2.6 Protrusion Consensus

I see some big name vendors with dollar bill signs in there eyes with there hands out with a Jesse James tatoo on there palms! PAY UP SUCKERS! lmao!*bdh*
 
Smokem said:
I just don't understand why people are concerned about limiting the location, when and if it were in front of the wheel it would make less power? If it is prohibited, it is one less thing to worry about and tech.
Click to expand...

I agree to just eliminate it but I do not understand how it will make less power in front than behind. If it's in front there is no longer a 2.6 bore, it is a 2.6 plus .25 which by my calculations is a 2.85.
 
When i put the press in bushing and clipped the wheel on my 3.0 it cost $250 at my machine shop
 
All this stuff is crazy boys....In my opinion all you end up with is the same stuff differnt rules....Guys will go to the machine shop and do what they have to do and at the end of the year you'll have guys wanting more change whatever that will be...not everyone can just keep changing their charger...change the cover buy two covers or whatever will end up having to be done.....im not opposed to protrusion i guess but to go as far as to say well this charger can have mwe and this one cant takes all the fun out of it and will cost people money that doesnt need to be spent...im not against trying to push it to a more strait forward 2.6 class but why limit the growth of the class? all your doing is driving more and more guys away everytime you change the rules or make someone buy a new charger to go run for another summer...and some of you will say the "true pullers" will keep up with the rules...well for the guys who say that can gather up with the other 10 guys who can do it and run their own series but come on boys lets find a way where not everyone has to drop a pretty penny to run next year in the 2.6 class...a common rule set where all guys have to do is go to the machine shop and conform can happen i believe...ok im off my soapbox now
 
ovrdrvboy said:
All this stuff is crazy boys....In my opinion all you end up with is the same stuff differnt rules....Guys will go to the machine shop and do what they have to do and at the end of the year you'll have guys wanting more change whatever that will be...not everyone can just keep changing their charger...change the cover buy two covers or whatever will end up having to be done.....im not opposed to protrusion i guess but to go as far as to say well this charger can have mwe and this one cant takes all the fun out of it and will cost people money that doesnt need to be spent...im not against trying to push it to a more strait forward 2.6 class but why limit the growth of the class? all your doing is driving more and more guys away everytime you change the rules or make someone buy a new charger to go run for another summer...and some of you will say the "true pullers" will keep up with the rules...well for the guys who say that can gather up with the other 10 guys who can do it and run their own series but come on boys lets find a way where not everyone has to drop a pretty penny to run next year in the 2.6 class...a common rule set where all guys have to do is go to the machine shop and conform can happen i believe...ok im off my soapbox now
Click to expand...
I think that is what they are trying to do is come up with a solid set of non expensive rules that everybody likes. The only way to get there is through constructive conversations with pros and cons from both sides till everybody meets in the middle. There is more ideas here then there has ever been in a sit down meeting trying to resolve this. Your able to take the brightest minds in the sport and have a great meeting with out going any where.:woohoo:
 
ABI MOTORSPORT said:
I agree to just eliminate it but I do not understand how it will make less power in front than behind. If it's in front there is no longer a 2.6 bore, it is a 2.6 plus .25 which by my calculations is a 2.85.
Click to expand...

If air is being drawn through the MWE groove in front of the compressor it is still only able to pass through to the inducer, whereas if the air is being drawn through the MWE groove to the exducer.

ovrdrvboy said:
im not opposed to protrusion i guess but to go as far as to say well this charger can have mwe and this one cant takes all the fun out of it and will cost people money that doesnt need to be spent.
Click to expand...

The idea with allowing the MWE groove on the S300 frame is in hope to make them a bit more evenly competitive with the S400 without. Again, trying to make it a more inviting field for those who do daily drive their truck.
 
Smokem said:
The idea with allowing the MWE groove on the S300 frame is in hope to make them a bit more evenly competitive with the S400 without. Again, trying to make it a more inviting field for those who do daily drive their truck.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what workstock is for? Most already agree that the 2.6 isn't an entry level class. Safety stuff is required and most won't drive their trucks with blankets, weighted clutches etc.
 
I was unaware that anyone still pulled in the Work Stock Class. What frame charger won the 2.6" Class @ TS this year?
 
Last edited:
Smokem said:
My opinion;

2.6 Class
inducer bore must be 2.6" for it's entire length
wheel must protrude 1/8"
limit turbine housing to T3/T4
limite single 35" tire
S300 MWE allowed
S400 MWE prohibited

The other classes are another story.
Click to expand...

Best set of rules of rules I have heard yet,mite cost a bit, but whats 200$ on a 2.6 truck. you want cheep yell resricter plate. Could add factory drw trucks limit to 33" tire
 
Smokem said:
I was unaware that anyone still pulled in the Work Stock Class. What frame charger won the 2.6" Class @ TS this year?
Click to expand...


I guess I have come to accept that most of the pulling is for dedicated pulling, the diesel classes have evolved like the gasser classes. There really aren't any "entry" level gasser classes. Those are the county fairs or "brush pulling".

An s300 charger won the 2.6 class at TS.

The point is for numerous reasons many places don't want the "daily driver" trucks.
 
zstroken said:
The point is for numerous reasons many places don't want the "daily driver" trucks.
Click to expand...

Understandable, but I don't think we should exclude them. Better to let them chance it and pique their interest to maybe progress.
 
Last edited:
I say to hell with all of the 2.6 crap, lets go back to 2.5 and limit the frame size to S300's, HTB2's, GT40's, ect... no water, no air to water intercoolers, heck even go back to single CP3's and try to figure out a way to limit the pumps to 12mm auto gov. again. Take it back to when this class was fun and most everybody got along instead of this deep pockets and spoiled attitudes class.

Ok. Let the flaming begin.
 
Smokem said:
Caught me, not often. No mores ideas on the case at hand?
Click to expand...

Too tired to think....

Just got back from the Full Pull rules meeting. 2.6 stays as is with NADM rules for 2011.

Protrusion is being looked at but until something is settled on, looks unlikely to go that way without a clear path.

Interest in restrictor plate was there but everyone agreed it is a science project.
 
Smokem said:
So all you have to fix is the NADM rules.
Click to expand...

Not sure they need "fixing" until we see how some of this protrusion stuff actually works out in practice.....see if the juice is worth the squeeze.

NADM is going to try and run a Ohio series....which would pit the COTPC protrusion trucks against NADM trucks (assuming everyone doesn't have 2 chargers of course) so that will provide an interesting comparison.
 
kino_fab said:
I say to hell with all of the 2.6 crap, lets go back to 2.5 and limit the frame size to S300's, HTB2's, GT40's, ect... no water, no air to water intercoolers, heck even go back to single CP3's and try to figure out a way to limit the pumps to 12mm auto gov. again. Take it back to when this class was fun and most everybody got along instead of this deep pockets and spoiled attitudes class.

Ok. Let the flaming begin.
Click to expand...

They don't want cheap easy and fun, it doesn't pay the bills.
 
nwpadmax said:
Too tired to think....

Just got back from the Full Pull rules meeting. 2.6 stays as is with NADM rules for 2011.

Protrusion is being looked at but until something is settled on, looks unlikely to go that way without a clear path.

Interest in restrictor plate was there but everyone agreed it is a science project.
Click to expand...

Good deal, time-a buy a turbo!
 
05_LLY said:
Good deal, time-a buy a turbo!
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that your 2011 charger might need modding in 2012 to fit whatever's coming down the pipe in terms of rules.

I guess the world ends in 2012 anyway, so go like hell next year....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top