The demise of 2.6?

pick017

pick017

ohio sled puller
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
457
So with all our aluminum foil hats on and ppl knows best shirts represented, let's have a mindful talk on the subject. I would to hear from other 2.6 puller on their opinions on the problems in the class. Myself with a month removed form pulling (Aka devastated driveline and wife feed up with pulling)! At first I was all for o/d ,but then after some careful thought. I would say single rear wheels, drop weight and lower hitch height would be best for the class. Otherwise there would be to much separation between 2.5 and 2.6 that no one would ever make the jump. Also besides cut tires on some, the crowd wouldn't be able to distinguish the difference between 2.6 and 3.0. As far as turbos go into thinking we should lock in the turbo rules in for 2 years that we have now, but with the expectation of 3.0 smooth bore after. These are just my opinions but I think we'll all need to agree on some changes and present them to the ppl.
 
first thing you have to do is get people to follow the rules.
Suspension, Rear:
An OEM-style suspension is mandatory. Lowering or raising the vehicle height with suspension modifications is permitted. Traction bars and devices are permitted; they must be bolt-on only; welds are permitted for attachment to frame or axle housing. All OEM suspension mounting points must be retained and used. Sway bars, limit straps, and camber kits are permitted. All rear suspensions must use at least one working shock absorber per wheel. Airbag spring assistance is permitted; airbag compressors must be disconnected. Blocked suspension is permitted.
This is straight from the ppl rule book. there is not a 2.6 truck in the country that still has (oem) style suspension.
 
stuckey_272002 said:
first thing you have to do is get people to follow the rules.

Suspension, Rear:

An OEM-style suspension is mandatory. Lowering or raising the vehicle height with suspension modifications is permitted. Traction bars and devices are permitted; they must be bolt-on only; welds are permitted for attachment to frame or axle housing. All OEM suspension mounting points must be retained and used. Sway bars, limit straps, and camber kits are permitted. All rear suspensions must use at least one working shock absorber per wheel. Airbag spring assistance is permitted; airbag compressors must be disconnected. Blocked suspension is permitted.

This is straight from the ppl rule book. there is not a 2.6 truck in the country that still has (oem) style suspension.
Click to expand...


You might wanna check the rule book again, those rules are outdated..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Big $ shops/sponsors push ppl for open driveline in 2.6 ... They really care less about common puller ... There is already a single turbo open driveline class (3.0). Why don't guys jump up run 3.0 if they are tired of driveline issues ... They should do away with 2.6 and add a 2.5 class...
 
Last edited:
2.6 class is a good class to keep....it is still kind of affordable, 2.5 great class to start in or that is where I started and learned quite a bit. I think bringing the weight down to 7500 and changing hitch height can work well. I do not think they should get rid of it, in my neck of the woods...people come to see both classes....but , I run in a small area and everyone comes for the joy of it, to include the pullers. Open driveline should be left at the 3.0 level...not all pulls will be able to field a 3.0 class, but can have a good 2.6 turnout from area pullers who can afford a charger but not a complete new driveline.
 
pick017 said:
So with all our aluminum foil hats on and ppl knows best shirts represented, let's have a mindful talk on the subject. I would to hear from other 2.6 puller on their opinions on the problems in the class. Myself with a month removed form pulling (Aka devastated driveline and wife feed up with pulling)! At first I was all for o/d ,but then after some careful thought. I would say single rear wheels, drop weight and lower hitch height would be best for the class. Otherwise there would be to much separation between 2.5 and 2.6 that no one would ever make the jump. Also besides cut tires on some, the crowd wouldn't be able to distinguish the difference between 2.6 and 3.0. As far as turbos go into thinking we should lock in the turbo rules in for 2 years that we have now, but with the expectation of 3.0 smooth bore after. These are just my opinions but I think we'll all need to agree on some changes and present them to the ppl.
Click to expand...

Personally I would not be surprised to see 2.6 fall away just like 2.8 did a few years ago a lot of the same rule changes that are being brought up now were brought up than as well.

IMO if 2.6 wants to stay and continue to grow the turbo rule is the only rule that needs to be addressed. Whether it be smoothbore or eliminate the gray area in the current rules whichever can prevent "Cheater" covers and is easy to tech. Than the rule is locked in place

For driveline IMO it wont matter whatever the choice may be open or factory the real problem with the class is big gains every year made by a compressor cover or wheel change.
 
94 12valve said:
Personally I would not be surprised to see 2.6 fall away just like 2.8 did a few years ago a lot of the same rule changes that are being brought up now were brought up than as well.

IMO if 2.6 wants to stay and continue to grow the turbo rule is the only rule that needs to be addressed. Whether it be smoothbore or eliminate the gray area in the current rules whichever can prevent "Cheater" covers and is easy to tech. Than the rule is locked in place

For driveline IMO it wont matter whatever the choice may be open or factory the real problem with the class is big gains every year made by a compressor cover or wheel change.
Click to expand...

Simple just go back to a s400 frame only bushing class so everybody can run a bushed S480. If you want to spend some more on a fancy cover more power to you. But even then that will limit the power and cost of a turbo and make the whole class alittle more affordable. It doesn't leave a class up to who has the most money to spend on a turbo to be the winner. Almost like a box charger class but allowing any s400 variation. We need a stock driveline class. After all that's what we are are truck pullers not component competition vehicles. If I wanted to change everything and be better off I'd build a damn tractor to pull.
 
I guess my way of thinking is with less weight and single rear wheel with the power that is being made now. You could strap whatever turbo you want , but the trick would be getting the power to the ground.
 
ILLINOISRAM said:
Simple just go back to a s400 frame only bushing class so everybody can run a bushed S480. If you want to spend some more on a fancy cover more power to you. But even then that will limit the power and cost of a turbo and make the whole class alittle more affordable. It doesn't leave a class up to who has the most money to spend on a turbo to be the winner. Almost like a box charger class but allowing any s400 variation. We need a stock driveline class. After all that's what we are are truck pullers not component competition vehicles. If I wanted to change everything and be better off I'd build a damn tractor to pull.
Click to expand...

So basically back to the old 2.8 rule is what your suggesting? I think a box turbo rule with a busing would be a step is the wrong direction from what we have now ... we would end up with turbos like FPP is currently running now
 
ILLINOISRAM said:
Simple just go back to a s400 frame only bushing class so everybody can run a bushed S480. If you want to spend some more on a fancy cover more power to you. But even then that will limit the power and cost of a turbo and make the whole class alittle more affordable. It doesn't leave a class up to who has the most money to spend on a turbo to be the winner. Almost like a box charger class but allowing any s400 variation. We need a stock driveline class. After all that's what we are are truck pullers not component competition vehicles. If I wanted to change everything and be better off I'd build a damn tractor to pull.
Click to expand...

And I will put my HX60 guts inside an s400 shell. :)
 
Yes. I liked the 2.8 class. But in comparison s4 chargers are cheap, durable and wildly available and make enough hp for stock driveline. Plus if 2.6 becomes too much, a sub 100$ bushing down to a 2.4 or 2.3 like the farm stock tractors run which would be another cheap option to pick up a used charger from a tractor that is stepping it up. Leave the duals. You can take 500lbs I wouldn't really care either way.
 
ILLINOISRAM said:
Yes. I liked the 2.8 class. But in comparison s4 chargers are cheap, durable and wildly available and make enough hp for stock driveline. Plus if 2.6 becomes too much, a sub 100$ bushing down to a 2.4 or 2.3 like the farm stock tractors run which would be another cheap option to pick up a used charger from a tractor that is stepping it up. Leave the duals. You can take 500lbs I wouldn't really care either way.
Click to expand...


I am curious why leave the duals?
 
Imo the driveline issue are what need to be resolved. If put a super stock with dot tires in a single rear wheel dot tire class we could beat them. By point it won't matter what turbo you have because traction will be the issue.
 
zstroken said:
And I will put my HX60 guts inside an s400 shell. :)
Click to expand...

That's your choice but we both know you won't do it. No advantage to spending that money because your turbine wheel won't fit and the comp wheel is the same anyway. It's still cheaper and more durable. I didn't say they couldn't be built.
 
Because I am a fan of not screwing with stuff. Stop complaining that the class needs to change. If you don't like it then you change your truck. The duals is because there are factory dually a out there. Just like long wheelbase trucks. It was available option So it's legal. Don't like go to a 2.5 class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top