Engine classes

[lsrjunkie]

The rule book states that for an engine to be used in XO class it must be a inline, flathead inline, or flathead V8 or V12 not built by ford or mercury. Easy enough. The question I have is about the part where it says, "1959 or earlier design." The way I read this is, if the engine was designed in 1959 or earlier then the actual manufacture date of the engine does not matter. Am I right in thinking this, or must it be built before '59 as well?

[Gary Perkinson]

I would think that it means that the first engine of that design would have had to have been built in '59 or earlier, but that any engine from the subsequent production run, regardless of actual year of manufacture, could be used. In other words, if you wanted to use an engine that was introduced to the marketplace in 1953, but that continued to be built until 1969, you could use an engine with an actual manufacturing year of, say, 1965 and still be within the rules. But if the engine design was on paper somewhere before '59 but not introduced to the public until, say, 1961, you couldn't use it. But I'm just guessing, and we know how dangerous guessing can be....

[Tman]

The engine architecture needs to be 59 and earlier. A good example is the 235/261 Chevy. It was produced before and after 59, so it is legal. The later 230/250/292 replacements were designed AFTER 59 and are not legal.

[RichFox]

You don't get a "Bye" on an engine that was on the drawing boards in 1959 but offered for sale only in '60 or later. It needs to be an engine in common use prior to 1960.

[maguromic]

I would think that it means that the first engine of that design would have had to have been built in '59 or earlier, but that any engine from the subsequent production run, regardless of actual year of manufacture, could be used. In other words, if you wanted to use an engine that was introduced to the marketplace in 1953, but that continued to be built until 1969, you could use an engine with an actual manufacturing year of, say, 1965 and still be within the rules. But if the engine design was on paper somewhere before '59 but not introduced to the public until, say, 1961, you couldn't use it. But I'm just guessing, and we know how dangerous guessing can be....

Though the design is the same, the French flat head Ford blocks aren't legal in vintage. Tony

[panic]

The cut-off date is intended to separate the semi-modern L6 OHV engines like the 1960 intros (Ford 144/170/200/250, slant 6 170/198/225) from the more primitive OHV engines (216/235/261 stovebolt, Ford 223, GMC, and Rambler (pre-AMC) 190).

[trimmers]

The cut-off date is intended to separate the semi-modern L6 OHV engines like the 1960 intros (Ford 144/170/200/250, slant 6 170/198/225) from the more primitive OHV engines (216/235/261 stovebolt, Ford 223, GMC, and Rambler (pre-AMC) 190).

Actually, it appears the Ford Thriftpower 6 (144/170/200/250) and Mopar Slant 6 (170/198/225) would qualify as vintage engines.   The rule book states "1959 or earlier design", and makes no mention of the model year of the vehicles in which they were introduced.  The 1960 Ford Falcon debuted on October 8, 1959, and the Plymouth Valiant on October 26, 1959.   Since the engines in question actually went on sale in 1959, they obviously had to be "1959 or earlier design".

[Peter Jack]

Tooooooo many people trying to be lawyers!!!!!!!

Pete

[BobDcuda]

Trying to be lawyers, yeah.  But "1959 or earlier design" does not say "1959 or earlier production" or "1959 or earlier model year".  Makes all the difference and would definitely end the debate.   

[RichFox]

The cut-off date is intended to separate the semi-modern L6 OHV engines like the 1960 intros (Ford 144/170/200/250, slant 6 170/198/225) from the more primitive OHV engines (216/235/261 stovebolt, Ford 223, GMC, and Rambler (pre-AMC) 190).

Actually, it appears the Ford Thriftpower 6 (144/170/200/250) and Mopar Slant 6 (170/198/225) would qualify as vintage engines.   The rule book states "1959 or earlier design", and makes no mention of the model year of the vehicles in which they were introduced.  The 1960 Ford Falcon debuted on October 8, 1959, and the Plymouth Valiant on October 26, 1959.   Since the engines in question actually went on sale in 1959, they obviously had to be "1959 or earlier design".

It mat appear that way to you. But I would not try to show up in impound with one of those engines. The class has been run for years and the cut off is well known and understood.

[panic]

Both engines were introduced as new for the 1960 models. Both the Falcon and Valiant were completely new platforms.

The original drawing was by DaVinci using a goose quill and a pot of walnut juice, but it still goes by what year is the 1st car to use it.

[panic]

Quite right: "trying to be lawyers" is actually nothing like a competent attorney. Weaseling around the language to make it say what you want instead of the original author's intent crashes in the upper Courts all the time.
BTW: that's the prism through which SCOTUS analyzes appeals: "what was the intent of the legislature?" takes precedence over any ambiguous language.

[BobDcuda]

I don't disagree with you there.  I do run a slant 6 motor in F engine class, but I still think the wording should match how it's applied and interpreted.  Change just one word, from "design" to "production", and it's done.  No more debate. 

[lsrjunkie]

I agree completely. Traditionally rules in all types of racing have always been up to interpretation. But there are more times than not when reading between the lines has not worked out for the reader. That is exactly what I am trying to avoid by asking the people that have already been through this.

[Peter Jack]

The easiest way is to get an interpretation from the person in charge of the class in which you intend to compete and save the answer to enter in your log book so you don't have problems in tech or impound. Having a whole bunch of opinions is going to be worth nothing when you come up against event officials.

Pete