Brad,
I appreciate your comments on the stringer rule for the Comp Jet class.  I guess I'm the one stirring up the controversy here.  Per posts above I was given the go ahead to race my tunnel boat in NJ.  The problem now is that I would like to race it in Comp Jet while I put together a more serious Comp Jet boat.  
  
My question to you, Terry, and I guess APBA is;  What constitutes a 'stringer'?  To my way of thinking (and I think 76 Bonneville agrees) my tunnel boat has four full length stringers made of solid fiberglass, and structurally tied together across each tunnel...  I can assure you that this arangement is much stronger and stiffer than a conventional two stringer V bottom boat.  Where in the rules does it define what qualifies as a stringer?  How wide, how tall, what material, etc...?

I understand that this rule came about because a boat failed that only had quarter length stringers and the rule was made to insure that boats raced in the future would be strong enough to handle the loads seen in competition.  I have no problem with this concept, only in how the rule is interpreted by the tech inspectors.  I maintain that my 4 stringer tunnel boat meets the letter and intent of the rule.

That being said, in order for me to meet all the rules of the Comp Jet class I will be building an iron block LS engine, bolting my seats through the floor,  adding a rudder, exchanging my loader bolts for through bolts, joining APBA and a local club and paying all the entry fees, buying a new lifeline jacket and helmet retention...  All this so that I can finish last in the Comp Jet class.  Before I do all this I would at least like to know that my boat will be allowed to race in that class.

At this time I am on the search for a Rogers or Liberty hull that I can build as a more serious Comp Jet, but in the mean time, I would like to race my tunnel.  I am not a new comer to Comp Jet.  I raced a Rogers in Comp Jet in the '70's and '80's having placed 3rd in national high points in 1978.  I also shared the driving of the US-1 boat in 1981 (Randy Peters, CJ-20).  Not to mention the many years I raced an SK flatbottom before I switched to Comp Jet.  I can tell you that there were a lot of serious Comp Jets back then...

So, how about it...  
MrE
Shirl Dickey

Brad
As you know the stringer rule is for safety. My comment about designing a boat to take the stress demands of racing comes from a basic understanding of structural engineering not a rule that implies a structural requirement.  Comments noted show that the rule is still vague and ambiguous. I don't say that braking a boat is required to pass the rule but if there was an exception to the stinger rule that would allow an engineered solution with component tests and manufacturer certification that the boats components meet or exceed those requirements that would make for a solution that would allow for improvements in the breed. Like the brake-away rules of capsules I know that an engineered solution to strength requirements can be established. I'm not saying chuck the rules I'm saying give us something else as an alternative to provie the same or better protection to the drivers, boats and spectators.

Brad
As you know the stringer rule is for safety. My comment about designing a boat to take the stress demands of racing comes from a basic understanding of structural engineering not a rule that implies a structural requirement.  Comments noted show that the rule is still vague and ambiguous. I don't say that braking a boat is required to pass the rule but if there was an exception to the stinger rule that would allow an engineered solution with component tests and manufacturer certification that the boats components meet or exceed those requirements that would make for a solution that would allow for improvements in the breed. Like the brake-away rules of capsules I know that an engineered solution to strength requirements can be established. I'm not saying chuck the rules I'm saying give us something else as an alternative to provie the same or better protection to the drivers, boats and spectators.

the problem with that is (as you know) that we are running 30+ year old boats that didnt have such standards or certifications when they were made. any joe with a mold was pumping out boats back then. Do we limit the class to only certain manufacturers? I think that would be more crippling of course.....and there is no one out there currently laying up compjet specific boats. We are doin the best we can with the rules for what the class is and they are evolving as time passes....so dont fret, this rule isnt set in stone as the way it is. it will evolve as needed.

I have been seriously contemplating running the NJ class with my 79 Sleekcraft Tunnel, however, after reading the rules regarding how seats are mounted it doesn't appear my boat would qualify without major reconstruction. I would hate to spend the $ on safety equipment only to be turned away at an event. The hull has stringers in the bilge area that the engine mounts to, but no rails. It has a factory sub floor that extends from the bilge area up to the bulk head area and then a single stringer in the center up to the bow eye area. The only way to mount the seats is to the floor. Several tunnels are built this way, does this mean this "factory" design is excluded? Any ideas on what would work? Glassing in some type of seat boxes and thru-bolting to those?   

I thought the seat mounting rule was only for comp jet?

OK Terry what needs to happen to get NJ rolling. I have all the major parts to put the boat together. Ive been working on it the last couple days and going to keep picking away at it. Im thinking a test race toward the end of the year and a full NJ season starting in november. That gives guys including myself plenty of time to get ready. The little motor I have wont run with the big kids but should be the perfect NJ set up.

Can we change the name of the class to ski jet? sounds more appealing to more people.

whats the final verdict of the full stringer deal, through bolted seat, etc?

And sorry for not coming through on that story. I totally dropped the ball on it!

Can we change the name of the class to ski jet? sounds more appealing to more people.

The Ski Jet class is/was a whole different class. It was a class that required logs/snails, no diverters, passenger, etc. it was not anything close to what NJ is.

Nostalgia Jet falls under the Local Nostalgia class umbrella (Nostalgia Jet/Nostalgia Endurance) that the APBA has approved to be run and is recognized as a local class. I believe region 12 isn't the only region with Nostalgia classes, although its the only region with Nostalgia Jet. Changing the name and/or demeanor of the class, i assume, would be covered with lots of red tape and stepping on toes. Its not just as easy as all us jet guy's agreeing upon it and telling the world about it.

I'm happy to see some reformation of NJ....I was bummed it fizzled out once CJ was brought back to life. It was never the intention to put it to sleep once CJ was started up again. Now if we can keep people hooked and interested in running it on a regular basis 

wish i could get my $$$$$hit together to bring another nj boat out there for you guys 

Have been in contact with the powers to be. Nostalgia Jet will run under the original rules as a local class. The CJ class reps will oversee the class.All boats will be inspected  for safety. The full stringers and the stringer mounted seats will not be a requirement. The seats will be inspected for secure mounting( No lag Bolts thru a rotten sub-floor) I will have a copy of the rules posted shortly. Now it's time for you to step up and make this happen. I need a at least 4 boats entered to run the races.

Here are the revised NJ rules:

http://www.socaljetboats.com/boat-racing/nostalgia-jet-rules-revised/

Should make Puddingstone very interesting