Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by hoscalecody:
Exactly this comment. No matter what you do, the big teams will still spend as much money as they can to be dominant. A lot of them teams usually have huge sponsors and other big businesses helping pay for the team.
I could almost guarantee you, if the rules all the sudden became open and they could do whatever they want to, there's going to be multiple teams paying for exactly that, to do whatever they can to beat the other guy.

Look how bad it's gotten with all carbon and Ti now. Teams are spending thousands of dollars for brand new carbon bodies and around $1000 for 1 Ti bolt kit, to save a little weight. Look at the midgets, new rules came out mandating tube thicknesses and made lots of cars illegal. Running thinner, lighter chassis. Just to possibly have a slight edge over someone, even if it meant potentially running a higher chance of injury in an wreck.

Let me clear that up for you a bit. The Midget Rule change was for Chili Bowl cars bringing them into compliance with current USAC and WRG rules.

The Irony is buying TI bolts and hen adding weight..... SMH.

I also noticed a bunch of three spoke front wheels breaking off at last years CB.

A full time crew chief is gonna cost ya, But there the ones finishing about every race and if they're not on the podium,, they're close. They got the parts orders, Wheel magnafluxed, Do a complete tear down every break in racing they get, everything gets the once over or replaced, etc However in many cases they save you $$ in less failures.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by oldfan49:
I was talking weekly shows.

I grew up in Central Mo sprint car country. When I moved to the central western Mo border i was surprised to hear this was common at the local tracks. (I stand corrected, you have to take the checkered flag).

I have heard many stories about racers who overheated or such would pull into the infield then pull out to take the checkered flag to get paid some using the starter to get across. I have read track purses that read if you don't finish you get tow money.

We raced a mini sprint and 360 and 410 winged sprint all over MO and never had to take the checkered flag to get paid. I've never heard of that happening. It's kind of crappy for a track to do that. Most places did force you to start the A or B to get any pay. Some would take care of you even if you had issues in a heat and couldn't continue.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by Charles Nungester:
Let me clear that up for you a bit. The Midget Rule change was for Chili Bowl cars bringing them into compliance with current USAC and WRG rules.

It wasn't just chili bowl cars. It made pretty much all Stealths illegal and the earlier Elites, which were basically wide body Stealths. Their B pillars are slightly smaller. I can't remember the manufacture, but I thought there were a couple more same also.

They did let a narrow body stealth, an Ellis and wide body stealth race this passed weekend, so i'm guessing they're not teching it.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by oldfan49:
I have always said that top heavy purses are killing the sport especially weekly racing..

Occasional top heavy purses really screws a tracks loyal racers. A few top guys come to cherry pick and the local guy that was getting 8th and $400 is now getting 11th and $250. :7::21:

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by hoscalecody:
It wasn't just chili bowl cars. It made pretty much all Stealths illegal and the earlier Elites, which were basically wide body Stealths. Their B pillars are slightly smaller. I can't remember the manufacture, but I thought there were a couple more same also.

They did let a narrow body stealth, an Ellis and wide body stealth race this passed weekend, so i'm guessing they're not teching it.

https://cdn.dirtcar.com/wp-content/u...-1024x765.jpeg

Referring to the frame drawings in the above link, which is (I think) from the 2023 rules, it would be appreciated if the tubing sizes in the mentioned chassis (Stealth, Elite, etc.) that do not comply can be pointed out, with the non-complying sizes.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by Frank Reiner:
https://cdn.dirtcar.com/wp-content/u...-1024x765.jpeg

Referring to the frame drawings in the above link, which is (I think) from the 2023 rules, it would be appreciated if the tubing sizes in the mentioned chassis (Stealth, Elite, etc.) that do not comply can be pointed out, with the non-complying sizes.

This is the "pillar" in red, I'm referencing. On the stealth's they were 1 1/4 .095. A friend of mine has an Elite and he said they were the same as my Stealth's were. His was an out door car (Don't think Elite made an indoor car.) If I remember correctly they were "lightweight bottom rails also." Don't exactly remember what the bottom rails were though. I was told the newest bigger cage Elites are all legal. At 1 point I had 3 stealth's 1 twister and 1 Boss. Twister and Boss would've both passed with B pillars, neither of the stealth's would've.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Thank you Mr. Corky!
Ironically, the cross sectional area of the 1.25-.095 tubing is greater than that of the now required 1.375-.083.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Originally Posted by Frank Reiner:
Thank you Mr. Corky!
Ironically, the cross sectional area of the 1.25-.095 tubing is greater than that of the now required 1.375-.083.

True, the cross sectional area of the 1.25 tube is greater by 2%.

But, the section modulus (measure of strength) of the 1.375 tube is 12% greater and the moment of inertia (measure of stiffness) of the 1.375 tube is 13% greater.

Therefore, the 1.375 tube is stronger and stiffer.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

Good to see discussion of this subject. What, if anything, is known of the failure mode(s) that are addressed by this change? Column failure in a roll-over? Transverse failure in a side impact? These two combined?

A slender column of 20-some inches is quite vulnerable to both eccentric column loading and transverse loading. That loading can be reduced by ~1/2 by adding a horizontal hoop that ties together the B-pillars and the A-frame tubes.

Re: concerning a recent thread about costs of racing
 

This thread is a total waste of time. Racers and owners are their own worst enemy. Every single dime you cut on cost in one area will be spent somewhere else. You will never save these guys money. I have a buddy that runs a "Crate" Late Model. He switched into that class to save money. You know motors are "supposed" to cost a fraction. Well guess what to be competitive his motor cost is almost double what it should be. He is saving some money, but nothing like he should be. O ya he is running for far less each night. So anything he is saving by running the lower class he is losing in pay difference.