Box Stock

How in depth do your tech officials go?

Tech person always gets blamed .
If first failed , second gets tech next .
Otherwise its hanky panky , no win situation .
 
Then again, few are willing to sit around for hours (some til 3am) to find out if 1st place got dinged in the tech barn for a trophy or $50 win.
 
No, maybe Don missed my question, but I'll throw this out there to everyone:

Have you EVER seen someone DQ'd for violating the Spirit & Intent rule (specifically in the engine tech barn)?
 
I can’t say I have heard anyone say they were dq’ed on spirit and intent. However, if you stop and think about it, getting dq’ed for something like a seat cut to more than the rule of 60 degrees would fall under spirit and intent? Or a restrict or plate hogged out? Or not enough CC? Or on and on. No matter what the dq might be it is the responsibility of the owner to be legal if he/she is competing against others. So a dq is a violation of spirit and intent. Some not as serious as others but still a violation. JMO
 
True .
Most using builders have no idea they are illegal .
Then the others do know .
At the least they expect the rule of Spirit and intent to be tested .
 
Sorry
DynoDon said:
I can’t say I have heard anyone say they were dq’ed on spirit and intent. However, if you stop and think about it, getting dq’ed for something like a seat cut to more than the rule of 60 degrees would fall under spirit and intent? Or a restrict or plate hogged out? Or not enough CC? Or on and on. No matter what the dq might be it is the responsibility of the owner to be legal if he/she is competing against others. So a dq is a violation of spirit and intent. Some not as serious as others but still a violation. JMO
Click to expand...
I view spirit and intent a bending of the rule or working within the grey areas. if the rule books says 60 45 30 degree cuts only and someone does something different on purpose...to gain an unfair advantage... that is a clear violation of the rule and cheating by definition
 
J'-remy said:
Sorry

I view spirit and intent a bending of the rule or working within the grey areas. if the rule books says 60 45 30 degree cuts only and someone does something different on purpose...to gain an unfair advantage... that is a clear violation of the rule and cheating by definition
Click to expand...
Correct.
Violating spirit and intent is like the case I pointed out in a previous post in this thread -- all of the parts measure legal (ie valve with minimum length, minimum margin, face, diameter, weight, etc.) but you know that they don't come that way from the factory. As a tech man, it's hard to call the competitor illegal because the part in question complies with all of the measurements given in the rules....but it does not comply with "spirit and intent" because you know that they don't come that way from the factory.
While you may find one valve that comes the minimum length, it likely will not have the minimum valve face dimension or valve head diameter. Another valve may be right on the dimensions at the valve head, but it's face and margin are on the conservative side. The same argument could be made for lifters, pushrods, rockers, valve springs, retainers, etc... and then when the tech man sees ALL of these individual pieces right on the limits, it's even less likely that they arrived that way in said engine from the factory (ie parts sorting for an advantage.) <- THIS is violating the spirit and intent rule.
FWIW, "comparing to known stock sample" doesn't come into play because the parameters given in the rules were decided so that it allowed a specific variance in manufacturing tolerances.

Being a tech man is hard enough (and expensive enough.) Why in the world we are still expected to make interpretive decisions (no machining, visual appearance, looks stock, spirit and intent, etc) is beyond me. No one wants to DQ a competitor (or be DQ'd) based on one's thoughts.
Rule makers, Give your tech men defined measurements and the right tools to check those measurements. Give us some legs to stand on!
I think, for the most part, that has been done (over time) with our rules, updates, new tech tools, and clarifications from time to time.
A better set of rules from the beginning of the engine platform helps a ton. The LO206 has had relatively few changes to it's rules over it's 10 year span. The clone, and now Predator, haven't been as fortunate. While the clone rules have settled out considerably compared to it's first 10 years, the Predator is just starting down that same wild west path that will be hard to reign in.
 
Again regardless which rule, if there's no intent to enforce it WHY included it and define it, in operating a track for 16 yrs we only enforced spirt of intent rule like 3 times, HOWEVER we passed out 100 times more warnings if we saw it again it would be enforced as spirt of intent, key to tech is be consistent which is the only reason I ever got involved in it in the first place, not because I'm qualified as a tech man.
 
jsf74 said:
This was us last year for a $500 to win box stock race. Passed🤘
Click to expand...
If my engine was torn down like that It would take me at least a week to get it put back together. But the only time anyone would want to look at my engine is if I didn't come in Last
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does anyone know anything about this tech rule for the box stock predator, was just teched illegal at my track tonight beause he couldnt get a drill bit in the fins and said the head was milled. But it was out of the box.. now went home and opened this predator box and checked and same thing, how am i supposed to not fail tech if they are out of the box like this ?
 

Attachments

  • received_184623881130910.jpeg
    received_184623881130910.jpeg
    113.5 KB · Views: 37
  • received_2349724665205295.jpeg
    received_2349724665205295.jpeg
    75.6 KB · Views: 38
Mulearacing said:
Does anyone know anything about this tech rule for the box stock predator, was just teched illegal at my track tonight beause he couldnt get a drill bit in the fins and said the head was milled. But it was out of the box.. now went home and opened this predator box and checked and same thing, how am i supposed to not fail tech if they are out of the box like this ?
Click to expand...
I could see using this (drill bit between the fins of the head and the block) as a reference, but to DQ someone, you would think they'd pull the head and take some actual measurements.
This is yet another example of why we can't expect a low quality / low cost mass produced Communist Chinese built engine to be consistent enough to be raced without completely blueprinting it first (ie clone.) And then you're comparing to an "as cast" area that's not even machined from the factory. Terrible rule. (period)



-----
🏁Thanks and God bless,
Brian Carlson
Carlson Racing Engines
Vector Cutz
www.CarlsonMotorsports.com
Carlson Motorsports on Facebook
www.youtube.com
34 years of service to the karting industry ~ 1Cor 9:24
Linden, IN
765-339-4407
bcarlson@CarlsonMotorsports.com
 
In the beginning that check was a valid check. However over the years I have seen so many changes that it wouldn’t surprise me that it is no longer valid. To be fair to the karter the head would need to be pulled for a visual and depth comparison to known stock head. Like Brian said, there is no actual spec to determine legality. You guys that want to run that class because it is a cheap class with no specs to go by just need to grin and bear it. Where is it written that is a spec check?
 
I saw where they failed a guy with a spacer and it was just an irregular casting flaw on his fin. You could see plain as day the spacer would fit anywhere but where he put the spacer. So what you need to do is grind your fins til it fits and sand blast it. That rule is BS
 
Rethinking this deal...You're running an engine built in Communist China that costs $35 USD with import tariffs and dock fees 10,000 pieces at a time. THEN you're calling it a "race" engine and trying to tech it with a drill bit.
What exactly is expected? Don said it, no real specs or rules = grin and bear it.
 
Back Racing MX and the different classes one was called poor boy, "totally bone stock z50 orxr/crf50". Came down to if you thought the person who won was cheating you would get a bunch of the racers together pay 100 bucks and the motor was tore down. Found one kid with a 51mm crank snuck in there and notched the cylinder base for the rod to clear made it work out to 60 something cc's. He didn't win but everyone got tired of him pulling every hole shot. Out of the 7 years that was the only tear down I saw, I knew in one class I ran specifically they had way more motor than I did but it didn't matter since they couldn't control it consistently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top