Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

User avatar
sdwarf36
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:06 pm

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by sdwarf36 »

It never would be anything I (or most of us) would have-but I build VSRA legal 289's at work that make 570+ hp 475 ft lbs that rev to 8300rpm-and thats with iron heads. Stock they weigh about 460-with a good Dart block your looking maybe 500. Take away the rules + build it out of Aluminum it could go down near 400.
But I rather worry about cars that do run with us-thats why I asked about the Tiger-is it under 5 liter now-and would we be moving it down a class?
Translating road racing to hillclimbing:
Proper tire selection== nothing hooks up on moss or wet leaves.
Staying on the racing line==anything paved is considered good.
User avatar
3rdgendennis
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:29 pm

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by 3rdgendennis »

If the engine in the Tiger is a 289 or 302, then yes this would bump it down to P2
The youngest David Dennis
"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space"
Dennis Motorsports
User avatar
sdwarf36
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:06 pm

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by sdwarf36 »

3rdgendennis wrote:If the engine in the Tiger is a 289 or 302, then yes this would bump it down to P2
Soooo-if the main goal was to not have to run against V-8s-you're now gonna open things up to allow them in TWO of the 4 classes? :?:
Translating road racing to hillclimbing:
Proper tire selection== nothing hooks up on moss or wet leaves.
Staying on the racing line==anything paved is considered good.
User avatar
walterclark
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:57 pm
Location: Dover, MA.
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by walterclark »

Of course I dont run with this elite group so who am I to say, but I dont see a problem. The potential power is similar and so is the risk of going there to both the engine and pocketbook. It makes P1 a class for really big boys (engines that is).

Which reminds me...Why is P1 limited to 8 liters?
The older I get the better I was.
User avatar
3rdgendennis
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:29 pm

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by 3rdgendennis »

walterclark wrote:Which reminds me...Why is P1 limited to 8 liters?
That is a good question. So if someone showed up in a modified with a 528 Hemi :shock: they can't run in P?
Looks like when the rules were written, they started at some number (8000) that was probably beyond any engine sizes running at the time, and worked their way down. Anyone know exactly when these specific limits were put into place?
The youngest David Dennis
"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space"
Dennis Motorsports
User avatar
KevinGale
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:01 pm
Location: Sutton, NH

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by KevinGale »

3rdgendennis wrote: That is a good question. So if someone showed up in a modified with a 528 Hemi :shock: they can't run in P?
Looks like when the rules were written, they started at some number (8000) that was probably beyond any engine sizes running at the time, and worked their way down. Anyone know exactly when these specific limits were put into place?
John Reed will know. As he posted earlier, he along with Jimmy Hale and Dave Patten create the basis of the rules we use now. I don't care if we raise it or remove it. If someone wants to show up with an 800 cu motor and run in P1 I want to watch.
User avatar
walterclark
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:57 pm
Location: Dover, MA.
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by walterclark »

I was thinking along the lines of a small aluminum V8 like the Audi 4.2 that has been turbocharged (aka RS6 biturbo) and using the front part of the A8/S8/RS6 running gear in the back of a tube frame chassis... :twisted:

I figure with 800HP on tap one might want to keep both hands on the wheel and the ZF from those cars can take it, so not clutch or shifter. Just point it and pull the trigger.
The older I get the better I was.
User avatar
sachilles
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 3:11 pm
Location: Waitsfield, VT

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by sachilles »

I like the way Walter thinks. I hope somebody builds it someday.
Sachilles
02 Subaru impreza (Donut) #66
sciroccohp
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: New Haven, CT

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by sciroccohp »

i was following this because if I ever get bored with the quantum I was going to cage it and run it. I figured if I ran street tires with the proposed rule it would be in P2. but right now it would be in P1 with little to no chance against a modified. Is the 8 liter limit to prevent the v8 turbo? to prevent a twin turbo v8 with nitrous from launching themselves into the woods at some ungodly speed.
User avatar
Rabbit Farmer
Posts: 2260
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 11:37 pm
AntiSpam: No
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Change in P Class Displacement

Post by Rabbit Farmer »

walterclark wrote:I was thinking along the lines of a small aluminum V8 like the Audi 4.2 that has been turbocharged (aka RS6 biturbo) and using the front part of the A8/S8/RS6 running gear in the back of a tube frame chassis...
Seth... sounds like what your cousin was making with his VW Rabbit pickup.... except rear engine.
Go Fast VW & Audi parts at FastAddiction.com
Post Reply