Here we go again

J. Peel 916

Member
Posts
15
Reaction
18
BOMBER! Again OUTRAGEOUS COST OF STOCK PARTS AND EXTREMELY WEAK PARTS IS A MAJOR REASON SOME PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO “LEARN” IN CLASS 9. THIS CLASS WAS DESIGNED FOR THE GRASS ROOTS BEGINNER. IF THE CLASS SUITS THE MAJORITY COOL. WE’RE OUT,

SAME OL poop. OFFICIALLY ANOTHER NINE CAR FOR SALE.
 

3 Amigos Racing

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,199
Reaction
743
I can say from racing 9 a couple of years, winning the MORE Class 9 and overall points series with every mile of every race completed for 10 races or so in a row, that we never broke a trans to the point we didn't finish a race, we broke a ball joint once after a cool flip at the road crossing and spun a drum once in Barstow or Lucerne. So you can race hard for many races and miles if you prep it hard core. We didn't baby the car at all.

Each race the prep included a look in the trans, mag checking the trans R/P, spindles, arms, axles, torsion bars, drums and spring plates every race. The ball joints were replaced every race, the shocks rebuilt every two races, every time no matter what the previous race miles were. We were going for all miles and points every race.

BAP was harder on the car for us with broken balls joints and trannies. We never did well at BAP. A few years I was pushing hard on some rule change ideas trying to find a way to reduce the prep costs while running for a points series. I thought I was right, now I know I was wrong.

After leaving 9 I did a Class 11 and to tell you the truth the open internal IRS transmission keep it stock gears cost was way more than a 9 trans ever did. Crazy high. Same with the motors, face fuel or low comp style motors, it was stupid money. Class 9 has been my best budget class compared to others I tried.

Work on car counts for and promotor incentives, maybe some alternate ideas for drums that are so hard to find. My old 2cents. 2009 9.jpgupside down 9.jpg
 

Racer_X

Member
Posts
11
Reaction
16
Its a really good fun class evidenced by our passion for it. The desert can be nasty and if you aren't dedicated to having a car that's ready to tackle it, it'll eat you up. These cars definitely have there limits especially the trans so its gotta be setup right and if you don't know what that means and your trans guy isn't telling you than find another trans guy.

Good luck! And dang that is one heck if a roll over!
 

J. Peel 916

Member
Posts
15
Reaction
18
We’re not DNF’ing. We are doing $1400 damage on average. Yes he’s driving the car incorrectly. Yes I think changes would help the class. I’m only one opinion.

I simply stated the need for a real meeting WITH CLASS 9 RACERS, ORGS AND GUYS LIKE Joel Mohr to discuss real facts. Not people’s opinions especially those who have never raced in the class.

Therefore ... screw it.
 

3 Amigos Racing

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,199
Reaction
743
We’re not DNF’ing. We are doing $1400 damage on average. Yes he’s driving the car incorrectly. Yes I think changes would help the class. I’m only one opinion.

I simply stated the need for a real meeting WITH CLASS 9 RACERS, ORGS AND GUYS LIKE Joel Mohr to discuss real facts. Not people’s opinions especially those who have never raced in the class.

Therefore ... screw it.[/QUOT

Does the 1400 damage money include the prep to renew all needed or just transmission?
 

J. Peel 916

Member
Posts
15
Reaction
18
Just trans. We’ve had a pretty bad go with the brand new car. Essentially we’ve had to build the car twice. But look who I’m talking to. I remember your trials and tribulations.
 

3 Amigos Racing

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,199
Reaction
743
Just trans. We’ve had a pretty bad go with the brand new car. Essentially we’ve had to build the car twice. But look who I’m talking to. I remember your trials and tribulations.
I was doing $700 each race on the trans..$1100 if I had to do a new ring pinion every other race..
 

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
12,605
Reaction
7,674
When I built my first Challenger race car, it was 1989 and the car cost less than $4k to build, and that included a front and rear tire wheel combo 1set of front arms and spindles and misc other stuff. The motor and trans were not stock and I farmed out some of the fab work that I felt was beyond me back then. A true beginner effort. Parts were cheap, even brand new thing drums. All other labor was done by me. It was a inexpensive class to run back then. Now just the costs of things like brakes and axles (for good stuff) make me shake my head. Disc brakes would be cheaper and more reliable long term. IRS axles same. At some point, just finding straight front arms will become an issue. Obsolete is an unfriendly but realistic term.
 

J. Peel 916

Member
Posts
15
Reaction
18
You are both correct. Unfortunately it’s been another expensive lesson. Based on the fact that we cannot even come together as a class to come to a realistic resolution it’s a moot point. I have/had family racing then winning a lot and I remember one racer was good with shocks, another transaxles, and another engines. And stock parts were on every corner. Racers worked together to keep racing ... unfortunately it’s not 1989, parts are few and far between and the good ol days are history.
 

tapeworm

Well-Known Member
Posts
554
Reaction
493
Well it’s finally got some discussion going. It seems as though opening the transmission up to any manufacturers parts would make a difference in maintenance. It would be pretty easy to get the calculator out and figure out exactly the same ratio we run now but with a 3.88 R&P instead so it lasts longer. Maybe that’s a starting point to see if the entries pick up a little.
 

Grease Weed

Well-Known Member
Posts
164
Reaction
63
Hypothetically, if I were starting a new class called 9 here are the specs.
Aluminum rims. R15” max tire size 33”.
Disc brakes.
Open Swingaxle trans.
Ball joint front end.
100” W/B
Same motor as now.
Same shock rule
Here’s the big one,
WEIGHT
Restrictor plate for S/S or
Weight the cars with the drivers
IDK???
 

J BomBer

Well-Known Member
Posts
193
Reaction
173
I have been in a 9 before, no I don’t own one but we do own a 67 class 11 and recently got rid of our 72, class 9 is just a class 11 buggy which I can relate to. Just pointing out how I see these cars driven and what could be contributing to busting the trans and other parts.
 

tapeworm

Well-Known Member
Posts
554
Reaction
493
If we’re going to talk about car weights I would be ok adding 50 pounds to the minimum of the single seaters but no more than that. A two seat car has advantages a single seat car doesn’t and vice versa. It does seem as though the single seaters have a slight advantage over the two seaters, but the goal should be to make them even, not an advantage.

How would you go about weighing cars to be at minimum? Before or after a race? With fuel or without fuel? Or just as you cross the finish line you have to meet a certain minimum weight with all occupants?
 

Speedingjake

Active Member
Posts
34
Reaction
4
Hypothetically, if I were starting a new class called 9 here are the specs.
Aluminum rims. R15” max tire size 33”.
Disc brakes.
Open Swingaxle trans.
Ball joint front end.
100” W/B
Same motor as now.
Same shock rule
Here’s the big one,
WEIGHT
Restrictor plate for S/S or
Weight the cars with the drivers
IDK???
Sorry if this is a steal, but I think spot on.

Hypothetically, if I were starting a new class called 9 here are the specs.
Aluminum rims. R15” max tire size 33”.
Disc brakes. ......front and rear?
Open Swing axle trans......limited to a max suspension travel
Ball joint front end......they are cheap but the spindles need to be open
100” W/B
Same motor as now.
Same shock rule
Here’s the big one,
WEIGHT
Restrictor plate for S/S or ....yes or car and driver Average weight
Weight the cars with the drivers.....average weight..im 240 my son is 160
 

tapeworm

Well-Known Member
Posts
554
Reaction
493
Sorry if this is a steal, but I think spot on.

Hypothetically, if I were starting a new class called 9 here are the specs.
Aluminum rims. R15” max tire size 33”.
Disc brakes. ......front and rear?
Open Swing axle trans......limited to a max suspension travel
Ball joint front end......they are cheap but the spindles need to be open
100” W/B
Same motor as now.
Same shock rule
Here’s the big one,
WEIGHT
Restrictor plate for S/S or ....yes or car and driver Average weight
Weight the cars with the drivers.....average weight..im 240 my son is 160

Average weight will never work. I would just find someone over 400 pounds to start and drive 300 feet and do a driver swap thus giving me a 100 pound average weight advantage over other cars.

I say weight the car at the end with fuel still in the car. If you build a car that weighs under the limit without fuel in the car you will have to stop and fill the car up before the finish. Same if you build it to the heaviest driver of the car, the lightest driver would have to stop and get out for the heavier driver to get in. Easy to add a 5 or 10 minute penalty for belts being undone at the finish if they swap and don’t belt up.

I think disc breaks in the back will eat the trans parts up since they don’t slip like the drums. Drums are expensive but you can run them for at least a full season with the chromoly centers that are out there.

I haven’t had any issues with the front spindles in a 9 car. I’ve heard of ball joints breaking but not very many spindles. There was a company that developed a rebuildable ball joint back in the day but they wanted some ridiculous amount for them. I wouldn’t change the front end rules at all.

Open swing axle there’s is no need to limit wheel travel. The swingaxle can only articulate so much before axles start snapping. At the short races you can push the angle a little more since you aren’t running as many miles but at the long ones you need to be more conservative.

I’m totally against a restrictive plate for a single seat car. As soon as you do that engines are no longer universal as a tune for a single seat motor is different than a tune for a two seat motor which would make it harder to sell parts when you decide to move up in classes.
 

Speedingjake

Active Member
Posts
34
Reaction
4
Tapeworm, good points on everything....but I think rear travel limit would stop the maxing out of the trans on guys that want to keep what they are using....meaning, this is the best we are able to get out of a vw swinger, keep that the limit but build what ever you can that will hold up and cut down the cost of racing
 

Grease Weed

Well-Known Member
Posts
164
Reaction
63
Title says it all...MORE or SNORE hasn't weighed a 2 seat 9 car that weighed under 1500lbs in recent memory. Why is that?

Building a car "questionably" light, running the smallest, lightest parts, finding the lightest rider, no GPS, no radio, no nothing basically...2.5 internal bypass rears...definitely not, all to try and get your 2 seat 9 car at a competitive weight. These are things racers should be doing to gain an advantage over other cars, not too just be competitive against the single seat cars. And all that said and done, take wind drag into account and a 1350lb 2 seat car with a 100lb rider will most likely loose in a heads up drag race. Is that really fair? Am I missing something...Why did 1600 get rid of the 1350lb min weight rule for 2 seat cars?

Personally, I think its time for Class 9 to follow suit: 1500 lb minimum weight, restrictor plate for single seat cars.

Its been about a year since there was a good heated debate on the swinger forum, lets start another one...
 
Top