Voting on new IJSBA Rules

prowatercraftracing

prowatercraftracing

Location
Lake Havasu City
Hello, The IJSBA is asking us to help them define some new rules for the ski class. Below I'm adding some notes in Blue to help you understand the possible new rule. Please copy/ paste the below and email it to Info@IJSBA.com PLEASE Forward to to as many friends as possible!!! Voting ends Jan 2nd.
  1. Shall IJSBA require that Ski Class PWC have the handle pole pivot in front of the engine compartment as a mandatory provision? This is a rule that is not defined in the rule book. Simple and obvious for us, but by voting Yes we can define the dimension and scale for the next OEM. I vote Yes
  2. Shall IJSBA require that Ski Class PWC have the engine compartment located in front (towards the direction of the bow) of the tray area. This is a rule that is not defined in the rule book. Simple and obvious for us, but by voting Yes we can define the dimension and scale for the next OEM. I vote Yes
  3. Shall IJSBA require that Ski Class PWC have a mandatory limitation that the ride plate, whether OEM or aftermarket, may not exceed 5 inches (127mm) past the stern edge of the upper deck? This is a rule that is not defined in the rule book for the OEM. By voting Yes we can define the dimension and scale for the next OEM. I vote Yes
  4. Shall IJSBA require that Ski Class PWC have a mandatory limitation that the ride pump, venture, and steering nozzle combination, whether OEM or aftermarket, may not exceed 5 inches (127mm) past the stern edge of the upper deck? This is a rule that is not defined in the rule book for the OEM. If you add 5" to an SXR it would be the same length as a Belassi B3S (Latest standup to compete). I vote Yes
  5. Shall IJSBA require that Ski Class PWC, whether OEM, or aftermarket, shall not exceed 97 inches (2.46m) from bumper to the most stern measurement of the PWC (measured by steering nozzle or ride plate, whichever protrudes most)? This is important because the current rule is 10' or 120" or 3.048m, that is to long and it's important that we limit this to the longest production ski to date the Belassi B3S at 96.5". I Vote Yes
  6. Shall IJSBA require that Ski Class PWC have mandatory flotation material (i.e. foam, inflatable, etc.) in the front and rear of the PWC that consumes 15% of the hull/deck volume? This is a rule that is not defined in the rule book. Simple and obvious for us, but by voting Yes we can define the dimension and scale for the next OEM. I vote Yes
  7. Shall IJSBA abandon the 8.2.2 provision, in Open Class(es), for Ski Watercraft only, that the aftermarket top deck must be an exact replica of the OEM top deck with no changes to dimension and/or scale? The current rule says we must exactly copy another manufactures product to be legal. This is ludicrous to be forced to "copy" another manufacture for any class. We need to preserve the entry level and "Open" the Open classes. This rule change and the above 1-6 rules will create a positive economic impact to the Standup Open classes, like we see in the freeride and freestyle industry. We will have more options with competitive prices. I vote Yes
  8. If Item 7 is yes, which of the following language shall be used:
    No change in language simply delete the requirement for an exact replica with no change in dimension or scale? Above the new rules create a definition for the dimension and scale. The only change would be a different shape on the top of the ski. This will allow our sport to have a New feel and look. I would use this language.
    Change to a silhouette test to compare to a homologated watercraft? Why? Look at the free ride and freestyle ski industry, they all have a different twist but mostly look the same. This rule makes no sense and it's hard to enforce.
    Change to resemble a homologated OEM watercraft? Again why? We need to market our exotic possibilities and have the unique look and not a spinoff. NO
    Change to resemble the look and shape of a traditional Ski watercraft? Not necessary. This sport needs a new look and feel not the same old thing. NO
  9. Shall IJSBA modify Rule 7.8.3.4 to clearly indicate that aftermarket fuel pumps are allowed in Runabout Limited? Abstain
  10. Shall IJSBA modify Rule 7.8.3.1 to clearly indicate that tensioners are part of the pulley system allowed in Runabout Limited? Abstain
  11. Shall IJSBA allow for replacement aftermarket valves in Runabout Stock Class(es)? Abstain
  12. Shall IJSBA allow for the supercharger shaft to have an additional oil fitting in Stock Class(es) by modifying Rule 6.4.9.? Abstain
  13. Shall IJSBA allow for the supercharger shaft to have an additional oil fitting in Limited Class(es) by modifying Rule 7.8.2.12.? Abstain
  14. Shall IJSBA specifically allow a vacuum line to be added to the intake manifold in Runabout Stock Class(es)? Abstain
  15. Shall IJSBA specifically allow a vacuum line to be added to the intake manifold in Runabout Limited Class(es)? Abstain
  16. Shall IJSBA prohibit lithium ion batteries in Stock Class(es) unless OEM equipped? I Vote Yes
  17. Shall IJSBA require Ski PWC in Open and GP Classes to be equipped with a boost pressure regulator? I vote No
  18. If Item 17 is yes then shall that boost pressure regulator be set to release at:
    12 LBS PSI ?
    14 LBS PSI?
    16 LBS PSI?
  19. Shall IJSBA change Rule 7.8.4.1 so that, in Limited Class(es), Ski type PWC shall have the required boost regulator release at 12 PSI? Ltd class favors the Hydrospace motor, the Ltd Class is suppose to be a budget class between Stock and Open. I vote Yes
  20. Shall IJSBA change Open Class(es) and GP Class(es), for Ski PWC, so that Open becomes normally aspirated and GP becomes the class that accommodates Ski PWC equipped with turbochargers and superchargers? We have to many classes. We do NOT want to separate our top pro riders. NO
  21. Shall IJSBA create restrictor plate requirements for Runabout Class(es) to limit the top speed of Runabouts on closed course tracks? Abstain
  22. Shall IJSBA change the maximum displacement in Runabout Rec Lites Class(es) to 1100cc with the following restrictions: 0-900cc for Runabouts Up to 450lbs and 1100cc for runabouts 720lbs and above? Abstain
  23. Shall IJSBA modify Runabout Stock Class(es) to require the PWC to be entirely OEM under the seat? Abstain
  24. If item 23 is No, are there other variations of allowances to remove?
  25. If item 24 is Yes, what is the implementation time for such a change?
  26. Shall IJSBA modify Rule 8.2.2 to allow an additional two inches in widening of the Ski’s standing tray area for specific models with a narrow standing area? Only in Open class no for all other classes
  27. Shall IJSBA modify Rule 6.4.5 to change “Additional cooling supply lines may be added to water inlet covers that are removable from the engine block.” To “ Water inlet covers that are removable from the engine block may be modified or aftermarket.”? Abstain
  28. Shall IJSBA increase Vintage Ski displacement to 800cc? NO
  29. Shall IJSBA allow Ski Stock Class(es) to have the provisions of boring the steering nozzle and/or cross model updating/backdating steering nozzles from the same brand Ski? NO
  30. Shall Veterans Runabout Class(es) switch from Limited Class Rules to Stock Class Rules for those Runabouts equipped with superchargers or turbochargers? Abstain
  31. Shall IJSBA modify the Runabout Normally Aspirated Class(es) so that Two Stroke powered PWC are scored separately from Four Stroke powered PWC? Abstain
  32. Shall IJSBA modify Rules 6.6.3, 7.5.1, and 7.8.3.4 so that direction is given on how to manage any fuel return line changes? Abstain
  33. Shall IJSBA add language to Rule 12.4.2 to specify penalties for missing a log jump and any exceptions to those penalties? YES
  34. Shall IJSBA extend larger displacement provisions to Open and Limited Ski Class(es) so long as proper restrictions are in place to ensure no advantage in performance over established displacements? YES
Please copy and paste this to Info@IJSBA.com
 
V

Vortex

Location
Southeast
Under the current rules you could run a 60mph+ ski in limited that costs over 20k. Something is wrong with this picture.

Lites class should have Yamaha and Kawasaki specific rules to equalize the playing field like the spec class rules from a few years ago. Just my 2 cents from someone looking to get more involved with the sport.
 
Last edited:
j0hnny

j0hnny

Location
detroit MI
Vortex said:
Under the current rules you could run a 60mph+ ski in limited that costs over 20k. Something is wrong with this picture.

Lites class should have Yamaha and Kawasaki specific rules to equalize the playing field like the spec class rules from a few years ago. Just my 2 cents from someone looking to get more involved with the sport.
Click to expand...


this is what happens with every limite class ever. look at 900cc freestyle. just created and already there are 900cc spec class engines that are more than 1100 engines. any spec anything that allows anything other than stock parts will be a game of who can play the rues better.
 
V

Vortex

Location
Southeast
Freestyle has been for years an all out class, aftermarket hull, everything. They just have that class to have another class so more people can compete for more than one title.

Nothing about racing is cheap either, Cost went up substantially with the introduction of the s4, more mods had to be allowed for 2 strokes.

The rules need clarifications. In stock class I could in theory run a superjet as a rius edition with the piped 760, this is not the case, only the cyl is allowed. I think the ijsba should give them the option of one or the other and limit what pipe you can use, b pipe or pro tec for example.
 
Last edited:
motobehrens

motobehrens

X
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Vortex said:
The rules need clarifications. In stock class I could in theory run a superjet as a rius edition with the piped 760, this is not the case, only the cyl is allowed. I think the ijsba should give them the option of one or the other and limit what pipe you can use, b pipe or pro tec for example.
Click to expand...

The Rius edition is it's own model, and you should be able to run one at WF in stock class. Of course that would put you on the old style hull. Your local promoter probably won't recognize it as a stock class ski since it wasn't sold here.
 
V

Vortex

Location
Southeast
motobehrens said:
The Rius edition is it's own model, and you should be able to run one at WF in stock class. Of course that would put you on the old style hull. Your local promoter probably won't recognize it as a stock class ski since it wasn't sold here.
Click to expand...

That would be a game changer for me because i still ride the old hull...so In other words, any old hull sj could be updated to piped 760? Wouldn't this put you past the lites class 90hp limit?
 
motobehrens

motobehrens

X
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Vortex said:
That would be a game changer for me because i still ride the old hull...so In other words, any old hull sj could be updated to piped 760? Wouldn't this put you past the lites class 90hp limit?
Click to expand...

I don't think they had lites class when I inquired about Rius edition eligibility. From what I remember, the ski would be ok for stock class at world finals, but probably wouldn't be allowed for any other stock class in the US. As far as updating your hull to rius edition spec, it would have to be a 96-07, hull. Your best bet is to send an email to IJSBA and ask for current info.
 
kevbo

kevbo

Location
dfw
All of these rules show that the IJSBA represent equipment providers only. Model specific classes are better for participants, general classes are best for MFGs.
 
V

Vortex

Location
Southeast
motobehrens said:
I don't think they had lites class when I inquired about Rius edition eligibility. From what I remember, the ski would be ok for stock class at world finals, but probably wouldn't be allowed for any other stock class in the US. As far as updating your hull to rius edition spec, it would have to be a 96-07, hull. Your best bet is to send an email to IJSBA and ask for current info.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think a direct inquiry is needed. However...the pro water cross tour is releasing its own rulebook next year, very interested in seeing what they have in store. The old 96 hull is abundant and I think it would still be a good race with the piped 760 against sxrs and 08 sj. The handling differences in new skis would even out added HP in the old hull.
 
Big Kahuna

Big Kahuna

Administrator
Location
Tuscaloosa, AL
From 2004-2008 you rarely saw SJ's on the race course. The hull even with Tubbies was not competitive. First race of 2004 I got to run a heat on and SXR. I bought one 2 weeks later. Never raced again on a SJ Hull. the 08 Hull is much closer to the SXR. If you have the strength and stamina you can be competitive but that hull has to be ridden hard for it to handle good unlike the SXR where it requires very little rider input to make it handle.
 
V

Vortex

Location
Southeast
Big Kahuna said:
From 2004-2008 you rarely saw SJ's on the race course. The hull even with Tubbies was not competitive. First race of 2004 I got to run a heat on and SXR. I bought one 2 weeks later. Never raced again on a SJ Hull. the 08 Hull is much closer to the SXR. If you have the strength and stamina you can be competitive but that hull has to be ridden hard for it to handle good unlike the SXR where it requires very little rider input to make it handle.
Click to expand...

I remember those days. Maybe one or two sj at any given race. I agree its not an easy hull to control, ive been riding one since 2003. Sxr is a yahcht in comparison. Its a bit like riding a 550 it will make other boats seem easy.
 
fast superjet chase

fast superjet chase

Location
Colorado
Rule #19 and #32 are a joke 14psi on a hydro is where it's at in a limited class. And larger displacements in the open class o heck no even with restrictors in place still wouldn't be comparable to a 1200cc. 14psi isn't an advantage on a hydro but that is what the yellow ecu in them is designed to run if you put it below that they don't run right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom