Is this legal for the Pro Production class?

[ssb4]

So what's does that mean for SMG?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blue Coyote]

Thought I read the 17 had a different front layout vs 16


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rynomx785]

Just to clarify the chassis / suspension mounting point rules for the two Pro Production classes. I spoke with Cory, here is what he said the rules are.

Any suspension mounting point with a single tab on either side of the suspension component, using a single mounting bolt, may add a second mounting tab to the chassis, on either side of the factory original tab, thus allowing a double bolt mounted arm. You may not remove the factory tab, only add a second tab. This rule was put in place to add strength to a single bolt, single tab mounting point. Corys example was the XP900 upper front a-arm with its single tab on each side of the arm with one long mounting bolt.

Any chassis that comes with a two tab per suspension mounting point MUST remain in the stock location. You may add gussets or doubler plates to strengthen the original tab. You must mount the suspension part between the two factory tabs. Mounting a part on the outside of a factory chassis tab mount, or adding a 3rd tab is not allowed per the rules. The chassis tabs if replaced and Authorized by tech, must still be the same location & width apart as the factory mounts. So if using a hiem vs a bushing, you might have to add spacers to fill the spread of the two chassis mounts. The XP1000 and new X3 have two tab suspension mounting points from the factory, so there is no need to add a second tab.

Any chassis that has moved, altered or added extra suspension mounting points to the chassis is considered an Unlimited class UTV.

Moving of the front dif is legal. Moving the trans if not mounted directly to the engine is legal (The old Mav and new Yamaha run a trans that is not bolt to or supported by the engine) so those vehicles could move the trans as long as engine location is left stock. The new Can Am X3 and Polaris XP have the trans bolted to the engine, so those must remain in the stock location. Again front dif or drive shafts can be moved.

So based on that, Craig's car won't pass tech this season?

 

[BiggJim]

So what's does that mean for SMG?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just so you know...I seen you palm that Ace. "Lets put the focus on Craigs car" so no one says anything about Robby cars. Robbys car is no where near the rules's....No where. You can't buy it on a dealer ship floor and A/C will NEVER sell a 1000 a year. With that said its NOT a Production car....and should be racing the Unlimited class.

 

[ssb4]

... I guess we will see who is out there racing next week. FYI, I didn't start the thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NIKAL]

Just so you know...I seen you palm that Ace. "Lets put the focus on Craigs car" so no one says anything about Robby cars. Robbys car is no where near the rules's....No where. You can't buy it on a dealer ship floor and A/C will NEVER sell a 1000 a year. With that said its NOT a Production car....and should be racing the Unlimited class.

100% agree that if Arctic Cat has not, and does not release the Wild Cat X with a turbo Yamaha engine, then Robby should not be able to race in the Pro Prod. He should be in the Unlimited class like Max is signed up for, until they do release it to the general public. Or Arctic Cat can verify this is in mass production and has a confirmed release date. Also per the BITD rules Arcit Cat does not have to sell 1000 units, just produce a 1000, which I agree as of now they have not done.

The way this is going we might and should see a good number of Unlimited class UTV's this year. I guess we will have to wait and see what Cory & BITD Tech is going to say about the RG Arctic Cat and the Holz built cars. Are they legal or not??? Does anyone know if Holz built more then one car like Craig's? I thought I heard they built two or three that way?

 

[tatum]

I saw a car on display at UTV World Championship last year like Craig's. I didn't see anywhere in the rules posted here specifying the rule only apply to Rzr 900 so I bet it gets a pass.

 

[JoeyD23]

I spoke with Craig about this.

He explained, Mark Holz spoke with Cory about the entire vehicle and its design. It passes tech and will race the Pro Turbo class at BITD.

I know Craig well and rules, class compliance and the class in general are very important to him and always have been. You see it in his support for the factory racers and privateers. He would never risk jeopardizing the classes integrity or his own by breaking a rule.

Rest assured, the vehicle is legal.

 

[Rynomx785]

I spoke with Craig about this.

He explained, Mark Holz spoke with Cory about the entire vehicle and its design. It passes tech and will race the Pro Turbo class at BITD.

I know Craig well and rules, class compliance and the class in general are very important to him and always have been. You see it in his support for the factory racers and privateers. He would never risk jeopardizing the classes integrity or his own by breaking a rule.

Rest assured, the vehicle is legal.

Joey, do you know how far forward Holz moves the arms? Based on the rules, I don't see how that could pass. Not trying to be argumentative....just curious.

 

[JoeyD23]

Joey, do you know how far forward Holz moves the arms? Based on the rules, I don't see how that could pass. Not trying to be argumentative....just curious.

The arms are not moved. The diff is moved back which is legal.

 

[Rynomx785]

The arms are not moved. The diff is moved back which is legal.

Gotcha...thanks for the clarification.

 

[george.felix]

Thank God Craig thinks the rules are important because that's becoming more rare these days. The rules are not only being massaged but they seem to come with a happy ending! And I'm not talking about this car at all.....

 

[JoeyD23]

Sappington measured (in front of God and everyone) the pivot points multiple times comparing them to a RZR with stock pivots and found that Craig's machine was within the rules and totally legal.

 

[badassmav]

I agree with you Todd, that it looks like the forward upper a arm pivot on the front suspension has been moved forward (relative to the lower front pivot point) to allow clearance for the badass front steer conversion Holtz did. I always admired the Holtz/Coastal front suspension designs for spending the time to maximize the dynamics and handling on their front ends.
As I read it, the rules in regards to changing a-arm pivot mounts only applies to cars that are delivered with a single bolt acting as the pivot, as in the 2008 type Polaris Ranger control arms. Then, you can change the design to a two bolt pivot, based on the guidelines as outlined above in the UTV-5 SUSPENSION reference:

'Any A-arm suspension point that uses only one bolt to mount the A-arm , may be changed to a 2 bolt mount design. Either side of the original pivot points may be used to remount the 2 suspension points."

So, as long as your car is delivered with only one long bolt holding the a arm onto the frame (and to my recollection, of the current long travel models available, only the upper rear arm on the Yammy uses a single bolt pivot design), you can customize a replacement arm utilizing the two existing pivot tab locations, adding a second set of tabs either in front of, or behind the existing ones, creating a 2 bolt pivot layout.
Good eye, Todd!