• Forum membership has its advantages....

Pro-lite and Super Buggy Spec Engines?

ELGUAPO

Member
True or false? Is TORQ going to spec motors in pro-lite and Super Buggy? If it is true is Lucas going to follow?
 

Pro-Lite Brian

Well-Known Member
There is a destinct possiblity that TORC will be allowing a Lo-perf. crate V-8 into the Pro-Light class. From what I have been told the guys in the Midwest are "all" for it... For 2010, USAC/ TORC plans to run the current 4-cyllinders and the V-8's both with additional weight that may be adjusted to maintain parity between the different manufacturer's engines... By 2011, I'm told that the crate V-8's from each manufacturer will be mandatory in TORC.

Now as a 'Lite owner on the westcoast, I have no desire to switch over to one of the new crate V-8's. That would severely limit where I could race my truck. LOORS is NOT planning on changing the current rules in regards to engines or transmissions. This rules stability will allow me to keep racing our truck on the little budget that we have.

It would be much wiser to put an RPM limit and compression ratio limit on the Pro-Light class to increase durability of the engines. These changes would be fairly easy on the wallet, but could/ would increase the length of time between rebuilds considerably.

The last thing that comes to mind about changing to V-8's in the Pro-Light class is that the class' identity lies directly in the sound of a healthy 4-CYLINDER engine! The class will get lost in the shuffle between their Limited 2, Limited 4, and now the "limited" Pro-Light's.

If these rules do come to fruition, we will change our plans from running "AT LEAST" the 4 west coast TORC rounds along with the LOORS series, to Glen Helen's short course series along with the LOORS series. In the past I've been a proponent of TORC as well as LOORS, but with shortsighted rule changes by a start-up organization I will have to change my stance...
 

SuperRanger

Well-Known Member
As an unbiased driver looking to race _____-Lite next year that just asked Tiffany at TORC a couple days ago, here is what I can offer:

They are "Having talks with the industry this week at PRI and will make a decision after that." I have heard nothing about if or how they will implement it.

If you want to get the official info first hand, you can get on the mailing list by contacting Tiffany. Her number is on the website.
 

07FJRog

Well-Known Member
since most of the small trucks come with 4 cyl or v-6's from the factory, why has there not been consideration for a Crate v-6? very few came with v-8's. this would still be in keeping with the small truck and longevity of the motors.
 

prolite#7

Well-Known Member
I agree a v6 would be a better bet!
 

CaptinCrash

Well-Known Member
i dont think specing the motors for those class would be good you would loose manufacturers support and interest if you could only use a ECOTEC oops did i let that slip
 

eric2448

Well-Known Member
i dont think specing the motors for those class would be good you would loose manufacturers support and interest if you could only use a ECOTEC oops did i let that slip
TORC is bringin in the Trophy Lites which run the Ecotec package... they wouldnt use that package in a pro class. Would be kinda cool to see them use factory V-6's... Would allow manufacturers to brag about power/durability in their production mid size trucks... no clue on what it would cost for something like that though...
 

Chas Moore

Well-Known Member
Keep it to a 6cyl. "Lets just put V8's in everything" There is nothing "light" about it.

Same situation if SCORE allowed V8's in Class 6. Wtf is the point.
 

racer56

Well-Known Member
i dont think specing the motors for those class would be good you would loose manufacturers support and interest if you could only use a ECOTEC oops did i let that slip
What manufacturer support exists in pro lite? They all bailed out long ago.

The funny thing about the pro lite motor deal is that Chevy, Toyota and Mopar spent millions developing purpose built four cylinders engines for dirt racing that are not allowed to compete in Loors or Torc.

If you want the car companies to support short course racing, you have to let the engines that they have developed compete.
 

Masek Racing

Well-Known Member
Never in Unlimited Buggy.
Thats why its called "Unlimited"
Use what ever power plant you want with in the rules.
 

Ron Dalke

Well-Known Member
I would like to see the supper buggies and class 10 both go to Ecotec crate motor, it just makes sence, more conpeditive and more afordible the classes would be on a more evan playing field and sted of the ones with the biggest wallets lets put raceing back in the drivers hands.
 

07FJRog

Well-Known Member
What manufacturer support exists in pro lite? They all bailed out long ago.

The funny thing about the pro lite motor deal is that Chevy, Toyota and Mopar spent millions developing purpose built four cylinders engines for dirt racing that are not allowed to compete in Loors or Torc.

If you want the car companies to support short course racing, you have to let the engines that they have developed compete.
I agree with this,

I do not agree with one motor for all in the this class, but there should be a motor from each mfr allowed, say 4.0.-4.2 cap or something like this for the v-6's, and like Karts, only MFR parts are allowed to be used, with a ECU exception for tuning/mapping.

Carbs need to go away also, just for the safety factor in a roll over ( carbs speew gas out)

I also don't agree with an "Ecotech Class" in Unlimited buggy.
 

idealer

Well-Known Member
I would be a huge fan of a spec truck motor, I would just stick a crate 350 and be done with it... cheap and plenty of power... I think the ecotecs are great motors but something with more power sounds like more fun and better entertainment.
 

ELGUAPO

Member
I agree with you Ron, a spec motor super buggy would not only bring tighter competition but it would allow for the under funded to be more competitive. I for one am hoping they make the change, I miss racing the buggy in a major series.
 

Pro-Lite Brian

Well-Known Member
You guys are so blind you don't even see why these spec engines WON'T make racing more affordable! If a racer has $XXX,000 to spend on their racing program, and you make the engine program "cost lest", that just means that the money will get spent elsewhere. More testing, more Dyno time, lighter less durable parts, etc...

Why do LOSERS always blame their engine program? The guys that in the middle of the pack aren't winning because they have other problems, not just that they are "down on power"! The guys up front are the better drivers, with better handling trucks, that don't have "prep" problems, and also have engines capable of running up front. You could put Kyle LeDuc, Rob Naughton, Chad Hord, Jeff Kincaid, Marty Hart, etc... in fourth place trucks and they would still be able to beat the 4th place driver in the truck with the most horsepower!

I guess it's easier to blame the engine than it is to change the talent level, or I.Q. that are required to run a race winning program... More often, a poorly funded team that is "smart", will beat a well funded team that isn't "smart"! Brains ARE the answer, not complaining about the rules...
 

Pro-Lite Brian

Well-Known Member
To top it all off, there isn't one person that has posted in this thread that could tell me who guy with the most horsepower in our class is! I'll give you a hint, he didn't even win a race this year...
 

Hesco

Well-Known Member
Adam Wik?
How about we limit the trannies to 4 speeds, with a maximum final drive ratio, and a max tire size. I agree that spec engine does not seem right. Seriously, they should just start a whole new class if they are going to do that... and limit everything wheelbase, width, weight, bore, stroke, compression ration, cam profile, you name it. Truthfully, people that have the money will spend it...and find a way around it.
 

curt

Well-Known Member
You guys are so blind you don't even see why these spec engines WON'T make racing more affordable! If a racer has $XXX,000 to spend on their racing program, and you make the engine program "cost lest", that just means that the money will get spent elsewhere. More testing, more Dyno time, lighter less durable parts, etc...

Why do LOSERS always blame their engine program? The guys that in the middle of the pack aren't winning because they have other problems, not just that they are "down on power"! The guys up front are the better drivers, with better handling trucks, that don't have "prep" problems, and also have engines capable of running up front. You could put Kyle LeDuc, Rob Naughton, Chad Hord, Jeff Kincaid, Marty Hart, etc... in fourth place trucks and they would still be able to beat the 4th place driver in the truck with the most horsepower!

I guess it's easier to blame the engine than it is to change the talent level, or I.Q. that are required to run a race winning program... More often, a poorly funded team that is "smart", will beat a well funded team that isn't "smart"! Brains ARE the answer, not complaining about the rules...
One motor builder I know, had a certain winning Toyota teams engine budget for a year estimated at over 6 figures. Not only did they run a new or refreshed bullet every weekend, they had the money to build extra motors to experiment with during testing looking for the edge down the road...A "normal" team, not doing this for a living, uses all it's resources to prep and make each race. There is no future planning they could afford to make, the off season is spent financially recuperating from trying to survive the season they just ran...We looked at Prolite a few years ago and came to the conclusion we couldn't afford it, the drivetrain expenses alone would have done us in...

Just for perspective, our current V6 has all the HP of your high strung 4's, has better torque, costs about $10-12k to build the first time and usually about $3-4k to refresh. Its very reliable and has over 400 racing/practicing shortcourse miles on it currently and can probably be run another season (200 miles) if necessary...

All that aside, I wouldn't want a full spec engine, there needs to be choices like one per mfg...Limitations to dispacement, compression ratio, and intake size would all go a long way to reducing costs mostly by improving reliability...

A V8 in a small truck? Ick, wouldn't even want to go there, I'd rather see you guys get another couple inches of track width with the corresponding couple inches more wheel travel, the in car shots look very painful.

Curt
 

Pro-Lite Brian

Well-Known Member
Thanks for bringing up Jeff Kincaid's engine budget. I think you would be suprised to hear that it isn't $100k+ like your builder may lead you to believe. Jeff's engines don't come out of the truck each weekend either. Goodwin Competition hasn't changed the basic combination that Jeff has used for a while. One thing they did do is LOWER the rev-limiter to increase durability. Yes, they did adjust things to make peak power earlier in the RPM band too.

Just about everybody in our class thinks that Jeff has the most power in the class, but they are mistaken! Like I said, the driver with the most power in the class didn't even win a race this year!

It's funny, our team has probably the lowest budget to race on in this class yet WE are fighting to keep things status quo... That may be because I know a little more about what is really going on in regards to the competitive powerplants?

The gorrilla in the room that nobody is talking about is the "perception" that you have to spend $hi+ loads of dough to be competitive. In reality, you need a modest budget, AND some brains...

Do you really think that Jeff won this year because he has the biggest budget ($$$), or because he has raced competitively in the class longer than anyone else has been in it (brains)?
 
Top