally. But if we were to combine current engines built to spec whether akra, wka, or nka to one class with weight breaks it would be better for all of us. They do it in some Jr classes why not adult classes. I would rather see a field of flatheads, animals, and clones go at it then sit there waiting for hours for all 15+ classes to run. In any form of racing there are different manufacturers of engines that run against each other. We preach that the best kart on the track is the guy who has the best tire and setup for said conditions. So why not put our money where our mouth is and prove it.
Kinda my point once the thread veered to # of classes and engines. The more engines that are introduced, the more the field is "un-level." That puts the emphasis on buying the latest engine that has an advantage (whether that's through technology or weight breaks.) Combining engine platforms in one class just opens up the variables to who has the best engine as well as tires and set-up, whereas when it is just one engine with a single set of rules, there's limited advantage from one builder to another within said rules.
The field was plenty level when there was one engine (flathead) that had established rules and were enforced.
It was plenty level when other engines ran additional classes, ie animal.

I totally agree that these new engines need rules and specs before even attempting to race them, let alone trying to combine them in one class.
 
Still could work ! Just needs the right organization with good leadership.
I still like the animal engine, Steve. We build fewer and fewer each year though and I'm seeing more tracks drop the class all the time.
The pro-wing class I'm talking about is kind of like Jimbo's super stock. Simplistic rule set based on the 206 - just add available parts to make 2.5 HP more and less expense than the BP animal - as I described waaaaaay back when I revived this thread. ;)
 
Kinda my point once the thread veered to # of classes and engines. The more engines that are introduced, the more the field is "un-level." That puts the emphasis on buying the latest engine that has an advantage (whether that's through technology or weight breaks.) Combining engine platforms in one class just opens up the variables to who has the best engine as well as tires and set-up, whereas when it is just one engine with a single set of rules, there's limited advantage from one builder to another within said rules.
The field was plenty level when there was one engine (flathead) that had established rules and were enforced.
It was plenty level when other engines ran additional classes, ie animal.

I totally agree that these new engines need rules and specs before even attempting to race them, let alone trying to combine them in one class.
I agree when the flathead was in its prime it was probably the best time to race stock classes as you could go to any track and unload. Now there are so many classes it's ridiculous and there will be no way to correct this unless we combine engines to 1 class or make 1 engine standard across the board. If they were to combine classes who would have the advantage? Would this cause other racers in same class jump on Johnny's band wagon possibly. But we have seen this for years with certain engine builders as well. Let's take the medium adult class as a reference. If they made it where there was a weight break for the lower hp engines like the flathead compared to the animal it would make for better racing, bigger fields, less time waiting, and more FUN. Then these new guys who bought a race ready kart with the wrong engine platform ( as we race now) wouldn't have to go out and buy another engine just so they can get on the track.
 
around here as far as i care to drive there is an engine platform with a defined set of rules called the clone with some of the biggest races you are going to find with some of the biggest purses in racing.
is there a stigma to the clone because it knocked Briggs out of the dirt karting game?
don't give me the "import" angle because briggs hasn't been made in the US for a while now.
As i see it Briggs did it to themselves. They should have gone OHV years ago. instead, they just kept on producing a out of date design out of cost savings. this has been the downfall of many American companies just refusing to keep up with the times. if they came out with the OHV in the eighties wed all still be running them today and Briggs wouldn't be the shell of the company it is today. Will be Harley Davidson in a few year's time. Must be something in the water in Milwaukee (maybe that 1993 Cryptosporidium aint all gone).
I'm genuinely interested in why all the opposition to the clone?
 
around here as far as i care to drive there is an engine platform with a defined set of rules called the clone with some of the biggest races you are going to find with some of the biggest purses in racing.
is there a stigma to the clone because it knocked Briggs out of the dirt karting game?
don't give me the "import" angle because briggs hasn't been made in the US for a while now.
As i see it Briggs did it to themselves. They should have gone OHV years ago. instead, they just kept on producing a out of date design out of cost savings. this has been the downfall of many American companies just refusing to keep up with the times. if they came out with the OHV in the eighties wed all still be running them today and Briggs wouldn't be the shell of the company it is today. Will be Harley Davidson in a few year's time. Must be something in the water in Milwaukee (maybe that 1993 Cryptosporidium aint all gone).
I'm genuinely interested in why all the opposition to the clone?
I am not opposed to the clone as I have 4 sitting in my shop to include 7 flatheads, and 2 animals. What I am opposed of is the number of classes it has jumped to because NO track wants to hurt someone's feelings. If we all got on the same page and took the set rules for the sanctioned engine platforms and combined those said classes we would have 20+ karts in an A and B main. Now you have the predator which has not been accepted by and has not had a set of actual rules set in place by any sanctioning body. Now here is a question for you as a racer would you be opposed to a few flatheads or animals racing against your clones? If the clone is such a superior platform why do the drivers and track promoters not want the animal or flathead mixed in with their classes?
 
Harley came out with OHV valve Big Twins in 1936 are you confusing Harley with Indian? Were any small engine company building OHV engines in the 80's? They really were not needed as flatheads performed well enough in non racing applications. I think the hatred of Briggs came out not because they started making the Animal but because they stopped making the flatty. For quite some time it was actually cheaper to build a NEW Animal then a New Flathead. The Animal engine is by far the easiest engine to build (and build competitively) for novice builders. I certainly will agree it is not as easy as bolting on a box stock Predator but nothing remains box stock for very long.
 
Last edited:
Mercedes developed a 4 valve engine in 1910. a $1800 brand new dual bearing raptor fully built flathead from your favorite national builder has as much power as a $99 Harbor freight predator with nothing done to it. Sad but true.
would not mind if flatheads ran with predators or you ran whatever you want in RWYB.
I personally think RWYB, stock appearing, etc etc are also classes I could do without. three people on the track is hardly a race. why is anyone asking about another engine platform unless their trying to sell them???
I think between the clone and a less expensive 212 platform (That I don't care about anymore) is all anyone around here needs or wants.
People in the Carolinas have rarely seen an animal engine and that's the hot bed of karting. they have more modified flathead races than any OHV briggs. the guy at Precision cams said he hasn't seen or built one in over 10 years . asking people to get on this forgot it died a long time ago.
Harley Davidson is on the verge of collapse and are being shifted to overseas production. I remember in 1998 when they came out with the twin cam and I thought 'Hey, they just caught up with 1936 triumph technology, and are bragging about it' LOL
no one needs another engine. we have plenty to choose from.
 
Last edited:
Why weight breaks? It will just cause arguments.... If you want to let the best motor to rise to the top, run them against each other and let it happen.
There aren't arguments already? And for the past 40 years? Arguments are how we got to where we are now. Everyone wants a rule package (or class) that will make them finish better. Karting has become a Saturday of a track handing out participant awards.
 
I am not opposed to the clone as I have 4 sitting in my shop to include 7 flatheads, and 2 animals. What I am opposed of is the number of classes it has jumped to because NO track wants to hurt someone's feelings. If we all got on the same page and took the set rules for the sanctioned engine platforms and combined those said classes we would have 20+ karts in an A and B main. Now you have the predator which has not been accepted by and has not had a set of actual rules set in place by any sanctioning body. Now here is a question for you as a racer would you be opposed to a few flatheads or animals racing against your clones? If the clone is such a superior platform why do the drivers and track promoters not want the animal or flathead mixed in with their classes?
- I think the predator class proves that most kart racers could care less about a sanctioning body. Most racers run locally and most regions generally have the same set of rules. I shake my head when people comment about how great it was to be able to unload anywhere in the country under the same rule set. The percentage of racers today that care about that is very small.
- I think it would be interesting to see flatheads and predators run together. I suspect the same is generally true with a clone on methanol vs an animal. It could be fun and worth a try.
- I just spoke with a fellow racer about mixing engines last week. What we wondered is it safe? Their lap times are fairly close but how they race is different. The concern being would one engine platform run the other one over? This is a bit extreme but here is an example: We see this at a local track where an adult clone runs nearly the same lap times as a 450 motocross engine in RWYB. There's no way I'd be out on the track racing somebody that has me by 10+ mph on the straightaway but doesn't corner as well as I do.
 
^ Great point about different closing speeds when mixing engines. The higher powered karts will always have an advantage (even if the lap times are the same as lower powered karts) because they can "recover" more quickly from an error. I suspect this much disparity would cause an awful lot of blocking issues on track = not good. Now, is the disparity enough between a flathead and a predator to become a problem. I have no idea. It could be an interesting experiment for a track to give it a try.
 
- I think the predator class proves that most kart racers could care less about a sanctioning body. Most racers run locally and most regions generally have the same set of rules. I shake my head when people comment about how great it was to be able to unload anywhere in the country under the same rule set. The percentage of racers today that care about that is very small.
- I think it would be interesting to see flatheads and predators run together. I suspect the same is generally true with a clone on methanol vs an animal. It could be fun and worth a try.
- I just spoke with a fellow racer about mixing engines last week. What we wondered is it safe? Their lap times are fairly close but how they race is different. The concern being would one engine platform run the other one over? This is a bit extreme but here is an example: We see this at a local track where an adult clone runs nearly the same lap times as a 450 motocross engine in RWYB. There's no way I'd be out on the track racing somebody that has me by 10+ mph on the straightaway but doesn't corner as well as I do.
The predator class also gives you insight on how rules packages can vary from track to track. If there was a rule package by an accepted sanctioning body then those predator racers could also run different tracks locally/regionally than just a choice of 1 or 2 tracks within a 100 mile radius of each other. You bring in a good point on the varying driving styles from engine to engine but if they are virtually the same hp with almost the same lap times why not run them against each other. Now I am not saying to just throw everyone who shows up in the same class but when you have 2-4 karts per class it would make more sense to put different engine platforms with the close to the same hp and lap times against each other. I would run my flatheads against predators any time as it would be more fun to race against equally skilled drivers.
 
The predator class also gives you insight on how rules packages can vary from track to track. If there was a rule package by an accepted sanctioning body then those predator racers could also run different tracks locally/regionally than just a choice of 1 or 2 tracks within a 100 mile radius of each other. You bring in a good point on the varying driving styles from engine to engine but if they are virtually the same hp with almost the same lap times why not run them against each other. Now I am not saying to just throw everyone who shows up in the same class but when you have 2-4 karts per class it would make more sense to put different engine platforms with the close to the same hp and lap times against each other. I would run my flatheads against predators any time as it would be more fun to race against equally skilled drivers.
are you saying flathead racers are mostly newcomers with older equipment?!? :unsure:
 
- I think the predator class proves that most kart racers could care less about a sanctioning body. Most racers run locally and most regions generally have the same set of rules. I shake my head when people comment about how great it was to be able to unload anywhere in the country under the same rule set. The percentage of racers today that care about that is very small.
- I think it would be interesting to see flatheads and predators run together. I suspect the same is generally true with a clone on methanol vs an animal. It could be fun and worth a try.
- I just spoke with a fellow racer about mixing engines last week. What we wondered is it safe? Their lap times are fairly close but how they race is different. The concern being would one engine platform run the other one over? This is a bit extreme but here is an example: We see this at a local track where an adult clone runs nearly the same lap times as a 450 motocross engine in RWYB. There's no way I'd be out on the track racing somebody that has me by 10+ mph on the straightaway but doesn't corner as well as I do.
^ Great point about different closing speeds when mixing engines. The higher powered karts will always have an advantage (even if the lap times are the same as lower powered karts) because they can "recover" more quickly from an error. I suspect this much disparity would cause an awful lot of blocking issues on track = not good. Now, is the disparity enough between a flathead and a predator to become a problem. I have no idea. It could be an interesting experiment for a track to give it a try.
You both act as if I suggested mixing something other than stock class engines. I am pretty sure most don't actually reads full posts anymore, let alone all the posts without forming an opinion. I don't even know how this entered into the discussion, it's so far outside the realm of reality that it proves this is the reason we end up in the situation we're currently in. I'll bow out of this conversation as it obviously wasn't fruitful to begin with, but some will just never see things other than status quo. I never intended to derail the thread but more so to spark conversation where it was happening. I apologize to anyone in thread that felt like this distracted from what the main topic was.

I just don't understand how everyone wants things to change but never actually want to do anything to facilitate the change.
 
are you saying flathead racers are mostly newcomers with older equipment?!? :unsure:
Not up here they aren't. As many of the predator racers also run clone, flathead, and open classes. If they were wanting to direct predator racers as newcomers they wouldn't have as many in the field and have a 3 win rule before they would have to move up. But most of the predator class racers are the seasoned vets of the sport that switched to a cheaper( for now) class. And we did get off topic on this thread.
 
You both act as if I suggested mixing something other than stock class engines. I am pretty sure most don't actually reads full posts anymore, let alone all the posts without forming an opinion. I don't even know how this entered into the discussion, it's so far outside the realm of reality that it proves this is the reason we end up in the situation we're currently in. I'll bow out of this conversation as it obviously wasn't fruitful to begin with, but some will just never see things other than status quo. I never intended to derail the thread but more so to spark conversation where it was happening. I apologize to anyone in thread that felt like this distracted from what the main topic was.

I just don't understand how everyone wants things to change but never actually want to do anything to facilitate the change.
I replied to Colt SR and even quoted him in my post. I'm not clear how or why you felt my post had anything to do with you. I think if you were to read my post you'd see I generally agree with your opinion of mixing engines and even noted it could be fun and is worth a try. In my last bullet I noted it as an extreme example. I added this info as a reminder that there's more to consider than just lap times.

For the record, I'm not included in "everyone" that wants change. I'm content with the classes at the races I attend. I also have no issues with the track mixing engines. I'd be on a flathead if they mixed them with stock predators and on an animal if they mixed them with NKA/AKRA clones. Why? Because I feel those engines will have an advantage over the others.
 
No need to apologize, ABR. This thread was off track LONG before this. LOL Your voice is much appreciated!
We're all just expressing our opinions. They differ and that's just fine -- that's what makes this world interesting.
The only reason I revived this old thread was that I had built a couple jr wing engines recently, and I was impressed with the power that could be made from a stock L206 with a few parts additions (more power and cheaper than a WKA bp'd animal.) I never even considered combining them on the track with anything else.
I'm not a big fan of combining engines on the track (I've said that before) but am willing to give it a try if that's what it takes to grow the sport and decrease the number of hours spent at the track I still have real concerns on uniform sets of rules for each engine package and the certification and cost passed on to tech men.
 
Back
Top