2.5 2012

house

house

the Fat kid!
2012 rules idea, well I know in my neck of the woods the single cp3 rule is going out the window and duals will be allowed. Due to simple fact a big single and dual cp3 is same price pretty much. No ag govenors allowed on P pumps and 2.5 with protrusion rule will be in effect
 
And there will still be a 2.6 class?

You realize the path you are proposing is EXACTLY how 2.6 came to be, right? First was single cp3 2.5. CR got whipped by ppump for the most part so they allowed dual cp3 the next year. Then the 66mm street trucks wanted to play so it became 2.6. Now we all know how 2.6 has progressed the last 3 yrs.
 
so the clas is basically a stock truck with dual cp3's and a clipped charger to 2.5 instead of 2.6

as common as 66mm turbos are now.....i dont think that class would get very big
 
2.6 smooth bore if your gonna do something like this or a 2.5 smooth bore class if your really thinking about pulling the power out.

Or leave the current , yank out air to water intercoolers.
 
WorkStock protrusion......STUPID!!!!

This year has been pretty interesting for Workstock......The trucks are showing up for that class!!! The farther you can keep the trucks from 2.6 the better!!!

Need to find a way to limit the turbo to an S300 size turbo. If not you going to have trucks show up with Clipped S480's, 13mm P Pumps and all that Jazz try and run workstock......and keeping those trucks out is the reason workstock is still around. 2.6 got crazy dang fast and if you dont show up with a 1000hp truck, you might as well keep your truck on the trailer!
 
6500 lbs, 2.6 charger, 31" bar tires....make all the power you want, but you gotta hook it to the ground.

Less rules=more trucks IMO
 
NO PROTRUSION. It is making turbo shops rich and keeping normal guys from pulling and its a stupid rule because it doesnt really limit power we all know that. Its going to be another 2.6 class already. NO WATER TO AIR IC either.
 
TwoStroke said:
6500 lbs, 2.6 charger, 31" bar tires....make all the power you want, but you gotta hook it to the ground.

Less rules=more trucks IMO
Click to expand...


Sounds like you want a prostock 4x4 (s10 trussed frames, profab/scs xcase, big front & rearends) truck with an oil burner in it?!
 
revolutiondsl said:
NO PROTRUSION. It is making turbo shops rich and keeping normal guys from pulling and its a stupid rule because it doesnt really limit power we all know that. Its going to be another 2.6 class already. NO WATER TO AIR IC either.
Click to expand...

exactly, very dumb rule for an entry class.
 
TwoStroke said:
6500 lbs, 2.6 charger, 31" bar tires....make all the power you want, but you gotta hook it to the ground.

Less rules=more trucks IMO
Click to expand...


Yea but you just added another rule 6500 lbs lol.

I think the rule list we have now is adequate, the protrusion rule cut back HP, it is just that billet wheels brought it back.

We can debate all we want, say use an s300 etc, it won't take the $$$ out, you will have guys that just blow their turbo up every other hook.

Let the turbo rule be for a few more years, and pull out some stuff like air to water, maybe drop the hitch height a little etc.
 
revolutiondsl said:
NO PROTRUSION. It is making turbo shops rich and keeping normal guys from pulling and its a stupid rule because it doesnt really limit power we all know that. Its going to be another 2.6 class already. NO WATER TO AIR IC either.
Click to expand...

Turbo shops will be fine no matter what... Top trucks are still going to be running custom chargers anywhere that sled pulling is highly competitive. :D

I think 2.6 is good as-is.

I'd be interested to see weston's restrictor tube tried in this proposed 2.5 class! That'd be interesting! Heck, let em run S480 but make the restrictor 2.5 & roll with it! There'll be a definite gap between this class & 2.6 then!


I see some calling this 2.5 class WS? You all don't have a stock charger WS class???
 
SmokeShow said:
Turbo shops will be fine no matter what... Top trucks are still going to be running custom chargers anywhere that sled pulling is highly competitive. :D

I think 2.6 is good as-is.

I'd be interested to see weston's restrictor tube tried in this proposed 2.5 class! That'd be interesting! Heck, let em run S480 but make the restrictor 2.5 & roll with it! There'll be a definite gap between this class & 2.6 then!


I see some calling this 2.5 class WS? You all don't have a stock charger WS class???
Click to expand...


x2 I'd like to see the restricter tube used in this class.
 
In this area of indiana 2.5 is workstock. And what your going to find is with all the 2.8 trucks that came down to 2.6 it's going to run a lot of 2.6 truck down to 2.5. And unless its a Bigtime 3.0 truck (haisley's ect.) 3.0 trucks are even getting beat by some 2.6 trucks. a non hanging weight, 1" travel, air to air, past the cab exhaust, 2.5 class is needed. Are "built" trucks going to run in it? Yes. First time a trailer queen was in the 2.5/workstock class? No. And yes some will say "Well you should just pay the money to keep up in 2.6" Well i know for a fact you have 25K motors in the 2.6 class. SO with that being said i honestly believe the 2.6 class isnt going to be for your everyday kind of guy, where a 2.5 class could still be that. Dual Pumps on a common rail is no big deal, Ag govs are. Protrusion is needed, just go talk to adam hallien who went and put 20+ feet everynight on some REAL stout ohio 2.6 trucks last summer. So all of you who dont feel like protrusion is needed just want to be able to run your s475 with a 2.5 plug and run it. Thats all great but defeats the purpose of having a 2.5 class and trying to limit the power doesnt it? Besides at the end of the day your going to want that protrusion to stop some built 2.6 trucks from literally buying a cheap cheap plug and coming down. And no 2.6 did not get this way because of allowing dual pumps, 2.6 got this way because it got used for the wrong purposes....2.6 was a solution to the worstock problem of teching 50 differnt turbos, to try and even the playing field, it wasnt designed for solving the "2.8 problem" Which was bogus anyway, so much for class seperation.....In my opinion its a good class that will need policed heavily or guys are right it will be just another class out of hand,
 
mech2161 said:
Keep NADM rules and leave it alone. Things are just starting to settle down.
Click to expand...


LOL, yea since many of the guys that were running the wicked trucks have went to a protrusion charger and run the protrusion charger at the NADM pulls, so the folks who were behind are still behind, just not as far as they would be if the folks wouldn't have put the protrusion chargers on.
 
ovrdrvboy said:
In this area of indiana 2.5 is workstock. And what your going to find is with all the 2.8 trucks that came down to 2.6 it's going to run a lot of 2.6 truck down to 2.5. And unless its a Bigtime 3.0 truck (haisley's ect.) 3.0 trucks are even getting beat by some 2.6 trucks. a non hanging weight, 1" travel, air to air, past the cab exhaust, 2.5 class is needed. Are "built" trucks going to run in it? Yes. First time a trailer queen was in the 2.5/workstock class? No. And yes some will say "Well you should just pay the money to keep up in 2.6" Well i know for a fact you have 25K motors in the 2.6 class. SO with that being said i honestly believe the 2.6 class isnt going to be for your everyday kind of guy, where a 2.5 class could still be that. Dual Pumps on a common rail is no big deal, Ag govs are. Protrusion is needed, just go talk to adam hallien who went and put 20+ feet everynight on some REAL stout ohio 2.6 trucks last summer. So all of you who dont feel like protrusion is needed just want to be able to run your s475 with a 2.5 plug and run it. Thats all great but defeats the purpose of having a 2.5 class and trying to limit the power doesnt it? Besides at the end of the day your going to want that protrusion to stop some built 2.6 trucks from literally buying a cheap cheap plug and coming down. And no 2.6 did not get this way because of allowing dual pumps, 2.6 got this way because it got used for the wrong purposes....2.6 was a solution to the worstock problem of teching 50 differnt turbos, to try and even the playing field, it wasnt designed for solving the "2.8 problem" Which was bogus anyway, so much for class seperation.....In my opinion its a good class that will need policed heavily or guys are right it will be just another class out of hand,
Click to expand...


You don't think someone will put $25K into a workstock engine? Or spend $3500 on a workstock turbo?

What is the issue with the ag pumps? Do they add any power?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top