IJSBA Managing Director’s tentative rule change recommendations

December 15, 2009

Greetings to the Personal Watercraft Racing community. This bulletin outlines the rule changes suggested by the Managing Director to the IJSBA Board of Directors for updates to the 2010 IJSBA Rule Book. Also included in this briefing is a list of the other rule change suggestions that may fall outside of the Managing Directors recommendations. These suggestions have come from the personal watercraft community at large and comprise comments taken largely from competitors. This recommendation is only the course of action suggested by the IJSBA Managing Director and may not reflect the opinions of each individual director. Further, these suggestions are not a guaranteed course of action. These suggestions could be voted down, or could change, as the items presented are discussed and debated. Please share this update with as many people as possible so that everyone has the opportunity to contact the IJSBA and their respective representative(s) in the IJSBA to advise us of the best course of action.

To get things rolling, this update was due on the 10th. However, we received, on the 10th, a series of emails asking for changes in the Limited Class. The last couple of days were spent circulating these suggestions so that feedback could be received. The IJSBA (and the Managing Director, personally) would like to thank everyone for their participation this year. This year brought one of the most civil, insightful, and productive discourse since 2005. We would like to especially recognize Doug Lavin and Jim Cebulski for sending in a tremendous amount of data (mailed at their own expense no less) and their careful research to try to inspire more discussion about alternative courses of action. There are many others to recognize, but this would be a list longer than the rule suggestions so it must be cut someplace in the interest of efficiency. As the Managing Director, I work for the entire community collectively. You are my bosses and it was a indeed a pleasure to tackle this project for you. As of this morning, December 15, we are still receiving comments that would have reflected this recommendation.

The Managing Directors suggestions are a synthesis of the requests from the entire community across the globe. Different parts of the world have incredibly different viewpoints. It is not possible to combine every suggestion into a single compromised change. Instead, we work very hard to let each perspective evolve and for the global market to seek out a common ground. There are many great ideas that came to IJSBA. All of them have very strong points which demonstrate validity. We will work hard to introduce all of them to the market and then we will react to what the market shows is the most attractive and feasible plan. It is not possible to give more opportunities, retain racers, make changes, keep things the same, and have fewer classes. Some things have to give. Our sport is always a work in progress and we will continue to reevaluate, evolve, and grow well past the 2010 version of IJSBA offerings.

Freestyle

For years, the Freestyle classes stayed remarkably constant. The most notable names in Freestyle pushed competition and tricks to heights that were so noteworthy that clips and segments of these performances started making global news. Remarkably, these pioneers shared their skill and helped develop hulls and other products which allowed the general public to perform the same tricks. What followed is an entire generation of Freestyle Competitors who are all capable of the same dazzling tricks that once guaranteed only a small subset of athletes could make the podium. In doing so, the hull technology has changed rapidly and the relationship between Freestyle and use of an OEM PWC has diminished rapidly. What is most notable about this is that the proliferation of the more exotic hulls and engine combinations has actually increased Freestyle participation (likely because the hulls help with the tricks).

The IJSBA strongly believes in protecting the sanctity of only using homologated watercraft for competition. Such a policy ensures that there is a link between the public perception of store purchased PWC being relevant to the action seen on the water. Interest in branded PWC increases sales and increased sales support the life blood of sanctioned competition. With this said, competitors are having difficulty adhering to homologation requirements in the hulls and having the freedom to use the best packages for homologated engines.

Therefore, the IJSBA Managing Director is recommending that the IJSBA adopt the policy that Freestyle Ski PWC be allowed to use a generic hull/topdeck configuration that resembles the look of a pole equipped Ski. This policy would set forth the requirements for a Ski appearance including: general shape, angles, and minimum/maximum measurements. Rather than have a freestyle homologated hull, hulls would be approved by IJSBA and the homologation requirement would rest on a homologated engine package or a reasonable replica of a homologated engine package. This policy would require that the competitor use an OEM case engine or cases that are replicas of OEM cases. A replica would require that some bolt patterns remained constant with the OEM patterns and/or than an OEM crankshaft could be used in the replica cases. Displacement requirements would remain the same.

Runabout Limited

The IJSBA Managing Director is recommending that Limited Class Runabouts no longer have to chose between cam/valve work and a supercharger impeller.

The IJSBA Managing Director is recommending that the aftermarket intercooler restriction of a +25% heat be changed to a simple provision for an aftermarket intercooler.

The IJSBA Managing Director is recommending the allowance of an aftermarket pressure relief valve (Blow Off Valve) to the intake systemfor 4-stroke Runabout Limited Class.

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends no additional changes for Runabout Limited.

Runabout Stock

The suggestion sthat have come in which relate to policy changes in the Runabout Stock classes have roughly fit into two categories: “No ECU” and “Allow OEM Performance to be Enhanced and More Reliable in Racing Conditions.” While researching the options, the numbers, and the underpinnings of suggestions on each side of the argument, the race population, and the marketplace of available runabouts. The most significant aspect of the runabout component is that there are a variety of runabouts offered by the five OEM producers. The marketplace offers entry level runabouts all the way up to extraordinarily high performance runabouts. High performance runabouts are the units that are showing up to the race course. This makes the situation highly likely that it is performance minded individuals who are the ones that make their way into the racing sport as opposed to persons interested in the racing sport going out and purchasing entry level runabouts in the hope of competing.

What this means to the IJSBA environment is that we have to examine the behavior of the performance runabout customer to make sure that the IJSBA Stock Rules do not exclude those customers that have the mindset to take their PWC experience beyond lake riding. IJSBA has researched heavily the purchasing patterns of persons who own performance runabouts. The majority of modifications allowed for runabouts in the Stock class are consistent with the purchasing behavior of performance runabout owners. The exception is the ECU which, while rapidly growing in numbers, is not yet one of the common additions to the average performance runabout.

The input received from the public places the known opinion on the ECU subject approximately 70% in favor of retaining the ECU and 30% in favor of removing the ECU from the Stock Class. This feedback, along with the continuing circumstances that policing ECU use is questionable at best, and the fact that a majority of competitors already have purchased this ECU based on IJSBA’s rules, has led the IJSBA Managing Director to recommend that the provisions for ECU in Runabout Stock Class should remain unchanged. The effect of removing ECU will affect units disproportionately. The IJSBA is also aware that in the 2010 calendar year, it is highly likely that the technology to “flash” all makes of OEM ECU will soon be prevalent and this will result in a difficult situation if we attempt to restrict ECU to OEM specifications only.

The Managing Director is recommending that the wording of Rule 6.4.5 be amended to make it clear that additional water can be added to the OEM intercooler. This rule needs to clearly dictate that additional cooling supply can come from the pump but that this additional supply can only go into the general cooling line system or to supply additional water to the intercooler.

The Managing Director is recommending that reinforcements to OEM intercoolers, aftermarket intercooler end caps, more durable fittings, aftermarket exhaust exits, and other aftermarket general parts be eligible for the Runabout Stock Class on a case by base basis when specific criteria are met. This criteria would include: a) that no volume or performance gain would be obtained from the use of the part to be approved; b) the part being replaced is known to be susceptible to failure in harsh race conditions; c) the aftermarket repair/enforcement/replacement is a more sensible alternative to the OEM part.

The Managing Director is recommending that backdating be allowed in Stock Class.

These recommendations reflect a global perspective that focuses on the use of performance Runabout. The IJSBA urges local markets to continue to explore classes which have more restrictive provisions for Stock Class as well as classes which address entry level runabouts (ie Lites and Normally Aspirated classes). The IJSBA can more comprehensively lean to this direction when a greater population of actual competitors participate in these classes across the globe.

Ski Open/Modified

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends that the Ski Modified Class should adopt a displacement limit of 1200cc for normally aspirated two stroke engine platforms. This recommendation is dependent on the additional recommendation that the IJSBA Board of Directors approve either an allowance for Two Stroke platform Skis to change same type crankcases between homologated PWC of the same OEM make or switch to Modified Rules for Ski PWC at World Finals. This move will allow Two Stroke Ski competitors to utilize larger displacement OEM engines (ie 1100 ST-X Kawasaki engine in an SX-R and 1100 Yamaha Wave Raider engine in a Superjet.) This will also allow those competitors who have kept same make engines in their GP built PWC to race both premiere classes. This change should also extend the competitive life of Two Stroke Ski platforms in the premiere Pro Ski classes.

Ski Limited

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends dropping the boost regulator pressure setting for Turbo/Supercharged Ski PWC from 100% increase to a 75% increase (going from 14 PSI to 12 PSI with a .25 PSI tolerance).

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends no additional changes for Ski Limited.

Ski Stock

The Ski Stock class has been one of the most passionately debated topics in the last many years. The Ski product line differs highly from the Runabout line in the market perspective. OEM’s tend to offer Ski PWC as a “one size fits all” product. This is to say that, with very little exception, an OEM has tended to release only one Ski model that was designed (or simply left) to cover both the entry level and performance minded consumers. Ski PWC have historically been Two Stroke models and tend to go unchanged for many years before updating. In recent years, the market for Ski type PWC has reduced sharply. Meanwhile, the manufacturing technology to produce a Ski type watercraft has become available to more designers/investors who are interested in challenging the PWC market. With new producers comes new ideas in what is and what should be a Ski. Where the entry market seems cornered by technology developed years ago, newer units tend to lean towards the performance oriented customers. Where older technology becomes phased out of the market place by restrictive efforts, newer technology which is performance leaning (and performance priced) becomes the entry level product because it is the only product of this kind available for sale.

The IJSBA is left with a situation where a larger body of older Ski technology exists in the community at prices more friendly to tight economies. Conversely, this older technology is not available for new unit sale in many important markets and a significant amount of competitors have already switched to new technology. There is no single class solution to this problem that does not invite dumping a bunch of performance parts into some stock Ski, slowing down other stock Ski, having inconsistent parity results because different packages will have different results in different environments, and bifurcating the Ski racing globally. Therefore, the sensible approach must be to prepare one class which protects the established older technology and another class which provides for future technologies and further advances in the evolution of a Ski PWC.

In dealing with Two Stroke technology, the overwhelming majority have requested that the IJSBA scale back the allowances for Ski PWC in the Stock Class. There were numerous suggestions on this subject with the two largest single consistent items being the pipe stinger and the water routing. There was a small, but significant, group that pushed very hard for exhaust upgrades to some models and this idea is addressed in the Spec heading of this bulletin. The Managing Director’s Ski Stock suggestions are a course of action that affects the Ski PWC known/formerly known as Lites (see Name Game below).

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends that the provisions for bore sizes up to 850cc be retained. This provision was initially created so that persons with older technology could have utilize every possible bit of bore of a cylinder before having to purchase new sleeves. When this subject was researched, the bulk of engineers polled concurred that there would be virtually no performance gain by any bores larger that what was currently being allowed. What would result, then, was a plethora of used cylinders that could be used as replacement parts for Two Stroke Ski PWC. The past year’s results from this allowance show that there hasindeed been no performance gains from the use of larger bores. Therefore, the benefit of being able to continue using the increased bore space should be retained.

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends that the provisions for head gasket and base gasket thickness be amended to reflect a sliding scale based on the displacement of the PWC in its current configuration. Ski PWC with a displacement of 0-779 cc would be allowed a larger tolerance of minimum/maximum base and head gasket thickness while 780-850 cc would retain the current restrictions for minimum/maximum thickness of the base and head gaskets.

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends that the provision for aftermarket cooling line routing be removed from Stock Class.

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends that the provision for aftermarket exhaust pipe stinger insert/water fitting be removed from Stock Class.

The Name Game (Ski Lites)

The IJSBA has been very hesitant to embrace the name “Two Stroke Stock” to describe the Ski PWC under 90 horsepower. First, it ignores the very real possibility that a low horsepower normally aspirated Four Stroke Ski may come into the market as a lower priced entry PWC. Second, this name may confuse the public as to the growth and evolution of the general PWC marketplace which has become nearly all Four Stroke and has evolved into some of the most environmentally friendly water vessels on the planet. Ski are the only PWC that all ages of IJSBA License holders can use. Ski are frequently the higher profile attraction for an event. We do not want to give the false impression to the media and to regulatory bodies (particularly those who approve our permits) that we are comprised of older technology that is (unfairly) seen as not in the best interests of local environmental trends. With these philosophies, the IJSBA adopted the Lites name as Lites has been a recognized name for this type of competition in many other motorsport disciplines. We have received a noticeable amount of replies that competitors would be much happier if we could adjust the names for this class and that such a change would secure their participation. Shakespeare has been dead for a couple hundred years so roses and names can be forgotten- if you want the name changed then we can do it.

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends amending the Rule Book to describe restricted horsepower Stock class racing as Lites or Stock and to describe unrestricted horsepower Stock class racing as Stock or Performance Stock. The IJSBA, at World Finals, will continue to use Lites on the entry form but will designate the current Ski Lites Class as Ski Stock and the unrestricted Stock Class as Performance Stock. This policy will be based off of what type of Ski PWC is offered by the bulk of manufacturers. For the 2010 model year, two OEM’s offer Ski under 90 horsepower and one OEM offers Ski above 90 horsepower. Because of the 2:1 ratio, the baseline Stock name will be assigned to the under 90 HP PWC. The IJSBA suggests each affiliate/local organization select the name system that best reflects your customers population and wishes. This recommendation does not apply to Runabout Lites.

Spec Ski Class Racing

In 2006, the IJSBA suggested that interested affiliates and local organizations develop a Spec Class in the interest of testing the possibility of creating a format of Ski racing where no brand or make of Ski would have a competitive advantage over any other make or brand. The philosophy of such an undertaking is truly admirable. The concept that any Ski owner could come to the race and only have to face the racing skills of other competitors (or the financial advantages of other competitors) is truly an ideal goal. The idea of having this as entry level class buttresses such a goal in that the most basic racing enjoys the most basic fairness. In this pursuit, it has been attempted to replace Stock Class racing with Spec Class racing. Such a replacement encounters a great number of difficulties which need to be explored before being implemented at the global or World Finals scale.

The greatest difficulties of creating a Spec class are the numerous variables that must all be addressed to transform differently built Ski PWC into identically performing PWC. Taking just the two contemporary Lites (it is still called Lites until we vote!) eligible PWC into account, the following is notable: there is more than a 10 percent difference in engine displacement, an approximate 15 percent horsepower difference, an approximate 20 percent weight difference, and approximately 10 percent difference in hull surface size. These factors do not reflect differences in pump/water intake design, hull design, effects of differences in fuel capacity, or efficiency of supporting components (ie exhaust, carburetor, ignition, etc.). Please note that this analysis totally ignores the tolerances and differences OEM manufacturers allow in their products such as fiberglass irregularities which can affect weight.

The first obstacle in equalizing these factors is the amount of resources it will take to accurately adjust every different element so that they measure equal. In many cases it is not possible to equalize the characteristics such as with hull/intake surface and design. To overcome this, allocations must be made to compensate in factors that can be adjusted such as adding weight or performance parts. This brings the obstacle of accurately measuring the real outcomes of the compensation. Assuming that these compensations/adjustments yield horsepower to weight numbers that are fairly equalized, this still may not play out equally on the race course. Differently displaced engines with the same horsepower rating will have advantages and disadvantages in acceleration- even slight power curve differences are exacerbated by differences hull surface to water contact. These issues become further problematic when additional variables are added to the equation. PWC equalization may have drastically different effects on the size of the rider (excluding skill). A “one size fits all equalization” assumes constant conditions such as water type, course length, first turn buoy distance, and many other factors that will change from race to race.

These concerns do not mean that we abandon the pursuit of Spec Racing. We simply must acknowledge that to do it right takes a substantial amount of resources beyond what has been applied to this endeavor. We also must acknowledge that the amount of parts additions and massaging that must be done to accurately and truly equalize the PWC appears to be well past that which defeats the original purpose of a Stock Class. Therefore, the IJSBA Managing Director recommends that a Spec Class menu of options be added to the Appendix section of the 2010 IJSBA Rule Book. This appendix will give organizations a guideline to test the prospects of equally performing Ski PWC as it applies to the market in which they operate. The IJSBA will make every effort to select the most successful elements of this activity and offer it at the 2010 quakysesne World Finals but not as a replacement for Stock Class at this time.

Modifying the Example Class List

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends modifying the example class list in the Rule Book to reflect the more contemporary classes offered by affiliates around the world.

Sport Spec

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends that the IJSBA publish the Sport Spec rules, as presented by Scott McKenna, in the Appendix section of the 2010 IJSBA Rule Book upon sufficient demonstration that such information is free of copyrights.

Veterans Class Ages

The IJSBA Managing Director recommends changing the Veterans Ski Class minimum age to 35.

Other Items

While not part of the IJSBA Managing Director’s official recommendations, the following is a list of other items that will be considered by the IJSBA Board of Directors.

1. Allowing aftermarket fuel injectors in the Runabout Stock Class
2. Further amendments to head gasket and base gasket sizes in all Stock classes
3. Clarification requiring that the OEM seat foam not be required in Runabout Stock.
4. Minimum/Maximum distances for the Black Bouy (aka Penalty Buoy)
5. A decrease in the maximum amount of Runabouts allowed on the line per heat.
6. Allowing aftermarket exhaust pipes for certain models in the Ski Stock Classes.
7. Allowing aftermarket heads in the Stock Classes.
8. Create a Senior Ski Class (50 +).
9. Allow only handling modifications for all Stock Classes.
10. Have different rules (ie Lites/Spec) for Stock Classes depending on skill classifications.
11. Allow aftermarket pump cones in Ski Stock classes.
12. Reduce the allowable boost pressure for Turbo/Supercharged Ski to 5 PSI in the Stock Class.
13. Put a limit of years on holding a Novice Card (in addition to the current limitations based on success).
14. Adjust Skill Classifications on the licenses to utilize Pro Am/Amateur
15. Remove Novice Class
16. Remove Pro Am Class

The IJSBA will release a voting slate within a week. The voting period will open on December 23 and will close on December 26. Please send your comments to the IJSBA by emailing info@ijsba.com. The IJSBA will forward any comments received to the respective board member who represents the commenting party.

The IJSBA is an association of Manufacturers, Promoters, Racers, and aftermarket producers. The IJSBA is made up of the comprehensive PWC community in favor of a positive future for the community. We are responsible for the rules which govern the sanctioning, organization and conduct of sanctioned events; the standards for eligibility and conduct of competition and officials; the regulations for eligibility and preparation of watercraft; and the rules for annual series of events around the world. The IJSBA Headquarters are located in Half Moon Bay, California and can be reached by call +1-(714)-751-8695 or by emailing info@ijsba.com

###