2010 midget rule change?

Heromaker · 12/9/09, 9:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAXIMHATER

so lets keep it how it is and it will be a spec esslinger series the last time i looked esslinger has never sponsored usac.This will help midget racing the guys that dont have to crank there motors more to keep up with esslingers it will level out the engine deal and it will save people money

You are so far off here. Esslinger is the most cost effective midget motor out there. DO you have 45000 for a Toyota?

And why is it that Toyota (a push rod motor) thinks they have to turn so many RPMs to compete with Esslinger (an overhead cam motor) to be competative?????

The valve train is not the only way to make power. There are other ways. It took 15 years and a lot of blood sweat and tears for Esslinger to start winning races. Why is it Toyota doesn't take its lumps and build a motor that is competative. Oh thats right they have a checkbook.......

quicktime3 · 12/9/09, 9:28 PM

Heromaker-
You are right about everything except for one part. USAC is no longer going to have Toyota vehicles. I think they're going to have Ford vehicles next year, I think I heard?
So, in that case, it makes this even more of a head-scratcher. Unfortunately, this was the idea that [I]quite a few[I] competitors I talked to came up with. I guess USAC listened to these people...? Not good.

DonMoore10 · 12/9/09, 9:30 PM

You people can speculate and dream all you want. This issue has been discussed so many times it's rediculous. All the midget officials in the world can sit around in rooms and meetings and talk about solutions till the cows come home... but....

Until some good old fashioned testing happens, everbody is totally wasting their time on this subject.

Does anybody on this planet know of ONE test that has been done anywhere that is aimed at finding a solution to this problem???

I think the answer is NO. If there has been some testing going on, would somebody please come forward and tell us where it happened and the results?

Thanks!!

Don Moore

rz1 · 12/9/09, 9:31 PM

I think even the Mopar guys can't compete with the high reving Esslingers, so they want them to be limited also.
Isn't it funny that most of the engine sponsored teams are quitting?
How pathetic that with all their engineering, Toyota, Chevrolet and Mopar can't compete with the Esslingers!
David kills Goliath again!!!

rz

v8j · 12/9/09, 10:28 PM

Don what testing are you talking about? motors,tires

DonMoore10 · 12/9/09, 11:13 PM

Well, I think testing should involve issues that will limit any major expense of a rule change. It makes sense to start with tires, wheel width, compound and possibly even offset. A weight rule could even be considered. Obviously, the owners with Esslinger engines don't want to be penalized for buying an engine that has been made legal originally by USAC. At this point there needs to be some kind of embellishment, IMO, for all the engines/cars that have been rendered uncompetitive. By an embellishment I mean some "gimmies" for the non Esllinger owners similar to what has been done regarding the rules for the midget Rumble Series.

TJ Domark · 12/9/09, 11:17 PM

It's not even the New Year and silly season in the midget world has already begun!

I have to agree w/ HEROMAKER:
Esslinger in the most cost effective motor on the market - Heck! if you look in the classified section you can pick up a fairly new XT with limited runs for about $18 ~ $20k. I have yet to see a published price on a Toyota motor? And I think the Mopar's ( Esp. the HEMI ) are in the mid to upper $30's. On top of the fact that from what I have seen and heard; the Hemi doesnt make more then about 2 race before the bottom falls out.

Sooooo... It leaves me to question; Why penalize the most cost effective motor in the industry?

Btw: Whens the last time anyone in the last 3 ~ 5 years seen an esslinger blow up? ... Outside of tracks like IOWA, PIR, ect. In which case I think almost everyone's motor blew up ... HAHAH... Hummm

In closing:
I've been involved in racing since the day I could walk and Ive won championships w. just about every motor mfg in the industry: VW, Brayton Fords, Mopar, Esslinger.... And I can say from experience that from a maintaince stand point Esslinger is # 1 by a large margin.

v8j · 12/9/09, 11:32 PM

DON Thank you you are the first person with any

to give a real answer to what to do about improving racing ie usac. dont know that you are right but but on the right track you have made an effort

TJ Domark · 12/9/09, 11:32 PM

Sorry - One last statement...

In regards to the people that keep pushing for a "HARDER TIRE" as an answer to solve the problem. I would urge you all to error on the side of caution. Take a look at CRASH CAR ( aka: NASCAR ) when they attempted to use 'harder tires' ... They bounced cars off the wall left and right due to a lack of grip and a side wall that would not give!

As expensive as midget racing already is - I dont think any of us want to wad up a car due to a hard tire.

I do agree, It would be nice to see something done to control the cost but what the answer to that question is? It's beyond me...

Possible Starter Areas:
Outlaw Carbon Fiber - it has no value in racing except to cost $$$$
Outlaw GAS Shocks - Get back to grandpa's steel body, 50/50 ratio shocks... No rebound control allowed
Outlaw Ti-bolts - again it has no value in racing except to cost $$$$
Maybe make: Combo cars standard - Not a bad idea, one car for both pavement and dirt! what a concept!

Anyone else care to add on to the list?

Tim Clauson · 12/9/09, 11:34 PM

1 Brad Kuhn Fontana
2 Brad Sweet Mopar
3 Darren Hagen Esslinger
4 Jerry Coons Jr. Toyota
5 Bobby East Esslnger
6 Cole Whitt Toyota
7 Tracy Hines Chevy

I believe these are the 7 teams that ran the full USAC deal this year

12/9/09, 11:34 PM	#20 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
Tim Clauson Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 510	1 Brad Kuhn Fontana 2 Brad Sweet Mopar 3 Darren Hagen Esslinger 4 Jerry Coons Jr. Toyota 5 Bobby East Esslnger 6 Cole Whitt Toyota 7 Tracy Hines Chevy I believe these are the 7 teams that ran the full USAC deal this year __________________ W.W.B.K.D. ?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12/9/09, 9:28 PM	#12 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
quicktime3 Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 159	Heromaker- You are right about everything except for one part. USAC is no longer going to have Toyota vehicles. I think they're going to have Ford vehicles next year, I think I heard? So, in that case, it makes this even more of a head-scratcher. Unfortunately, this was the idea that [I]quite a few[I] competitors I talked to came up with. I guess USAC listened to these people...? Not good.

12/9/09, 9:31 PM	#14 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
rz1 Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 13	I think even the Mopar guys can't compete with the high reving Esslingers, so they want them to be limited also. Isn't it funny that most of the engine sponsored teams are quitting? How pathetic that with all their engineering, Toyota, Chevrolet and Mopar can't compete with the Esslingers! David kills Goliath again!!! rz

12/9/09, 10:28 PM	#15 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
v8j Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 591	Don what testing are you talking about? motors,tires

12/9/09, 11:13 PM	#16 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
DonMoore10 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,474	Well, I think testing should involve issues that will limit any major expense of a rule change. It makes sense to start with tires, wheel width, compound and possibly even offset. A weight rule could even be considered. Obviously, the owners with Esslinger engines don't want to be penalized for buying an engine that has been made legal originally by USAC. At this point there needs to be some kind of embellishment, IMO, for all the engines/cars that have been rendered uncompetitive. By an embellishment I mean some "gimmies" for the non Esllinger owners similar to what has been done regarding the rules for the midget Rumble Series.

12/9/09, 11:17 PM	#17 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
TJ Domark Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 18	It's not even the New Year and silly season in the midget world has already begun! I have to agree w/ HEROMAKER: Esslinger in the most cost effective motor on the market - Heck! if you look in the classified section you can pick up a fairly new XT with limited runs for about $18 ~ $20k. I have yet to see a published price on a Toyota motor? And I think the Mopar's ( Esp. the HEMI ) are in the mid to upper $30's. On top of the fact that from what I have seen and heard; the Hemi doesnt make more then about 2 race before the bottom falls out. Sooooo... It leaves me to question; Why penalize the most cost effective motor in the industry? Btw: Whens the last time anyone in the last 3 ~ 5 years seen an esslinger blow up? ... Outside of tracks like IOWA, PIR, ect. In which case I think almost everyone's motor blew up ... HAHAH... Hummm In closing: I've been involved in racing since the day I could walk and Ive won championships w. just about every motor mfg in the industry: VW, Brayton Fords, Mopar, Esslinger.... And I can say from experience that from a maintaince stand point Esslinger is # 1 by a large margin.

12/9/09, 11:32 PM	#18 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
v8j Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 591	DON Thank you you are the first person with any to give a real answer to what to do about improving racing ie usac. dont know that you are right but but on the right track you have made an effort

12/9/09, 11:32 PM	#19 Re: 2010 midget rule change?
TJ Domark Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 18	Sorry - One last statement... In regards to the people that keep pushing for a "HARDER TIRE" as an answer to solve the problem. I would urge you all to error on the side of caution. Take a look at CRASH CAR ( aka: NASCAR ) when they attempted to use 'harder tires' ... They bounced cars off the wall left and right due to a lack of grip and a side wall that would not give! As expensive as midget racing already is - I dont think any of us want to wad up a car due to a hard tire. I do agree, It would be nice to see something done to control the cost but what the answer to that question is? It's beyond me... Possible Starter Areas: Outlaw Carbon Fiber - it has no value in racing except to cost $$$$ Outlaw GAS Shocks - Get back to grandpa's steel body, 50/50 ratio shocks... No rebound control allowed Outlaw Ti-bolts - again it has no value in racing except to cost $$$$ Maybe make: Combo cars standard - Not a bad idea, one car for both pavement and dirt! what a concept! Anyone else care to add on to the list?