Call to RA members regarding HS Homologation

Group K · 10-18-2005, 03:03 PM

Now that the world finals has come and gone, itâ€™s very clear that HydroSpace is serious about competing in IJSBA stock class racing (the biggest of all classes). Along with this comes a very important task for the members of the Riders Association.
When the SXR was introduced, it was very clearly a better race boat than the stock SuperJet. When the SXR was homologated, it meant two thingsâ€¦ (A) If you wanted to be competitive in stock class, you had to get a $6000 SXRâ€¦and (B) if you had a SuperJet that you loved to race, the IJSBA did not have a place (or class) for you to race it inâ€¦.â€œand be competitiveâ€?. The result has been a world where there are hundreds of pwc enthusiasts that want to race competitively with their SuperJetsâ€¦. And race events where virtually no SuperJets exist because the IJSBA has made no accommodation for these SuperJet owners to have a competitive place to race.

Now the homologation of the HydroSpace stands to do the same to all SXR owners as the SXR did to all SuperJet owners. The big difference here is that the HydroSpace will cost twice what an SXR costs, and the costs of â€œpreppingâ€? it to the stock class rule limits stands to add $1000-$2000 to that initial cost. Sadly, there will be far fewer HS skis available than were SXRs, so the key to winning IJSBA stock class will be trying to find one of these expensive machines, and do whatever prep is required to gain a competitive advantage over the other few HS skis you will be racing against.

If there â€œisâ€? a Riders Association, they need to make their voices heard â€œnowâ€? on several very important questions.
1) Is the RA membership okay with the doubling of the cost to win a stock class race?
2) When the existing SXR owners see they have no hope of winning stock class, does the RA advocate some accommodation to offer a competitive place for SXR owners to race. Or does the RA membership beleive that IJSBA should simply tell SXR owners they have to go buy the â€œnewâ€? boat ..... or go find another sport? (as was done to SuperJet owners).
3) Since â€œstockâ€? class is considered the entry level class to pwc racing, and the HS would be the only competitive machine for that class, does the RA membership feel that a stock class HS is a good entry level machine that will attract more new folks to the sport of pwc racing?? If notâ€¦.why homologate it for stock class competition?

In the recent weeks, Iâ€™ve had the pleasure many conversations with Scott Frasierâ€¦. And been impressed by each one. Whether you like Scott or not, he is THE ONLY guy who could have pulled off the very successful save of the World Finals we just hadâ€¦. And he is one of the sharpest guys in the industry.
By far the smartest thing Scott has said to me is that the IJSBA is in the â€œcustomer serviceâ€? business, and the first order of business is doing what best â€œservesâ€? the membership. If the RA does nothing else, it needs to adopt a common opinion on the questions above, and submit that opinion to the IJSBA so that the best choices can be made to â€œserveâ€? the membershipâ€¦. This IS what racer associations do.

Respectfully, Harry Klemm

SeaLion · 10-18-2005, 05:30 PM

My feeling was that the original S4 HydroSpace that was 100hp was fair game for stock class. Now that the S4 N/A never made it to production and seems like never will, I think a serious change is in order for stock class. The 110hp S4 Turbo has no place in the stock class with 2 strokes. The key word here is 2 strokes. Like I said, a normally aspirated I would say yes but not the latest turbo version. It could be in a stock 4 stroke class though. The bottom line is that the classes really need to be looked over now and certain new parameters set.

I believe in progress and love this new HS since actually finally seeing it in person, but it is not for everybody. Not yet anyway. It shouldn't be alienated and neither should the hundreds across the world that have 2 stroke stock skis that compete. The ultimate goal is more riders and the readily available current 2 strokes are an ideal situation for new rider participation as witnessed by the fairly large stock class entries (adult and the two juniors classes). I am willing to bet that if things stay as they are, there will be way less participation in these top drawing classes at next years finals. To inject a little reality to this, the following is a conversation that went on right behind me in the stands between a father and young son as I watched the races. It was the first moto of the juniors class were the HS finished 1,2,3 . A kid behind me was commenting on how well those HS are doing and how he would love to be racing one next year. His father said " son I wish we could afford one of those but you won't be on one of those any time soon". I would have worded it a little different but I just felt heartbroken to hear it. Will that kid be racing next year knowing that he won't be able to compete with the other kid that gets one? Will he lose interest and do something else? Is this just one of many stories just like this? I have a feeling that it might be unless something is done to stop it before it's too late.

To summarize, had HS done what they intended to originally do and have a 100hp normally aspirated 4 stroke, I would see no issue. I think that would have caused less outcrys and have probably cost less money to purchase too. A turbo or super charged model needs to be in a different class in stock form. I also don't think the answer is allowing mods to an SX-R or SJ to compensate for the turbo S4.

GMJim · 10-18-2005, 05:57 PM

First I want to state that I did not get a chance to go the World Finals and watch the Hydrospace in person. With that being said, if I was the owner of Hydrospace Corporation and wanted to make a statement about my new product, I would hire the right riders to showcase it which I believe they have done indeed. I have read numerous threads about Mac and how he could win on just about anything. I race an SXR in Novice stock class and I sure wasn't up front a lot for the simple reason that I am not that good. Would a Hydrospace give me an advantage? Maybe yes, maybe not. The last word on the 2 strokes that I heard was that Kawasaki wasn't going to produce anymore after this year. Is this the final word? The ball is in Kawasaki's court to either produce a 4 stroke power plant for the ski or simply discontinue the model like Polaris has done with the Octane. Sooner or later, parts will get scarce.
In the meantime, maybe the IJSBA needs to address the horsepower variance between the manufacturers. Maybe explore some add on products to bump the sxrs and superjets ponies up so that the 110 hp Hydrospace doesn't have such an advantage. I am sure that Yamaha would love to see their product up front again.
Remember back in the 70's when the US car manufacturers were building some pretty lousy cars. Foreign competition made them change their mind in a hurry. Just look at the quaility of their products now. Lets see how Kawasaki and Yamaha handle a little pressure.

Group K · 10-18-2005, 06:03 PM

SL,
Many thanks for the response. These are all very good accounts from someone who was at WF...... but what IJSBA needs is specific answers to the 3 questions. Saying that rules need to be "looked at" doesn't offer much in the way of clear decision making guidance.

In short, yes or no on homologating the HS, yes or no on accomidating SXR owners (and perhaps SJ owners) with added mods, and yes or no on making the HS legal in the classes where first time competitors will be asked to start out.

To be sure these are not easy questions..... That is why the collective voice of the RA is so important to help with the right choices.
Respectfully, Harry Klemm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeaLion

My feeling was that the original S4 HydroSpace that was 100hp was fair game for stock class. Now that the S4 N/A never made it to production and seems like never will, I think a serious change is in order for stock class. The 110hp S4 Turbo has no place in the stock class with 2 strokes.

The bottom line is that the classes really need to be looked over now and certain new parameters set.

I believe in progress and love this new HS since actually finally seeing it in person, but it is not for everybody. Not yet anyway.

I am willing to bet that if things stay as they are, there will be way less participation in these top drawing classes at next years finals. To inject a little reality to this, the following is a conversation that went on right behind me in the stands between a father and young son as I watched the races. It was the first moto of the juniors class were the HS finished 1,2,3 . A kid behind me was commenting on how well those HS are doing and how he would love to be racing one next year. His father said " son I wish we could afford one of those but you won't be on one of those any time soon". I would have worded it a little different but I just felt heartbroken to hear it. Will that kid be racing next year knowing that he won't be able to compete with the other kid that gets one? Will he lose interest and do something else? Is this just one of many stories just like this? I have a feeling that it might be unless something is done to stop it before it's too late.

To summarize, had HS done what they intended to originally do and have a 100hp normally aspirated 4 stroke, I would see no issue. I think that would have caused less outcrys and have probably cost less money to purchase too. A turbo or super charged model needs to be in a different class in stock form. I also don't think the answer is allowing mods to an SX-R or SJ to compensate for the turbo S4.

GMJim · 10-18-2005, 06:11 PM

Harry, I added the superjets in on my comment because I feel that their are superjets owners out their that might not be able to afford an SXR, but might race if a few add ons would put them in the hunt. It seems like their was a 2 month period that the IJSBA was accepting rule change suggestions for next year. I am not sure what the deadline is, but hopefully not in April.

Hammockbay · 10-18-2005, 06:12 PM

I am sure no one wants to add yet another class to PWC racing. But dividing the class may be the only option.

Group K · 10-18-2005, 06:33 PM

Hammock,
You are completly right that the addition of another class is not a great idea. However many enthusiastic racers may be lost if the current (successful) class were overtaken by a high priced, limited availability machine.... which is a high prospect in this case. The IJSBA already knows that there are no easy answers here.... they just want to know which answer is the collective thought of the Riders Assoc.

The Riders Assoc. needs to get it's members to take a collective posture on what advise to give the IJSBA...... Do any of you RA regional guys have a fix on what your members wish the IJSBA to do??
Respectfully, Harry Klemm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammockbay

I am sure no one wants to add yet another class to PWC racing. But dividing the class may be the only option.

LisaLisa · 10-18-2005, 06:44 PM

Harry,

All of your questions are very valid, and I believe when the dust settles from Finals, the Rider's Association can take this item into consideration for a conference and majority vote.

I would suggest that you copy this item and email it directly to the elected head of the Rider's Association, Mr. Riff Del Pardo. If you need contact information, please feel free to PM me and as one of two Region 2 Rider's Representatives for the Rider's Association, I'll do what I can to expedite the process.

I'm hopeful, after all that went down at Finals, and all the hard work the IJSBA crew went through to pull the event off, they will now officially recognize the Rider's Association, and agree to sit down and participate in meaningful, professional, and mutually satisfying exchange of information and ideas to bring our sport back to where it belongs.

Lisa Price

Rudedog · 10-19-2005, 12:00 AM

I beleive the HS problem CAN be solved.
Would I be correct in my asumtion that most NEW RIDERS are not willing to shell out the cash for a HS and that MOST that buy the HS have been riding for some time??
So then here it goes.
Next year make the HS legal in the limited and open class only.
Allow the product (HS) to gain more riders and owners before allowing them into stock class.
Last year the 4-stroke R/A's where put into, and raced with the 2 strokers.
Most of the reason was due to the fact that there where not that many and they didn't want to add another class for just them.
Now that there is alot of 4 stroke R/A's, its time to make there own class..
If the regional entries can handle it and there is turn out, then make a 4-stroke stock class and a 2-stroke stock class.
Same true with the Stand-Ups.
But allow the people BEGINING to explore racing without having to spend alot of $$$
Just a thought.
L8TR
Rudedog

SeaLion · 10-19-2005, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudedog

I beleive the HS problem CAN be solved.
Would I be correct in my asumtion that most NEW RIDERS are not willing to shell out the cash for a HS and that MOST that buy the HS have been riding for some time??
So then here it goes.
Next year make the HS legal in the limited and open class only.
Allow the product (HS) to gain more riders and owners before allowing them into stock class.
Last year the 4-stroke R/A's where put into, and raced with the 2 strokers.
Most of the reason was due to the fact that there where not that many and they didn't want to add another class for just them.
Now that there is alot of 4 stroke R/A's, its time to make there own class..
If the regional entries can handle it and there is turn out, then make a 4-stroke stock class and a 2-stroke stock class.
Same true with the Stand-Ups.
But allow the people BEGINING to explore racing without having to spend alot of $$$
Just a thought.
L8TR
Rudedog

That is essentially what I said too. I hope they sell well so that they can have their own class. That would be ideal and keeping a 2 stroke class as well.

Harry, how much more specific do you need? At this point we need all ideas and sides heard and then draft a final complete solution. This is not as simple as yes or no like you propose. If it were, you could just post a poll of yes or no and make that the final answer and no one would be happy? If ideas are discusssed and all angles covered then a compromise can be reached?