Animal BP vs 206 Super Stock

Terry Nash said:
Still sticking with the SS kit. The hard connecting rod is game changing in my world. Seen too many cast rod failures by both inexperienced and experienced racers. The cam in the kit is the bomb. Provides a linear power band that makes for great tuning results on the kart. Still believe the class will take off when drivers experience the package on the track with great competition. All in all i believe its good for 4 cycle racing.
Click to expand...

Mr Nash, Question for you. So update us on how this is all working in California. Has IKF adopted the SS class for their series, is it just a club track running a few or just you doing testing with it? IDK, I haven't heard much out of IKF over the past few years. What sanctioning body does your tracks follow and what's the game plan moving forward ?

Steve
 
Steve, IKF has withered terribly. Not a good time to introduce ss class. Just local clubs doing test run this season when we start back up. There is money and prizes for winner of season end but not official class for club this year. Dirt oval is on trial basis---two primary competitors testing for this venue besides me. Northern california has expressed interest also. I have currently converted 8--206 engines with obsolete seals to this class.
 
Not trying to be a pessimist, but unfortunately, I think we just missed our best opportunity on this one. We have short blocked and/or replaced a pretty large number of engines (that number is relative, as our kart shop is small) due to the seal rule change. I (and many of my customers) would have loved to turn a few of those into SS 206’s, but with no class to run, it was not financially feasible.
We tried to get one of our local clubs to adopt it in their classes, but couldn’t drum up enough interest. I like the idea of CKNA running it. Maybe get a trickle down from there? I hope so. I’m with Gary, get 10-15 in a class somewhere and I’ll build one next week.
 
Are SS206 head temps on gas that much more than a Progas animal? I would think they'd be pretty comparable? Maybe even slightly less, because a SS206 doesn't seem to rev as high as the progas animal?
 
MrBojangles said:
Are SS206 head temps on gas that much more than a Progas animal? I would think they'd be pretty comparable? Maybe even slightly less, because a SS206 doesn't seem to rev as high as the progas animal?
Click to expand...
I don't have the track data to validate this, but considering the SS on gas still makes 1 HP more than a Pro Gas and with the recoil starter that restricts more air flow than the Pro Gas does with the spec blower housing cover with min hole requirements, also the Pro Gas was spec'd with the RLV #5511 that is a superior header design ( port extension reduces head temps ) as compared to the #5506 & #5507 LO206 headers. The SS206 is certainly going to be above 450 F, and that will create head gasket failures and head warpage.
Even with the LO206 under some weather conditions and track configurations I can hear the engine saying " a little cooler would be OK with me" the evidence of this is still some head warpage and valve seat distortion observed during top end rebuilds.
BTW, the SS206 camshaft ( AN-Mod-1 ) was deigned by Dyno Cams for the Limitied Modified Animal engine way back about 18 years ago and is very capable of running 9000 to 9200 RPM levels with more spring pressure.
As time goes on for the SS206 engine you will see racers above 8000 RPM, if its capable of that.........that's where they will be !

Steve
 
Last edited:
MrBojangles said:
Are SS206 head temps on gas that much more than a Progas animal? I would think they'd be pretty comparable? Maybe even slightly less, because a SS206 doesn't seem to rev as high as the progas animal?
Click to expand...

Temps were considerably higher on the SS206, I suspect due to the increased compression. Granted I've only built a couple pro-gas and SS206s. I could have been off on my tune, but I don't think so. That's why Jimbo says it's imperative to not allow taping of the blower housing and starter recoil. Most of us don't even run a cht on the LO206 on the track. The problem with allowing electric start is not a matter of cost, despite the argument having been made, it's because we all know that once we go to a flywheel screen, we'll either tape it off, or install the ones without holes at all!


-----
🏁Thanks and God bless,
Brian Carlson
Carlson Racing Engines
Vector Cutz
www.CarlsonMotorsports.com
Carlson Motorsports on Facebook
31 years of service to the karting industry
Linden, IN
765-339-4407
bcarlson@CarlsonMotorsports.com
 
There are multiple reasons for requiring pull start.
In no particular order:
1. If someone illegally machines the head for more compression it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
2. If they use dual valve springs with additional pressure it will destroy the compression release and it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
3. If they use a bigger cam with more lift they will have to use bigger springs with additional pressure it will destroy the compression release and it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
4. If they use a cam with an adjustable gear it won't have a compression release on it they will have to use bigger springs with additional pressure it will destroy the compression release and it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
5. If someone is using a hand held electric starter it's a pretty good indicator that something illegal is going on.
6. And yes the recoil starter is one heck of a lot cheaper.
 
Steve
Thank you for your input.
I'd be ok with allowing more air flow through the pull start to help keep the engine temps down.
Possibly removing every other spoke from the recoil cover. I'll have to research that.
Valve springs become a rev limiter of sorts.
 
Jim, Yea i've been thinking about some recoil air flow options also. We could see if Briggs has another recoil from another engine with bigger slots or holes. We might consider using something like the old flat head was where you used a pull starter then stuck in your pocket or hung it on the fence. That way you could spec a blower housing cover shield with a certain number of spec holes and diameters.......? IDK.But then again if the fuel is going to be Methanol it's probably not a problem , but as always cooler is better!
 
If methanol becomes the choice fuel then i could see running the onboard recoil starter. I also like steves idea of the flathead pull starter. Lots of good discussion going on, and since this thread and other animal threads started popping up I have seen more and more animals and parts going around on the site.

This is good, in 2021 we might see more animals, 206s, and other briggs ohv engines back in the scene.
 
Looking at a recoil it sure looks like it will flow plenty of air.
However, if removing spokes from the recoil cover lets it run cooler that's something that anyone can easily do.
It doesn't require another part and it's always on the engine.
It can be started anywhere.
No offense guys but I don't like the idea of not having the starter on the engine at all times
If it dies on the track just pull the rope like a 206.
The recoil isn't back at the starting grid.
 
Jimbo said:
There are multiple reasons for requiring pull start.
In no particular order:
1. If someone illegally machines the head for more compression it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
2. If they use dual valve springs with additional pressure it will destroy the compression release and it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
3. If they use a bigger cam with more lift they will have to use bigger springs with additional pressure it will destroy the compression release and it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
4. If they use a cam with an adjustable gear it won't have a compression release on it they will have to use bigger springs with additional pressure it will destroy the compression release and it will pull much harder and possibly pull the recoil handle out of their hand and injure them. Yes they get what the deserve in that case but it is still a strong deterrent.
5. If someone is using a hand held electric starter it's a pretty good indicator that something illegal is going on.
6. And yes the recoil starter is one heck of a lot cheaper.
Click to expand...



Jimbo, most every reason that you just stated ends with people (wives, girlfriends, kids, etc included) incurring injury and "getting what they deserve." I'm sorry, but what a jerk attitude.

I guess I'm the lone deterrent here again.
Just because someone wants to use an electric starter, doesn't mean that they are illegal.
How did we get from a convenience factor of having an electric start - to - predetermined that he must be cheating?
That's why we have tech!
"Having a trial without witnesses is like racing without tech!" Right? You have pre-supposed cheating based on the racers' choice to use an electric starter?
I've told folks for many years that when my wife and I got back into karting, she would typically start my karts on the grid. It didn't take long to realize that she deserved an electric starter - and that was in the low compression flathead days.
I've had compression releases on the LO206 (MUCH lower compression ratio than the SS or animal) stick, and they'll flat pull your fingers out of joint trying to pull start them. I don't wish that on anyone!
Can the racer not have a choice on the starter of their choice?
If you want to use the original pull starter, have at it.
Want to use electric start, then spec the hole size on the flywheel screen as Steve suggested.

Keep thinking and discussing guys, but be open to others' suggestions too.
 
BTW, if this is Jimbo's SS206 class and rules, then more power to him. He put in the effort to design it and spec it. He should have full say in it.

If this is to be a national class, then I think it should be open to further discussion.

Just my opinion. :)
 
gary10 said:
If the valve spring end up being the “limiting factor” of the engine then isn’t this going to be just like the clone where you want the freshest/stiffest springs in it every chance you get?
Click to expand...
Yes, using valve springs as the rev limiter.......as i've already said is dangerous for more than one reason.

Funny thing, I asked DK to tool PVL for a 8100 Rev limiting coil back in 2013 when we where developing the Pro gas engine...he said no, then I told him I would pay for the tooling from PVL...........never heard from him again on that topic..........guess he thought I was serious about that!

Steve
 
I hate to say, but removing spokes from the recoil to allow more air flow is not really a good idea either as these recoils are designed at the factory to meet certain safety requirements as not to allow fingers of any size to fit thru them and contact the flywheel. Yes, removing every other spoke should theoretically allow for more air flow, however, it is a dangerous idea that I would not promote. Just my opinion...
 
Also worthy of discussion is that a removable starter requires the recoil clutch from a flathead, which also requires the crankshaft from a flathead, or that era of engine.

That makes an electric starter a requirement of removing recoil.
Then, compression release is not needed.
I hand cranked my modified flathead with the recoil still on and no compression release. Technique is everything, and you are reminded when technique is off. Lol
I like keeping the recoil on.
Once the genie is out of the bottle, hard to put back in. It's a neverending battle.
 
We have ran them locally at the kart track at Road America for 2 years and the only thing i have seen is one broken rocker arm and one side cover gasket suck in.
I have not replaced the valve springs on any of these engines.
Peak HP is around 6200 rpms and starts to take a serious nose dive after 7500 rpms.
The fastest way around the track at RA is with about a 7600 rpm.
If someone wants to run it at 8000 he's going to get passed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top