Sport 40 strut mounting

[Don Ferrette]

I don't have a horse in this race and I probably shouldn't even be posting. However, since I managed to "jockey" home a winner(that, of course is just my opinion) when I wrote NAMBA's current Nitro Sport Hydro strut rule the following quote from well respected I.M.P.B.A. member seems very germane to this topic.

"If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got."

Call me lazy if you want, but I find it easier to mount a strut on the outside of a transom and make strut adjustment. And, at my age making things easier is a good thing.

JD

Amen JD! Last night I mounted the strut on the P sport hydro I'm building, took all of about 5 minutes. Heaven forbid we should do something to make things easier for a newbie or even us "seasoned boaters".

Hmmmmm, it sure does looks menacing though hanging off the transom like that, gotta be worth 15mph over one mounted underneath .................. at least that's what one would think based on some of the posts on here against allowing it on the sport 40s.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[FloridaScaleBoater]

Don;

Seems no one wanted to reply to my post in this thread, you referring to making all the sport hydro classes with basically the same rule.

SO, I'll touch on it here again,,,, MY concern with this rule change as you referred to it, to bring Parity (SP) to ALL sport classes...

WILL JUST OPEN THE DOOR for the "modified outrigger" style of boats... that are being raced in the gas sport hydro classes....

Once the transom mounted struts are allowed,,, it's just a matter of time, they will start showing up

And really Don,,, when was the last time you actively raced a Sport-40?

Now,, this is just my opinion and concern...

 

[Don Ferrette]

Rick, I'll be the first to admit in hindsight I think we screwed up BIG TIME on the gas sport hydro rules. We should have stood our ground to the threat of the lawsuit over a certain manufacturer's hull design rather than let the gas sport rules be altered for that design simply because it had already run in a race. However, as for the other seven IMPBA sport hydro (N,P,Q,S,T in FE and sport 12 & 21 in nitro) classes that have always allowed the transom mounted struts I have yet to see them overrun with "modified rigger" designs. You race a good bit in NAMBA and they allow transom mounted struts on the sport 40s, how's that working for you all at NAMBA races? Have you seen any differences between the two? Just looking for serious feedback on those two Qs, it may just prove a point or it may not.

And really Rick... sport 40 hasn't changed a bit since I stopped running the class so what's your point there?

 

[P THOMAS]

Don;

Seems no one wanted to reply to my post in this thread, you referring to making all the sport hydro classes with basically the same rule.

SO, I'll touch on it here again,,,, MY concern with this rule change as you referred to it, to bring Parity (SP) to ALL sport classes...

WILL JUST OPEN THE DOOR for the "modified outrigger" style of boats... that are being raced in the gas sport hydro classes....

Once the transom mounted struts are allowed,,, it's just a matter of time, they will start showing up

And really Don,,, when was the last time you actively raced a Sport-40?

Now,, this is just my opinion and concern...

Rick, The new nitro sport rules passed in June, that limits the hull configurations. Now how long it takes to get published in the rule book is up to the IMPBA secretary?

 

[Kevin Sheren]

I don't see any of our Sport Hydro rules looking like the Gas Sport hydro rules any time in the future.

The new Sport 40 rules take affect 1/1/2014. All of the rules will be updated in the rule book then.

I am working on them now.

Kevin

 

[tom galdys]

When did we vote on the rules? Tom Galdys

 

[Joe Wiebelhaus]

I don't see any of our Sport Hydro rules looking like the Gas Sport hydro rules any time in the future.

The new Sport 40 rules take affect 1/1/2014. All of the rules will be updated in the rule book then.

I am working on them now.

Kevin

That's after the membership votes on it correct ?

 

[P THOMAS]

I don't see any of our Sport Hydro rules looking like the Gas Sport hydro rules any time in the future.

The new Sport 40 rules take affect 1/1/2014. All of the rules will be updated in the rule book then.

I am working on them now.

Kevin

That's after the membership votes on it correct ?

Go read the June roostertail it was voted on and passed. We still have the strut rule to vote on. Two separate things. That should be in the december roostertail I think.

 

[ZZ RACING]

That is correct Phil. The Sport 20 and 40 hull rule was voted on in June and was passed by the membership. It takes effect Jan 1st. The strut placement rule was voted as a one year trial rule for 2013 and will go to the membership for a vote in Dec. The strut placement rule just allows guys to put the strut on the transom. It does not say you have to. It just gives you that option.

 

[Scott Liddycoat]

I think it's great to have options, this leads to creativity and innovation. I have built plenty of limited inboard hydroplanes and you would not even think about building one without an adjustable strut on the transom.
My vote is to accept the trial rule.

 

[HOTWATER]

I think it's great to have options, this leads to creativity and innovation. I have built plenty of limited inboard hydroplanes and you would not even think about building one without an adjustable strut on the transom.

My vote is to accept the trial rule.

Words from the driver of a REAL full size Unlimited Hydroplane!

I agree......

 

[FloridaScaleBoater]

Rick, I'll be the first to admit in hindsight I think we screwed up BIG TIME on the gas sport hydro rules. We should have stood our ground to the threat of the lawsuit over a certain manufacturer's hull design rather than let the gas sport rules be altered for that design simply because it had already run in a race. However, as for the other seven IMPBA sport hydro (N,P,Q,S,T in FE and sport 12 & 21 in nitro) classes that have always allowed the transom mounted struts I have yet to see them overrun with "modified rigger" designs. You race a good bit in NAMBA I might run one race a year at a NAMBA event,,, the changing of the transom strut rule changed after I had moved to Georgia,, and they allow transom mounted struts on the sport 40s, how's that working for you all at NAMBA races? I personally have not seen one yet,, Have you seen any differences between the two? Just looking for serious feedback on those two Qs, it may just prove a point or it may not.

And really Rick... sport 40 hasn't changed a bit since I stopped running the class so what's your point there? Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run. I do, always have and probably always will run sport-40.... My ballot will read NO!!

 

[Don Ferrette]

Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run.

Rick I have been crystal clear about it from the onset, consistency across the board for all the sport boats when it comes to strut mounting, the fact that it makes things easier for the boaters (as JD pointed out) is just a bonus. What gettin' me fired up is not one single person in this thread or the last one (that went on for 17 pages) can offer up a legitimate reason not to or evidence it will give some kind of "unfair advantage". The last PT sport 40 I had I tested both ways and it was maybe a touch better in the corners with the strut under the boat so that's where it stayed until I sold it. The new hull rules are already in place to keep the "modified riggers" out so what are you afraid of that you will still vote no...........

 

[SayMikey]

Rick, I'll be the first to admit in hindsight I think we screwed up BIG TIME on the gas sport hydro rules. We should have stood our ground to the threat of the lawsuit over a certain manufacturer's hull design rather than let the gas sport rules be altered for that design simply because it had already run in a race. However, as for the other seven IMPBA sport hydro (N,P,Q,S,T in FE and sport 12 & 21 in nitro) classes that have always allowed the transom mounted struts I have yet to see them overrun with "modified rigger" designs. You race a good bit in NAMBA I might run one race a year at a NAMBA event,,, the changing of the transom strut rule changed after I had moved to Georgia,, and they allow transom mounted struts on the sport 40s, how's that working for you all at NAMBA races? I personally have not seen one yet,, Have you seen any differences between the two? Just looking for serious feedback on those two Qs, it may just prove a point or it may not.

And really Rick... sport 40 hasn't changed a bit since I stopped running the class so what's your point there? Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run. I do, always have and probably always will run sport-40.... My ballot will read NO!!

In about 6 weeks we should know the outcome

 

[Don Ferrette]

Rick, I'll be the first to admit in hindsight I think we screwed up BIG TIME on the gas sport hydro rules. We should have stood our ground to the threat of the lawsuit over a certain manufacturer's hull design rather than let the gas sport rules be altered for that design simply because it had already run in a race. However, as for the other seven IMPBA sport hydro (N,P,Q,S,T in FE and sport 12 & 21 in nitro) classes that have always allowed the transom mounted struts I have yet to see them overrun with "modified rigger" designs. You race a good bit in NAMBA I might run one race a year at a NAMBA event,,, the changing of the transom strut rule changed after I had moved to Georgia,, and they allow transom mounted struts on the sport 40s, how's that working for you all at NAMBA races? I personally have not seen one yet,, Have you seen any differences between the two? Just looking for serious feedback on those two Qs, it may just prove a point or it may not.

And really Rick... sport 40 hasn't changed a bit since I stopped running the class so what's your point there? Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run. I do, always have and probably always will run sport-40.... My ballot will read NO!!

In about 6 weeks we should know the outcome

AMEN to that. Time will tell.............

 

[FloridaScaleBoater]

Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run.

Rick I have been crystal clear about it from the onset, consistency across the board for all the sport boats when it comes to strut mounting, the fact that it makes things easier for the boaters (as JD pointed out) is just a bonus. What gettin' me fired up is not one single person in this thread or the last one (that went on for 17 pages) can offer up a legitimate reason not to or evidence it will give some kind of "unfair advantage". The last PT sport 40 I had I tested both ways and it was maybe a touch better in the corners with the strut under the boat so that's where it stayed until I sold it. The new hull rules are already in place to keep the "modified riggers" out so what are you afraid of that you will still vote no...........

Don, it appears we will agree to disagree on this subject,,, YOU seem to think your opinion is better than others. And carries more weight I myself don't see a legitimate reason from your post's as to why we are even having this conversation...

Legitimate,,, what makes your reasoning MORE legitimate than mine?

My opinion doesn't match or agree with yours,,, so now I'm afraid of something,,,, PLEASE!

You, yourself have stated there is NO real advantage either way, other than it's easier to set the boat up, I have heard the sport-40 class refered to as a tuners class. I feel if you can't bore a hole through the bottom of a hull maybe you shouldn't be building a sport-40

I feel it is easier to make a strut template from a strut mounted through the hull, rather than the transom.

 

[jim hagan]

are struts, skidfins, drivelines and rudders considered part of the hull. I really only need a yes or no but I realize comments about the stupidity of the question are sometimes included

Thanks

 

[P THOMAS]

are struts, skidfins, drivelines and rudders considered part of the hull. I really only need a yes or no but I realize comments about the stupidity of the question are sometimes included

Thanks

No

 

[Don Ferrette]

Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run.

Rick I have been crystal clear about it from the onset, consistency across the board for all the sport boats when it comes to strut mounting, the fact that it makes things easier for the boaters (as JD pointed out) is just a bonus. What gettin' me fired up is not one single person in this thread or the last one (that went on for 17 pages) can offer up a legitimate reason not to or evidence it will give some kind of "unfair advantage". The last PT sport 40 I had I tested both ways and it was maybe a touch better in the corners with the strut under the boat so that's where it stayed until I sold it. The new hull rules are already in place to keep the "modified riggers" out so what are you afraid of that you will still vote no...........

Don, it appears we will agree to disagree on this subject,,, YOU seem to think your opinion is better than others. And carries more weight I myself don't see a legitimate reason from your post's as to why we are even having this conversation...

Legitimate,,, what makes your reasoning MORE legitimate than mine?

My opinion doesn't match or agree with yours,,, so now I'm afraid of something,,,, PLEASE!

You, yourself have stated there is NO real advantage either way, other than it's easier to set the boat up, I have heard the sport-40 class refered to as a tuners class. I feel if you can't bore a hole through the bottom of a hull maybe you shouldn't be building a sport-40

I feel it is easier to make a strut template from a strut mounted through the hull, rather than the transom.

"I feel if you can't bore a hole through the bottom of a hull maybe you shouldn't be building a sport-40"

Yeah that's the right attitude to promote the hobby........................ NOT!

My opinion is my own and carries no more weight than anyone else's. Now reasoning.... that's a whole different subject. We clearly are done here as you are stuck in the past, I want things to move forward.

 

[FloridaScaleBoater]

Just can't figure out why you are being so vocal about rules in a class you don't run.

Rick I have been crystal clear about it from the onset, consistency across the board for all the sport boats when it comes to strut mounting, the fact that it makes things easier for the boaters (as JD pointed out) is just a bonus. What gettin' me fired up is not one single person in this thread or the last one (that went on for 17 pages) can offer up a legitimate reason not to or evidence it will give some kind of "unfair advantage". The last PT sport 40 I had I tested both ways and it was maybe a touch better in the corners with the strut under the boat so that's where it stayed until I sold it. The new hull rules are already in place to keep the "modified riggers" out so what are you afraid of that you will still vote no...........

Don, it appears we will agree to disagree on this subject,,, YOU seem to think your opinion is better than others. And carries more weight I myself don't see a legitimate reason from your post's as to why we are even having this conversation...

Legitimate,,, what makes your reasoning MORE legitimate than mine?

My opinion doesn't match or agree with yours,,, so now I'm afraid of something,,,, PLEASE!

You, yourself have stated there is NO real advantage either way, other than it's easier to set the boat up, I have heard the sport-40 class refered to as a tuners class. I feel if you can't bore a hole through the bottom of a hull maybe you shouldn't be building a sport-40

I feel it is easier to make a strut template from a strut mounted through the hull, rather than the transom.

"I feel if you can't bore a hole through the bottom of a hull maybe you shouldn't be building a sport-40"

Yeah that's the right attitude to promote the hobby........................ NOT!

Don, this has nothing to do with promoting the hobby or not,, you wouldn't expect a new person to the hobby to build a 1/8th scale, or a twin hydro, due to the difficulty in building, prepping and running,,, so DON'T come off with that BS!!!!

My opinion is my own and carries no more weight than anyone else's. Now reasoning.... that's a whole different subject. We clearly are done here as you are stuck in the past,

No, not stuck in the past, I just happen to like the rules as written (with the exception of the exposed tuned pipes) but that's another subject

I want things to move forward.