USAC Racing Forum

I know this isn't the QMA forum, but I haven't paid my membership at QMA yet so I can't post this on their forum.  If I was already a member, I would post this there without a second thought about it.

I have done a lot of digging this week (several hours on the phone) discussing the Animal engines and the rules at USAC and the proposed rules at QMA because we would like to run both if the rules sync up.

Rusty (National Tech at QMA) seems dead set against going with the current rules set forth by the USAC rulebook.  He wants to eliminate the milling and decking and go with the engines out of the box.  He keeps talking about how Briggs is going to offer to replace all the heads currently in USAC (for free) if USAC will adopt the same rules as QMA.  Which sounds like a reasonable compromise on the surface and had me ready to contact James at tell him to take the deal. 

However after more digging, I found out that Briggs has also made a similar offer to QMA and agreed to do the milling and decking on the engines before they ship so they all will be within the USAC specs.  Rusty quickly defended this as not being an option because the first couple hundred engines are already boxed up so the builders would have to do this work.  For that reason he says it is easier for everyone if USAC takes the deal and makes their users switch to box stock heads.  I questioned how an organization already in the midst of a racing season switching an engine platform could be considered easy.  I also pointed out some of the details builders have told me about needing to mill the heads during rebuilds due to warping and such.  At that point Rusty's responses got quite tense so I wished him luck and ended our conversation.

I have validated all this information and I support USAC sticking with their current rules and if that means we don't go QMA racing this year, so be it.

2008 Turkey Gobbler 110+ cars --> 2010 Turkey Gobbler 30ish cars
2008 Lil 500 150+ cars --> 2010 Lil 500 70ish cars

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.

Anyone that is a member of both and wants to consider running both, feel free to contact me and I will share more details with you in case you wish to reach out to Rusty and make your voice heard.

Hey I just found out last week that we have been running a box stock against all the other milled and decked engines and I kept wondering what the heck is going on. Thanks to Steve Baker we should be ok for this weekend. :)

Thanks, Scott, for the research. With the 2011 USAC season already under way, I think changing the USAC Animal specs would be impractical.

We have done our homework and have run these engines for over two years. I will tell you that USAC got it right with the specs. There have been conference calls to go over where we are at today and all those involved agree that we did all the right things for the racer and not the engine builders.

As time goes on this spec will be the best thing for racers. It will always keep the playing field as even as it can for everyone and this can all be done for under $100.00. If a engine builder is charging more than that to have the deck and head machined then you are being overcharged.

Trust me - The other organization is making a BIG mistake. And their members will end up paying for it the end....like they always do. Been there done that... remember the key issue, Thailand engines and the Japan Head....just to name a few.  Don't buy into the hype from them.

 QMA asking USAC to align their platform that USAC originated and have been sucessfully running..........



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!

I think I just peed a little!!  

USAC should not change anything to align with QMA. As stated above USAC has it right already.

I totally agree, USAC has it right and since QMA got an offer from Briggs to make engines for QMA match USAC specs out of the box, it should be a no brainer. 

Anyone that still runs QMA too or for those QMAers that troll this forum too, if you agree I would recommend you call Rusty, Rich and/or Tom and make your feelings known.  They have a chance to start to pull the nose up with this decision.

Milling block and cylinder heads………Hmmmmmmmmm Why?
I will try to put this into the simplest form to understand I can. Do you think that a 2 HP gain in a 750 HP NASCAR engine is important? You bet it is, just Chris Murray. It might not sound like a lot but it is. That would be a .27% gain and in a typical NASCAR race on a 1 mile long track that would equate to 12 feet of racing surface. Now let’s take a 7 HP Animal engine and apply a .27% HP gain, that would be 0.019 HP. So taking that a step further that would equate to 7.2 inches per lap on a typical 1/20 mile QM race track. Have you ever been beat by 7.2 inches? Now take that 7.2 inches times 20 laps! That would be 12 feet! The point I am trying to make is yes yes yes even only a few thousands of an inch in engine design makes a difference on the race track. Racing organizations number 1 priority when creating engine tech specs need to make sure they can help to equalize performance with engine cost in mind with both of these very important. Unfortunately we still have some variation from part to part in other engine components that we cannot control, however every effort should be made if possible to eliminate the performance variations by well thought out tech specs. I feel that USAC is staying on top of their game in this department.

Thanks
Steve Baker

Steve,

While I agree that a small amount of HP gained makes an appreciable difference, the numbers you use make no sense.

Power is a measure of (distance*mass*acceleration)/time.  You can't equate a .27% increase in power to a particular distance without accounting for the mass, acceleration and time components.

WingNut,

Maybe the way I am stating it is a little confusing. What I am saying with a .27% HP gain you will be 7.2 inches farther down the race track at the same given time on your stop watch versus not a .27% HP gain. All I am saying is more HP is energy and this will do more work and this will move the car farther in any given time frame.

Steve

My son does rocketry projects every year for the Pickaway county fair 4H.  The projects are based on Newton’s Laws of Motion.  Steve is using Newton’s Second Law of Motion in a practical sense for quarter midget racing.  The physics that allow a rocket to go into motion also relate to how a quarter midget travels around a track.  Great points and lesson Steve.

Good point Offset

Yes, How fast the car goes is all based on energy and Newton's law. Another on the car that I always payed a lot of attention was the noise and vibration especially as it relates to the drive train. For example if you could spin your axle while attached to the front and rear gears without the engine you would more than likely hear a lot of noise and feel some vibration. If you could eliminate this energy loss your engine would be capable of transferring more energy to the tire patch and the car would be faster.
Cool stuff!!!!!!!!

Steve

I would think a splined axel will vibrate less than a keyed one, due to the missing mass at the keyway causing an imbalance.  Has anyone ever tried a belt / pulley drive with fluid or harmonic balancer?

By reading the forums on the QMA site it sure looks like a lot of people over there want them to just adopt the same rules as USAC too.  What a shame a few people over there have their heads in other places.

The other forums are making me crack up laughing regarding this topic.  Apparently QMA is experiencing carb issues with their engine configuration. 

ROFL!!!  Does that sound familiar to Jr Animal handlers from last year? 

What really cracks me up is I told Rusty all about the carb issues we had last year to try to help him out so they could avoid a bunch of wasted time on his part as a result.

This will be our first "real" season competing in USAC. I have not renewed our QMA membership. What cracks me up is that from everything I have read gives me the impression that QMA will do ANYTHING to not follow what USAC has already accomplished to make this a better sport for the kids.

When we made the decision last year to race solely USAC events we knew a schedule, rules and could get time off of work. If I had waited, my son would have gotten the shaft since work schedules would have been set, budgeting for which motors to aquire and send up to be updated. I had all of this done by January..

I wish them all luck scrambling around at the last minute and expecting engine builders to do the same. I am sure they will all be happy with doing that!

Offset, we run a belt drive setup. I believe that there is less vibration because there is no chain slap. I really can not say for sure that it is any better than a chain set up, but it does run smoother and my hands stay cleaner. The disadvantage to the belt drive is the cost. It is much more costly than a chain set up. We have been hit pretty hard in the rear axle and have never lost a belt, I know if we were running a chain that it would have come off.
Dale Gross

So what are other Pro's and Con's to the belt drive deal?

Where can we locate a set-up and what is a total cost to install?

Thanks!

Tony
Here is what i found, Hope it helps           

SC Customs.net


Steve

 My bet is that QMA NBOD will adopt most of the current Animal specs because they are running out of time, some QMA clubs are already racing or are about to. If anyone remembers the QMA World Formula tech manual took forever and the NBOD has asked the same ones responsible for that fiasco to help with the Animal.

 It appears QMA will mandate the use of the "scatter shield" on the Animals as they did on the World Formula. For weeks now Ziggy, QMA VP, has been offering his "race preped" Animals complete with the scatter shield. Another dime to squeeze out of the membership.   

Tony,  Drop me a email and I can share what info I have on the belt drives. We run they on 4 cars and have have good luck with them. They are not SC custom. I had them made.
d.gross@rcn.com

Is the belt drive setup lighter?  I am looking to shed 3-5# and maybe loosing the chain would accomplish that!  I am waiting for the SC pictures to download...they are HUGE pics! 

Can we run the belt drive in USAC rather then a chain? 

I will weigh a set up today and let you know what it weighs. You can run a belt drive in USAC.
Dale

Kendall42,
The weight of the belt drive is 1298.6 grams. The weight of a standard chain systems was 995.4 grams. That was with a standard slip collar gear hub. If you through in a spring loaded quick change gear hub you are about the same weight as the belt drive. The belt drive is picking up weight because the engine gear is 1'' wide and the axle gears are 2'' wide. Sorry you will not loose any weight with the belt. Our kids are little so we were not trying to save weight. They just seem to run smoother and cleaner.
Dale Gross