Future state of UTV Classes

Dave Cole 4454

KING MAKER
Posts
738
Reaction
5,131
Lets discuss what/how race UTVs look like over the next decade.

For me it is pretty simple, I do not like making rules that require ANY tools or even effort to determine compliance. (Motor displacement, tire balls, weight, etc) way too hard to enforce and too easy to cheat.

The reasons why UTVs are attractive is the low barrier to entry (cost and mechanical talent necessary to compete) and Industry support.

For Ultra4 I am proposing two classes:

Pro Unlimited: Do ANYTHING you want only performance limit is 1000cc motor but I am open to saying "Powersports based motor" and letting that go too.

Pro UTV:
Must be an OEM Chassis pan and suspension pickup points

1000cc or less motor

No Portals (Unless OEM equipped)

35" max tire size


Both classes would have same safety rules (6 point cage, seat mounting, fire suppression, etc)


My thoughts if you reduce the expensive performance adders (Portals and one off chassis) you reduce barrier to entry while showcasing OEM parts and vehicles. Secondarily if you cap tire size you reduce the need for an exotic drivetrain.

I would assume the desert side would have a NA/Turbo seperation at the Pro UTV level. But Im totally fine to add a turbo to a NA platform.

My assumption the Pro (stock) level is where the OEMS will support.

Thoughts?
 

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
13,772
Reaction
8,927
I would say 3 classes- Open UTV, Production turbo and Production NA. The other stiff makes sense. Only thing I might do different is say the production classes have a limit on how much bigger than stock A-arms cam go.
 

NIKAL

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,853
Reaction
1,596
Clarification, Are we talking UTV rules for Ultra 4 only or for all desert racing series in general?

Because if we want the UTV classes to prosper with continued manufacture support. I think we need a standard set of rules that is used by all off road desert series.
 

ekozy39

Well-Known Member
Posts
240
Reaction
278
Lets discuss what/how race UTVs look like over the next decade.

For me it is pretty simple, I do not like making rules that require ANY tools or even effort to determine compliance. (Motor displacement, tire balls, weight, etc) way too hard to enforce and too easy to cheat.

The reasons why UTVs are attractive is the low barrier to entry (cost and mechanical talent necessary to compete) and Industry support.

For Ultra4 I am proposing two classes:

Pro Unlimited: Do ANYTHING you want only performance limit is 1000cc motor but I am open to saying "Powersports based motor" and letting that go too.

Pro UTV:
Must be an OEM Chassis pan and suspension pickup points

1000cc or less motor

No Portals (Unless OEM equipped)

35" max tire size


Both classes would have same safety rules (6 point cage, seat mounting, fire suppression, etc)


My thoughts if you reduce the expensive performance adders (Portals and one off chassis) you reduce barrier to entry while showcasing OEM parts and vehicles. Secondarily if you cap tire size you reduce the need for an exotic drivetrain.

I would assume the desert side would have a NA/Turbo seperation at the Pro UTV level. But Im totally fine to add a turbo to a NA platform.

My assumption the Pro (stock) level is where the OEMS will support.

Thoughts?
original pan or just bulkheads? Requiring just OEM bulkheads was good enough not sure why BITD changed it and made class a mess. If you require the OEM pan, then a SCORE legal car Pro Turbo would get bumped to Unlimited when all we've done is built a safer car. So OEM pan would mean we're just building a cage so how would it be different than Pro Stock?
 

Dwoods669

Member
Posts
6
Reaction
5
Limiting to 3 classes would be good.
Pro Turbo / Pro NA - 1000cc , stock pick up points, factory turbo, stock shock package (no added bypass or bumps)
Pro Stock - 1000cc , stock frame/pan , stock pickup points & track width
Unlimited - Powersports Based motor and anything else go’s.

biggest thing that needs to happen is qualifying. Draws don’t work when you have 60+ cars entering every race in all classes.

let the racers who want to qualify for it and draw after that.
 

Dwoods669

Member
Posts
6
Reaction
5
original pan or just bulkheads? Requiring just OEM bulkheads was good enough not sure why BITD changed it and made class a mess. If you require the OEM pan, then a SCORE legal car Pro Turbo would get bumped to Unlimited when all we've done is built a safer car. So OEM pan would mean we're just building a cage so how would it be different than Pro Stock?
BITD changed it because the bulk head mounting wholes auger out over time even with gusseting. So guys would have to do a whole new frame/car or keep trying to band aid.
 

NIKAL

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,853
Reaction
1,596
BITD changed it because the bulk head mounting wholes auger out over time even with gusseting. So guys would have to do a whole new frame/car or keep trying to band aid.
That’s a lame excuses for needing full chromoly aftermarket lower chassis & bulkheads. Oh and it’s only been offered to Can Am using the Gieser frame. If you wollow out a bolt hole you can weld in Chromoly insert washers. If you keep your parts tight you won’t wollow those out. Also several top teams have been vocal in saying this is not necessary.

RT Pro makes these step washer inserts. $25 for 4 of them. Problem solved!
 

Attachments

  • BE7C7015-E865-4D01-A8FF-59DF9DD07D8B.jpeg
    BE7C7015-E865-4D01-A8FF-59DF9DD07D8B.jpeg
    12.6 KB · Views: 34

ekozy39

Well-Known Member
Posts
240
Reaction
278
BITD changed it because the bulk head mounting wholes auger out over time even with gusseting. So guys would have to do a whole new frame/car or keep trying to band aid.
I know that b/c I have 2 cars race cars that deal with those issues, but there was a spirit of the class that was maintained and now there are full tube chassis racing in Pro Turbo.. I don't see why a promoter feels like they need to change rules to fix OEM issues(You could say the same for 11, 5/1600, etc..) Why allow ONLY ONE builder cars to run full tube chassis in Pro Turbo. Sorry, I don't want to hijack the thread.
 

Steve_Sourapas

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,413
Reaction
1,396
original pan or just bulkheads? Requiring just OEM bulkheads was good enough not sure why BITD changed it and made class a mess. If you require the OEM pan, then a SCORE legal car Pro Turbo would get bumped to Unlimited when all we've done is built a safer car. So OEM pan would mean we're just building a cage so how would it be different than Pro Stock?
They changed it because some of the Pro Turbo guys were crying because of cars like ours that were build according to the past rules. We did that because we didn't want to throw our car away after 5 races every year. Now next year I'm told we are going to have to run the Z class. I would love to build another car but the way most of these promotors ( not Dave ) change the rules I'm going to pass. Not to mention I think our car is much safer than any stock frame that's patched up and called a race chassis.
 

ekozy39

Well-Known Member
Posts
240
Reaction
278
They changed it because some of the Pro Turbo guys were crying because of cars like ours that were build according to the past rules. We did that because we didn't want to throw our car away after 5 races every year. Now next year I'm told we are going to have to run the Z class. I would love to build another car but the way most of these promotors ( not Dave ) change the rules I'm going to pass. Not to mention I think our car is much safer than any stock frame that's patched up and called a race chassis.
agree with you 100%. My car isn't as Gucci as yours, but I've taken similar steps.. Christian and I DM regularly about our cars and the class. I did Parker, and then sticking to SCORE and hopefully the car stays Pro Turbo legal for KOH next year. I can't keep up with BITD.
 

jon coleman

Well-Known Member
Posts
8,263
Reaction
4,766
That’s a lame excuses for needing full chromoly aftermarket lower chassis & bulkheads. Oh and it’s only been offered to Can Am using the Gieser frame. If you wollow out a bolt hole you can weld in Chromoly insert washers. If you keep your parts tight you won’t wollow those out. Also several top teams have been vocal in saying this is not necessary.

RT Pro makes these step washer inserts. $25 for 4 of them. Problem solved!
those look just like the ones i made welding cro mo tubing to grade 8 washers, then welding to the pivot points
 

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
13,772
Reaction
8,927
As in width Martin?
Yes. Make it +3" or +4" per side or leave it at stock but allow after market arms and radius rods. Look at it as more like the 1600 class in desert racing. Suspension is limited to lengths no crazy and it gives anyone entering the class a base feeling that they can be competitive, regardless of whether they are or not. Open up suspension and money wins.
 

OFFRD-JNKIE

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,786
Reaction
545
Unlimited anything goes
Turbo and NA classes, max 35" tires, factory pan & suspension pick up.
 

y2kbaja

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,905
Reaction
1,389
Yes. Make it +3" or +4" per side or leave it at stock but allow after market arms and radius rods. Look at it as more like the 1600 class in desert racing. Suspension is limited to lengths no crazy and it gives anyone entering the class a base feeling that they can be competitive, regardless of whether they are or not. Open up suspension and money wins.
Or like 7200 where you measure track width. I'm all with Dave for not wanting to bring tools to check the legality of the car.
 

Fourstroker

Well-Known Member
Posts
5,057
Reaction
1,259
That’s a lame excuses for needing full chromoly aftermarket lower chassis & bulkheads. Oh and it’s only been offered to Can Am using the Gieser frame. If you wollow out a bolt hole you can weld in Chromoly insert washers. If you keep your parts tight you won’t wollow those out. Also several top teams have been vocal in saying this is not necessary.

RT Pro makes these step washer inserts. $25 for 4 of them. Problem solved!
Mitchell Alsup has a turn key chassis for Canam as well. He and Chris Blais each raced one of his cars at Parker
 

ekozy39

Well-Known Member
Posts
240
Reaction
278
Mitchell Alsup has a turn key chassis for Canam as well. He and Chris Blais each raced one of his cars at Parker
But I don’t believe it was allowed to run Turbo hence the complaints why only the Geiser car was. Mitch raced Open and Chris in Unlimited.
 
Top