[SAC74]

Originally Posted by Midget98 If so BMARA is far from a D2 organization.

Badger definitely is not a D2 series. They never intended to be, and their members will quickly correct you if you mistakenly refer to them as D2. Another series copying their engine rules does not change what Badger is.

[Midget98]

Originally Posted by SAC74 Badger definitely is not a D2 series. They never intended to be, and their members will quickly correct you if you mistakenly refer to them as D2. Another series copying their engine rules does not change what Badger is.

I believe you are absolutely correct. I think if they could get peak HP up to around the 340-350 mark by doing something to the rules without really increasing costs too much you would see racing back to how it used to be. For me the current cars look to be lacking just a little bit of power especially when there is a cushion to run on.

[Ray3]

Originally Posted by Midget98 I believe you are absolutely correct. I think if they could get peak HP up to around the 340-350 mark by doing something to the rules without really increasing costs too much you would see racing back to how it used to be. For me the current cars look to be lacking just a little bit of power especially when there is a cushion to run on.

I would argue that Badger is there now. They don't have the peak HP of a Toyota, SR-11 or Esslinger BB7. However, that was never the intention of the rules anyway. The intention was to be fast enough to keep the fans entertained while also reducing cost to a range acceptable for the average or regional racer. The cost came in right about where people expected ($15K new which is the same as a new top of the line D2 engine) and the speed exceeded expectations.

The engines do not make as much overall HP but they are extremely drivable which allows them to turn some fast laps. The Badger guys turn Angell Park at around 14.9-15.0 today. When Badger ran head to head with POWRI National at the Pepsi Nationals the fastest lap turned in the feature was by Andrew Felker at a 15.449 with the best Badger car at a 15.659. Two Badger cars were in the top 11 for feature lap times. So they can turn quick laps. Where they suffer is when you lose momentum. When you make a mistake with a Badger engine it costs you far more than if you had a purpose built engine.

One thing people don't realize is that the Toyotas, SR-11s and Esslinger BB7s are running 161 to 166 CID and the Badger engines are only at 146 CID. The architecture of a Badger engine doesn't allow them to get to those cubic inch sizes. The Badger engine program has been extremely successful and it will only get better as more teams come on board.

Edit: I should also mention the Badger weight rule is 1100lbs with driver to eliminate the advantage of carbon fiber and titanium, whereas USAC is 1035lbs and POWRI is 1050lbs with driver. So Badger has not only tried to reduce cost on engines but on cars as well. If Badger cars were down at the USAC and POWRI weights that 14.9-15.0 would certainly be quicker.

[Midget98]

Originally Posted by Ray3 I would argue that Badger is there now. They don't have the peak HP of a Toyota, SR-11 or Esslinger BB7. However, that was never the intention of the rules anyway. The intention was to be fast enough to keep the fans entertained while also reducing cost to a range acceptable for the average or regional racer. The cost came in right about where people expected ($15K new which is the same as a new top of the line D2 engine) and the speed exceeded expectations. The engines do not make as much overall HP but they are extremely drivable which allows them to turn some fast laps. The Badger guys turn Angell Park at around 14.9-15.0 today. When Badger ran head to head with POWRI National at the Pepsi Nationals the fastest lap turned in the feature was by Andrew Felker at a 15.449 with the best Badger car at a 15.659. Two Badger cars were in the top 11 for feature lap times. So they can turn quick laps. Where they suffer is when you lose momentum. When you make a mistake with a Badger engine it costs you far more than if you had a purpose built engine. One thing people don't realize is that the Toyotas, SR-11s and Esslinger BB7s are running 161 to 166 CID and the Badger engines are only at 146 CID. The architecture of a Badger engine doesn't allow them to get to those cubic inch sizes. The Badger engine program has been extremely successful and it will only get better as more teams come on board. Edit: I should also mention the Badger weight rule is 1100lbs with driver to eliminate the advantage of carbon fiber and titanium, whereas USAC is 1035lbs and POWRI is 1050lbs with driver. So Badger has not only tried to reduce cost on engines but on cars as well. If Badger cars were down at the USAC and POWRI weights that 14.9-15.0 would certainly be quicker.

I'm close to agreeing with you, but I think where BMARA is lacking just a little bit right now is the same as where you mentioned. The momentum issue is where I notice the biggest difference. I don't think Badger needs to have HP numbers coming close to the Toyota, SR11, or other super high dollar motors, but if they could bring them in just a bit more to make running a heavy cushion a bit more manageable, I think the on track product would benefit greatly and bring even more growth to the group. I don't know that it is practical with the current platform in that the displacement is limited by the stock block, but maybe there is a way without going "dollar crazy" again. I think the $15,000 top end new motor price is about as high as you can go to keep the series growing and it is admirable that the organization has been able to accomplish what they have so far. I just miss seeing the ability to bang off of a heavy cushion without such a lag in getting back to speed. Maybe a few year's development is all it will take to find that little extra power needed to get it done.

[TQ29m]

I have a question, about an engine I considered to start with, then found it had been removed from the legal engine list, I have asked many times, with no answer in most cases, or any reason either. The engine in question is the 2.0L Mitsubishi, Neon, 420a, Chrysler engine, what is the issue with using this engine, it is very available, and AM parts are plenty available, just curious. Thanks! Bob

[Quantrill]

Is there a shortage of current motors listed? I would say the powers that be were originally trying to keep the rules and tech simple by allowing each 2.4 manufacturers to have a motor. More brands and generations of brands make it more difficult to police. JMO

[Wayne Davis]

Originally Posted by Aces&Eights Isnt Southern States Midgets, D2? They are Powri...

No.... LOSS Midget are not POWRi

[Ray3]

Originally Posted by Midget98 I'm close to agreeing with you, but I think where BMARA is lacking just a little bit right now is the same as where you mentioned. The momentum issue is where I notice the biggest difference. I don't think Badger needs to have HP numbers coming close to the Toyota, SR11, or other super high dollar motors, but if they could bring them in just a bit more to make running a heavy cushion a bit more manageable, I think the on track product would benefit greatly and bring even more growth to the group. I don't know that it is practical with the current platform in that the displacement is limited by the stock block, but maybe there is a way without going "dollar crazy" again. I think the $15,000 top end new motor price is about as high as you can go to keep the series growing and it is admirable that the organization has been able to accomplish what they have so far. I just miss seeing the ability to bang off of a heavy cushion without such a lag in getting back to speed. Maybe a few year's development is all it will take to find that little extra power needed to get it done.

https://youtu.be/YbiqX5TRnY0

Check out the first half of this feature from 2016. This is me and Gage Walker going at it running the cushion. Later you see Brandon Waelti and Walker going at it a bit. I think this tells most people everything they need to know about how good the Badger engine program will be when its at its full potential. Also I was in a Honda and Walker in a Ford. Waelti had a Ford as well.

[Ray3]

If anyone would like to see a quick, clear and concise set of rules for the production based Midget engine rules I invite you to visit http://www.2-4midgetracing.com

These are NOT D2 rules. These are the Badger style rules. If anyone is interested in working together to implement a program like Badger's into their series please feel free to use these rules. These are 15 easy to understand rules that can quickly be placed into a rule book. All I ask is if you do use them do not alter them without contacting me. Thanks.

In case anyone is wondering, I wrote the rules for the IMRA in winter of 2013 that were used in 2014 and 2015 (before they changed to D2 in 2016). Those rules were the basis for the Badger rules that the Badger teams later implemented in their own way through a vote by their car owner members. So the rules on the 2-4midgetracing.com web site are an evolution of the original IMRA rules.

These rules were based off of the Chevy II engine my family built in 1973 but with updates for today's technology and engine design. The main goals were to reduce cost significantly without hindering the speed, ingenuity and creativity that Midget racing is known for. If you believe in all that and I can help you in any way please feel free to contact me.

[Wayne Davis]

Originally Posted by Ray3 If anyone would like to see a quick, clear and concise set of rules for the production based Midget engine rules I invite you to visit http://www.2-4midgetracing.com These are the Badger style rules. If anyone is interested in working together to implement a program like Badger's into their series please feel free to use these rules. These are 15 easy to understand rules that can be quickly placed into a rule book.

2. All engines must use an original manufacturer’s OEM engine block, OEM cylinder head and OEM crankshaft. Engine blocks, cylinder heads and crankshafts must be from the same OEM manufacturer.

Does this mean it has to match block to head to crank as it came from manufacture 2.4/2.4/2.4 or as long as it is OEM GM...OEM Ford ect.... as in a 2.4 block Ecotec with a 2.2 Ecotec head with a 2.0 Ecotec crankshaft...all GM buy 3 different engines? please clarify