NTPA 2.6 Class for 2015-In and Around MN

takedown95

takedown95

New member
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Messages
2,841
Fellow pullers as you may know Casey and I have been pulling with NTPA the last 3 years in their 3.0 class with our 2.6 trucks. Over the last couple of years we've been working on trying to get a 2.6 class of our own.

Recently, they have been showing more interest in getting a class started. A few of us met with an NTPA official and they are going to pitch a class to the board.

The class would be a Minnesota state class and consist of 4-8 hooks the first year. Payouts would range from $375 for first place down to $100 for 6th place. The rules would be similar to PPL national rules with the ability to have an aftermarket rear end. The safety equipment is a little different but if you pull HTP or PPL 2.6 you'd already have 95% of the safety equipment required.

At this point all of this is proposed. No final decisions have been made.

The purpose of this post is to gather names of people that would likely pull at one or more events and to have input into the final tweaks of the rules.

If you are not going to pull please refrain from commenting to allow us to get a true representation of those that will be pulling and their interests. If you're not sure if you are going to pull but have a very serious interest please feel free to ask questions.

This past year very few if any of the pulls overlapped with HTP so you could pull both if desired. NTPA is a first class organization with pulls that are very well set up and well maintained tracks.

We'd like to have 4-6 trucks that would commit to making a good number of the pulls.

Please let me know if you are interested and if you have any questions or comments. Thanks! Jeff
 
I would consider it if a pull didn't overlap a Badger State hook and depending on how far away they end up being from us in southern WI.
 
cfunk said:
I would consider it if a pull didn't overlap a Badger State hook and depending on how far away they end up being from us in southern WI.
Click to expand...

I will put your name down Cory. If you want PM your info. The hope is we would pull in more guys like yourself from WI and Iowa.
 
2.6 ntpa

Jeff I'm going to pull in northern Iowa on Saturday with there 2.6 trucks I will see if anyone is interested about it down there ..
 
I hope this works out, Jeff and Casey have put a ton of work into giving this a fighting chance. :Cheer:
 
Id be down if some didn't over lap badger state also. Only thing I wouldn't like is the aftermarket rear ends
 
ramtough01 said:
Id be down if some didn't over lap badger state also. Only thing I wouldn't like is the aftermarket rear ends
Click to expand...
The rear end is nothing set in stone and it doesn't mean you have to have one it's just and option . I think it's a good idea to let the trucks do this . It's just a way to slowly work your way up to a 3.0 truck instead of dumping it all in at once ..
 
ramtough01 said:
Id be down if some didn't over lap badger state also. Only thing I wouldn't like is the aftermarket rear ends
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the rear ends! I think they should only be allowed if PPL changes there rules to allow aftermarket rear axles in the 2.6 class. Although, after I break a couple ring and pinion's I might change my mind on that! :doh:
 
duramaxzak said:
I agree with you on the rear ends! I think they should only be allowed if PPL changes there rules to allow aftermarket rear axles in the 2.6 class. Although, after I break a couple ring and pinion's I might change my mind on that! :doh:
Click to expand...

I think if a org with the size and clout like NTPA writes the rule into the books it will break a lot of ground as far as helping other orgs with rule changes. If it keeps more trucks pulling night after night instead of being on the trailer with a drive line failure how could it be bad for the sport?
 
ramtough01 said:
Id be down if some didn't over lap badger state also. Only thing I wouldn't like is the aftermarket rear ends
Click to expand...

We have debated the pros and cons of this a few times. As other have said it would just be an option for those that want to have it.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on why you wouldn't want it. Feel free to PM me too. Thanks for your interest and input.
 
My thought on that is if allow open rear end you might as well just go 3.0. Cause how is a person going to tell the difference between the to class from a glance with out crawling around the truck not that most fans in the stands can tell but when I tell people the different between the 2 class I say look at that truck see the big rear end that's a 3.0 see my truck with the small axle that's a 2.6 and the also say the turbo is different. Another thing is if your going to open rear its very hard to find 4:88 gears or any lower gears for them. Cause most 3.0 trucks I know run like 6:20 gears or something close to that to match front and back. Then you might as well run a drop box and since that far might as well be 3.0.
 
ramtough01 said:
My thought on that is if allow open rear end you might as well just go 3.0. Cause how is a person going to tell the difference between the to class from a glance with out crawling around the truck not that most fans in the stands can tell but when I tell people the different between the 2 class I say look at that truck see the big rear end that's a 3.0 see my truck with the small axle that's a 2.6 and the also say the turbo is different. Another thing is if your going to open rear its very hard to find 4:88 gears or any lower gears for them. Cause most 3.0 trucks I know run like 6:20 gears or something close to that to match front and back. Then you might as well run a drop box and since that far might as well be 3.0.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. I understand the first part and that is part of the debate we are discussing. I am pretty sure you can get taller gears for SQHD and 106 axles though. I'm almost positive you can get 4.88s and I think you can get them as tall as 3.70.
 
Setup rules that allow single rear tires. Could lower hitch height to save on ring and pinion damage.
 
takedown95 said:
Thanks for the feedback. I understand the first part and that is part of the debate we are discussing. I am pretty sure you can get taller gears for SQHD and 106 axles though. I'm almost positive you can get 4.88s and I think you can get them as tall as 3.70.
Click to expand...

Theres actually more gear sets available for open rearends than pickup rearends. They go into the low 2 range. You just have to call and order a set of gears. None of these component tractors are running 6.20s gears they use 3.55 4.10 4.88 sizes.
 
I am a big fan of opening the rules to allow any rearend in 2.6. For what we spent on a good spool and axle kit and the number of ring and pinions we broke this summer we could have a bulletproof big rearend in the truck that doesn't need to be worked on every week. I have some ideas and have contemplated machining some ring gears out of higher strength material over winter but what is the point? Why keep spending thousands of dollars on a solution to a problem when a known solution exists? I really can't see any downfall to allowing any rearend, if you are not breaking them you don't have to spend any money on changing to a big rear. If you are breaking them you will spend less money on a known solution to the problem.
 
cfunk said:
I am a big fan of opening the rules to allow any rearend in 2.6. For what we spent on a good spool and axle kit and the number of ring and pinions we broke this summer we could have a bulletproof big rearend in the truck that doesn't need to be worked on every week. I have some ideas and have contemplated machining some ring gears out of higher strength material over winter but what is the point? Why keep spending thousands of dollars on a solution to a problem when a known solution exists? I really can't see any downfall to allowing any rearend, if you are not breaking them you don't have to spend any money on changing to a big rear. If you are breaking them you will spend less money on a known solution to the problem.
Click to expand...

I like this post .. And know one can tell me that there is any HP gain ..I don't know any 2.6 truck holding back there engine to save there rear end .. Plus by putting a larger rear end in its adding weight to the back of truck not up in the weight box ..
 
One of the major safety requirements has just been modified to help pullers out and reduce the barriers to participation. Previously you had to have a yearly clutch inspection in addition to running a SFI rated clutch. NTPA has now discontinued the need for a yearly clutch inspection. You should still have documentation that the clutch is SFI certified with a certification card or pictures of the certification numbers and will still have to run the appropriate SFI certified bellhousing or blanket.
 
takedown95 said:
One of the major safety requirements has just been modified to help pullers out and reduce the barriers to participation. Previously you had to have a yearly clutch inspection in addition to running a SFI rated clutch. NTPA has now discontinued the need for a yearly clutch inspection. You should still have documentation that the clutch is SFI certified with a certification card or pictures of the certification numbers and will still have to run the appropriate SFI certified bellhousing or blanket.
Click to expand...

Was the creation of a 2.6 class discussed at all in that meeting?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top