UMP license??

jdearing said:
I'm all for unified rules but, if UMP unifies the Sportsman, Factory Stock, Limited Modified & Sport Compact rules and says "no exceptions" and your track adopts those rules and your car is completely obsolete, then what..

You will be on here throwing a huge fit...

The UMP Stock Car rules are uniform. The UMP Factory Stocks are not.
Click to expand...
UMP stock car rules are no way near uniform,[I am assuming you also mean street stocks]. Go some where besides Tri City and Pevely and you can see for yourself...
 
Yea..... I have 2 separate and very different cars to compete in both central illinois and stl area street stock classes...... that's not uniformed rules and I don't need the factory stock vs street stock explanation I've heard it already that's the ump version of uniformety just sanction 10 different sets of rules split em all up...... that'll fix it..... work with the racers to combine the 2 sets of rules and you would have an extremely competitive and healthy feild pf cars........... instead we get a fee, confusion(that's for the central illinois guys) and nobody really looking at the cars anyway.........
 
Damn.... lol ..now you guys got me all wound up.......... street sto ks are street stocks.... even though there can be,, there doesn't need to be a bunch of different versions...... I can count 4 different versions at the 3 closest tracks to me right now......... what's the point?..its detrimental to the class in general........ ump can fix this I'll throw some $$ they're way...
 
It doesn't matter if UMP makes a set of uniformed street stock rules or not.. All you same guys will be complaining about the rules no matter what...
 
We have to have some kind of sanctioning body because if not it will be worse then it is right now.

I see the biggest problem is not really that you have to buy a license it's you feel you are not getting any bang for your buck. You need to figure out a way to get the promoters and ump to understand this. UMP needs the promoters and the racers, The promoters need the racers and the fans, the racers need the promoters, fans so, we all need each other in order to survive. Now how we get there so everyone is happy is the million dollar question.

If you have a Stock car class at your track, UMP has a set of rules and if your tracks says they are ump but, do not follow the rules Ump should fine them or strip them of their sanction for every class for not following the rules. Ump put out a set of rules and if tracks are not following them as written then really who is to blame here.

You guys have the power to make things happen because you can tell tracks you will not run their track if they do not enforce the rules but, the risk is that the promoter may tell you he will just drop your class so, watch what you ask for here because you may not like the outcome.
 
I know he said that he didn't want to hear about it (sorry), but for the benefit of the people who aren't aware of the issue, the problem that Kris has with the situation is that almost all of the tracks around here have a class that they call street stocks, but not all of them run under the same UMP class. Some are UMP stock cars, and some are UMP factory stocks. UMP stock cars have a set of rules, but UMP factory stocks are governed by track rules. These tracks are advertising "street stock" races, but don't all run by the same rules. For this reason, I think that the tracks should be required to call their UMP sanctioned classes by the same name as the UMP class that they are sanctioned under.
 
Last edited:
mkoch96 said:
I know he said that he didn't want to hear about it (sorry), but for the benefit of the people who aren't aware of the issue, the problem that Kris has with the situation is that almost all of the tracks around here have a class that they call street stocks, but not all of them run under the same UMP class. Some are UMP stock cars, and some are UMP factory stocks. UMP stock cars have a set of rules, but UMP factory stocks are governed by track rules. These tracks are advertising "street stock" races, but don't all run by the same rules. For this reason, I think that the tracks should be required to call their UMP sanctioned classes by the same name as the UMP class that they are sanctioned under.
Click to expand...
Amen Matt!!
 
Havoline28 every class in this area has a set set of rules that UMP has put out but one. That is the hobby stock/street stock class that runs at Highland, Tri City, Belleville and Brownstown. So how can every other class out there have a set of rules but this class not. The rule UMP has for that class states must run street legal dot tires then the very next rule is local track rules prevail! How is that even possible? now here is a class that the drivers/owners should be throwing a fit about! But yet they want them guys to buy a membership but yet don't have a set of rules for them!
 
The Sportsmans and Limited Modifieds (aka B-Mods) also have a problem with unified rules. UMP has a set of rules, but then they say that track rules prevail. The track rules in this area are nowhere close to what the UMP rules are.
 
Last edited:
faustfan2 said:
Havoline28 every class in this area has a set set of rules that UMP has put out but one. That is the hobby stock/street stock class that runs at Highland, Tri City, Belleville and Brownstown. So how can every other class out there have a set of rules but this class not. The rule UMP has for that class states must run street legal dot tires then the very next rule is local track rules prevail! How is that even possible? now here is a class that the drivers/owners should be throwing a fit about! But yet they want them guys to buy a membership but yet don't have a set of rules for them!
Click to expand...

UMP has stock car and factory stock rules so, why can't those tracks either have their cars go by one of these two classes and call them as such. It seems pretty simple fix to me. Since the factory stocks don't really have a set of rules then I agree they should not be required to buy a license.
 
Last edited:
UMP does not have factory stock rules. They only say that they need to run street tires, but (and this is the funny part), tracks can choose to allow e-mod tires too. So basically they have no rules and are totally governed by the track rules.
 
mkoch96 said:
UMP does not have factory stock rules. They only say that they need to run street tires, but (and this is the funny part), tracks can choose to allow e-mod tires too. So basically they have no rules and are totally governed by the track rules.[/q
Click to expand...
 
mkoch96 said:
UMP does not have factory stock rules. They only say that they need to run street tires, but (and this is the funny part), tracks can choose to allow e-mod tires too. So basically they have no rules and are totally governed by the track rules.
Click to expand...
Yeah I seen that and I can understand their complaint.
 
Mkoch96 I can't quote but you are correct and I give propps to what stl area and now fayette co. has in the way of streets AND central Ill too they are both good SS communities I'm stuck in the middle and I have 2 slightly different cars to compete...... it would be great for the entire SS community to combine the 2 and we would immediatly have what the mods and late models have...... a strong, healthy field of competitive racers who can go everywhere....... every track has a street stock class of some form or another....... why the subtle differences?? someone needs to unify it all....... tbats UMP's place to do that..... I think we could all agree on that........instead they just sanction them all under different names to keep everyone happy....... its frustrating..... now they want me to send them some of my extra cash to pay for a point fund I can't truly compete in because half the tracks I go to.... I run this car for these points and the othef half I run this other car for these other points.......
 
havoline28 said:
We have to have some kind of sanctioning body because if not it will be worse then it is right now.

I see the biggest problem is not really that you have to buy a license it's you feel you are not getting any bang for your buck. You need to figure out a way to get the promoters and ump to understand this. UMP needs the promoters and the racers, The promoters need the racers and the fans, the racers need the promoters, fans so, we all need each other in order to survive. Now how we get there so everyone is happy is the million dollar question.

If you have a Stock car class at your track, UMP has a set of rules and if your tracks says they are ump but, do not follow the rules Ump should fine them or strip them of their sanction for every class for not following the rules. Ump put out a set of rules and if tracks are not following them as written then really who is to blame here.

You guys have the power to make things happen because you can tell tracks you will not run their track if they do not enforce the rules but, the risk is that the promoter may tell you he will just drop your class so, watch what you ask for here because you may not like the outcome.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.
Weekly racing needs a good strong sanction. Increasingly I wonder if UMP is the right sanction. I have friends in Iowa and Wisconsin that suggest we'd be better off with IMCA or Wissota.

The racers, promoters and UMP are all to blame for the stock car (street stock)mess. Racers don't want to change their cars to meet the new rules so they tell the promoter they'll go somewhere else to race. The promoters decide to run track rules so they don't lose cars even though they say they have UMP rules. UMP allows them to do that. Ultimately the blame falls on UMP. They are the sanctioning body. They set the rules. The problem with UMP is they make rules but they don't enforce rules. A promoter told me part of the mandatory license deal was UMP was supposed to send tech inspectors around to weekly shows.
 
how about the part in the hobby stock rules on UMP's web site where it says " due to wide variance of rules,the attached are only guideline base rules and may be adopted by a track as UMP Dirt Car Sportsman'? what kind of bull is that?
 
Pops... you got it perfectly....... there is absolutly no UMP presence at the weekly race track to keep order of it all....... or on here listening to us,, or (my opinion) cares...... sure that's fine.... just stay out of my wallet there os enough hands in there already..... but I would happily aplaud them (and pay) if there was....... and as far as the SS class I don't think it would take much......
 
Pops15 said:
Excellent post.
Weekly racing needs a good strong sanction. Increasingly I wonder if UMP is the right sanction. I have friends in Iowa and Wisconsin that suggest we'd be better off with IMCA or Wissota.

The racers, promoters and UMP are all to blame for the stock car (street stock)mess. Racers don't want to change their cars to meet the new rules so they tell the promoter they'll go somewhere else to race. The promoters decide to run track rules so they don't lose cars even though they say they have UMP rules. UMP allows them to do that. Ultimately the blame falls on UMP. They are the sanctioning body. They set the rules. The problem with UMP is they make rules but they don't enforce rules. A promoter told me part of the mandatory license deal was UMP was supposed to send tech inspectors around to weekly shows.
Click to expand...
Pops I agree, they are all to blame for the mess. When Ump decided to take over the ss class there was a lot of bitching going on and for 5 straight years the guys in central IL did change their cars. It seems to have settled down the last couple of years. I agree UMP needs to have their own tech guys that actually go around to different tracks and enforce these rules. Then and only then will guys start t gain respect for UMP. Guys just don't have any respect for them right now because they don't stand for nothing.

I was told the same thing that UMP was going to have their own tech guys and not just for the upper classes but, the lower ones as well. It's time for UMP to step up to the plate or get the heck out of the way.
 
faustfan2 said:
how about the part in the hobby stock rules on UMP's web site where it says " due to wide variance of rules,the attached are only guideline base rules and may be adopted by a track as UMP Dirt Car Sportsman'? what kind of bull is that?
Click to expand...

It will be some growing pains for the guys in that class if they want unified rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Back
Top