Poll

Should motorcycle engines be allowed in all car classes except production

absolutely
13 (31%)
all but vintage
18 (42.9%)
no
11 (26.2%)

Total Members Voted: 40

Author Topic: moto roadsters  (Read 33353 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dwarner

  • Guest
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #45 on: May 25, 2008, 12:38:52 AM »
BTT

Offline Seldom Seen Slim

  • Nancy and me and the pit bike
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13158
  • Nancy -- 201.913 mph record on a production ZX15!
    • Nancy and Jon's personal website.
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #46 on: May 25, 2008, 11:21:49 AM »
Okay, I was in error when I said the motorcycle-engine only rule was tested by the #7 Bub 'liner, the error being that the bike didn't compete under SCTA rules.  That's what sometimes happens when I try to illustrate a point -- someone comes along and reminds me that I forgot to touch second base.

Thanks to both of you (maybe more?) that posted to discuss my error.  I meant well, though -- isn't that worth something?
Jon E. Wennerberg
 a/k/a Seldom Seen Slim
 Skandia, Michigan
 (that's way up north)
2 Club member x2
Owner of landracing.com

Online tortoise

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #47 on: May 25, 2008, 12:41:15 PM »
Speaking of the motorcycle-engine only rule, the "engine" requirement for special-construction motorcycles (A class) in the AMA (not FIM) rulebook at the BUB site says

"7.B. ENGINE
Any combination of engines, not to exceed two are allowed.
Combined engine displacement cannot exceed maximum of
3000cc."

Note no mention of "must be motorcycle engines", in contrast to SCTA rule and also AMA streamliner rules.

Particularly in the pushrod classes, which AMA has similarly to SCTA, some automobile racing engines are clearly superior to any motorcycle alternatives. Anyone ever inquire as to the legality of this? It sure looks legal per the rulebook.

Offline Stainless1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8948
  • Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #48 on: May 26, 2008, 10:59:50 PM »
In 1984 the scta ruled motorcycle engines would not be allowed in cars (we had planned to put one in our Abarth and run Modified Sports).  Someone in the scta got them allowed quite a few years ago (so they could make a points run.... ) now everybody but production gets to use them. 
If there is a groundswell of support, someone should submit a rule change to the scta.

It is how hot rodding works, put something in a car that doesn't belong.  8-)

Any engine has always been allowed in special construction.  it's not really a gender thing, it is more like a species thing  :roll:
Stainless
Red Hat 228.039, 2001, 65ci, Bockscar Lakester #1000 with a little N2O

Offline mkilger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #49 on: May 27, 2008, 12:18:51 AM »
Stainless is right ,I think that if you dont like the idea of bike motors in roadsters or any (CAR)  you sould send in for a rule change I think or WE think its just not me, I cant count how many folks dont like the idea so in Oct-Nov send them in  We believe there is enough support it would pass this time.  :-P

dwarner

  • Guest
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #50 on: May 27, 2008, 12:49:42 AM »
I think you guys should present a united front. Instead of 70 people sending in disjointed rules proposals let one person combine all the ideas and make the proposal.

Contary to Mike's suggestion of submitting in Oct-Nov, meetings will be over by then, log to www.scta-bni.org and fill out the on-line form.

DW

Offline mkilger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #51 on: May 27, 2008, 12:58:45 AM »
Thanks Dan thats a better idea lets present a united front that sounds good to me  LOL missed you at El Mirage  see you in June at LA roadster show come by my booth will have my new roadster  there and a beer waiting.

Offline desotoman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2815
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #52 on: May 27, 2008, 01:05:38 AM »
We believe there is enough support it would pass this time.  :-P

Mike,

IMO The problem is not with the support. The problem is in the wording. If you are really serious about a rule change and want it to happen, you must do the research, and come up with suitable wording where both sides will be happy and vote for it. That is the problem. I suggest if you are going to put in for a change to not allow motorcycle motors in vintage car classes you better dot you i's and cross your T's. Now that we have had a SCTA points champion with a motorcycle motor in a Vintage Car Class, I personally think it is too little too late. If you are still up for the challenge I suggest you read John Romero's posts over again and determine how you can get both sides to agree with your wording. What I mean by both sides are the Traditionalist car guys, and the who cares car guys. Good luck.

Tom G.
I love the USA. How much longer will we be a free nation?

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers.

The rational person lets verified facts form or modify his opinion.  The ideologue ignores verified facts which don't fit his preconceived opinions.

Offline SPDRACR

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #53 on: May 27, 2008, 02:29:53 AM »
Mike, I do not think their are as many people out there as you might think . That are that disturbed by this, it's only "h" and maybea small"g" class that these engines can run in. As I recall Jack D., Doc Jeffries, and George Callaway where the three that pushed for these small classes back in the 80's, I belive both of these cars have one #1 championships.Mr Desotoman has already mentioned that last years #1 car was "MOTO" powered and no one fussed about that, but maybe rear engined modifieds are not traditional , but since when a 300mph roadsters tradtional, I would bet that there are no tradtional parts on that new roadster of ours.Our roadster was fist built by Greg Carlson, than bought by Ralph Wisher(went over 200mph) than rebuilt by my dad and myself over this past winter,from the out side it looks like every other lo-boy out their. 29 body 32 grillshell, cubic inches are just that... would you be offended by a rotary in a roadster also?My guess is that the flathead racers of their time were not impressed when they had run straight up with olds,hemis,and that new s.b. chevy thing that came out in 55. Would it more to the traditionalist liking if I grafted my Suzuki head on to Austin Healey block added billit crankshaft, al. rods, and custom forged pistons? The SCTA has been harping on we need yonger blood, this might insire some. As our second driver is a 22 year old mechanical engineering student at CalPoly Pamona, and I,m sure on her budget she can not afford a blown fuel burning aluminumn head 500 ci engine to put in her traditonal roadster.As a owner of two tradional roadsters I applaude the efforts of any one willing to tackle the writing of such a rule, but do not stop at motocycle engines it should be all foregin engines in any vintage class. I would even vote for it. Thank You all For your time. feel free to come buy and see us at El Mirage Roadster's 832 a/gr and #2 h/gr Eric Eyres SDRC President
salt is OK, but the DIRT is where it's at!
Proud 2nd generation Roadster Racer
Muroc 2 club, El Mirage 2 club, Now Bonneville 2 club,       All in a Roadster

Offline RichFox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2663
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #54 on: May 27, 2008, 10:12:35 AM »
In general I have a gut feeling against motocycle engines in roadsters. But I have no plans to run in such a class, so who am I to try to ruin somebody else' fun? Count me out.

Offline jimmy six

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2785
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #55 on: May 27, 2008, 08:26:10 PM »
I was at the meeting where the vote was taken NOT to allow non-automotive engines in the vintage classes a few years back. I was one that did not feel non-automotive belonged in vintage. I however did not have a vote, as many, only an opinion. At this time I would not be infavor of removing them. (horse out of the corral type of thing).
Others may correct me but I kinda remember the reason for automotive engines in M/C's was because of the AMA rules governing the Bonneville meets and it may be in their rules at that time.
First GMC 6 powered Fuel roadster over 200, with 2 red hats. Pit crew for Patrick Tone's Super Stock #49 Camaro

John Romero

  • Guest
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #56 on: May 27, 2008, 10:20:41 PM »
One thing to keep in mind. If SCTA bans M/C engines in vintage cars (roadsters) would you propose that the existing records that have been set at both El Mirage and Bonneville remain or would you want them to be erased?

If you erase them you will have taken legitimate records that were set 100% in accordance with both the spirit and the letter of the rules and disregarded them.

If you choose to let them remain but not let any new records be set with them then you are handicapping those who come after and try to take them away.

There is no right answer. Both options suck. This is the reason why many say that once a record is set then the horse is out of the barn and she ain't coming back.

Offline mkilger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #57 on: May 27, 2008, 11:12:44 PM »
I dont think that the records that are set sould be erased but if it would pass it sould be noted that it was a bike motor, just like the AABGR record or the AABFR sould be  noted that it was a 4 wheel drive roadster that set the record   and you are right about the handicap but dont take it away in the books we all know it takes a alot hard work to set some records. I know one thing for sure there is more than 70 people  who dont want bike motors in the vintage classes thats a fact.  maybe we sould start a list, maybe we already have one ?? 

Offline John Noonan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3606
  • 306 200+ mph time slips. 252 mph on a dirtbike
Hot Rodding! !
« Reply #58 on: May 28, 2008, 12:52:45 AM »
John, Iam right we cant put a chevy in a bike frame right?  but bring the frame I will build it and you can ride it  LOL am not riding it you bike guys are nuts. Any way what  we think is were will it end I understand that its hotrodding ect but will it come to the point were you can put two bike motors in a roadster (say two put together) we just want to try to keep the traditonal roadster with car engines in them  and not turn them into a gocart class

If you want to keep it "traditional" then all records not running the OEM ORIGINAL engine should not be allowed as well, however you cannot erase the records and accomplishments of those that came before you.   I have had to change several things on my bikes to meet the "Current" rules and there have been things that I have had to change to comply with the "Current" rules and it is called progression and it is done not to "save" records so that cannot be beat it is done in the interest of safety.
 Also as noted you cannot run two engines in a roadster and are you and others threatened to be out powered in one class (H) as I guarantee you that engine builders could take a car engine that fits the class size and make more reliable power (and torque)..if you look back at records from 1995 you will see that the current unblown Fuel roadster record is 131.942 mph and since then no one has been able to make more power or go faster?..it is called progression and as others mentioned once the other racers pulled the OEM engines out it was no longer "traditional"

Stop the complaining and bring your car to the dirt or salt and lets rock & roll and have a great time as that is what this is supposed to be about right?

John

PS, if you need a bike engine I am sure I can take care of it.  If you need a stronger more proven car engine John Romero I am sure could point you in the right direction.

J

Offline SPDRACR

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
Re: moto roadsters
« Reply #59 on: May 28, 2008, 02:13:46 AM »
Being borned a roadster guy, and it flows through my veins. Can any one out here tell me what the difference is????? I have put a 4cly. internal combustion engine-6 speed transmission- drive shaft,w/ all of the safety hoops- and a differental (open one legger still). You
" traditonalist's" a barking up the wrong tree.You already have JUDD hondas, and ILMORE IRL chevys taking away records every meet, put not one of you have complained about a $75,000.00 non oem engines, Do they fit your view of tradition? I guess since I have only raced roadster since I was legal to drive, and that most of you have seen me grow up in this sport, that my views are clouded, It's my belief that i'm one of the more traditional people out here. I have a question why does the SCTA run migets and sprint cars in a assocation of LSR's ? What makes a roadster traditional? with the hood on the #2 roadster looks like any other. what makes the suzuki engine not tradtional? i asked a question earlier which no one responed to, If I built a billit block(which is currently legal),had henry v make  me a crank, bought some carrello rods and of course some JE pistons than bolted any 4 valve twin cam head on would that be traditional? there are a few simple questions, just looking for some truthful response. ERIC
salt is OK, but the DIRT is where it's at!
Proud 2nd generation Roadster Racer
Muroc 2 club, El Mirage 2 club, Now Bonneville 2 club,       All in a Roadster