Sure. Here is where I am coming from.
Section II-1
right after the engine displacement table
" for reasons of ECONOMY and HISTORICAL authenticity, vintage engine
modifications are restricted to older technology levels.....so far as
practical."
Now it seems to me that hogging out the blocks' valley and rewelding in a
new and very sophisticated valley that lets the exhaust exit through the top
of the block, use of fuel injection and big honking new blower is bending
the rules a bit to much. Even Jacls use of turbos' seem to me to be a
stretch. And according to the program guide, both were in the same XF/BGS.
Now none of this affects me in any way possible and I really do not care one
way or another. It was just a curious question to me.
mayf, the red necked, ignorant desert rat in Pahrump.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Fox" <v4gr@rcn.com>
To: "DrMayf" <drmayf@teknett.com>; <land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2001 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: An Odd Question...
> Dr. As I understood it Ron Main was in XF/BFS and Jack was running gas.
Some
> years ago when Ron Main first ran his "flathead for the 21st century", it
> caused much outcry, as did the roadster he ran it in. There was a number
of
> changes required and a vote among roadster and I guess other competers. I
> voted for it, Jerry my driver, voted against it. At any rate the motor as
it
> now sits has been voted on and approved. I looked for the part of the
rules
> that require"modifications must be simple in nature" and was unable to
find
> it. perhaps you could direct me to that page. Thank you, Rich Fox
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DrMayf <drmayf@teknett.com>
> To: land-speed@autox.team.net <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> Date: Sunday, August 19, 2001 12:11 PM
> Subject: An Odd Question...
>
>
> >Whenever I come back from the races, I always get an odd thought in my
> head.
> >This time it is a rules type question in a class that I will never
compete
> >in. It has to do with watching NTIII and Flatfire racing against each
> other.
> >I am browsing the rule book and the program guide and it says both are in
> >XF/BGS class. I then read the XF engine rules and it of course explicitly
> >states that the engines must be of the vintage nature. Then it very
> >explicitly states that any modifications must be simple in nature. Oh? I
> >remember the Flatfire engine articles where the engine modifications were
> >truly monstrous in nature (ie machining out the valley of the flathead,
> >building a new and completely different valley which lets the exhaust
come
> >out the top of the engine, and welding allof this in place). So what part
> of
> >"simple" and in keeping with the spirit of the times of the the
flatheads,
> >is this? Does the term "simple" mean in the saying or doing? Such as
"let's
> >go to the Moon" which is a simple statement but really really compex like
> >the flatfire motor. Just an odd thought.
> >
> >
> >mayf, the red necked ignorant desert rat in Pahrump.
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe land-speed
///
///
|