[Mike]

I would like to support the proposal that Alex has put up for the running of the KKS races. The idea for the novice class is also very good but maybe it should be P3 and older as there is not supposed to be any P4's running around.

I am sure that the weight limits would be an area for griping but lets start somewhere and like John says, we can revise it as we go along.

With this formula, we can maybe cater to the needs of the many as well as promote and bring back the fun into karting in Malaysia. It can also provide a good platform for aspiring CIK class participants to race locally while keeping costs down. Benefits can include teaching our young drivers how to tune engines as part of the learning experience.

In this manner, we can basically have 3 major engine categories in Malaysia;

Yamaha - A good entry level class, level playing field and a nice intermediete engine for the cadets moving up to juniors(now that we hae moved to Comer 60's which may be a fairly big jump to TAG juniors) Also a good and cheap way to learn carburetor tuning

RMC - For the more serious karter, lots of power and a means of reaching the world finals.

KKS - An open class to promote karting in general and allow both experienced and new karters to have a lot of fun and hone their skills.

There seems to be a wonderful meeting of minds on this thread and like Mikko says, we need to communicate this to our club. As, I am also guilty of this, I believe that a lot of the club members are a fairly lazy lot and we do not attend our very own club meetings.

The club has always been very well run and we have left it to the powers that be in the club to do it. How will they, the people that run the club know , what we the members want if we don't let them know?

I am sure that almost all of us at some time or another has cornered poor "Uncle Paul" at some race meeting or another to give him our view on how the races should be run, but I believe that we should communicate our views in a constructive and proper manner to the good people who so ably run the KKS.

If, acted upon, I am sure that racing in Malaysia will become really exciting and if we can make the KKS races zone invitational, then maybe we can see the presence of our neighbouring countries.

Next steps, shall we write officially to the club, attend the next general meeting. Two or three years ago, Paul David had a meeting with the parents and drivers of the cadet class on the change of engines from Comer 85 to Comer 60. I attended it and found it very constructive and the club took very seriously the views of the participants and acted upon it.

[Mikko Nassi]

I would like to support the proposal that Alex has put up for the running of the KKS races. The idea for the novice class is also very good but maybe it should be P3 and older as there is not supposed to be any P4's running around.

Remember that the P3-P2-PWhatever is just the mold that was used to manufacture the Cylinder. You can (and there are drivers/were drivers recently) win races on a P1 or P2 or P3 cylinder or engine, it is no slower than a P8.

You can buy a brand new engine and put a P2 cylinder on it. If you have an old "P2" engine the changes since theyare for reliability mainly - different con rods for example - you won't be able to replace it with an "old-spec" conrod because you won't be able to buy one.

The problem I see with adjusting weights as we go on is simply because the people that own an engine that is winning will get pissed off and maybe quit because they think the club is against them or their engine. That's why I think it is essential to test unknown engines properly. For certain engines you could copy TAG USA to get around the right mark. You can't only base it on results in a race because different drivers will be driving different karts with different setups.

In my opinion the regulations have to be "stock standard" for all engines as they are in TAG USA... any deviations for a Rotax engine for example have to be spelled out clearly (tag USA has open jetting in Rotax for example).

[Mike]

Hi Mikko. I do not wish to pre-suppose Alex but from my point of view, the proposal to use the older cylinders was more from the point of view where there is a class for older engines and not trying to imply that the new engines are more powerful.

While agreeing with your point of the different numbers denoting different manufacturing moulds, Ill bet I can find at least 10 mechanics and fathers who would be willing to argue this point with you. In racing everyone seems to want new engines and this class may also create a demand for older engines which in turn can mean a lower entry cost into karting and healthy sales of new engines for the importer.

I really see your point on the weights. In the AKOC series, they have come up with a formula and lets try it for the season first. I have seen ROKs set fastest times during qualifying and Rotaxes winning heats. If it is not equitable, change it for the next season.

Maybe the use of the term, Open Class, was confusing, I believe that it was open to whatever 125cc engine type, not open to modifications. Whatever the engine they should still comply to standard manufacturers specifications.

[Alex Ritchie]

Hahaha...I think there is enough convergence and divergence of minds to be able to put workable alternatives before the powers that be, for them to make decisions.

So the next step should be a general meeting with the KKS where all interested parties should attend, especially ALL engine and chassis importers.

[Mike]

I will certainly concurr with that comment, but for the purpose of this exercise, let us all work towards reaching a meeting of the minds.

As most of the people who are involved or interested in the sport are at this forum, maybe we should use it to achive at least a blueprint of what we would like to see happening with the KKS races. I do believe that it already exists with the post Alex made.

With that, we can hopefully present a united request to KKS when and if we get to meet them. Should write to Uncle Paul to see if we can set up a date for this.

[Mikko Nassi]

Hi Mikko. I do not wish to pre-suppose Alex but from my point of view, the proposal to use the older cylinders was more from the point of view where there is a class for older engines and not trying to imply that the new engines are more powerful.

Sorry I didn't assume that the post was implying that either, I was simply questioning the intention of having only older cylinders for novices. What happens to a novice that has bought a used P6 engine and then shows up at a race meeting and is told he has to buy a P5 or P3 cylinder to race in the novice category? What then happens if he can't find a suitable suze cylinder of the suitable age to put on his engine? If someone buys a 4-year old used engine they are likely going to have to rebuild it to be competitive, which could make everything on the engine the same spec as a new engine except for the cylinder. I feel that it would only give the perception that they aren't being beaten by fresher engines rather than any real advantage by making a certain-age cylinder a must.

An alternative (not necessarily better) control to give the Novices less chance of being outspent in my opinion would be for example making the tyre regs only 1 set of tyres for the race meeting including free practice (no need to put brand spankers on for qual and buy another set of rims). Or how about limiting the engine maximum to only 1 engine for novices (not two) - and the Rotax importer could make available 1-2 spare engines that can be used in case of a failure during a race meeting.

I wonder if there could be enough novices to make and sustain a new category? I guess it all depends on how many entries would be received if there was a novice category but they would most likely be put in with the others but perhaps with a "rookie" mark in the championship standings? We've seen that novices can be just as good as the experienced drivers sometimes. A good idea if run together might be to award the winner of the novice category at each round with a trophy and then a "rookie of the year trophy" at the end of the series?

Another option for a novice cost-control would be to enforce for example a 3-race no cutting off your seal rule if the Rotax seal is used - no opening your engine after every race to put in a new ring etc.. can be controlled so that if there is a problem a Rotax center can check the engine and replace only what is necessary to fix the problem...

Additionally another thing that is a possibility and is done in Australia for a budget racer category at slower-than-rotax max speeds there are senior categories at senior weights but using Junior engines. I don't think there are enough drivers around to support such a category either though;)

I'll bet I can find at least 10 mechanics and fathers who would be willing to argue this point with you.

And how many of those ten have done back-to-back testing with several different cylinders of the same bore (on the same engine, setting the squish the same, on the same day, at the same track)? In karting assumptions easily turn into fact . You might be surprised what 'P'-cylinders some of the top drivers were running this year.

In racing everyone seems to want new engines and this class may also create a demand for older engines which in turn can mean a lower entry cost into karting and healthy sales of new engines for the importer.

That's true although old engines are still always there for a lower entry cost. Used engines seem to sell like hot-cakes already btw.

I really see your point on the weights. In the AKOC series, they have come up with a formula and lets try it for the season first. I have seen ROKs set fastest times during qualifying and Rotaxes winning heats. If it is not equitable, change it for the next season.

In AKOC it doesn't matter a lot if the weights are "correct" because the categories are scored separately - AKOC is effectively 3 categories that are run on the same grid, rather than one category with different engines. Weights shoudl also to be suited to the tracks the series will run at and even more importantly they have to be suited to the tyres used.

Maybe the use of the term, Open Class, was confusing, I believe that it was open to whatever 125cc engine type, not open to modifications. Whatever the engine they should still comply to standard manufacturers specifications.

Definitely, but also "open to whatever 125cc engine type" is too open imo. There is simply no way for the club to know what is "stock standard" on an engine if they don't get a few samples to measure and the spec sheets as well as templates for scrutineering, so allowing anyone to show up with any 125 engine won't work and because you can't set a weight for an engine that you have no idea about.

Both the Thailand TAG and USA TAG require the assistance of the engine importers to make the series a success from benchmarking to setting the regulations for the engine to supplying templates for scrutineering etc. If there isn't proper assistance from importers that wish to have their engines in the series and the engines are allowed in (say Comer 125s, KF-engines, ROKs such as Super and TT) the series then it is effectively an open (modifications) category because scrutineering won't be any good.

Mike do you feel it might be a good idea to have some sort of "homologation" procedure similar to TAG-USA for the club to follow in allowing engines into their series? I'm personally more interested in seeing a multi-engine category with tightly controlled regulations and weights where all engines are part of only one category - first because most engines will probably have only 2-5 drivers which would make it a bit insignificant to be "champion" and second because it will make the races a lot more exiting because you know they are actually racing each other rather than just being annoyed that a kart from another category is bothering them . I don't know if most feel the same way though.

Thailand SuperKart regs for example have:

"Engines from all kinds of brand must remain Standard from factory. The company who sold the engine must bring the engine along with its detail and will be given to R.A.A.T for inspections."

Side-question: has anyone with a KF2 engine tried their engine in KF4-spec? (basically put on a KF3-RPM limiter (14,000), and an ROK-type carburetor - a 30mm float carb) - that sounds like an engine that could be raced with a Rotax on fairly even weights if KF drivers don't want to run ~10+ kg heavier.

I'm seeing some great ideas from this thread, will be interesting to see if KKS feels any of the ideas could be implemented. As Alex said it's probably time to set a meeting with KKS for some discussions to find out how they feel since the members seem to have a lot of ideas? Probably more focused for next year rather than this year unless they are willing to make changes at short notice.

edit: damn I'm happy I can type fast that was one long post.