Bmods??

I agree there is no perfect way to do things. I will tell you I dont think I would want to exchange my engine for a used one though. If i change my oil every 4 nights and never run it hot how do I know I am not getting somebodies engine that ran it hot and low on oil and never changed it, etc. anyways, they need to tighten up on the open spec engines too before they get out of hand in my opinion. most of the classes are getting out of hand!
 
shredxcam said:
I think to make people believe in a crate only class, you'd have to tear one down every week.

How much money does Gm throw at ump for promoting their crates ?
Click to expand...
Agreed, You would have to do it consistently. And to be clear, you only lose your motor for one week. You race with the replacement motor, which is the same grade crate and get yours back after its torn down and put back together. Mullins did the work on the crate LMs. The racer was given the option to put new bearings and rings in if he paid of the parts.
 
T-man said:
we know crates ain't cheap for by the time we put the carb, headers, fuel,water,pump, ignition control, flywheel coupler/clutch were down another 1500 or more bucks, then we need the upgraded valve springs, better go with the cam upgrade, do they even check for the seal bolts and make sure the timing cover hasn't been tampered with? either way to get a legal untouched crate tunkey in my car will set me back 5g, so what would be the difference if i take that 4g and build a motor and bolt a 4 barrel on that, i'm just not buying in on this dictating brand of parts, maybe a engine claim rule could be a way to persuade builders to build in check with some form of a budget for the class modeled around a gm crate rather than monopolizing the gm crate market which don't help if we can find other ways around putting a motor together, so a claim rule might not be what anyone wants, but im getting sick and tired of the hearing this cater to the crate crap when i just want to put a 4 barrel on what i got and run it for what it is, you all don't like it then bring in claim rules, and fireball with great respect, you going out there getting lapped by some them Amods that damn near cost as much as nice houses til you decide to pull off can't be much fun either
Click to expand...
---------------------------------actually I have finished all but one feature this year-- I run the 27 as a B mod at Bellville and finished ALL the races I was in ---at my age just getting in the car is fun -JMO
 
I think part of the deal on exchanging crate motors is that it has to be brand new or rebuilt from a reputable builder

That would be messed up just to play musical motors
 
Here is some interesting information from Bill Martens, the guy at GM who runs the crate engine program for GMPP.

http://crateinsider.com/news-interv...view-bill-martens-chevrolet-performance-video

I have never heard of GMPP throwing money at any sanction to get them to mandate a crate engine. I mean seriously, does anyone really think that GMPP needs to pay any sanction money to run what is essentially a pickup truck engine they have been manufacturing for 50 years or more that they tweaked up a little bit for racing? And if they open that can of worms, paying a sanction to mandate crates, then they would have to do that for all the sanctions or no one would mandate them at all.

Martens said they started this crate thing up as a response to the sanctions asking for a more economical engine to curb the costs and even out the playing field. What the sanctions have allowed is what created the problems (rebuilds, providing bolts, allowing machine work to bring parts to within minimum GM Crate engine specs, etc.) And of course, lack of stringent tech.

As far as somebody buying up a bunch of crate engines and then paying to dyno the batch and "picking the best one" and selling the rest, I find that pretty far fetched. By the time you do all that, you could just buy a new engine and have it gone through and know you're getting the best you can from that engine.

But, if you read on that site, there are a couple of big time engine builders saying that this whole thing about huge performance disparity between engines isn't something they have seen and they dyno a lot of engines. Hendrens says, in summary to the question of whether or not its worth having a brand new engine gone through "So, essentially I’m answering your question by saying no, there is no big advantage power wise in going through a new engine unless you have one that simply won’t run."

This whole thing could be solved pretty easily if there were just some added weight rules in effect. Like win a feature, add 30 lbs for the next week. Win again, add another 20. Then reverse it. You could do this to the top three every week to even out the competition and discourage cheating. Just figure out an effective handicap system that gives the guys behind a chance too.
 
Last edited:
t.nie said:
Here is some interesting information from Bill Martens, the guy at GM who runs the crate engine program for GMPP.

http://crateinsider.com/news-interv...view-bill-martens-chevrolet-performance-video

I have never heard of GMPP throwing money at any sanction to get them to mandate a crate engine. I mean seriously, does anyone really think that GMPP needs to pay any sanction money to run what is essentially a pickup truck engine they have been manufacturing for 50 years or more that they tweaked up a little bit for racing? And if they open that can of worms, paying a sanction to mandate crates, then they would have to do that for all the sanctions or no one would mandate them at all.

Martens said they started this crate thing up as a response to the sanctions asking for a more economical engine to curb the costs and even out the playing field. What the sanctions have allowed is what created the problems (rebuilds, providing bolts, allowing machine work to bring parts to within minimum GM Crate engine specs, etc.) And of course, lack of stringent tech.

As far as somebody buying up a bunch of crate engines and then paying to dyno the batch and "picking the best one" and selling the rest, I find that pretty far fetched. By the time you do all that, you could just buy a new engine and have it gone through and know you're getting the best you can from that engine.

But, if you read on that site, there are a couple of big time engine builders saying that this whole thing about huge performance disparity between engines isn't something they have seen and they dyno a lot of engines. Hendrens says, in summary to the question of whether or not its worth having a brand new engine gone through "So, essentially I’m answering your question by saying no, there is no big advantage power wise in going through a new engine unless you have one that simply won’t run."

This whole thing could be solved pretty easily if there were just some added weight rules in effect. Like win a feature, add 30 lbs for the next week. Win again, add another 20. Then reverse it. You could do this to the top three every week to even out the competition and discourage cheating. Just figure out an effective handicap system that gives the guys behind a chance too.
Click to expand...
T.nie, trust me this was not far fetched and was happening. Now I can't say they are still doing this because of exactly what your saying and that is they can rebuild the motor and put their own seals on that they by online but, when crates first came out you couldn't get the seals.
 
shredxcam said:
I think part of the deal on exchanging crate motors is that it has to be brand new or rebuilt from a reputable builder

That would be messed up just to play musical motors
Click to expand...


Under a proper claim deal you would only run a replacement motor for one week while yours is being inspected. Once completed you receive your own motor back. Worked good for UMP LM crates when they did it.
 
havoline28 said:
T.nie, trust me this was not far fetched and was happening. Now I can't say they are still doing this because of exactly what your saying and that is they can rebuild the motor and put their own seals on that they by online but, when crates first came out you couldn't get the seals.
Click to expand...

UMP never required seals on the engine. You could rebuild it yourself, no questions asked, it just had to be within the GMPP crate engine specs if torn down.
 
t.nie said:
Here is some interesting information from Bill Martens, the guy at GM who runs the crate engine program for GMPP.

http://crateinsider.com/news-interv...view-bill-martens-chevrolet-performance-video

I have never heard of GMPP throwing money at any sanction to get them to mandate a crate engine. I mean seriously, does anyone really think that GMPP needs to pay any sanction money to run what is essentially a pickup truck engine they have been manufacturing for 50 years or more that they tweaked up a little bit for racing? And if they open that can of worms, paying a sanction to mandate crates, then they would have to do that for all the sanctions or no one would mandate them at all.

Martens said they started this crate thing up as a response to the sanctions asking for a more economical engine to curb the costs and even out the playing field. What the sanctions have allowed is what created the problems (rebuilds, providing bolts, allowing machine work to bring parts to within minimum GM Crate engine specs, etc.) And of course, lack of stringent tech.

As far as somebody buying up a bunch of crate engines and then paying to dyno the batch and "picking the best one" and selling the rest, I find that pretty far fetched. By the time you do all that, you could just buy a new engine and have it gone through and know you're getting the best you can from that engine.

But, if you read on that site, there are a couple of big time engine builders saying that this whole thing about huge performance disparity between engines isn't something they have seen and they dyno a lot of engines. Hendrens says, in summary to the question of whether or not its worth having a brand new engine gone through "So, essentially I’m answering your question by saying no, there is no big advantage power wise in going through a new engine unless you have one that simply won’t run."

This whole thing could be solved pretty easily if there were just some added weight rules in effect. Like win a feature, add 30 lbs for the next week. Win again, add another 20. Then reverse it. You could do this to the top three every week to even out the competition and discourage cheating. Just figure out an effective handicap system that gives the guys behind a chance too.
Click to expand...

One of the things the guy in the video essentially says is that GM got into this crate engine market to equalize competition.... Nonsense! They entered the market to make money selling a made in Mexico pickup truck engine for more money than it would sell for as a replacement for the Vortec engine.
 
DaveMcLain said:
I say that the program has no integrity because a sealed engine package cannot work. They do not have the technical means to adequately police the engines it is not possible.
Click to expand...
Oh, the means are there, they just don't wish to go that route!
 
DaveMcLain said:
One of the things the guy in the video essentially says is that GM got into this crate engine market to equalize competition.... Nonsense! They entered the market to make money selling a made in Mexico pickup truck engine for more money than it would sell for as a replacement for the Vortec engine.
Click to expand...

I really don't think they got into this a some big money maker for Chevy/GM, Dave. And my information doesn't come from online sources, it comes straight from Bill Martens from when I interviewed him 10 years ago to write a story on Crate late models for a magazine. I spent well over an hour, probably close to 2 hours, talking things over with him and it never seemed to come across to me that Chevy/GM was looking to make this into some big money making thing for GM.

Compared to what they do globally as a corporation, selling a few crate 602/604's to dirt trackers in the states amounts to pocket change.

The reality is Chevy/GM has a long history and reputation of supporting all forms of auto racing and in particular stock car racing. They do this stuff to promote brand loyalty and to be seen to be supporting racing as that is considered a pretty big part of their "corporate" identity. Sure, they don't do it for free, but I don't think it is done with big $$$$$ signs hanging in front of them.

He was pretty straightforward though, about breaking those seals and what that meant in the bigger picture. He was very certain that once you break the GM seals, it isn't a GM crate engine any more, but "something else" and he didn't put a label on what. And he also pointed to the ASA sanction as an example of where the rebuilding leads to, which is more along the lines of refining what GM provides stock to the point that it becomes a money game again for the haves and have nots of racing. And that defeats the stated purpose of many sanctions when they go the crate engine route to begin with.
 
first off some parts seller could put together a accessory package for the crate and give a deep discount to the racer converting to a crate also I feel the motor could be offered at a lower price (I might consider one if the price were dropped ) the buyer would need to have a B-mod and be able to prove it..only one discount per car ..
 
Lenny,,when my brother and I were in the parts business we looked into this...Unfortunately the motor has little mark up and freight eats you up. Especially when the were shipped from Michigan,,,that's where are parts were co ing from.,I don't know where you buy parts from but deep discount was not a word we could use., you have to make money or you shut the doors.
 
t.nie said:
UMP never required seals on the engine. You could rebuild it yourself, no questions asked, it just had to be within the GMPP crate engine specs if torn down.
Click to expand...
When they first started you had to take it to a certified builder and you couldn't rebuild it yourself.
 
t.nie said:
I really don't think they got into this a some big money maker for Chevy/GM, Dave. And my information doesn't come from online sources, it comes straight from Bill Martens from when I interviewed him 10 years ago to write a story on Crate late models for a magazine. I spent well over an hour, probably close to 2 hours, talking things over with him and it never seemed to come across to me that Chevy/GM was looking to make this into some big money making thing for GM.

Compared to what they do globally as a corporation, selling a few crate 602/604's to dirt trackers in the states amounts to pocket change.

The reality is Chevy/GM has a long history and reputation of supporting all forms of auto racing and in particular stock car racing. They do this stuff to promote brand loyalty and to be seen to be supporting racing as that is considered a pretty big part of their "corporate" identity. Sure, they don't do it for free, but I don't think it is done with big $$$$$ signs hanging in front of them.

He was pretty straightforward though, about breaking those seals and what that meant in the bigger picture. He was very certain that once you break the GM seals, it isn't a GM crate engine any more, but "something else" and he didn't put a label on what. And he also pointed to the ASA sanction as an example of where the rebuilding leads to, which is more along the lines of refining what GM provides stock to the point that it becomes a money game again for the haves and have nots of racing. And that defeats the stated purpose of many sanctions when they go the crate engine route to begin with.
Click to expand...

A few thousand engines that each cost a few thousand dollars is more than 10 million and while that is small change for a corporation such as GM it amounts to a LOT of money that is taken away from small shops and part suppliers so I do not believe that GM's crate engine program is entirely altruistic, no way.

If you think about it the whole thing was easy for them, grease a few greedy palms, feed a few shills and convince a few of the gullible and they can sell a lot of engines and who cares if the whole thing makes zero sense.
 
What percentage of drivers build their motors anymore ? My grandpa always built his but I don't think now a days he could of kept up.

Mullins motors are 15k+?

A crate is 3500?

A junkyard freshened 350 is dirt cheap
 
DaveMcLain said:
A few thousand engines that each cost a few thousand dollars is more than 10 million and while that is small change for a corporation such as GM it amounts to a LOT of money that is taken away from small shops and part suppliers so I do not believe that GM's crate engine program is entirely altruistic, no way.

If you think about it the whole thing was easy for them, grease a few greedy palms, feed a few shills and convince a few of the gullible and they can sell a lot of engines and who cares if the whole thing makes zero sense.
Click to expand...

Actually it went more like this, Dave. Some promoters, hearing a lot of racers complain they couldn't afford an open engine any more let alone a rebuild on it twice a year, saw an opportunity to introduce some kind of controlled engine program into racing to meet that need.

Now, it would be great if you could go to Johnny the local engine builder and get him to build a spec engine and guarantee everyone gets the same thing, but the first time one of Johnny's regular open engine customers started winning a little too often in the spec engine class, the accusations of him getting something a little extra over the next guy were going to start flying and just kill off any hope of that working before it could even get started. That and the complaints that one builder was getting all the work while other builders suffered, yada yada. But you can't have multiple small engine builders because then one guy would just try to start outdoing the other to get all the business and then no one wants to be involved.

No, what a good promoter needed was a big manufacturer who had no connection to anyone who could churn out a lot of engines and not be accused of favoring one over the other. Someone like GM maybe.

So the crate engine class was born using an existing crate engine from GM. But it really wasn't long before crafty racers started seeing they could get an advantage if they could just get inside those seals once in awhile. And the greed came in the form of the promoters, who saw that they could charge a fee to "certify" a rebuilder, they could give the racers what they wanted (as if a $5000 engine was now just to pricey to replace every couple years when these same racers were spending 4 times that on an engine plus rebuilds at thousands a pop not a year before) in the form of rebuilds, and line their pockets on top of it.

Then along came counterfeit sealing bolts and UMP saying you don't even need sealing bolts "just be within spec" and the whole thing gets out of whack pretty fast.

I really don't think GM was the bad guy in all this. Martens told me point blank the engines should stay sealed, be raced for a couple years then sold onto the hotrod or drag racing markets and not be rebuilt. He was against allowing rebuilds at all. But as a manufacturer, he also understood that the promoters and racers were the customer in all this, so they tried to give the customer what they wanted.

I still say the first sanction that said ok to rebuilds on crates, and we'll supply the bolts was the sanction that doomed the whole thing. If someone had just had the courage and wherewithal to stick to the original plan, race it and sell it off when you want a new one, the crate thing could be doing way better than it is now.

I think if I were going B mod racing these days, I'd be looking to build an engine rather than go the crate route. There is a very good argument being made that you can build good HP for the same or less and at least have some control over what parts are going into the engine and who is doing the work. Bottom line if you win with a crate engine, people are always going to assume you're cheating somehow within the bolts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Back
Top