You can rationalize this any way you want, but in the end it just isn't feasable to come up with a method that will allow the sanctioning body to verify that the second engine did what you wish it would do.
For 1.3 miles produce measureable power. Are you going to require a load cell with data collection on board? WAAAAY beyond what our sport, as volunteers, can possibly monitor.
In Rick's case it isn't in the "spirit" but doesn't violate any current rules. Say what you want about the lack of 2 stroke oil, cold engines, but the rules don't say zip, nada, nothing except 2A: "Only Streamliners and Unlimited Diesel Trucks may use more than one engine at the same time." 5A: "Inovation is unlimited"
If the engine was off at tech inspection, it shouldn't have passed tech inspection. But it did. Not from a class rules violation, but safety.
It did pass class vehicle inspection at the end of the run because no matter what you THINK the RULES don't require a live motor.
If the engine had been duct taped on like the picture I posted on page 2 of this thread it wouldn't have passed safety. If it was bolted on with no drive train you could argue is isn't a second engine. But Rick bolted it on, hooked up a drive train and did all the things that made it look like it COULD run.
So skip the woulda, coulda, shoulda, and show me rules that would positively, without a doubt, absolutely guarantee that both engines produce measureable power. And would keep me from kicking it into neutral after you checked it. And wouldn't put an excessive burden on the poor overworked tech guys.
