Advertisement
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Home Who's Online Today's Posts HP Calculator CompD Gift Shop Mark Forums Read
Go Back   Competition Diesel.Com - Bringing The BEST Together > The Starting Line > Sled Pulling
Register Members List Timeslips EFI Live Library Invite Your Friends FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Sled Pulling From Street to Pro-Mod, get your Sled Pulling fix here!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-14-2017, 07:54 PM   #61
kjpcummins
 
kjpcummins's Avatar

Name: kjpcummins
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Here
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: leon, ia
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by RSieck View Post
I'm not sure why I typed smooth bore to be honest, it was probably already on my mind after working on the 2.6 smooth rules for our club. I don't have a preference to any particular size charger, just any single. But hanging a single 5.5" charger meant for a 680cu prostock on a 460cu motor probably won't work out that great..lol

The weight argument is kinda a toss up for me. I know that a diesel is going to weigh more than a gasser, but when you start throwing around tube frames and fiberglass bodies, that weight can drop pretty quick. I'm still in favor of not going over 8000lb for any sanctioned diesel truck class.

I was basing my assumptions by comparing the ssd4x4 trucks to the sm4x4 trucks, but didn't realize that there was almost 24-25" difference in wheelbase. I assumed they were all 158". Didn't know this till looking at the PPL rulebook while writing this post. So, yes, getting to light will be detrimental to driveline parts.
24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
__________________
1997 2500 4x4 5spd
2002 2500 4x4 6spd
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 08:24 PM   #62
jones95runner
 
jones95runner's Avatar

Name: jones95runner
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Jan 2010
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjpcummins View Post
24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
Yes a larger than 5 had already been run in the ss class it's just not very driveable. Traction is one of the bigger problems with the ss class now. Going lighter would hurt the high hp vehicles. but it would make it easier for the 3.6 class to dominate the ss class if they could make weight. The less hp would be killer.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 08:58 PM   #63
takedown95
 
takedown95's Avatar

Name: takedown95
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjpcummins View Post
24-25 wheelbase difference is under 50lbs on a tube frame. If a superstock tractor has no problem hanging 1000+ at 6000lbs a ssd truck shouldn't have any moveable weight issues. A large single 5"+ works just fine on smaller cubic inch. Take a look at European prostock tractors. There will be two European prostocks at gordyville this year but they are at 510ci. The valtras that run 444ci run 5" plus chargers.
The total weight isnít as big of an issue. The issue is how far away from the rear tires the front tires are and if you canít hang enough weight out there the front end will float more and chatter. You break parts every time a frontend chatters on a SSD with bar tires. With gassers the wheel base is much shorter and float is less on the front end with less weight out there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 09:04 PM   #64
kjpcummins
 
kjpcummins's Avatar

Name: kjpcummins
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Here
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: leon, ia
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,227
There is no minimum wheelbase if I recall just a maximum. You don't have to build to maximum wheelbase that is a choice.
__________________
1997 2500 4x4 5spd
2002 2500 4x4 6spd
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 09:57 PM   #65
takedown95
 
takedown95's Avatar

Name: takedown95
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjpcummins View Post
There is no minimum wheelbase if I recall just a maximum. You don't have to build to maximum wheelbase that is a choice.
Get real. Guys already have their trucks built. You really expect guys to cut up $30k tube frames and refab everything? Thereís no reason to reduce the weight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2017, 10:00 PM   #66
jones95runner
 
jones95runner's Avatar

Name: jones95runner
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Jan 2010
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by takedown95 View Post
The total weight isnít as big of an issue. The issue is how far away from the rear tires the front tires are and if you canít hang enough weight out there the front end will float more and chatter. You break parts every time a frontend chatters on a SSD with bar tires. With gassers the wheel base is much shorter and float is less on the front end with less weight out there.
Not starting a pissing match just saying, most every ss out there can be picked up and spun by one person. The ss trucks have a lot bigger weight bias to the front than the 3.6s trucks at 7800..... A few 3.6 trucks you can do that but the ss seem to be a lot more frequent..... if you watch the ones that are bad about hoping the front tires, it's very easy to see the problem. And it's not weight over the front tires.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2017, 09:54 AM   #67
takedown95
 
takedown95's Avatar

Name: takedown95
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by jones95runner View Post
Not starting a pissing match just saying, most every ss out there can be picked up and spun by one person. The ss trucks have a lot bigger weight bias to the front than the 3.6s trucks at 7800..... A few 3.6 trucks you can do that but the ss seem to be a lot more frequent..... if you watch the ones that are bad about hoping the front tires, it's very easy to see the problem. And it's not weight over the front tires.
Your statement is more than fair and I don't disagree.

I think the weight limit is fine where it's at and my argument is not to reduce it. There are certainly trucks that come out and run pretty smooth just about every time (Atley, Deeters...etc). If you reduce it 500# I think you will just see more trucks not being able to get down a good pass.

One of the things I like most about SS is it's no longer a "who's got the most power" class. It's a drivers (and set-up) class and it should stay that way but be careful making rule changes and still make it a spectator worthy class. I have been hearing complaints for years that it takes forever for the trucks to get into the throttle. Even with the unlimited mods they are in it sooner than SSD 4x4 on most tracks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2017, 12:27 PM   #68
cumins01

Name: cumins01
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: somerville,oh
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 1,160
I just wish they would leave it alone for once, all classes. I'm working on a 3.0 SB and it makes me want to sell it all! I'm one who can't afford to change every year. I've sat out for 2 years cause I can't throw money away like some can.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2017, 01:59 PM   #69
kjpcummins
 
kjpcummins's Avatar

Name: kjpcummins
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Here
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: leon, ia
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by takedown95 View Post
Get real. Guys already have their trucks built. You really expect guys to cut up $30k tube frames and refab everything? Thereís no reason to reduce the weight.
I didn't say weight needs reduced. But you act like weight couldn't be reduced because they don't have very much moveable weight. This is very false. Also your other defense is certain people cant seem to figure out how to setup a longwheel base chassis. This is a horrible defense to change or not change a class rule. You are a great example of how diesel trucks have got to where they are today.
__________________
1997 2500 4x4 5spd
2002 2500 4x4 6spd
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2017, 11:20 PM   #70
widieseltech

Name: widieseltech
Title: Green Behind the Ears
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Jan 2013
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by cumins01 View Post
I just wish they would leave it alone for once, all classes. I'm working on a 3.0 SB and it makes me want to sell it all! I'm one who can't afford to change every year. I've sat out for 2 years cause I can't throw money away like some can.
I'm in the same boat as you and know many others that are as well in our area. The constant rules changes are what killed a lot of class numbers in the last two years. I built my 3.0 truck over the last two years and by the time I had it running this year I had to change a bunch of stuff just to fit rules. It would be nice if they left things alone for a year and let some of the classes regain some numbers
__________________
2012 Denali 2500 EFI, 5" MBRP, 10mm cp3 conversion, SDP Intake Piping.
Pull Truck-2005 Dodge 2500, 12v motor, 3.0 smoothbore
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2017, 06:19 AM   #71
Cummins41
 
Cummins41's Avatar

Name: Cummins41
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Kansas City Missouri
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 336
We just had the rules meeting for PPL Western Series. John Mears was present. As far as the 3.0sb class, he said the "No bed floor as long as it's covered" is really the only change and it's for helping some of the old 3.0 trucks to drop down. He said the 7,800 won't work cause there's a couple v8 trucks that struggles to make 8,000. As far as spec fuel, its not gonna be a thing as of now, could possibly be something for the future. For the 2.6sb class, we are just clarifying some grey areas such as wording the intercooler so that electric fans are allowed, must have a safety hitch, clarification on the wheelbase rule, and clarifying to make sure all rules we have do not allow us to run something the classes above us are not allowed to run such as block, head, ect...

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
__________________
2.5 Puller Smokin Goat
94' Peterbilt 379
12' Chevy LML Grocery Getter
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2017, 09:32 AM   #72
rawdog
 
rawdog's Avatar

Name: rawdog
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Jan 2007
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 2,161
X2. He was at ESP banquet, didn't know where everyone thought the proposed changes came from and squashed the bs like said above. Not in writing, but was talked about during the yearly meeting
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2017, 07:44 PM   #73
bigstacks95
 
bigstacks95's Avatar

Name: bigstacks95
Title: Diesel Doc
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Falls Village, CT
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawdog View Post
X2. He was at ESP banquet, didn't know where everyone thought the proposed changes came from and squashed the bs like said above. Not in writing, but was talked about during the yearly meeting
It started the same place every rumor starts..... Facebook........
__________________
--Dave--

95 Ram Cummins "Used and Abused"
Limited Pro Stock 3.0 Diesel
2017 Shootout Productions points champion

2013 Cummins CCSB G56 Laramie tow rig
EFI Live by Higher Power Performance
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2017, 08:23 PM   #74
jones95runner
 
jones95runner's Avatar

Name: jones95runner
Title: Too Much Time
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Jan 2010
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawdog View Post
X2. He was at ESP banquet, didn't know where everyone thought the proposed changes came from and squashed the bs like said above. Not in writing, but was talked about during the yearly meeting
What was squashed? No bed floor is a pretty serious change. Fuel change and weight I guess? Neither of those seems to be a game changer no bed floor is a 600#+ bias change. One of those things almost has to be done when one truck does it.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47 PM.

 


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2006 - 2017, CompetitionDiesel.com
all information found on this site is property of www.competitiondiesel.com