DWES

This will open the class up to more boats and manufactures.
Why do we stay with 500ci. engines?With all the new good parts available today.Open it up from 600ci. to 632ci.Cams at .650 lift and rev limit set at 6200 or 6400rpm. Engines will make the same power as a 500ci.engine at 7600rpm but last longer.This will cut caust.

Dave W

tachyon

Since friction losses increase with the square of the engine speed, it makes make sense for peak power to be made at the lowest possible engine rpm. I'll always trade rpm for cubic inches in a marine application.

KiloKat

In my opinion, the best news coming out of both APBA and SBI has to do with the drive system rule changes for both Supercat (UIM) and Supercat Light. Limiting Supercat to #6's and Supercat Light to Bravo style outdrives (without the unreal weight penalty) never made sense for the racer. Now, a "bulletproof" package can be built and raced in both classes and in either sanctioning body!

tachyon

Couldn't agree more.....and the economics are racer friendly....a pair of BPM's or Trimax drives cost one quarter the price of #6's....are higher performing (when coupled with a rudder)....and are equally bulletproof.

The europeans learned this years ago...not one boat in the C1 fleet runs anything but shaft drives.

DWES

Do you mean not limiting to #6 drives

DWES

Do you mean not limiting to #6 drives

tachyon

Yes, not limiting to #6's. Mercury needs a shaft drive in their product line!

DWES

To realy cut caust we need to change the engine package to 600 or 632ci. To stop the need to rebuild after one or two races.

DPT MOTORSPORTS

I agree to various drive specifications. One problem with that is Mercury Racing gets very upset if they are not the only ones. This problem circulated for the past few years.

KiloKat

DPT is correct. However, the #6 rule was only initiated because Mercury was paying APBA Offshore a six digit annual fee which they no longer do. I.e., the rule and/or drive choice has never been in the best interest of the racer.