NEW Top 25 Stock rules poll

Do you like the proposed new rules?


  • Total voters
    63
  • Poll closed .

JoshH

Daggum farm truck
Staff member
Vendor/Sponsor
Feb 14, 2007
13,716
779
113
Texas!!!
I'd say the gutted interior part and the fuel cell have both been argued enough to warrant a separate vote.

I agree. Once this poll closes, I will put up those two and head studs as seperate issues. I'll probably roll fuel cells in with gutted interiors since both are pretty much weight reduction issues. May consider throwing headers/manifolds in there too. There have been a few mention those.
 

Smokum

New member
May 21, 2010
124
0
0
All those sharp edges and holes are just waiting to hurt someone in an accident whether you agree or not.

I'd say the gutted interior part and the fuel cell have both been argued enough to warrant a separate vote.

Who's truck is that in the picture you posted? Has anyone on the previous list removed the door panels? Just curious.
 

derek06

New member
Feb 6, 2012
452
0
0
35
massachusetts
I would hope there would be a minimum weight. And I don't agree with fuel cells. Imo should be a factory tank. Let's be honest who has a fuel cell on there every day driver?
 

JustinD

Plow Truck
Nov 21, 2008
2,067
0
36
42
Tiverton Rhode Island
I also think the fuel cell and battery relocation is ridiculous, like Derek said who does that to a daily driver? This is how these lists get out of hand, I'm pretty sure this was intended for everyday daily driven trucks??? Hell I was even on it at one point :D
 

TROJAN366

Gold Rush
Jan 13, 2012
2,474
1
38
MASS
I also think the fuel cell and battery relocation is ridiculous, like Derek said who does that to a daily driver? This is how these lists get out of hand, I'm pretty sure this was intended for everyday daily driven trucks??? Hell I was even on it at one point :D

Your truck was fast?:roflmao:


Fuel cells shouldn't be allowed and neither should relocating batteries. I've never seen a stock truck with batteries or a fuel tank in the bed.
 

Noreaster

Active member
Jun 13, 2007
2,910
0
36
43
Cape Cod,MA
thing that I haven't liked from the beginning of this rule change stuff is its all to cater to 1 truck. it was always a close group of times the stock 25 list because there was only so much you could do, now theres a .25 gap between 1st & 2nd place.
 
Last edited:

dordtrecht5

Regular Cabs Rock
Jul 21, 2009
900
0
16
Wherever I am working
I agree. Once this poll closes, I will put up those two and head studs as seperate issues. I'll probably roll fuel cells in with gutted interiors since both are pretty much weight reduction issues. May consider throwing headers/manifolds in there too. There have been a few mention those.

Josh, I respect your willingness on the vote. Would it be reasonable to consider making those three (head studs, interior and fuel cells) as three separate issue. I do agree that they are weight reduction items, but they are obviously opposite ends of the spectrum. If there is one to remove for weight reduction the everyday guy can remove interior as its more simple and easy. However, the fuel cells, well you probably know the issues there and that is mostly a dedicated race vehicle there.

Not trying to be pithy about it though.
 

MACKIN

Smell My Finger...
Aug 14, 2006
3,948
1
0
Connecticut
I'm with what he said about the fuel cell! As that is very true that if you have moved the battery and went with a fuel cell then you have crossed the line to a primary race truck.

Now in saying that you have to say SOME suspension mods also might put you in the same category? For instance certain shocks and leaf spring removal.

Thing is you have to stick with the obvious otherwise your going to over complicate this whole rule rules for this list. Im just giving some thoughts.

As far as weight reduction why are some so thick headed to realize it's a temporary removal not a everyday scenario. It takes five mins to remove a door panel and I doubt anyone would anyway. The only items of weight are seats. Sharp edges? Give me a break what are we OSHA governed?

I believe the only thought is are you going to allow what is a race only truck. Or being built for that purpose and cater to them when they can join the RWYB list?
 

TROJAN366

Gold Rush
Jan 13, 2012
2,474
1
38
MASS
You could still drive on the street with qa1s and overloads removed. Don't see an issue as long as the mounts are stock and in stock location. No interior and a fuel cell would render a truck useless though. I think rear seats in ec and cc should be removable but pass seat should stay in all trucks. Help keep the big trucks competitive.
 

sweetdiesel

That's better
Aug 6, 2006
10,390
0
0
52
Thailand
Gut it and push the stock motor as far as you can!

Be careful of them sharp edges though!


Tough list Josh but IMO the best thing about the old list was seeing how far a stock internal motor can go

Personally I think if guys could simply post the weight of the vehicle it would give other guys at more weight a feeling of sucsess still
 

bigbird

Member
Sep 18, 2006
837
0
16
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Gut it and push the stock motor as far as you can!

Be careful of them sharp edges though!


Tough list Josh but IMO the best thing about the old list was seeing how far a stock internal motor can go

Personally I think if guys could simply post the weight of the vehicle it would give other guys at more weight a feeling of sucsess still

So, you starting a stock motor list? I personally think there should be a stock motor list, a stock motor, turbo and injectors list, and the top 50.
 

dieseltwodoor

New member
Apr 13, 2010
189
0
0
Alberta
All those sharp edges and holes are just waiting to hurt someone in an accident whether you agree or not.

I'd say the gutted interior part and the fuel cell have both been argued enough to warrant a separate vote.

In my experience with volunteer fire/ems more people are injured from all the extra crap in the cab. Also, the plastic breaks and makes even sharper edges, and it gets in the way when we have to cut your ass out. That being said, Air bags, and stock seat belts are a must.
 

Dudgy

Runaway
Jun 1, 2010
416
0
0
Alberta
Guess i'm still allowed to run with the lbz swap :thumb:
We'll see if i'm gonna have my bigger turbo on the truck in march or not, if not i'm very curious if it will be faster now, truck is quite a bit heavier again though, got full leather interior back in the truck.

I like the rule list. About manifolds and uppipes and downpipe; they are simple bolt ons, just like an air intake, increases airflow, if you ban those then also ban boost tubes and intercooler and run stock air filter and exhaust...
 

jacobdewey

This won't last long...
Jan 14, 2011
972
0
0
No on the fuel cell, I say stock everything, (except allison mods and lift pump). I say let them gut and shave weight, I say yeah on no2.
 

dirty-b

KCCO!
Jun 5, 2010
337
0
0
Central MN
I agree. Once this poll closes, I will put up those two and head studs as seperate issues. I'll probably roll fuel cells in with gutted interiors since both are pretty much weight reduction issues. May consider throwing headers/manifolds in there too. There have been a few mention those.

I would keep the fuel cell and interiors a seperate issue. How much weight are we really talking with completely gutted to just remove the seats? I see the carpet being a big weight loss but the rest cant be that much? If its that big of a deal are we going to find a 90lb kid to run the trucks to save weight.

I say head studs and weight reduction yes not weight relocation so no fuel cell.
 
Last edited:

dirty-b

KCCO!
Jun 5, 2010
337
0
0
Central MN
Also is anyone really going to do a full race truck with a stock motor just to get on this list?
If you upgrade your truck later are you still on the list or is it only while your truck is stock?
 
Last edited: