THESE ARE THE PROPOSED RULES FOR DISCUSSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

whatever happen to "no rule changes for 2004"??? and talking about 2005 and beyond??

Joey,

From Orange Beach on, it's been no rule changes...unless the class agreed to a change then the rule makers would review it. A few F1 guys have ask for a 1+1+1 proposal from APBA. APBA posted one for discussion. Some like it, some don't, and some don't care. And here we are today... with no rule changes in Factory Class which is all I care about. :) At least were having some good discussion.

Jim

OK...Mike, will there be ANY rule changes for 2004 in factory?? and the ones on the ORL site will be 100% unchanged for 2004? the "proposed" rules are for 2005 and beyond only?

DISCLAIMER!!!!! FOOD FOR THOUGHT PURPOSES ONLY.

We can create two new classes around the 496HO and call them Manufacturers or Stock Class, and leave our Factory classes alone for now. Let the market decide which is the product that will survive long term. I would bet that a manufacturer might even step up to be the title sponsor of such a series.

OK - twolk among yourselves. I am verklempt.

Mike

I think what Mike is saying is that if there are not some substantial changes to Factory class in the coming weeks there may be no class at all. I believe that the purpose of changing would be to attract more participants into the class. I can understand Joe's frustration though because he has a boat that runs well and is dialed in.

From a newcomers perspective I have always had concerns about getting ejected from a factory boat at speeds over 90mph. If the rule changes bring the speeds down I am fine. I just want there to be as many boats as possible in my class.

Joey,

If the majority of team owners tell us to adopt the proposed rules then we will. If not then we won't. Or we can adopt two new classes if that is what people want. If you are not racing with us though why are you showing so much concern? Not attacking you. Just asking.

mike

never said we were not racing...i just want to know what and where!...last year the rule change on the 525 had us removing 500's from the boat...then steve simon requested that ted z. put the rule changes in writing and fax to him so he could complete the building of our race boat...the boat was completed and dialed in by december...then the sportmaster decision came out...then the weight changes...leaving us 4 lowers used and useless...damn near double the max weight ted told steve...and the engines had to come back out!....well, it's damn near january....there should be no talk of what the rules are going to be for 2004???SHOULD have been done long ago.

your right...it does piss me off...your last minute rule changes cost us a lot of $$ and an A$$ LOAD of time!...here we are again...engines may need to come back out...drives not legal!...transom needs to be cleared again, plugged, engine mounts refabed...on and on...props not legal...Mike i'm just ecstatic about doing all this work again in less than 13 months...all to go slower and backward in technology.

OK Joey. You do not have to do anything if you do not want to. And maybe everyone says to draft the rules for two new classes and we end up leaving Factory as is.

Mike

You know that feeling that you get when you buy something expensive and a few days later feel like you made a big mistake........ oooohhhh, I dont feel so good.

i know, no one has a gun to my head! but, 2004 is here, your still talking about things that should have been set in stone long ago, and i gota VERY large, expensive piece of racing machinery sitting here.

"could remain unchanged"...you said it right there! i would like to know WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED!

"You will save tremendous amounts of money over the long haul running a 496HO package over the 500 or 525. "...how do you know that! you have extensive knowledge of engine? hell miklos never has to change the oil in his vortec...it's the best thing in the world...ask UTZ's crew their thoughts on that program.

80 mph would seem DAMN boring in an F2 boat!

"and then look what happened. Was it the boat or the operators? "....well, it's fixed...that's all i will say...O, other than the people involved REALLY stepped up to the plate!

hey Mr. O that guy on that surf board is going faster than your proposed new F1 boat could go...w/o protective gear! OMG...maybe they need a canopy? no one ever dies surfing do they???

Not alot of deaths surfing but when someone thrashes around in the water too much they usually come up with an arm or leg missing! BH

i looked it up...more die of skin cancer!

Hey Mike,


I wanted to hear your opinion on this.

Even though I did not have the chance to attend the Alabama Worlds race it seems to me that from looking at that race coarse layout in Alabama with approximately 8 mile laps,longer straights,and less turning involved that it would be safer than a tighter coarse with more turns and extra laps. What is your opinion on this.It seems to me the fans have the same exposure to the racing action and a safer race coarse to race in.

I support the 496 HO change but like I said in my early post last night I don't feel the speed in F1 and F2 is the problem, it's the new era of racing with stepped bottom boats,tighter coarses with more turns,and the closer competition which is good.

Any accidents occur in Alabama ?? What was the feeling of the racers in a longer race coarse layout ??

I will support you guys either way just giving some input.

Regards,

JO

By the way the only reason I brought the race coarse layouts question up is because we are discussing also the current speeds in the Factory classes and what to do to increase the safety to the racers in the class.

I am not busting Balls!!!

Regards,

JO:D

HEY JO !!!!

I dont mean to get off topic but.....

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY

Thanks Bruce.

Have a Merry Christams and a Happy New Year and let The Jersey Boyz know I feel the same way.

Regards,

JO

Does anyone out there feel that the ever changing engines over the last 4 years has anything to do with the decline of racers? 1st its the HP500 Carb, then the 500 EFI, then the 525 and the Vortec. IMO, this has been detrimental to the average racer who does not have the overflowing wallets. As much as I feel that slowing down the boats is ok, I have to admit, this new engine just sounds like a rerun of the past few years. Why don't we just keep the 500's, lower the X and possibly limit props etc? Slower speeds and a cheaper mod. Also, 500's are still available from Merc.

Bruce,

The 496HO is fundamentally different from the other changes. First with the others we were always increasing speeds and costs to the racers. Here we are decreasing both.

Second, the we know the 496HO will be around for at least three years and currently is a mainstream product offering. The 500 is NOT being built as it once was and Mercury Racing wants to phase it out. The appeal of that engine is gone from a consumer standpoint and most now agree that to reinvigorate the class with racers and builders we need to slow down, lower the costs and use a package that more people can relate to.

Remember now too that according to Steve and Al most should be able to make the switch at zero cost or actually on the plus side once they sell their old stuff.

There needs to be some agreement on prop limitations and drive allowances but it seems the guys are getting closer.

Mike

Jo,

We actually had an F2 wreck in Orange Beach on a straightaway I think.

The longer courses are boring to everyone and commercially have very little appeal.

The shorter courses, while posing some unique challenges are only as dangerous as the teams running the boats make them.

Most of us know when our boats are on the edge or should know.

When we crashed twice in a row in 1999 we were running a new boat. Problem was we were running it like our old boat which cornered much better. The new boat gave us all kinds of warning signs too and we ignored them. Fact is we pushed too hard and turned too hard and wrecked.

Concentrating on cockpit improvements and using better judgment when turning these beasts are essential to improving safety. We also made many turns soft (90+ degree) which helped this season.

But the boats are going too fast from where the classes were designed to run originally. My guess is that the 496HO packages will ultimately push the boats as fast as we were running in 1997 and 1998. And as I said if you ask any of us who were running then we can tell you the boats were plenty fast and the racing plenty fun.

Mike

Our sport needs a home!
 

Rum Runner:

What we really need in our sport is a stadium style location that would be privatized. Just imagine a location that was privately owned where the dry / wet pits / race course could all be together. Basically a St Pete type scenario located in some deserted area. We buy the land , develop it and have a race there 2-3 times a year. I'm sure car racing fans many years ago were saying "where is Talledega , Alabama" ? OSO is 14,000 members strong. Just think if we could find a location and let the OSO Members have a stake in it. We have bankers , developers , paving contractors , boat dock manufacturers , etc on here. We would own the land develop it and the fans / racers would have a place to call home! This is my dream OSO Brothers! Man I can see the bleachers packed , the PA System blaring and the campers and motorhomes packed in like sardines in a tin can! BH

Buy an island and race around it. Ferry transportation to and from. Come by water or ferry.

I like the island idea.......:D
just make sure it's in a warm place.....;)

I'm not thinking an island - not reasonable. Way out place like Grand Isle , Louisana - " Home of Offshore Racing " Man I want campers everywhere , fans getting sprayed when the boats go by - Bleachers lining the shore and vendors selling everything under the sun that pertains to boating. And of course a huge OFFSHOREONLY.com sign hanging proudly! BH

"You might feel like 80mph is DAMN boring...if that's the case, you should be able to go out and put a major case of whoop on people"

not the case at all...as you slow these 35+ foot boats down to 80ish...a skilled racer will be beyond the capabilities of the boat. this will also bring less skilled people right to the front. i am ALL for rubbing rails...but there is simply not enough money in this hobby motorsport to allow for more crashing and sinking. personally i like forms of racing where the machinery is always better than the racer...that in my book is racing...maybe paying 10 bucks to ride around bumping wheels with your buddies on the local go kart track is tight racing to you/others??

NOT too many professional motorsports that i know of where you can buy the most powerful, hi-tech, ultra competitive racing machine out there, and race it the same day!!!...no schools, no moving up through the ranks with a SYSTEM.

funny there is SO MANY people that keep looking at the equipment as where we need to increase safety...why not look at the RACER!!??...how much safer do you think a racer would be if he was physically fit!...could tread fresh water for a 1/2 hour. hold his breath for some time...how do they respond to G forces(CRASHING)...10lbs over weight max or have a low body fat. basically an ATHLETE!...your not going to see a 250lb out of shape 50 year old on a MX bike now will you!?....but you can in a offshore race boat now can't you?....in the offshore scenario it really dosn't matter until you CRASH!

so why is it we keep looking at the BOATS and not the racers in them for added safety solutions??? my opinion would be offshore racing is not going to turn away anyones money! too old and busted? too fat? no skills? you say no racing experience?..no boating experience either!!??? got money??..WELL,, then come on down and lets get ya into professional offshore racing...today!!!

This is almost like the divergence that happened to motocross. Some wanted stadium style courses that were more spectator friendly and others preferred to stay with the soul of the sport and ride natural terrain. Likewise my image of "Offshore" racing has always been open water, big seas, man and machine battling competition as well as the elements. I would not be interested in a lake or bay style permanent facility. I really think that some of the ideas of long distance races such as Jacksonville to Miami are the stuff. Lets race offshore!!

D, i agree with a lot of your points...i think you can get both...as you know SX and MX pay the bills(sponsors/fans)...

"big seas, man and machine battling competition as well as the elements"....this is how i grew up looking at offshore racing....now it seems we are trying to make it so the average joe can set his beer down and go race offshore boats....O,,,and NOT have to lie to his wife, convincing her it's perfectly safe out there!

Well when I read the prologue to the new rules I really was suprised to see the concept of "exchanging paint" as a part of the show. These boats are expensive, they are not insured, and I think that racing at those speeds in close proximity is very dangerous. Especially if someone is to get ejected in a turn and have another boat very close.

I think that longer courses, close to the beach, with high speeds are great. I have no problem with running faster than what is being run now.

D...more good points:"These boats are expensive, they are not insured"...and there is no money in winning!

how about looking to the manufacture to step up to the plate when it comes to safety...DONZI did..how about requiring the manufacture to build F boats the will pass a series of crash, impact, and stuff tests. put the "homologation fee" to some good use!!? there is no reason that an open cockpit boat could not utilize a restraining system in conjunction with a 1/4 canopy...sitting down in the case of the DONZI using 2 1/4 canopies...or standing up in the formula's case using 1 very large 1/4 canopy...drivers head well supported. NONE of this standing there with 1/2 of your body exposed trying to hold on to a thin piece of aluminum. in your old 100 dollar helmet! only to get tossed out and have the boat fall apart crap!

making the boats better; closed or open is not of concern...slowing them down so they DON'T have to be safe, collecting "homologation" fees and trying to get more manufactures money IS!!!!

NEED proof: ever see some of these boats after a crash....blown apart...seats broken, folded back, missing...helmets blown off, jackets floating in the water without the racer in them! How about race boats on the bottom with salvage companies swarming like vultures...if racing mandated anti-sink devices the cost would come down, and the technology would improve rapidly...down the road it would become a standard in a pleasure boat! RACING pushes technology to the next level that will inevitably show up at the consumer level down the road...how fast it can be sold there is what should be looked at....as i type this here at Ford Development we are years ahead of what the market will bare...In offshore the consumer/pleasure boat has more technology than the ones racing...why is that???

i would like to see open/F class racing get faster, closer, AND safer...and I KNOW it can be done with out slowing them down!

Canopied boats are the best solution to safely racing these boats at the speeds we are talking about.

Joey: you want to go faster in an open cockpit boat. You want money to be invested in improving the technology in these boats to make them faster and safer. That is a noble goal for sure. Now, go develop a written business plan, invest your own money and time, and secure the necessary capital and sponsorship from third parties to make it a reality.

I know I cannot do it. I know of no one else who can do it and I know of no one else who is out there trying. So, grab the bull by the horns and make it happen.

You do a great job of challenging us and ascribing some pretty questionable motives to us. We deny it and explain ourselves and it does not move you an inch. So rather than engaging in this back and forth anymore, I simply challenge you to do this for the rest of the racers out there.

Mike

Mike

Joey,
I have a lot of respect for you both as a friend and as a racer, but some of these last posts are, in my opinion, way off base.

"as you slow these 35+ foot boats down to 80ish...a skilled racer will be beyond the capabilities of the boat. this will also bring less skilled people right to the front."

By simply slowing the top speed of a group of boats down, rookie racers with no experience or skills will suddenly shoot to the front of the pack with the best of the best? C'mon dude, that's way too far of a stretch and you know it. Remember, there are still a lot of factors in the equation, such as prop selection, (testing) setup, (testing) and balance, (testing). Just a hint, but props, setup and balance are still very important parts of a winning team that are usually refined through testing. Something you know just a little bit about. ;) Fact is, some racers will always be better than the equipment no matter how good it is, and some will always be middle of the pack racers even with the best equipment. In the end, they all love the competition.
As for physical condition, I guess an overweight out of shape slob is always going to be more prone to injury of all kinds in any physically demanding sport. But if you want to start citing theory of mass vs inertia vs deceleration vs g-force vs energy absorption, think of this...
Muscle weighs more than fat, so which is more likely to "tend to stay in motion" upon impact? Are you insinuating that all motorsports sanctioning bodies take responsibility and liability for the % of body fat to muscle ratio for each person in a boat, car or monster truck? Now we're reeeeally stretching.
As for manufacturers stepping up to the plate and making boats better and safer, you're right. Donzi did, as well as Formula, Fountain, Cigarette and many of the other manufacturers involved in racing today. Thanks to racing, boats are stronger and safer than they were 10 years ago. Even 5 years ago. Not just for racers, but for the recreational boating public as a whole.
You made the statement;
"put the "homologation fee" to some good use!"
What exactly do you think those fees goes? let me guess, you think it goes right into Mike A.'s pocket, right?... :rolleyes:
I think you need to talk with Drew Corn to get a clue as to what those fees are spent on, and how that money is already way to short to do the job it really needs to be doing.
You also made the statement;
"there is no reason that an open cockpit boat could not utilize a restraining system in conjunction with a 1/4 canopy"
Now if you can prove to me exactly how this would be safer on WATER, I'm all ears. Or, if you can find a way for everyone to race with a mandatory 1/4 canopy and race on full time air, I'm in. By the way, are you going to convince all the manufacturers to re-tool and pay for all these air systems and canopy changes?
Wait, I assume this sarcastic statement means you expect APBA to pay for it...
"making the boats better; closed or open is not of concern...slowing them down so they DON'T have to be safe, collecting "homologation" fees and trying to get more manufactures money IS!!!!"
This one flat pisses me off.
WTF are you insinuating here? That APBA has no concern for making boats safer?
Here's a news flash for ya Joey,
APBA doesn't build boats.
They DO however, require specific safety equipment ON the boats, IN the boats and ON the race crew at all times.
There is always new safety equipment coming out. New safety items to be tested. New safety features being tested by various manufacturers and vendors. Maybe you should talk with Pops, Buddy, Clay and the rest of the STARS team. I've seen their eyes when someone is lost, or even injured. They are the best in the business. If you have better safety ideas, I'm sure they wold be all ears also.
I guess progress is never fast enough when it comes to safety. So, Sounds to me like you need to start building your own boats, design your own open cockpit safety system, create your own governing agency for marine safety and crash investigation, and open a gym for racers.

Mike how much would it cost a racing association to insure the use quality safety products??? require race boats to have a min spec???...you sure can drop the hammer on the racers to the tune of 5K for a "professional" membership....manufactures for homologation!...why not drop the hammer and say no seats that will FOLD back during a crash. Not approved for racing!...jackets and helmets that are blown off from a crash,,,,NOT approved for racing!. Funny how the average joe has gone out there thinking his pleasure boat was a "Factory Race Boat"...only to have it blown apart structurally! hatches and other parts flying off! not knowing that the boat in front were purpose built race boats having WAY more structural integrity...hell, pay the homologation fee and it's a race boat!!! How about someone checking for a WORKING intercom...How safe is it having one guy controlling the gas and the other trying to steer if something goes wrong?

Mike you are right, back and forth we go!...maybe because what you say and what you put in writing are different...you keep talking of "long term" business plans....i have yet to see one executed!! mid season; rule changes, scheduling changes, officer changes...it's not only a revolving door internal the organization....but, also it's NO WONDER why there is a revolving door in the racer line as well.

we are the racers you are the organizer...it's your job to get us there!...maybe even stay for a few years??...obviously this is a problem for you....the current state of this motorsport reflects it! maybe it's just offshore racing?

Joey,
I think Mike is right...this post started and has some great info.about us racing in 2004 and what we can do....and most of all who will be racing....I know safty has been brought up but we will be racing in 3 months talking about the manufactures doing crashed tests.....it comes down to this, the racers have an opertunitty to make their own rules and as member if you have 7 F2 boats that become members and 6 of them want 496's and one dose not....thats it, the one can either race what has been agreed to or not.....we all said we want input and the racers should be heard.....this is what happends we start talking about crash teast and body wieght....next thing will be air bags...I'm not trying to be a smart ass....its we are so far off the discusion from talking about some different rules to this....can the teams that going to race F1 or F2 discuss for 1. who is going to race with APBA for 2004 and 2. what way would you race between the cirrent rules and the 496 pack...
That would be a great start......
Gino

"WTF are you insinuating here? That APBA has no concern for making boats safer?"...it's all about being reactive...not proactive...it wasn't till someone came out of the boat with out killing the engine did they start making random tether checks right!...someone died in F2 racing...now they are too fast!...APBA checks your helmet (NOT FIT)...tow lines, kill switches that work, life jackets...O, yeah non skid stuff...what are they checking in my F2 boat to make sure it's safe for RACING???nothing my fishing boat doesn't have! again,,,they have GREAT REACTIVE safety support! those divers are on you like white on rice!!!...doesn't do much good when they get there to find your jacket and helmet off does it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

gino....i don't think racers should make rules....nor manufactures...maybe if they didn't change them all the time (even during the year!) more racers/manufactures would want to come out and play!!!! just tell me what it is going to be for a few years!!! **** every year they have a new long term plan!

Joey,
When APBA did that some of the F1 teams complaind they will go elsewere if they were not heard.....a few of us asked if APBA would help us....the teams that were not going to race somewere else....thats when Mike and Steve offered to help.....the point I'm trying to make is do you know how many teams are racing F2 for 2004.....if you don't thats a problem if your racing F2 next year becasue how can you get sponsors if their are no other F2's....the point is if for some reason their are F2 teams that will race and agree on different rules..such as the ones posted and it brings out 7 F2's thats a good thing....
The attitude Jo N. took is what we need....he spoke on what he thought was good.....but he finished with I will support the class and race what they agree on.....thats what we need...we have our say and others and at the end of the day we do what is best for the class and support it....if you completly disagree then that person has the right not to race.....but its the teams that overall are going to support the class are the ones who are going to make this work.....thats all I'm saying...
Gino