i know peterborough has allowed roller rockers for 2011, not sure why we need them as i run stock rocker and never seem to have a problem. as for rev limiters, that will be for 2012 and for crate motors only. seems they have figured out that some of these crates are turning way more rpm`s than they are supposed to. most tracks south of border are using rev limiters on crates as well as most dirt tracks here in ontario. crates are only supposed to run around 6200 rpm, so what is wrong with putting a rev limiter on them? i run a built motor and turn it 6800 rpm max., so what rpm would sunset be looking at for built motor? oh, and by the way, i only spend 1200. dollars on my bottom end  ( baldwin engines in u.s.) and around 1500. on rest of motor, so it is not like i am spending big money on a built motor.

Changing valve springs is the easy part on a sealed crate motor and nobody tech's the springs of a sealed motor anyway. One way to limit the crates to be sure is a rev limiter, and that's easy to get around too, unless the track implements the same rule as the LM Car Quest in the maritimes does - which is distribute the chips just before the race. (pooled from all the race teams)

Crate motors aren't the money saver they once were - let's get that out of the way right now. Teams can easily spend 6 to 7 grand (or more - they literately go through two or more crate motors per season and burn them up) on a crate package and some do. The only thing running a 'crate' does is reduce the amount of time in tech and of course, a great defense "hey I run a crate"....

Track operators can't win, they'll argue : " If the weight break was eliminated (as has been often debated with no clear consensus) the cost of racing would NOT simply even up... with the slant that built motors entering would increase and thus a rise in the cost of racing.

Tech inspection needs to be improved and actually done on crate motors AND built if only to be fair. But it won't save any money and nor will it be a deterrent to spending money. Tech inspection is ugly, it costs money, something that track operators want to avoid in these economic times.

As Don has stated, you can spend a little or a lot. There are engines out there that are $4,000.00 (crate) and then it simply goes up from there. Roller Rocker arms, MSD ignition, etc, etc. all have pluses and minuses. I could go out tomorrow and acquire a legal and fully compliant engine that costs $25,000.00. But so what...no promises that what it will take to win. And that's what some guys are doing with Sealed Crate motors, they're improving them with better valve springs and retainers, zinging the RPM's to 7,000 and wearing them out faster and buying two per year - "it's still cheaper than a custom built motor".

I still maintain that Roller Rocker Arms are fine to allow or rev limiters or any ignition system.  If allowed, simply eliminate the weight break rule and classify the sealed crate motors as built motors. There's only two tracks that can really leverage such an advantage anyway - Kawartha and Mosport - and even then, it's not huge because they have a gear rule in place (yes there are two different options - still they have it). So here's a question; instead of a rev limiter; implement a max final drive of 6.00 regardless if you run a crate or built motor. Would that help even out the competition?

hey doug, i have a better idea. how about going back to original rule for crate engines which was no rebuilding them. or if rebuilt then classed as a built motor, same weight as a built with a 100 hundred pound penalty because they have the vortec head.

Don,

I would say that would work, if:

a) Crate motor valve springs were inspected
b) Sealed motors are verified as legit sealed units

But I honestly don't think that's gonna happen so.......

Sunset did pull a engine (from a Thunder), installed their own crate and the car still won.

There's no easy answer / solutions....

Don,

Sunset did pull a engine (from a Thunder), installed their own crate and the car still won.

ya but wasn't that the '75 laguna, 83 camaro, 72 nova, 86 monte frankencar?