2.6 turbo rule

2.6 rule?

  • True 2.6

    Votes: 86 76.1%

  • Anything with a bushing/Cheater Chargers

    Votes: 27 23.9%
  • Total voters
    113
2000wvdodge

2000wvdodge

Public Enemy
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
462
ok, with all the bickering and boo hooing about these new "cheater" chargers. lets have a poll to see just how many are for, against, and dont really care about the larger 2.6 turbos. while we know that there are some heated posts in the scheid thread, lets try to keep this civil and technical as best we can.:hehe:
 
ok, evidently i missed a box or something, can some one help me out here? :bang it was supposed to be a poll then said it had to be within 2 min, my computer must be a little slow:hehe::hehe:
 
Untill they change the rule of just measuring the inlet size...looks to me your goin to have guys with big chargers and a 2.6 inlet. But ya cant blame them either...they are within the rules!

If they don't get a handle on this, befor long your going to have to have a hood scoop to get the charger under the hood and have a 2.6 inlet! :hehe: :hehe: :ft:
 
Last edited:
I think the whole point to the crying is that 2.6 needs to be more "streetable" so to say. The majority of the trucks that run 2.6 need to be running 2.8. Let the street trucks pull street. Cause the 2.6 trucks are built from top to bottom just like the rest of them but with a 2.6 bushing in there. My feeling is no bushings, no fancy covers.... 2.6 inducer bore and 2.6 compressor wheel. I myself was guilty of the same thing last year in order to compete. But don't think it is right.
 
I'm getting a s500 next year with a 2.6 cover... F you all.

:Cheer:
 
JFlagg said:
I'm getting a s500 next year with a 2.6 cover... F you all.

:Cheer:
Click to expand...

LOL F you! I'm getting a S600! LOL



Seriously, this is never gonna end. No one wants to be yanking covers for inspection. Until that happens, this bullshat will continue ad infinitum.

Put a spec on the exducer diameter, and actually tech it, then it ends. But that will never happen, so this is the same retarded conversation over and over again.

Can't fix stupid!
 
2Tone12V said:
I think the whole point to the crying is that 2.6 needs to be more "streetable" so to say. The majority of the trucks that run 2.6 need to be running 2.8. Let the street trucks pull street. Cause the 2.6 trucks are built from top to bottom just like the rest of them but with a 2.6 bushing in there. My feeling is no bushings, no fancy covers.... 2.6 inducer bore and 2.6 compressor wheel. I myself was guilty of the same thing last year in order to compete. But don't think it is right.
Click to expand...

but i have a s400 with a custom cover and it is plenty streetable, and i would bet that i cant keep up with the built 2.6 guys. what isnt streetable is a truck that turns more than what is listed on the tach, no off the lot diesel to my knowledge does so unless its a jetta or something. i think kman and i are running similar setups, and i personally feel that it would take one hell of a run to catch a 12v that turns 5k. personally if you wanted to keep a tighter pack in 2.6 you should put in a rpm rule. that would slow down alot of trucks. and help moniter how big of a charger someone can run. if everyone was to use a industrial 66mm charger for instance, it would be damn hard to keep the duramax and common rails in check. i think you should be let whatever charger you want as long as the inducer meets the rules. along with rpms maybe the wheel should protrude into the bore. that definately would hold them back.
 
Last edited:
i've been discussing the 2.6 turbo rules w/ some pullers from our area and something they suggested was that we require the wheel to protrude into the 2.6 inducer bore. do you think this will help restrict the class some but still allow for simple tech?????
 
No matter what you do your not gonna please everyone. Still gonna have those that find ways to bend the rules. My personal feeling is follow the rules as they are meant, not as interpreted. I wouldn't feel right for cheating and never will.
 
I say run TRUE 2.6 chargers, no bushings, no steped chargers none of that bull****! Run what the class was ment to run! I bet the top 5 2.6 trucks have the same amount of power as most or the 2.8 class! That just stupid! There is no class anymore where someone could pull there truck and not havfe a TON or money in it and compete. It doesnt exist anymore! Here and there they will have a stock turbo pull even then you hear of guys puttin bigger wheels in there stock turbos and doin dumb stuff like that! it crazy. Its gettin alittle outta hand, it needs to be pulled back in.
 
gottacummins said:
I say run TRUE 2.6 chargers, no bushings, no steped chargers none of that bull****! Run what the class was ment to run! I bet the top 5 2.6 trucks have the same amount of power as most or the 2.8 class! That just stupid! There is no class anymore where someone could pull there truck and not havfe a TON or money in it and compete. It doesnt exist anymore! Here and there they will have a stock turbo pull even then you hear of guys puttin bigger wheels in there stock turbos and doin dumb stuff like that! it crazy. Its gettin alittle outta hand, it needs to be pulled back in.
Click to expand...


Define a true 2.6 charger.
 
PTPULLINCHASSIS said:
i've been discussing the 2.6 turbo rules w/ some pullers from our area and something they suggested was that we require the wheel to protrude into the 2.6 inducer bore. do you think this will help restrict the class some but still allow for simple tech?????
Click to expand...

This is the easiest way to define the 2.6 rule.

A true 2.6 will be hard to tech, but if you require that it protrudes into the compressor housing, then you can visually tech the charger, and then plug it.

and why im on the soap box,

all this talk about pullers chargers being hot and failing tech, thats because they made it a 2.64 turbo, not 2.60, so i call it illegal. Rule states 2.60 plugged with 2.65. that doesnt mean to build a 2.64 turbo.
 
2000wvdodge said:
but i have a s400 with a custom cover and it is plenty streetable.
Click to expand...

Yes they can be. But our definition of "street" these days takes us anywhere from 300 hp to 900 hp. Would you drive that truck 600-700 miles? I think not. My point is 2.6 should be for the chips, programmers, dv's, injectors guys. Let the show build. Run the smaller trucks, then get into some pretty hot trucks with the 2.8 guys and then let the no doubter sled pullers go.
 
I guess it comes down to what ever you can hide behind a 2.6 cover without a bushing.

Examples of 2.6 wheels that would meet platte city rules.
 

Attachments

  • DSC00207.jpg
    DSC00207.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 96
  • DSC00193.jpg
    DSC00193.jpg
    36 KB · Views: 86
I also wish they would go back to a 2.4" charger class as the lower class. That way the guys with the REAL street trucks that have 62mm chargers that you can still tow with have a good class to pull in. Id probably buy a 62/65/12 if they went back to a 2.4 class. Awesome towing and driving charger that can make a little power.

I also voted true 2.6 charger in the 2.6 class. Bushings in 2.6 is BS in my opinion. It really is getting out of hand.

When you guys say your S400 chargers are "streetable", then that means that you can pull it out on the road and go to the grocery. My definition of streetable is a truck that can pull on Saturday, drive to church on Sunday, and then hook to a 14k lb goosneck and go to work on Monday, and do all this without having to spray water to keep EGT's in check, and also without smoking the whole time you are driving it down the road.

I just think something needs to be done because there truly isnt a class anymore where someone with a small aftermarket charger can come in off the street and have a shot at placing in the top 6 or 8 trucks.

Eric
 
99% of the time it will be a money issue. If you limit the size of the turbo, then you will create a market for custom wheels, and you might even force folks to really focus on the internals of the engine, etc, etc.

It is motorsports, and 99% of the time the guy with the most money stands the best chance of making the best truck.

If you think making the turbo small will take money out of the class, will make it cheap to compete, it won't. Might make it so the stock appearing drivelines can stay together, but your still gonna be running $6000 trannies, $1500 clutches, etc, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top