Four-Stroke Specific Classes/Rules

Lee Bower · 10-17-2005, 02:08 PM

I've read much discussion that there should be four-stroke specific classes. Just as an FYI, there are already four-stroke specific classes and rules. You've probably seen the rules and even the class listings. What is often missed is the eligibility to combine the four-stroke classes with the two-stroke classes. This was needed since at the start of four-stroke racing, there weren't enough four-strokes to fill the line, so the IJSBA needed a way of combining them. By actually having these separate classes allows a great deal of flexibility as the technology and interest in four-strokes developes. As time goes on, the four-stroke classes can stand on their own, leaving the two-strokes alone. The basic rules allow for this. The only thing that will need to change is the "eligibility chart" that combines the four-stroke and the two-stroke classes.

And example of the flexibility of these rules was initially allowing the stock turbocharged four-strokes to compete only with the Limited-class two-strokes, then later adjusting the eligibility so they could compete in the Stock class for 2005. Keep in mind that this could have been done separately for skis and runabouts (but apparently wasn't). Not knowing how the Stock class turbocharged or supercharged boats would run, for the first year of these, they were combined with the Limited class. Again, I'm not going into that discussion on the skis or HS - I have no idea on what lead to any decisions with that.

willycrumb · 10-17-2005, 03:14 PM

You had a starbucks this morning.

squish · 10-20-2005, 01:29 PM

Tech was not fair in the 1200 stock class. There was a lot of misunderstanding of the 2005 rules . The techs were not up to what the rule book states. They had a big issue with the thickness of the gaskets, and water routing that was allowed for this year.
Is it fair for only the two strokes to have to be torn down and not even take the valve cover off of a four stroke? This is what happened . I guess anyone can do internal work and since they are not going to teardown you can get away with it . The techs need to tear down at least the cylinder head to view the block.The camshafts need to be profiled and compared to a stock camshaft.Just because it has the mfg's stamping or casting mark does not mean anything. This goes for the ski class as well.
If they race together then they should follow simillar rules, specially when it comes to teardown for a world championship title.

creator · 10-20-2005, 02:08 PM

Ya-hu... And, do you know how much it'll cost us to put these things back togeather again?? How long it'd take not only for dis-assembly, but to get them re-assembled and running again????? I say, not unless you have a trained tech from the manufacturer of that four stroke on site and ready to do the tear down AND re-assembly. Untill that happens, there's a verry slim chance in He** I'm letting a guy who only deals with 2-strokes even pull my valve cover off, not to mention pull the cams and head.

I mean, I'm all for it if the guy was so far out in front that it's obvious... But, if it's an even fight and the valve cover looks like it's never been popped, then I'm totally against. ... Except for pro's, everything should get torn down there.

Prem1x · 10-20-2005, 02:11 PM

Youre responsible for your own tear-down and reassembly.

one1one · 10-20-2005, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squish

Tech was not fair in the 1200 stock class. There was a lot of misunderstanding of the 2005 rules . The techs were not up to what the rule book states. They had a big issue with the thickness of the gaskets, and water routing that was allowed for this year.
Is it fair for only the two strokes to have to be torn down and not even take the valve cover off of a four stroke? This is what happened . I guess anyone can do internal work and since they are not going to teardown you can get away with it . The techs need to tear down at least the cylinder head to view the block.The camshafts need to be profiled and compared to a stock camshaft.Just because it has the mfg's stamping or casting mark does not mean anything. This goes for the ski class as well.
If they race together then they should follow simillar rules, specially when it comes to teardown for a world championship title.

I am glad someone finally mentioned this issue.

The rightful winner of Pro/Am 1200 Stock was DQ'ed for "illegal" head gasket, the gasket was thinner than OEM but same style, type & material.

The 2005 rulebook specificly mentions cylinder base gasket thickness but opens the use of aftermarket replacement gaskets with no mention of gasket thickness except for cylinder base. The term "replacement part" isn't used so the term in the glossery isn't applicable.

The rule is poorly written & the obvious winner (won the qualifier, and both moto's) was DQ'ed for the gasket issue, yet the 2nd place getter on a Kawasaki 15F had a lanyard check & thats it! During the appeal process James Masterton (the winner) was told the rule was poorly written & will be changed yet was still DQ'ed....

I know that runabout stock isn't an high profile class in the US, but in area's like Australia, New Zealand & even Europe it is important and the actions of the tech crew at Havasu are dissapointing to say the least.

This is the rule as it was written-
6.3.11 Replacement of general maintenance parts (e.g., gaskets, seals, spark plugs, spark plug wires, spark plug caps, wiring, water hoses, fuel lines, clamps and fasteners) shall not be restricted to original equipment providing the following:
1) Replacement gaskets may be used but must be of the same type (e.g., sheet, o-ring, etc.) as their OEM counterparts. Base gasket cannot be thicker than 0.8mm (0.032in).
2) Stripped threads must be repaired to the original size.
3) Fasteners (e.g., bolts, nuts and washers) may not be substituted with titanium pieces unless originally equipped. Fasteners may integrate locking
mechanisms.

squish · 10-24-2005, 03:18 PM

I remember seeing through the chain link fence and noticed masterson was not even asked to remove his cylinder head when he was being dq'ed
and he was told to leave tech area. Others were being asked to go all the way to cylinders off and front cover ect.
Later they called masterson back into tech and pulled the pipe and the cylinder head. I don't think that is correct either. How can you let some one take the boat, and a a half hour later call him into tech again. This allows for you to change things while you have it. I don't believe this happened in this particular instance ,but it could in onother. At this point something happened because the cylinder did not have to come off. I know they were checking for bore size and for power valve machining, even before cylinder removal. The techs won't comment on other competitors race boats. I think the techs should let the other racers know what they are nailing people for so as to not let it happen again the following year. The rules also have to be clarified by ijsba the problem is sometimes the person in charge at the rulebook writing is not the person interpreting the rules at the world finals. It hard to say he meant THIS when you wrote THIS.

sponge racing · 10-24-2005, 10:39 PM

Wow the more I read some of these posts, the more I think the ijsba have no clue. Not tearing down a 4 stroke is totally not fair and bs. Doesnt matter how hard it is too put back together. If they are racing in the same class same race that should mean same rules= Breakdown especially at the world finals. This is true because I know of 2 classes that were won on 4stokes and they were not even touched atall..

411 RXP · 10-24-2005, 11:09 PM

I won on a 4 stroke and they did a boost test but did not pull the head.It would cost about $250 and 5 hrs to tear down and put back together.They don't have that time in tech but I would have let them do it if I had to.My motor never had a bolt out of it from stock even the stock clutch that they say fails.

fitzen101 · 10-24-2005, 11:19 PM

no tear down for 4-strokes? i'm getting one for sure now! LOL