2016 3.0 turbo rule changes

jones95runner said:
We ran open rear end 2.8 for a year. The open rear end didn't solve any breakage isuses. We had several slip yokes break on 271 the cases and .not sure of
How many 271s our group wentp through that year but it was a few. Back then I know our trucks didn't make the power 2.6 does now days. We were exploding tcases mid track and not just and the big end. Also when I tcase explodes it's a good chance you won't get the motor slowed down before it goes too. I'll see if I can find videos. I belive we lost 4 motors that year to driveline failures.
Click to expand...

Just changing the rear DA will just move the problem to the weakest point TC. I agree its ODL or move 3.0 or start stripping to 2.5.

3.0 motors are good for about 25 (Duramax) Hooks before you need to freshen them up Weather it deck plate or Dry.

Here's another thought allow ODL 2.6 NO deck plate or dry blocks allowed, So if you want to sacrifice your engine to win that's up to you, In reality the entire power plant and DL must be changed in 2.6, Now 2.6 and 3.0 are so close how do you decide to separate the classes.
 
TCDiesel said:
Just changing the rear DA will just move the problem to the weakest point TC. I agree its ODL or move 3.0 or start stripping to 2.5.

3.0 motors are good for about 25 (Duramax) Hooks before you need to freshen them up Weather it deck plate or Dry.

Here's another thought allow ODL 2.6 NO deck plate or dry blocks allowed, So if you want to sacrifice your engine to win that's up to you, In reality the entire power plant and DL must be changed in 2.6, Now 2.6 and 3.0 are so close how do you decide to separate the classes.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I know the fix for everything but I do agree something needs to be done. Do I agree with cuts tire 3.0? Id love to run cut tires but the more I think about it there is going to have to be a **** ton of money spent just to reliably run cuts. I understand 3.0 isn't a beginners class but people would be surprised how cheap you can. Build a truck that runs pretty dang good if you don't buy a "store bought" motor or truck. Our motor lasted 60+ hooks without a deck plate or girdle before it finally spun a rod bearing. Our short block cost less than $2000 to build. That's including pistons, cam, Rod bolts and machine work for fire rings.
 
We've been talking about this for 2 yrs trying to figure out which way it needs to go, and I agree with everyone to some point. I'd love to have an indestructible drivetrain, can't afford it, but would like one. I saw it mentioned that dropping weight and hitch height would work, nearly fell on deaf ears, other than agitating some. Here's the thought process. I was talking to an engine builder recently and they stated that even though there's been a large increase in hp, both in the 2.6 and 3.0 classes, the distances have remained largely the same. Guess what, this sport is centered on going approx 300ft. The same sled we pull (usually) is the same sled that runs the 6200lb gas trucks and 10k lb unlimited modifieds. We go up in power and hooking ability, they go up in weight and stopping ability. That simple. Take away hitch and weight, they hook less, sleds use less weight to stop you, driveline lives easier now. Just the best explanation i can come up with, and it would be nearly free, some exclusions of course.
 
Pudge said:
We've been talking about this for 2 yrs trying to figure out which way it needs to go, and I agree with everyone to some point. I'd love to have an indestructible drivetrain, can't afford it, but would like one. I saw it mentioned that dropping weight and hitch height would work, nearly fell on deaf ears, other than agitating some. Here's the thought process. I was talking to an engine builder recently and they stated that even though there's been a large increase in hp, both in the 2.6 and 3.0 classes, the distances have remained largely the same. Guess what, this sport is centered on going approx 300ft. The same sled we pull (usually) is the same sled that runs the 6200lb gas trucks and 10k lb unlimited modifieds. We go up in power and hooking ability, they go up in weight and stopping ability. That simple. Take away hitch and weight, they hook less, sleds use less weight to stop you, driveline lives easier now. Just the best explanation i can come up with, and it would be nearly free, some exclusions of course.
Click to expand...

I've tried to state this so many times and like you said falls on deaf ears. Everyone wants to go ODL to fix what really seems to be a problem from the gear manufacturer. I know everyone broke before but not nearly as often. Once Yukon gets there gear problem fixed and if everyone would agree to drop some weight and hitch height, i believe they would live for a good while. Some people say they can't loose weight. Seems like most those truck are to long for PPL or can be stripped down more to loose weight.

I was told that Yukon had a metallurgy problem with the gears and had or was fixing it. I could be completely off though.
 
I am so glad to see someone talking about weight and hitch. This is the simplest fix and most sensible for the 2.6 trucks. I know this a 3.0 thread and do not mean to sidetrack it.
I am the president of the SWWI Pullers and have been giving this speech for the last two years. 7,500 lb and 24 inch hitch is a good start and doesn't cost nothing....but maybe some time in the shop.. I'd about guarantee it would reduce breakage and put everyone in the class closer together. We will be testing this at the Redneck Rally in Richland Center, WI on October 10....after the pull we could talk about the turbo's.
Any questions or like to discuss this you can call me on 608-632-3178
Guy
 
prochargedcumnz said:
Like I said before.
Click to expand...

Taking 500 pounds off a truck no matter where it comes from will lesson the stress on the drive line. They took weight away from the SS trucks and they stopped breaking the big rears. It's all leverage. Take weight off the furthest point from the pivot point and it lessons the force on the pivot point. Which in this case is the rear tires. So why won't it work since you think it won't help?
 
My wheel base is off. Should have been 218" which would make 7400# of force. Now this doesn't take into account hitch height or weight of the engine or anything else but just the weight in the weight box. Not the most ideal calculator but it gives you the idea how taking 500# off the nose changes the force
 
I did some calculating with a friend one time to look at the forces exerted on a chassis based upon where the hitch was tied into the frame ( using current hitch height requirements). The conclusion IIRC was that every inch the hitch was forward of the rear axles placed another 1100# of force onto the front axle. I know this is irrelavant and clearly no sanctioning body will allow a hitch mounted forward of the rearend, but I found it pretty signifigant in adding downforce to the front end if allowed. Regardless, reducing weight and or hitch height would be the easiest thing to change at this point to minimize any driveline premature failure across the board. Thats my just .02 though.
 
DISTURBED said:
My wheel base is off. Should have been 218" which would make 7400# of force. Now this doesn't take into account hitch height or weight of the engine or anything else but just the weight in the weight box. Not the most ideal calculator but it gives you the idea how taking 500# off the nose changes the force
Click to expand...

If you go from 1500 to 1000 is a much larger decrease than going from 3000 to 2500.
 
zstroken said:
If you go from 1500 to 1000 is a much larger decrease than going from 3000 to 2500.
Click to expand...

You mean on the calculator?

3000 would be 14863#
2500 would be 12386#

That's 2500# compared to 2600. I wouldn't consider that a large variation
 
Last edited:
He meant 1500 to 1000 is dropping 1/3 of the weight. Going from 3000 to 2500 is only dropping 1/6 of the weight.
 
SS are also barley able to turn bc they have everything on the front. I know that you know that already. I still feel like talking 500lbs that far forward of the pivot point will load the rear nearly as much as it would be with the added weight and 2in higher hitch. I can see how taking 500lbs off you should loose distance bc of not being tired to the ground quite as well. Anyway whatever they do with the rules we will deal with and go from there.
 
coady said:
He meant 1500 to 1000 is dropping 1/3 of the weight. Going from 3000 to 2500 is only dropping 1/6 of the weight.
Click to expand...
Regardless the out come is almost identical. 500# off the end at 218" is roughly 25-2600# off the rear of the truck. It's not sure fire numbers but it does show the relationship between the two.



prochargedcumnz said:
SS are also barley able to turn bc they have everything on the front. I know that you know that already. I still feel like talking 500lbs that far forward of the pivot point will load the rear nearly as much as it would be with the added weight and 2in higher hitch. I can see how taking 500lbs off you should loose distance bc of not being tired to the ground quite as well. Anyway whatever they do with the rules we will deal with and go from there.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying its the right answer. But it does make a decent argument. Now is it ideal? Maybe not but 250 and 2" of hitch might make the same difference.

I wish I could change some of the variables in the equation to show hitch height. I wish I knew the answer but my opinion is 2-300# & 2" of hitch before spending money on parts. They dropped 3.0 to 7800 and that's seemed to stop them from tearing up the big rears.

Will it require a little chassis work to get it figured out. Probably but little to no money spent
 
Last edited:
Traction and power are what is breaking things in 2.6. Go to single rear wheels and you will spin out at the end of the track instead. Leave 3.0 alone. If bar tires are what you want go up a class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top