PDA

View Full Version : (Moved)Another P Limited / Spec motor discussion



longballlumber
01-10-2018, 09:18 AM
Since no one else has asked yet; I will....

What does this mean? ">> Spec motors are to be unmodified from the factory"

Isn't changing connectors a modification? Stock connectors on many over the counter motors will not survive heat racing. What about replacing worn out bearings? Wouldn't that be considered maintenance? I thought this is why we when to a physical size limitations, because it's techable. It's already been determined that high end, high quality, and high dollar motors don't offer an advantage. Right?

I personally purchased a motor and the manufacturer claimed was 61.5mm in length; it showed up longer (62.94mm). However, I was able to take a little aluminum off of each end bell to put it in spec. Is this motor modified?

I am ready for the verbal beating!:popcorn2:

Doug Smock
01-10-2018, 09:42 AM
Been waiting for this. I'm afeared I don't have a legal motor in the fleet.:mellow:

jaike5
01-10-2018, 10:05 AM
I would say Mike you got duped by the manufacturer, surprise surprise !! By shaving the end bells you have modified . replacing bearings from wear is maintenance , replacing bearings on a new motor / modification. lol
Cheers, Jay.

T.S.Davis
01-10-2018, 10:39 AM
We don't want guys losing to someone they believe is beating the system. We don't want any perception (accurate or not) to deter a guy from participating. In my head............ "spec" racing is a stepping stone between the RTR guy and us racing lunatic. We have to get RTR guy out of his back yard pond and out on to a course with us. Racing these things is like a drug. We need to get them passed that first heat. Feeling the playing field is relatively even (in my head again) is our best shot.

We want/need a spec that's simple, doesn't need to change all the time (like limited did), and makes a new guy feel he can be on the course and even compete with a vet. It also needs to have enough performance so as to not bore a vet to tears. A class that is so slow that a guys don't wanna is pointless. Anyone want to run some N1 mono? Apparently not since almost nobody does.

Stepping down from the soap box.....

We're just trying to keep people from winding their own Mike. NOT because I personally feel there is an advantage but because some will "perceive" that there is. Back to that perception effecting reality thing.

We don't want cans to be machined to fit the spec. By that I mean, someone orders a 65mm (for instance) motor totally aware that it's too big but plans to just butcher it to fit.

However, it doesn't seem right to me either (or fair for that matter) for a buyer to be stuck with a useless motor that doesn't even meet the specifications of it's own data sheets. You order something based on the manufacturers drawings and when it comes in your screwed? It aint right by me. Me personally, I would be fine with fixing a can that doesn't meet the specifications of the very people that built the darned thing.

There's more than way to look at that too. Let's say I went to a race. Not this one. Any race with a random CD that doesn't know the subtle nuances of the Neu motors for instance. 1412's stuffed into 1415 cans is a good example. Say I ordered for me fleet 1412's based on the drawings and they show up in a longer can. WTH?? The spec sheet says they should be "Xmm". So I machine the can to match the data sheet and go racing. Now I have a motor that is within spec and is exactly as the manufactures data sheet claims. There were some 1412's built in the original 1412 cans per the drawings. Which one was manufactured that way and which one was machined? How does random CD tell me which is legal? Can't tell. They're now exactly the same. Heck, I do know some of the subtle nuances and I doubt seriously that I could tell the two apart.

Most motors don't come with connectors. That's typically an RTR thing.

For now I'm thinking any connector, motor within the dims, modification to meet the published dims of the manufacturer are okay. I have no authority to enforce any of this thinking outside of this race.

BTW I still have no real feel for how the proposal has been received by the BOD. I know they've seen it. Just not sure if they're okay with it......or hate'n it. I know there were some serious FE guys that were not on board with any notion of "spec" classes. For ever and ever amen. So it could get modified, shelved, poop can'd, trial period. I just don't know at this point.

Doby
01-10-2018, 11:14 AM
I cut up a bunch of Lehner 3080's to fit the spec rules.

tjcast
01-10-2018, 02:04 PM
The things that we all do to get a stock motor to run in our Spec setups ( changing connectors, flat spot on shaft, adding cooling jacket) are not a problem. Replacing worn out bearings with stock ones OK, replacing them with high tech ceramic $300 bearings no. We have to rely on the integrity of each racer for compliance. It's a sad commentary if someone is so desperate to win they have to circumvent the rules to do so!

Doug Smock
01-10-2018, 03:08 PM
"I still have no real feel for how the proposal has been received by the BOD. I know they've seen it".

It hasn't been put in front of the BOD. It's my understanding that will happen soon. That's pretty quick BTW, proposals (except safety) aren't usually addressed until the annual meeting @ the Nitro Internats (July 12-15, 2018).:wink:

"We want/need a spec that's simple, doesn't need to change all the time (like limited did). The "spec" didn't need to change IMO, the mentality did. Just sayin,again. lol Done talking about it for now.

Let's race!!


:focus:

T.S.Davis
01-10-2018, 04:07 PM
Gotcha Doug. I know these things take time. I'm being patient. Honest. Hugs.

The "spec" did change though Doug. By "spec" I mean the NAMBA P Limited set. Proboat changed what they were making and the list had to change. New companies came long and couldn't get on the list. How to get added isn't clear. I know, I proposed the dumb thing. It was too much of a PIA. Some of the motors on the list currently are tough to get. I suppose we could have left the "spec" alone but since IMPBA didn't have one that might have been tough to do. Multiple IMPBA events referenced NAMBA's limited set for racing. Sooooo........if NAMBA is in the process of moving away form the list........and they are. OH! Just thought of something. If IMPBA passed a size spec and then NAMBA followed suite..............everyone on the same page for once! Picture me clutching my chest like Fred Sanford.

MarkF
01-11-2018, 02:57 AM
The new rules say 62mm can length but nothing about the stator length. To me, the stator length is more important than can and should have been included in the rules. We all know a 1515 can be cut down to meet the new can length. I know Neu has received orders to have 1412 motors cut down to meet specs. People are already trying to cheat. You should have put in there no longer than 1" stator lengths like real spec motors have if you want an even playing field. Just leaving the rules to can lengths opens the door for cheating.

Mark

T.S.Davis
01-11-2018, 07:44 AM
No it doesn't Mark. Neu manufactured the 1412's and just threw them in 1415 cans. So the motors came and didn't match his own drawings. Asking them to build them as advertised isn't a crime.

The spec has to be simple. Opening up motors to measure stators isn't simple. Few manufacturers even publish that data. Also, this has been tested already.

Side note. Just saw that Hobbico filed for bankruptcy. Who knows what will happen to Aquacraft.

T.S.Davis
01-11-2018, 07:54 AM
Actually, what we should have done was leave "as manufactured" completely out of it. Let guys do what ever they want inside the dims.

dethow
01-11-2018, 10:17 AM
The new rules say 62mm can length but nothing about the stator length. To me, the stator length is more important than can and should have been included in the rules. We all know a 1515 can be cut down to meet the new can length. I know Neu has received orders to have 1412 motors cut down to meet specs. People are already trying to cheat. You should have put in there no longer than 1" stator lengths like real spec motors have if you want an even playing field. Just leaving the rules to can lengths opens the door for cheating.

Mark

First, a 1515 won't fit the rules because the can diameter is to big.
Second, what Terry said about the 1412. And we've had a couple guys running 1412's this past season with no advantage observed. A think the main advantage in the 1412 will be durability.
Third, Cheating??? Them's the rules and if you get a motor to fit within those rules it's not cheating. Furthermore... a motor that anyone else can order and put in their boat... is not cheating.

longballlumber
01-11-2018, 10:36 AM
We don't want guys losing to someone they believe is beating the system. We don't want any perception (accurate or not) to deter a guy from participating. In my head............ "spec" racing is a stepping stone between the RTR guy and us racing lunatic. We have to get RTR guy out of his back yard pond and out on to a course with us. Racing these things is like a drug. We need to get them passed that first heat. Feeling the playing field is relatively even (in my head again) is our best shot.

We want/need a spec that's simple, doesn't need to change all the time (like limited did), and makes a new guy feel he can be on the course and even compete with a vet. It also needs to have enough performance so as to not bore a vet to tears. A class that is so slow that a guys don't wanna is pointless. Anyone want to run some N1 mono? Apparently not since almost nobody does.

Stepping down from the soap box..... .

Let’s talk about perception for a moment. “Perception” is somewhat subjective. Most people or groups ARE NOT using facts when drawing their own conclusions, therefore creating perception. For the topic we are discussing; you’re concern with perception is only including motors. What about the perception around props, boat building, boat setup/tuning, batteries and battery specs. There is perception surrounding all of those sub-levels necessary to make a competitive boat.

Example: there is most defiantly a perception about props… Everyone is hot and heavy over the new style ABC props. The perception is you need those to win a race. What about people B/S’ing their own props. Some do and some don’t. There is most defiantly a perception that you need to pay someone to do it rather than learn yourself in order to be competitive.

In my experience, the ONLY way you’re going to be able to control perception is to define clear and concise set of rules around what your trying to control. Our SV27 Class is a great example of managing perception. There was a great deal of time invested in the rules to make sure we controlled perception.


We're just trying to keep people from winding their own Mike. NOT because I personally feel there is an advantage but because some will "perceive" that there is. Back to that perception effecting reality thing.
We don't want cans to be machined to fit the spec. By that I mean, someone orders a 65mm (for instance) motor totally aware that it's too big but plans to just butcher it to fit.

However, it doesn't seem right to me either (or fair for that matter) for a buyer to be stuck with a useless motor that doesn't even meet the specifications of it's own data sheets. You order something based on the manufacturers drawings and when it comes in your screwed? It aint right by me. Me personally, I would be fine with fixing a can that doesn't meet the specifications of the very people that built the darned thing.

There's more than way to look at that too. Let's say I went to a race. Not this one. Any race with a random CD that doesn't know the subtle nuances of the Neu motors for instance. 1412's stuffed into 1415 cans is a good example. Say I ordered for me fleet 1412's based on the drawings and they show up in a longer can. WTH?? The spec sheet says they should be "Xmm". So I machine the can to match the data sheet and go racing. Now I have a motor that is within spec and is exactly as the manufactures data sheet claims. There were some 1412's built in the original 1412 cans per the drawings. Which one was manufactured that way and which one was machined? How does random CD tell me which is legal? Can't tell. They're now exactly the same. Heck, I do know some of the subtle nuances and I doubt seriously that I could tell the two apart.

If rewinding is your concern then explicitly state it and have a way to check it. A “catch all” one line vague statement doesn’t define specifications. It only creates questions.


Most motors don't come with connectors. That's typically an RTR thing.

There are still plenty of motors available that fit the size limitations and have connectors already on the motors. This is nothing more than a formality.


For now I'm thinking any connector, motor within the dims, modification to meet the published dims of the manufacturer are okay. I have no authority to enforce any of this thinking outside of this race.

This is exactly why I asked the original question. I am nothing more than an IMPBA member that is trying to understand what makes a motor legal or illegal so I can make an informed decision.

The modification statement is ONLY present on www.rcracingevents.com. The statement doesn’t show up on the FE Nationals Flier, nor does it show up in the “MMEU 2017 Supplement” which you direct racers to via the flyer.



BTW I still have no real feel for how the proposal has been received by the BOD. I know they've seen it. Just not sure if they're okay with it......or hate'n it. I know there were some serious FE guys that were not on board with any notion of "spec" classes. For ever and ever amen. So it could get modified, shelved, poop can'd, trial period. I just don't know at this point.

Ignorance is bliss… I’m not on the IMPBA Board, so I will see what you guys have proposed the same time the rest of the membership sees. I am only aware of the proposals because I happen to be within earshot when you asked others for signatures.

I want to be clear about this... I am simply an IMPBA member that is considering participating in this race. This is an IMPBA FE National event! Because there are no current rules listed in the IMPBA rule book, I must rely what is being published and what has been published up to this point doesn't clearly define what "Spec motors are to be unmodified from the factor" means.

T.S.Davis
01-11-2018, 11:12 AM
Well this is going exactly as I suspected. "As manufactured" is biting me in/on/around the a$$ area.

What was proposed is what we've been racing for a year now. With the exception of the "as manufactured" bit. Your dead right Mike. Can't check it either. I can't look in the end and know if it was rewound. "Oh look, there's wires in there". Are they the original? Who knows? AQ wound 2030's with two different size wire depending on what month they were made. If I compared two I could conclude one was tampered. I'd be wrong. The proposal will likely need to be modified before it reaches (if it reaches) the membership for voting. I believe the BOD has the ability to do that.

We're not trying to create stock classes like SV was. Defining props, batteries, bottom work ect isn't the plan.

Having it on the sign up is us asking people to leave the motors alone like they come.

dethow
01-11-2018, 11:52 AM
I see your points on the "As Manufactured" thing Terry. Seems to be an almost impossible rule to spec and/or enforce all in an attempt to eliminate perception. All it will really do is open the door for people to accuse cheating if they see something slightly different in the wires visible through the rear end. Or if the motor is slight shorter/longer than theirs. As you said... manufactures sometimes change things.

I say the hell with perception. The rules should be for size limits only and let people do what they’re going to do within those size rules. If someone perceives that a custom wind motor has an advantage, then learn how to wind your own motors. Much like those who perceive an advantage to a hand build sport hydro go ahead and build their own. Or… maybe we will start seeing some entrepreneurs selling their services much like prop work.

In the end, you can only get so much out of that can size.

And for those who will say that the size rule makes it more expensive to get into the hobby and compete. First… a cheaper Proboat motor has been the dominant and most desired thus far (from what we are seeing). Second… expensive custom props and hand built boats don’t make it easy to get into the hobby and be competitive either. Should we make rules to eliminate them? NO!

So anyone who wants a cheap off the shelf class (like the old MMEU SV27)… they should go ahead a write some rules for their club and run them.

Last point… if custom wind motors have such a possible advantage then why are there not more of those motors represented in the open classes? Simple obvious answer seems to be because there is no advantage and it’s not worth the time and energy it takes to do it.

T.S.Davis
01-11-2018, 12:25 PM
Last point… if custom wind motors have such a possible advantage then why are there not more of those motors represented in the open classes? Simple obvious answer seems to be because there is no advantage and it’s not worth the time and energy it takes to do it.

Sort of.

If you think about it, every motor we buy is a custom wind. An AQ 2030 and an AQ 1800 are the same motors with different winding. Same with the PB1500 and 2000. Think TP4060. We have 3 different wind of that same motor running in a single class. We choose them from the chart and TP winds them as ordered. Same with Neu. The fact that I don't wind it with my own grubby mitts doesn't really change that. They're all chosen for the application. In theory, ordering from someone that does it for a living "should" be better than me doing it myself. That is of course, unless the original is a POS.

Doby
01-11-2018, 12:47 PM
I think all stator lengths should be measured prior to racing, then seals placed on the motors so any apparent tampering will be quickly noticed.

Also, external voltage meters need to be installed that are clearly visible from the drivers stand when racing. This will help eliminate 6S packs being installed in P boats AFTER Terry has wandered around checking pack voltages prior to racing.

dethow
01-11-2018, 12:49 PM
Sort of.

If you think about it, every motor we buy is a custom wind. An AQ 2030 and an AQ 1800 are the same motors with different winding. Same with the PB1500 and 2000. Think TP4060. We have 3 different wind of that same motor running in a single class. We choose them from the chart and TP winds them as ordered. Same with Neu. The fact that I don't wind it with my own grubby mitts doesn't really change that. They're all chosen for the application. In theory, ordering from someone that does it for a living "should" be better than me doing it myself. That is of course, unless the original is a POS.

Agreed... so why even add the "As Manufactured"?

Lets move beyond the custom wind question/issue.

As for cutting down a Neu 1412 or even a 1415 to fit the size rule. Anyone can email/call Lisa at Neutronics have this motor made. By "this motor" I mean a 1415 motor at 62mm length. It is manufactured by a known supplier and can be purchased by anyone who wants to place the order. So that also fits within the "As Manufactured", does it not? Will someone be called a cheater for using a motor that anyone can order/buy? Does one have to bring a receipt for their motors so they can prove it was purchased from a manufacture in its current form?

Guess I'm trying to make the point that there is nothing someone can/will do to a motor that can't be done by the manufacture. So why even add the "As Manufactured"? It just throws a scoop of dirt in a clean easy to spec rule which makes a lot of mud for people to throw around and debate for years to come.

Or maybe we add in that it has to be "As Manufactured" and able to be purchased from your local and/or national hobby shop/supplier. But then what stops one from asking their local hobby shop buddy to call Neu and get a supply of these 1415 motors? Or what stops a national/world wide dealer from having a manufacture produce something that maybe local hobby shops can't get? Like the Neu/OSE Raider motors?
The questions and debate will go on and on....

dethow
01-11-2018, 12:51 PM
I think all stator lengths should be measured prior to racing, then seals placed on the motors so any apparent tampering will be quickly noticed.

Also, external voltage meters need to be installed that are clearly visible from the drivers stand when racing. This will help eliminate 6S packs being installed in P boats AFTER Terry has wandered around checking pack voltages prior to racing.

:hornets_nest: :rofl:

MarkF
01-11-2018, 01:01 PM
As someone who knows how to wind motors. I can tell you it's done before the stator is glued into the can. After you wind the motor. The stator has to be put in a machine type device that smashes the windings flat. It would be very hard to wind one after the stator has been glued into the can. But a longer stator will go faster than a shorter one and there is plenty of room now for longer stators in the longer can and all it takes is to ask TP or Neu to put one in there. Cheater motor. Also the 1515 I meant to say 1415.

Mark

dethow
01-11-2018, 01:17 PM
...and all it takes is to ask TP or Neu to put one in there. Cheater motor. Mark

If anyone can ask TP or Neu to put one in there... then how is it a "cheater motor". It's manufactured by a known supplier and anyone can order/buy from that known supplier. Is it a "cheater motor" simply because you don't want to ask a supplier for it, so no one else should be allowed to?

And like I said above. What stops a national/world wide dealer from having a manufacture produce something special that local hobby shops can't get? Is that a cheater motor? Maybe next thing OSE will do is order up a batch of 1415 motors that fit the size rules. Does that now remove it from your "cheater motors" list because a large dealer is selling them? But what about the local hobby shops? Maybe they can't get what the large dealer got...
Where does it end???

dethow
01-11-2018, 01:58 PM
Where does it end???

I guess your response will be "With a 1" max stator length". Right?

Instead of having to open motors to check stators... just put max can dimensions in place and go with the fact that you can only do so much with a 62mm can. Much like you can only do so much with a 1" stator. Both limit motors but one is much easier to check/spec.

Max can dimensions allow for existing motors to be used and limit how far future motors can go and still be within the spec limits. Your proposed method of max stator dimensions will add so much work to judging events and possibly eliminate motor choices available under the can size rule. Motors which have thus far proven themselves to not have an advantage.

And every time a new motor comes out that MAY fit the stator spec both NAMBA and IMPBA officials will have to open and approve it. After all you can't expect novice racers to start open cans and measuring stators.

Just don't see your limited stator size working out and throwing around phrases like "cheater motors" it not helping. A motor which fits the can size rules and can be purchased from a manufacture by anyone... is NOT a "cheater motor".

dethow
01-11-2018, 02:31 PM
Sorry that I have contributed to turning this race event thread into another motor spec debate.

I just think this stator limit idea is silly and along with the preceptions debate... I think it's clear that the "As Manufactured" portion of the rules needs to be eliminated moving forward. Just muddies the water with no real results.

Also, with Hobbico's bankruptcy taking place it just reinforces the idea that any new motor rules should be inclusive and easy to spec. Otherwise we'll just be back in this debate again in 5+ years.

Simple dimension limits should withstand the test of time along with the incoming or outgoing of manufactures, suppliers and/or dealers.
Plus easy for a novice/beginner to know if a motor is legal or not.

That's my 2cents... and with that I'll get off my box and stop hijacking this race thread. Sorry all. :focus:

Doby
01-11-2018, 03:47 PM
As someone who knows how to wind motors. I can tell you it's done before the stator is glued into the can. After you wind the motor. The stator has to be put in a machine type device that smashes the windings flat. It would be very hard to wind one after the stator has been glued into the can. But a longer stator will go faster than a shorter one and there is plenty of room now for longer stators in the longer can and all it takes is to ask TP or Neu to put one in there. Cheater motor. Also the 1515 I meant to say 1415.

Mark

Well, as you seem to have figured a way to "cheat" perhaps your motors should be checked first at any races you attend.

Doby
01-11-2018, 03:48 PM
Sorry that I have contributed to turning this race event thread into another motor spec debate.

I just think this stator limit idea is silly and along with the preceptions debate... I think it's clear that the "As Manufactured" portion of the rules needs to be eliminated moving forward. Just muddies the water with no real results.

Also, with Hobbico's bankruptcy taking place it just reinforces the idea that any new motor rules should be inclusive and easy to spec. Otherwise we'll just be back in this debate again in 5+ years.

Simple dimension limits should withstand the test of time along with the incoming or outgoing of manufactures, suppliers and/or dealers.
Plus easy for a novice/beginner to know if a motor is legal or not.

That's my 2cents... and with that I'll get off my box and stop hijacking this race thread. Sorry all. :focus:

You are on a good soapbox...stay on it!

T.S.Davis
01-11-2018, 03:58 PM
Well, as you seem to have figured a way to "cheat" perhaps your motors should be checked first at any races you attend.

That's uncalled for John.

Needs to just be dimensions and move on.

Doby
01-11-2018, 04:10 PM
Exactly.....

When conspiracy theorists start coming out of the woodwork they need to be shut down.

Can dimensions are all that's needed.

And if a racer is that pathetically insecure about whats in their Fruit of the Looms that they feel the need to "cheat" to race...well Karma is always there to even things out.

Some of these concerns being raised here borderline sheer paranoia.

Its playing with toy boats folks.

CraigP
01-11-2018, 04:22 PM
Wow, this deep discussion certainly can make a newcomer just stay on the beach! It’s just so difficult to get your head wrapped around what most are using. My brother and I had an experience with go carts back in the day. The Sport classes grew at twice the rate because they had very little regulation. The Spec classes started to go away, because the same people would win with all the very expensive chassis/motor combos they would use.. Its like Deja Vu!

Doby
01-11-2018, 04:32 PM
Wow, this deep discussion certainly can make a newcomer just stay on the beach! It’s just so difficult to get your head wrapped around what most are using. My brother and I had an experience with go carts back in the day. The Sport classes grew at twice the rate because they had very little regulation. The Spec classes started to go away, because the same people would win with all the very expensive chassis/motor combos they would use.. Its like Deja Vu!

Exactly....The Mich club seems to be the only ones that have spent the time this past season to try out their theories that $$$ doesn't mean victory all the time...on some thread they posted results with motors that were used and there was no apparent edge gained either way, yet there are always some rocket scientists that try and tell them what they should be doing differently.

Don't like the rules they advertise...stay home.

MarkF
01-11-2018, 05:24 PM
Doby

You got a problem with me?
It's not a cheater motor if it's not in the rules so put whatever you want in there until it does. You don't have to open a motor to check stator lengths either. You could just go by weight, you can measure the windings from end to end and only check the motors of the winners like they do at most races.

Mark

T.S.Davis
01-11-2018, 06:21 PM
Which races? I've been to a few. I've never seen a motor checked. Aquacraft motors aren't having their windings, rotors, bearings, checked. Voltage yes. Motors no.

That was part of the problem with the old rules. Couldn't be tech'd in a practical manor. Impound the boats, dissemble maybe 12 in a day, start measuring them against the manufacturers specifications to ensure that they are in fact out of the box. I promise you this has never been done.

This is the problem with anything other than a can dimension too. If we say "unmodified" how can we be sure that the stator, windings, bearings, rotor, shaft, wire cover, endbell, bearing lubrication are "as manufactured". Collect them and check against their respective web site? Some came with connectors. UN-modified implies that you can't change those either. Heck, some came with motor screws. This is what Mike was getting at. As manufactured was a disaster when it was part of the NAMBA rule and it will be the same now.

Should have left it out. Kicking myself.

ugh, remember when this was a thread about the nats?

Doug Smock
01-11-2018, 07:20 PM
Wow, this deep discussion certainly can make a newcomer just stay on the beach!

Absolutely, and this particular discussion has been going on for nearly 10 years!

Still very good questions with few very good answers.

Doug Smock
01-11-2018, 07:25 PM
ugh, remember when this was a thread about the nats?

You're welcome sir. :wink:

Keep it on the surface fellas. We are all passionate about these "Toy Boats". :tiphat:

rayzerdesigns
01-11-2018, 08:29 PM
Ok here’s my 2 cents.. I was ok with current rules.. I’m ok with the new rules.. yes it opened up room for a lot of interpreting.. here’s how I see this going.. I think currently p is way to easy to over power the hull size.. and with the new rules the gap between limited and p is very minimal..yes I said it. Yes I will be more than happy to prove it.. I’ve tested 2 cheap hobby king motors.. both under 60$.. that fit within the new size rule.. both are faster by a big margin than my current limited setups.. which if anyone knows mine aren’t slow..I haven’t even had time to test a bunch of props yet.. but in mono and cat I have picked up almost 5mph.. so my thought is that limited will basically end p.. I mean truthfully look at numbers at races.. how many p entries do you get compared to limited numbers? I agree that the rule needed to change even though I’m totally happy with the rules the way they were.. we needed to be able to let a guy go into a Hobby shop and buy a boat and be able to race it off the shelf.. period.. the end.. we need these new people in the Hobby..otherwise it goes away.. this was the most viable way for it to happen..yes of course people are going to push the limits.. but that is nothing new..I actually like tweaking things to get the most out of them.. . Whether or not impba approves the size rule.. namba is..all we heard was everyone complain about the aq motors burning up.. but they didn’t look at the other motors on the list.. never gonna please everyone.. but we needed to do this to allow it easier to let new guys girls to get into it easier.. if not then who knows where it’s going..I will be testing a lot this year.. be ready!!!

Doug Smock
01-11-2018, 09:02 PM
"I think currently p is way to easy to over power the hull size.. and with the new rules the gap between limited and p is very minimal..yes I said it".

I think you're probably right. So this should be the last discussion on these classes right? Congratulations fellas, mission accomplished!:wink:

In my best estimation RTR is the best way to get people out of the hobby shop and on the drivers stand. Plug and play, with very few rules. That's how this started. But no, racers turned it into 9 years of threads just like this one. :olleyes:

dethow
01-11-2018, 10:06 PM
..and with the new rules the gap between limited and p is very minimal..yes I said it.

Well I can tell you from my experience last season... I have a Pursuit with a Neu 1412 which resulted in one of the top 3 to 4 spec mono boats in terms of speed. I entered that boat in open P mono just to turn some laps and I was lapped by first and second place. So no, I don't think the gap between spec p and open p is very minimal. If you are seeing that then either your spec Ps are VERY fast or your open Ps are VERY slow. Or maybe both... IDK.
Also didn't see spec sport hydros having a chance in holding their own against open p sport hydros. Not a chance... night and day difference in speed.

BTW the other spec monos which I considered faster then mine had TP, Proboat and SSS motors.

rayzerdesigns
01-11-2018, 10:36 PM
Well if u look at the record for limited mono which I broke by 10 seconds this year in a full 6 boat heat and all 6 finished and in Vegas water... yes my spec boats are prob the fastest in the country.. u can ask around.. and first motor and prop I threw on picked up almost 5 mph..so yes the speeds are very close.. and I don’t think anyone would call any of my boats slow..but again.. let’s hope that this new rule will be accepted by impba as an official class.. and will help draw new boaters

dethow
01-11-2018, 10:45 PM
As manufactured was a disaster when it was part of the NAMBA rule and it will be the same now.

Should have left it out. Kicking myself.

Terry,
Is this "As Manufactured" thing just a thing mentioned in the rules for the nats event or is this part of a proposal for IMPBA 'Spec' class?

This needs to be removed if beyond just the nats event. My issue is... what's the definition of "Manufactured".
If it comes from a manufacture does that make it legal no matter what modifications you requested from the manufacture? In which case a Neu 1415 put in a 62mm can is legal.
Or does it not only have to come from a manufacture but also meet the manufacture's standard spec drawing? In which case a Neu 1415 put in a 62mm can is not legal.

But what if a large retailer has Neu build a custom motor that is basically a 1415 in a 62mm can but they call it a 1413 or 1414. And the retailer has Neu produce a spec drawing that represents a can which fits the rules. Problem is that only this large retailer has access to this motor. Local hobby shops and/or other large retailers can't get it. And this retailer charges $350 for what could have been bought for $235 if "As Manufactured" is left out.

Also… Manufactured by whom? Can anyone just start making motors, produce a spec drawing and offer to sell them? So now you have a machinist putting 1415 sized stators in 62mm cans. And this machinist charges $450 for what could have been bought for $235 if "As Manufactured" is left out. And this machinist is only producing 10 of these per year so you'd better be a good friend to get a hold of one.

This “As Manufactured” thing brings a lot of questions and gets really muddy with how its interpreted. If not removed it will need a lot of explanation and definition added. Lets say someone brings a 1415 to a race and dominates. Do we just say no 1415 motors allowed? Then the next motor comes along... maybe that custom 1413 or 1414. Or TP or SSS builds something to cram all they can get into a 62mm can. Do we put them on an excluded list as well?

I think the possible future on this issue says it should just be a can size limit and let it go where it goes. If a Neu 1415 gets into races and dominates then others may start spending the $235. Or maybe someone (TP, SSS or Proboat) will start cramming more into a 62mm can and compete with the $235 Neu for less money. Let it go where it goes. Otherwise you'll have retailers, machinists and/or excluded lists to deal with in the future.

tjcast
01-12-2018, 01:11 AM
Some random thoughts

"as manufactured" was something I thought should be included. Obviously I was WRONG :frusty:!

People spend more time arguing the rules and figuring out how to cheat rather than how to be competitive within the rules :cursing:.

People are losing sight of what was intended for a "Spec" class and their rules, or maybe I am just wrong.

Being a Devil's Advocate is what some people live for :nono:

I am so tired of all this stuff :frusty:.

And It's only January :doh:!!

just my 2 cents

T.S.Davis
01-12-2018, 07:41 AM
"As manufactured" will be a disaster. Sorry I didn't see it before guys.

Where the heck have you "no gap" to P guys been racing? If you're not seeing the gap youre not racing with the fast P guys. Limited has had much higher participation numbers since before there were rules for it. The threat of to P has always been there.

The old rule set can't exist anymore. AQ is going to shrivel up. What do we call it then? Proboat class? How would a new company with very high sales get to play too? Takes a year to add to the list. BTW the Proboat motor is a better motor for the class than the Neu. Based on the results that is.

I think some of you are confused about what this power level is. It's a place both new and vet guys can meet and race together. It's a compromise. New guy has a shot by buying something off the shelf. He can't do that In P. Vet guy gets enough speed to still be interested. The spec needs to focus on a common ground (pond?) That puts enough guys together to make heats. That's all limited was. Easy enough to start into and tough enough to keep guys interested. A stone stick RTR is not likely to keep the lunatics satisfied. Not long term.

This new motor spec isn't a quest for speed. It's finding the common place in between standing on shore and being a complete lunatic.

Doug Smock
01-12-2018, 08:01 AM
It is frustrating Tom. The fuel guys went through the same thing with anything called "stock" or "as manufactured". I don't think cheating is where guys heads are though I imagine there may be some.

Have you seen the tech sheet for a Super Sport engine? "Stock Zenoah G26" wasn't enough. There had to be a means to tech them.
4. Stock Motor Inspection
Inspection to include all parts of motor:
a. Fasteners: Stock or Stainless
b. Gasket Thickness: Carburetor .017 to 0.023; Manifold .017 to .023; Case .017 to .019;
Base/Barrel .014 to .018 may be copper or fiber
c. Seals: Springs
d. Bearings: Stock
e. Flywheel: Thickness .800 - .810 – Keyway .118 - .123
f. Crank Rod, Piston, and Ring – Keyway .118 - .123
Piston diameter above ring compared to piston diameter below wristpin
= max. diameter difference of 0.0015
g. Intake Manifold: Thickness .680 to .702
(Allow to sand gasket sealing area only to make flat)
h. Ignition Parts – Color (original red & gray) – Slotted Holes
i. Case to Crank Shaft Top .908 - .912
j. Barrel (Cylinder) Depth 1.9650 - 2.0000
k. Must have original cooling cap – painting, anodizing, and etching allowed.
l. 34mm (1.338 inch) bore, 28mm (1.102 inch) stroke.

''As manufactured" is impossible to tech unless you have some real data as above. Even those rules have had to be edited as time went on as we found there were some known "stock" engines that were justoutside of the specifications at the time.
Can dimensions are fine and can be easily teched but be ready to accept "Frankenstein" motors. They will be showing up at a pond near you, already have. Is that cheating, or just a racer working within the rule to find a better more reliable mouse trap?

longballlumber
01-12-2018, 10:56 AM
Holy Cow, this has spun grossly away from the original question. I have no idea where “as manufactured” everyone keeps quoting is coming from…

My original question had everything to do with ONE event (2017 IMPBA FE Nationals) and ONE line listed on rcraingevents. There is also a reference on rcracingevents.com to reference another document that DOES NOT list “Spec motors are to be unmodified from the factory.”

Specifically for the 2017 IMPBA FE Nationals; is this rule in place? If so how will it be enforced?

dethow
01-12-2018, 11:40 AM
People spend more time arguing the rules and figuring out how to cheat rather than how to be competitive within the rules

I think the word cheat and cheater motors has been thrown around enough here.

Is a manufacture and/or retailer building the best and most desirable motor to fit within the rules cheating? There’s already been two new motors developed this past year by a boat retailer and a parts retailer with their respective names put on it in an effort to sell a desirable product that fits within the upcoming rules. That’s not cheating… that’s capitalism and entrepreneurship.
It’s only a matter of time before one of them looks in the back end of a motor and says “Hey, there’s more room in there.”

And is someone asking exactly what “As Manufactured” means cheating? I already got a verbal clarification on this matter a couple months ago from Tom and Terry which was that if a manufacture makes it and others can purchase it then it’ll be considered legal.

But now MarkF says:

We all know a 1515 can be cut down to meet the new can length. I know Neu has received orders to have 1412 motors cut down to meet specs.
Mark
Terry responded:

Neu manufactured the 1412's and just threw them in 1415 cans. So the motors came and didn't match his own drawings. Asking them to build them as advertised isn't a crime.
Mark clarified:

But a longer stator will go faster than a shorter one and there is plenty of room now for longer stators in the longer can and all it takes is to ask TP or Neu to put one in there. Cheater motor. Also the 1515 I meant to say 1415.
Mark

The response from Terry was only in regards to the 1412 and that it's fine to have a motor produced to meet advertised specs. What about the 1415 that Neu will make and anyone can buy but doesn’t meet the advertised spec sheet? The motor Mark is calling a cheater motor? Crickets….

Tom and Terry know exactly what’s going on here because I’ve told them exactly what I’ve inquired about and ordered. I’m tired of beating around the bush here…. I’ve got a $2k order with Neu for several 1415 motors that fit within the can length spec because I was told by Tom and Terry that if a manufacture makes it and others can buy it then it's legal. But now it seems we have people throwing around the cheating word and I want to know if I’m going to be called a cheater for doing something I was told was going to be allowed.

Bottom line is that I’m no cheater and I just want a clear definitive answer on what’s allowed. I thought I had that. Now I’m not so sure. If you all decide to go against what I was previously told. FINE! I’ll be out $2k, but at least I won’t spend the next 4 months setting up my boats with motors in which will raise a ruckus at nats.

And to be clear… Tom and Terry both told me that if the motors demonstrate to be dominant then they will not be allowed in the future. Future meaning next year 2019. In regards to that, I’m asking for some clarification on what process will be taken to accomplish that? Will there be an excluded motor list? Will the definition of “As Manufactured” be altered to mean that it must meet a manufactures standard spec and not even be altered by the manufacture?
And that’s fine… I’m just pointing out to you guys that in either one of those situations a retailer, manufacture and/or machinist can legally get around that by making a new motor design, having a spec drawing for it and selling it. And again... that’s not cheating. It’s capitalism and entrepreneurship.

I’m trying to be clear and up front here. Not trying to cheat. If I was trying to cheat, I’d never had said anything to anyone and just ran my motors. If challenged, I’d say “Measure them… they fit the limits allowed. And here’s the receipt from the manufacture. They are ‘unmodified from the factory’ or ‘As Manufactured’.”

My integrity means a lot to me. I’ve given up a podium position at a Michigan Cup due to being honest about a cut buoy that no one else saw including my pit. Tom and Terry both thanked me for my honesty. I take pride in that and I don’t want to be thought of and/or portrayed as a cheater of any sort. And since Tom knew exactly where my basis of conversation was coming from I am actually a bit butt sore regarding his use of the word cheat.

I will :hug1: it out with him at a later date.


Mike, The “As Manufactured” phrase came into play because that's how Terry described it.

Actually, what we should have done was leave "as manufactured" completely out of it. Let guys do what ever they want inside the dims.

T.S.Davis
01-12-2018, 11:54 AM
That sounds easy Doug. You impound the top three of these at every race and rip them apart to tech them right? Where do we sign up to do that job? sounds like the high point of any racers weekend. Odd though................zero mention of a brand.

"as shipped from the manufacturer" is the lie we've been living since NAMBA P Limited was first dreamed up. Put a lot of boats on the water but was never quite right. In our defense, we were ignorant. It was a different time. It did hold up longer than we guessed it would and probably longer than it should have. We've all been living a lie because NOBODY was checking "as shipped" really. You look at the motor, see a gold can, the 2030 stamp, and wires bundled with shrink..................looks good to me. Nobody....NOBODY was taking them apart to verify the wind, or the bearings, or even the rotor for that matter. "as shipped" was vague like Mike mentioned. Heck, you could argue that the bearings needed the factory lubrication. Even if you did take one apart, 2 AQ motors could have had different wire and have both been "as shipped". Ya can't know that.

I don't think of this new path as a band aide for limited the way we all knew it. I think if it as something brand new. We need something as I described previously. Something simple that puts guys who have boats into heats. A motor list isn't going to work. Impossible to verify anyway. Always was. "as manufactured" can't work for the same reason. Do we tell guys to bring their motor and it's spec sheet in case we decide to check it. A weekend race will turn into a week long race with the tech work. Not gonna happen. We've proven that.

As for the lack of gap.......I did some digging. Thunk on it some. Came up with.......who gives a rats ass? There's no gap between Q and P yet there are Q boats. The P sport oval record is a full half second faster than the Q sport record. The P mono record is over 1 second faster than Q mono. Yet......there are Q boats. P mono is faster than S mono for that matter. The only real gap speed wise is from 2s to 4s. If a power level creates more heats that have humans racing I don't care about any particular classes being butt hurt or losing entries. It's about heats. Heats er' fun. Remember fun?

New racers are going to come from the RTR market. We've already proven that part of the concept. We can't just ignore them. Well, we could but I don't see that being good for racing. Especially not good for FE. New guy isn't going out to buy a 1527 for his brand new Zeles to run in P against a Cheetah But we also have to make it attractive enough to get existing racers to want to do it with them. The idea is to fill the dead space between standing on shore watching and racing with us.

The simplest form of this brand new power level is a size limit. Size only. No "as manufactured" minutia. This what we ran all season, what we allowed at the Cup last summer, and what was run in Atlanta. There were hand wound motors at both of those major events. There was at least one hand wound motor at on our club pond too. Faster? We didn't think so.

Dave, no worries man. I feel your integrity is intact. I totallyyyyy! get your concern with that. An assault on mine over lithium polymere made me resign as national chairman. I would tell you straight up if I thought you were skirting the line. I don't think you are.

T.S.Davis
01-12-2018, 12:01 PM
Here's the actual wording as proposed. Let me know what you guys think. Still think Note 2 should be revised because honestly I don't care. I can't prove either of them on race day.

Note 2:
Motor to be an in-runner to a maximum of 37mm x
62mm, any kv, any speed controller, readily
available from manufacturers (no hand winds, no
can mods).

ray schrauwen
01-12-2018, 12:02 PM
Agreed... so why even add the "As Manufactured"?

Lets move beyond the custom wind question/issue.

As for cutting down a Neu 1412 or even a 1415 to fit the size rule. Anyone can email/call Lisa at Neutronics have this motor made. By "this motor" I mean a 1415 motor at 62mm length. It is manufactured by a known supplier and can be purchased by anyone who wants to place the order. So that also fits within the "As Manufactured", does it not? Will someone be called a cheater for using a motor that anyone can order/buy? Does one have to bring a receipt for their motors so they can prove it was purchased from a manufacture in its current form?

Guess I'm trying to make the point that there is nothing someone can/will do to a motor that can't be done by the manufacture. So why even add the "As Manufactured"? It just throws a scoop of dirt in a clean easy to spec rule which makes a lot of mud for people to throw around and debate for years to come.

Or maybe we add in that it has to be "As Manufactured" and able to be purchased from your local and/or national hobby shop/supplier. But then what stops one from asking their local hobby shop buddy to call Neu and get a supply of these 1415 motors? Or what stops a national/world wide dealer from having a manufacture produce something that maybe local hobby shops can't get? Like the Neu/OSE Raider motors?
The questions and debate will go on and on....

Just for giggles I could bug a Gool RC 36mm x 70mm 2280kv motor and cut it down. Won't have the longevity of a neu but it will run like the clappers for $30.00.

I'm not planning on building any Frankenmotors but I've been inspired! :flashfire:

ray schrauwen
01-12-2018, 12:05 PM
Here's the actual wording as proposed. Let me know what you guys think. Still think Note 2 should be revised because honestly I don't care. I can't prove either of them on race day.

Note 2:
Motor to be an in-runner to a maximum of 37.6mm x
62mm, any kv, any speed controller, readily
available from manufacturers (no hand winds, no
can mods).

The way I see it above is perfect! Thanks!:tongue_smilie:

dethow
01-12-2018, 12:06 PM
Dave, no worries man. I feel your integrity is intact. I totallyyyyy! get your concern with that. An assault on mine over lithium polymere made me resign as national chairman. I would tell you straight up if I thought you were skirting the line. I don't think you are.

Thank you Terry... And I'm actually glad its just out there now. So now no one is surprised or butt hurt at nats.

I honestly don't know if these 1415s with be an advantage. I'll tell you guys coming to nats that you probably shouldn't worry about it in my hands. I still consider myself a somewhat newbie that lacks real driving skills. And I skipped most of last season due to my precious baby girl who will be 2 years old in about a month. Between the time she took as an infant combined with being self employed out of a home office... I had no time to build and/or race.

dethow
01-12-2018, 12:12 PM
Note 2:
Motor to be an in-runner to a maximum of 37mm x
62mm, any kv, any speed controller, readily
available from manufacturers (no hand winds, no
can mods).

I think "readily available from manufacturers" is where it gets grey. Who interprets that? Does that mean it has to be on their shelves and ready to ship? Or does it mean they are willing to make it and anyone can order?. The difference there can mean months of time. One may say its not readily available if it takes months to get.

T.S.Davis
01-12-2018, 12:14 PM
How do I prove as a CD on race day that a motor is "readily available"? Has to be on a website?

Doug Smock
01-12-2018, 12:14 PM
No it's not easy Terry, it sucks as a matter of fact! That was my point. But that's what you've got in dealing with such classes. Go with dimensions. I'll have motors that fit the rule. We can address this again next season. Nope, not me..... Work it out fellas, I'll see you at the pond.:beerchug:

HTVboats
01-12-2018, 12:45 PM
Right how many people are capable of identifying the all the motors in the current approved list? That inspection would be a nightmare. Simplifying to 37X62 makes an after race inspection feasible without generally removing motors and water jackets, by an individual who can read a micrometer. Inspections are rare as it is, so make it easy for clubs to enforce if they choose.
We have had here in Florida discussions about what if! One guy is going to buy a Lehner and there goes the neighborhood. So be it. If that 2% of people need to shoot fish in a barrel to feel like a winner, that's ok. And probably not going to happen. Put a claiming rule of say $125 in and all ringers are out. If you win the race anyone there can buy your motor for $125 or a nominal fee that could change with inflation. Keeps the class cost reasonable and custom motors not so much. I hate to see the what if's ruin a very good class of power for new and experience racers to compete.
The intent here should be a "sport" non record class that is in the rule book (IMPBA). When prospecting new people and you say well your motor is legal here but maybe not be in another district. That says he's spending money for a local class that isn't participating in national rules of an organization your making him join. Basic structure does not need to be complicated.
Mic

dethow
01-12-2018, 12:52 PM
There is still an issue that I think needs to be thought about.

What happens if my 1415 motors or any other future developed motors demonstrate to be dominant?
If you do go ahead and remove ‘unmodified from the factory’ or ‘as manufactured’ or ‘readily available from manufacturers’… there is no grey area that can be further explained or defined to knock a motor out.

So now all you can do is make an excluded motor list. But is that a good idea? Won’t that just stunt technology and growth by saying anything that which proves to beat the majority will be black listed? Does that promote capitalism and entrepreneurship? Or even competitiveness amongst manufactures.

What if Proboat makes a new motor that stuffs the 62mm can and it dominates? Do we black list it and tell guys to pull that otherwise legal motor out of their brand new off the shelf boat and put something slower in there?

Food for thought… :popcorn2:

dethow
01-12-2018, 01:02 PM
Put a claiming rule of say $125 in and all ringers are out. If you win the race anyone there can buy your motor for $125 or a nominal fee that could change with inflation. Keeps the class cost reasonable and custom motors not so much.
Mic

Not a bad idea... I'd personally be screwed out of a lot of money I've spent on both 1412 and 1415 motors.

I think this thought came up in the past and there was some negativity about that I can't remember right now.

It is what it is... and this could eliminate people getting butt hurt over high priced motors and/or people putting so much time into winding their own or creating other Frankensteins.

Given the position I'm in I should be advocating against this... but I'll always be about whats best for the hobby, not my pocket.
Besides I could still race my Neu motors... I'd just have to sell them at a loss based on a claiming rule.

But if considered... please make sure the claiming rule is for a bare motor. No cooler, no collet, no connectors. Because I will burn off my 6.5mm Castle connectors if someone wants to buy my $225+ motor for $125.

ray schrauwen
01-12-2018, 01:50 PM
Not a bad idea... I'd personally be screwed out of a lot of money I've spent on both 1412 and 1415 motors.

I think this thought came up in the past and there was some negativity about that I can't remember right now.

It is what it is... and this could eliminate people getting butt hurt over high priced motors and/or people putting so much time into winding their own or creating other Frankensteins.

Given the position I'm in I should be advocating against this... but I'll always be about whats best for the hobby, not my pocket.
Besides I could still race my Neu motors... I'd just have to sell them at a loss based on a claiming rule.

But if considered... please make sure the claiming rule is for a bare motor. No cooler, no collet, no connectors. Because I will burn off my 6.5mm Castle connectors if someone wants to buy my $225+ motor for $125.

I've seen you buy and sell numerous motors for spec class racing. Those tenshock motors weren't cheap. Are you ableto recover those losses by reselling them? Do you still have them?

You can run those neu motors in open classes. Some do run them and successfully to boot.

The new PB 2000kv motor comes with 5.5mm bullets.

T.S.Davis
01-12-2018, 02:17 PM
We don't need a list of unacceptable motors.

Guys, here's a list of what we ran off the top of my head this summer. This is without digging for data. Memory.
AQ2030, AQ1800, TP1750, TP1950, TP2070, TP2220, Raider 1700, Raider 2030, SSS 2030, PB 2000, PB 1500, Neu 1412 (custom winds, 2 versions), and we even had a Lehner 1700 run in 10thscale. Think that one had a fan on it. Didn't win. At the cup and in Atlanta we had some hand wound motors and we also had at least one machined can. The hand wound was competitive but nothing crazy. About the same as the others. The mod can failed I believe. Expensive experiment.

The best performer overall was........Proboat. So $80 motors beat $300 custom wind Neu motors. Is it driving? Who knows. Could be part of it but the notion that you can just purchase wins doesn't really fit IMO.

I don't think we need a spending cap either. Suppose I stumble across a deal on something? An inventory clearance. Steve does that with motors all the time if it's been on the shelf too long. Or what if I order something on line and don't even realize I'm getting a deal on it. Then on race day..........."hey, those retail for $135, DQ'd"

Spending dough on motors hasn't proven fruitful to date.

If if's n' buts were fruits and nuts.....................
We could what if this to death and likely already have.

Can size, voltage, length limit on the boats..........done. Idiot proof.

Steven Vaccaro
01-12-2018, 02:35 PM
I dont see this as bickering or fighting. there are lots of good questions being asked. I aslo have one.

Let me ask this. If I was to have a particular manufacturer make a motor to fit these specs that absolutely kicked ass because it was like stuffing a 1415 into a 1413 sized case, whos fault is that? Id say no ones. The other manufacturers would have to step up if they wanted to sell motors to fit this class. This isnt cheating. Its working within the rules of the class.

Maybe adding a weight rule to the dimensional rule would help?

T.S.Davis
01-12-2018, 02:51 PM
If you think about it Steve. We're sort of doing the same thing with our 34" length limit.

The theory was always that you could only push a 34" boat so fast before flight took place. Go faster.......................don't finish.

So what happened? The hulls evolved to fit the class. Not just one either. The Black Pearl. All the of the ML boats. The Huff boats. Designed to fit the class. Designed to stay in the water at higher speeds. Designed to move that edge we're all chasing. I'm having a one off mono engineered for me. It will be the only one on planet earth. Am I cheating or building something smarter inside the rule set?

Steven Vaccaro
01-12-2018, 03:38 PM
If you think about it Steve. We're sort of doing the same thing with our 34" length limit.

The theory was always that you could only push a 34" boat so fast before flight took place. Go faster.......................don't finish.

So what happened? The hulls evolved to fit the class. Not just one either. The Black Pearl. All the of the ML boats. The Huff boats. Designed to fit the class. Designed to stay in the water at higher speeds. Designed to move that edge we're all chasing.
[/QUOTE]

I agree, its a good thing.


I'm having a one off mono engineered for me. It will be the only one on planet earth. Am I cheating or building something smarter inside the rule set?

Thats what I mean. The rules are written and people should do what they need to fit in those rules and still stay legal. In the end, when you go to a race, Its not like going to a car race where there are 100 plus racers. you probably know at least half the guys rather well. If someone needs to cheat to beat their friends to win, they are not friends and its an empty win.

dethow
01-12-2018, 04:02 PM
I don't think we need a spending cap either. Suppose I stumble across a deal on something? An inventory clearance. Steve does that with motors all the time if it's been on the shelf too long. Or what if I order something on line and don't even realize I'm getting a deal on it. Then on race day..........."hey, those retail for $135, DQ'd"

After having time to think about it, I came up with some issues regarding a spending cap and/or a claiming rule.

What Terry said covers the simple spending cap and its potential problems.

The claiming rule would create a cancer to spread.
Let’s say I put my 1415s into service. I win and someone claims from me for $125. Now that happens several times because I have more than one of these. Before you know it you’ve got a handful of guys who have one of these motors and they keep changing hands because each time someone wins it becomes a spectacle of people attempting to be the first to make a claim.
And besides MY 1415s this could happen otherwise by someone finding a deal or building a Frankenstein to win at a nats event even thou they know it will be claimed afterwards.
Just doesn’t work…

Can size, voltage, length limit on the boats..........done. Idiot proof.

dethow
01-12-2018, 04:21 PM
I've seen you buy and sell numerous motors for spec class racing. Those tenshock motors weren't cheap. Are you ableto recover those losses by reselling them? Do you still have them?

Yes, I do buy and sell a lot. The Tenshock motors are gone. Ended up with those over false specs shown. Took a loss but they're gone.
Myself and a couple others in MMEU have reached into our pockets to see what's possible. And as for me... I'd like to get past all this discussion and race. So lets get some of these high dollar motors in service and see what actually happens is my thought. The 1412 didn't prove to be dominant in terms of speed. They were good and moved my boats up the scale a little but nothing that would burn the doors off some other cheaper options. The Proboat performed nice and so did that new SSS 6-Pole.

I didn't end up being able to race much thou and didn't really have time to fully set my boats up for max speed. My conclusions are drawn from my one race event and what another member saw out of the 1412s. Also... I believe Terry threw one of the 1412s in Tyler's sport hydro and didn't see any huge improvement. It ran as great as it always does, but not better. From what I heard...

HTVboats
01-12-2018, 04:26 PM
A claiming rule does not cap what you can pay for a motor. I simply sets a price that deters you from using a motor that costs more than the claiming price. I threw out $125 assuming most of the mass produced motors are under $100. The claiming price could and should be reviewed to reflect the current market. If manufacturer's comes out with better motors, boats or hardware that's positive evolution and should be encouraged. Having some sort of regulation to ensure racing on a budget is positive. Claiming just closes the door on "what ifs". It is not for you to buy the motor to win the next race.
Again a simple 37X62 class of power seems to have a lot of support. The other end of limiting size is watts. This allows using less expensive ESC's and batteries. This will draw more new people and IC racers to FE power.
Mic

dethow
01-12-2018, 04:37 PM
Claiming just closes the door on "what ifs".
Mic

I don't think it does...
"What if" my 1415s are put into service or I sell them on eBay and someone else puts them into service because they picked them up for $150ea and don't have much to loose if they get claimed. As I said... it will become a spectacle of people attempting to make a claim at the end of each race.
This could happen with a variety of situations and just cause a cancer to spread that makes it so a new guy can't compete anyway because they don't have and can't get one of these claimed motors. And even if they have the means to go spend the $235 to get a 1415 of their own... they probably won't because they'd just be afraid it'd be claimed if they won with it.

HTVboats
01-12-2018, 06:36 PM
There is the what if. I do not think for a minute anyone is going to get a deal and risk loosing their motor. If that happened once a year it wouldn't affect racing in general.
Forget claiming just do voltage-length-and motor 37X62. If cut 1415's dominate so be it.
Mic

dethow
01-12-2018, 09:20 PM
Forget claiming just do voltage-length-and motor 37X62. If cut 1415's dominate so be it.
Mic

It does seem to be where we are at... And I don't think the 1415 is going to dominate. And even if it does a little, it probably won't be long until Proboat and others start cramming a 37x62mm can at a better price. Especially if both NAMBA and IMPBA have similar motor rules which will stick for long term.


And BTW... Terry,


Note 2:
Motor to be an in-runner to a maximum of 37mm x
62mm, any kv, any speed controller, readily
available from manufacturers (no hand winds, no
can mods).

What happens if a motor is discontinued and no longer "readily available from manufacturers"? Maybe soon to be AQs.
Would people have to pull them from their boats even if still working fine?
I know ridiculous... But as worded, they would.
:tiphat:

Steven Vaccaro
01-13-2018, 11:27 AM
Why not add a weight?

dethow
01-13-2018, 02:26 PM
Why not add a weight?

I'll let you know when I get my final 1415 motors delivered in the next couple weeks, but as of right now... there is only 30 gram difference between one of the heaviest favorite motors (TP3630) and a Neu 1415 in its spec 70mm long can. These weights are with no connectors.
TP 3630 = 263 grams
Neu 1415 = 293 grams

We'll see how close that gets pulled together once my final 62mm long 1415s come in. Plus don't forget that weight could be altered by wire lengths and shaft lengths.

Lets just assume we set a weight limit at 280 grams to allow for 15 grams in connectors/solder/shrink and leave some play for the TP 3630 to be legal.
Once those 1415s are cut down they may be in the 280 grams area and I may be able to offset the extra 15 grams for connectors/solder/shrink by cutting down wire lengths and taking as much as possible off the shaft.

I think its going to be very close and probably not enough difference to set a limit and start having people pull motors out of their boats to be weighed.

Steven Vaccaro
01-13-2018, 02:59 PM
I'll let you know when I get my final 1415 motors delivered in the next couple weeks, but as of right now... there is only 30 gram difference between one of the heaviest favorite motors (TP3630) and a Neu 1415 in its spec 70mm long can. These weights are with no connectors.
TP 3630 = 263 grams
Neu 1415 = 293 grams

We'll see how close that gets pulled together once my final 62mm long 1415s come in. Plus don't forget that weight could be altered by wire lengths and shaft lengths.

Lets just assume we set a weight limit at 280 grams to allow for 15 grams in connectors/solder/shrink and leave some play for the TP 3630 to be legal.
Once those 1415s are cut down they may be in the 280 grams area and I may be able to offset the extra 15 grams for connectors/solder/shrink by cutting down wire lengths and taking as much as possible off the shaft.

I think its going to be very close and probably not enough difference to set a limit and start having people pull motors out of their boats to be weighed.

30 grams is a big diff between the 2. cutting 10mm off the case length shouldn't make a huge diff in weight.

dethow
01-13-2018, 03:06 PM
30 grams is a big diff between the 2. cutting 10mm off the case length shouldn't make a huge diff in weight.

I'll let you know. But there will be about 8 to 10mm coming off case, shaft and wires.

dethow
01-13-2018, 03:16 PM
The new rules say 62mm can length but nothing about the stator length. To me, the stator length is more important than can and should have been included in the rules. We all know a 1515 can be cut down to meet the new can length. I know Neu has received orders to have 1412 motors cut down to meet specs. People are already trying to cheat. You should have put in there no longer than 1" stator lengths like real spec motors have if you want an even playing field. Just leaving the rules to can lengths opens the door for cheating.

Mark

BTW… I pulled out my measurements spread sheet when looking up the answer on weights for Steve’s question… I ran into my rotor measurements on various motors. From what I see the rotors in the motors look to be similar in length to the stator as you suggest we limit length to 1” or 25.4mm.

First of all, the TP3630 front end is not open enough to even get a measurement so that motor would have to be opened.
Second, just two examples that have a rotor/stator much longer than 25.4mm.
DYNM 3835 1500kv has a rotor length of 39.1mm
SSS 3656 2030kv has a rotor length of 35.8mm

The Neu 1412s rotor is only 30.0mm long.
But the 1415s rotor is 38.1mm long.

So you have to set a limit at 40mm to allow for a very popular Dynamite motor and that limit would NOT knock out Neu motors.

I did confirm the measurements on the Dynamite, SSS, and Neu 1412 motors before writing this. I cannot confirm my measurements on the Neu 1415 right now as it’s not currently in my hands. But the others were confirmed just as I had them in my spread sheet so I’ll assume I have them correct on the 1415 as well.

I think this is very telling on why the Dynamite 1500kv is such a beast. I wish I had one of the Dynamite 3831 2000kv motors that guys have been using and kicking some butt with. This is the UL-19 motor. I bet that rotor will be at least similar to the Dynamite 3835 motor at 39mm long.

dethow
01-13-2018, 03:20 PM
Also... Steve,

I was looking up some specs for the Dynamite 3831 2000kv and the weight issue is blown up.
It looks like that motor weighs 296 grams which is more than the Neu 1415 in its spec 70 mm can at 293 grams. I don't know if that includes connectors but either way you'd have to knock that motor out to try and exclude a Neu 1415 with a weight limit.

But based on all this... there is probably no reason a Neu 1415 made to 62mm long should out perform this $80 Dynamite 3831 motor. The Neu will weigh less and have a similar to slightly smaller rotor/stator.

156160

OHHH!!!! Just realized the 296 gram weight on the Dynamite 3831 probably includes the cooling can and bullet connectors which comes installed. It'd be great if someone could provide a bare weight with no cooling can and connectors along with a length on the rotor/stator for this motor. May help answer some questions. Connectors wouldn't be a big issue if they stay on. Three 5.5mm bullets weight about 8 grams, so I'm thinking with solder and shrink we'd probably be at about 10 to 11 grams for those.
We won't have the final answers until my 1415s come in thou.

HTVboats
01-13-2018, 03:40 PM
If you add a parameter like weight it makes removal of the motor mandatory to inspect. Much more complex for contest officials. After a heat or race inspections are rare as it is. 37X62 is done by a simple measuring device. Racers can kind of visually police themselves knowing what motors look like.
Mic

dethow
01-13-2018, 03:50 PM
If you add a parameter like weight it makes removal of the motor mandatory to inspect. Much more complex for contest officials. After a heat or race inspections are rare as it is. 37X62 is done by a simple measuring device. Racers can kind of visually police themselves knowing what motors look like.
Mic

Agreed... we're just playing out the "what ifs".
And it not only would require the removal of motor, but we'd have to remove the cooling can and collet as they vary in weights. Some cooling cans are a pain to get on and off. So... agreed.

Steven Vaccaro
01-13-2018, 03:55 PM
You can add weight as a secondary requirement. The only time that would come up is in a big race event. I don't think during club races anyone would care unless there was a solid standout, then it could be checked.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

dethow
01-13-2018, 03:58 PM
OHHH!!!! Just realized the 296 gram weight on the Dynamite 3831 probably includes the cooling can and bullet connectors which comes installed. It'd be great if someone could provide a bare weight with no cooling can and connectors along with a length on the rotor/stator for this motor. May help answer some questions. Connectors wouldn't be a big issue if they stay on. Three 5.5mm bullets weight about 8 grams, so I'm thinking with solder and shrink we'd probably be at about 10 to 11 grams for those.
We won't have the final answers until my 1415s come in thou.

The cooling can off a Dynamite 3835 motor weight 22 grams and if we figure the connectors at 10 grams we would have the Dynamite 3831 motor at about 264 grams which is similar to the TP 3630.

dethow
01-13-2018, 04:18 PM
You can add weight as a secondary requirement. The only time that would come up is in a big race event. I don't think during club races anyone would care unless there was a solid standout, then it could be checked.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Maybe... Maybe... to keep out any fully stuffed Frankenstein custom made motors, but I don't believe a weight limit will exclude a Neu 1415 motor.

But with that said there IS more room to be used in a 62mm can then even a 1415 will use. Example being that the rotor in the Dynamite 3835 is 3.5mm closer in the front than the Neu 1415 is. I think a custom Frankenstein motor could be made to hold as much as a 45mm rotor/stator. Which is 6mm longer than the Dynamite and 7mm longer than the Neu 1415.

That is coming from my measurements taken on the Dynamite 3835 which has the least amount of space from front and rear to rotor ends.
The rotor is 7.2mm from front and 9.6mm from rear. Can is 55.9mm long, so 55.9 minus 7.2 and minus 9.6 equals a 39.1mm rotor.

With these measurements applied to a 62mm can the results would be... 62.0 minus 7.2 and minus 9.6 equals a 45.2mm rotor.

So I don't think you have a bad point here Steve. Maybe there should be some kind of weight limit in the 285 gram area and maybe even just call it an even 300 grams. This comes from the TP 3630 at 263 grams and estimated Dynamite 3831 at 264 grams and then add 15 grams for connectors/solder/shrink and we're at 279 grams.

dethow
01-13-2018, 04:43 PM
So I don't think you have a bad point here Steve. Maybe there should be some kind of weight limit in the 285 gram area and maybe even just call it an even 300 grams. This comes from the TP 3630 at 263 grams and estimated Dynamite 3831 at 264 grams and then add 15 grams for connectors/solder/shrink and we're at 279 grams.

I would take (current heaviest motors) a TP3630, add 5.5 bullets to the stock length wires and weigh it. Also weigh a Dynamite 3831 with the factor installed 5.5 bullets but with the cooling can removed. See where they are and maybe add 5 to 10 grams for slight manufacturing differences and maybe some future products but still kept within reason to not knock out existing/current motors from being able to compete.

jerry123
03-17-2018, 02:14 PM
The new Pro boat u-l 19 hydro motor be legal for impb*!** and namba P limited sport hydro? Getting back into F E after 17 yrs.

Thanks Jerry Pelletier

dethow
03-17-2018, 02:42 PM
The new Pro boat u-l 19 hydro motor be legal for impb*!** and namba P limited sport hydro? Getting back into F E after 17 yrs.

Thanks Jerry Pelletier

The motor that comes in that boat is not legal under the current NAMBA national rules and there are no IMPBA national rules for a limited or spec motor class. There may be a rule change coming to NAMBA which would make this motor legal but details are being worked out. There are some NAMBA and IMPBA clubs which are actually running different rules that may include that motor. I'd check in with your local club you intend to race with and/or check the race fliers for any national event you want to attend.

Some IMPBA events which include electric classes are individually defining what motor rules are being used for limited/spec classes. Both of these races would include the motor that comes in that boat.
2018 IMPBA SPRING NATIONALS in GA is going with max dimensions of 37mm can diameter X 62mm can length.
2018 IMPBA FE Nationals in MI is going with max dimensions of 37mm can diameter X 62mm can length and shall not exceed 268 grams weight (minus can cooler, collet, mounting fasteners, and motor connectors).

See section 28, pages 5 and 6 of the NAMBA rule book for current motors allowed in limited classes. These are pages 101 and 102 of the pdf file.
http://namba.com/content/library/rules/namba_rulebook.pdf

rayzerdesigns
03-17-2018, 03:02 PM
The rule proposal was withdrawn from namba.. some districts have adopted it.. but with people doing the 1415 thing put a damper in it.. I’m not in agreeable with the weight thing.. the whole idea was to make it easy to tech.. I’m thinking making the dimensions smaller say 36.2 by 58 or 60 max.. but will be keeping eye on it.. so for this years namba nationals it will be the approved motor list

jerry123
03-18-2018, 12:17 PM
You would think that pro boat says in the discription that the boat is namba legal and that would include motor too.

TRUCKPULL
03-18-2018, 12:48 PM
You would think that pro boat says in the discription that the boat is namba legal and that would include motor too.

Yes it is for "P" class, but not for "P Limited class"

Larry

T.S.Davis
03-19-2018, 08:57 AM
I’m thinking making the dimensions smaller say 36.2 by 58 or 60 max.. but will be keeping eye on it.. so for this years namba nationals it will be the approved motor list

Yeah maybe. That might eliminate a couple TP's but if that keeps someone from inventing something insane it may be worth it.

Interesting to me is the fact that the motor list was and still is virtually un-techable.

The weight thing is not that big of a deal Ray. Think about every other class that has some form of limitation. Nitro and gas have limitations. You have to actually disassemble the motors to know with certainty they are correct. A weight limit for us is drop it on a scale. Dropping it on a scale - would only happen if there was some clearly obscene fast motor that raised suspicion of other racers. Like a "hmmmmmmmmm?" moment.

We need to take a minute and give ourselves some credit I think. For all the on-line hand wringing over it, on race day there was never any discourse. Maybe a level of trust exists that we don't give ourselves credit for. With the list, you could have rewound them to look factory. You could have swapped bearings. No way to prove that really either. Heck, from outside the can you would never know if the rotor was factory. Can you modify that somehow? I have no clue on that. All these things could maybe have been done (not to my knowledge BTW) and were impossible to prove or disprove. To tech the motor list you would have had to take them completely apart and check them against the original manufacturers specifications. Two AQ 2030's from different lots had different wires. "Unmodified" is right in the text. So.....prove it's "unmodified". Yet, no protests.........ever. 9 years or so.......and not a single motor protest anywhere. Not at a Cup. Not at a nationals.

I predict that with any new guidelines this will still be the case. L x W x W. Simple. Most guys would look inside someones boat. See motor x,y,z. Recognize it. Know what it was and a protest doesn't come. If it ever did, it will still be less intrusive than the procedure for a B hydro protest. Perspective.

Is there going to be a NAMBA FE nats this year Ray? I would be concerned that the motor list would hinder participation since most/some (how bout many?) of the country is moving away from that. A NAMBA nats might be a good place to establish proof of concept since there are fewer NAMBA clubs of late to use for reference. Of those I'm not sure there is consensus. I'm no NAMBA expert though.

ray schrauwen
03-19-2018, 10:30 AM
What's odd or maybe funny is that only 1/10 the scale RC car brushless motors are completely rebuildable and designed for being teched and or rebuilt. Too bad all brushless motors aren't as rebuildable. Teching them by teardown would be easier.

Just sharing silly morning thoughts....

jerry123
03-19-2018, 11:45 AM
So all I need to do is swap out the motor for an approved p limited sport hydro motor.

dethow
03-19-2018, 12:17 PM
Hey everyone… I want to start with an apology for going off on the IMPBA BODs in another thread regarding this issue. We need to be patient and I get that. I just lost it when told via some private messages (from an unnamed person) that told me IMPBA will NEVER make a national rule. After settling down, I THINK this person may have just been upset as well and maybe spoke a little out of turn. Only time will tell.

But I digress and hope everyone reads this in its entirety.

I re-read through this thread and the other which has been closed. I believe there is some closure to be had and as many have pointed out to me… we just need patients. I hope both NAMBA and IMPBA will look at things over the next couple years and we get to the goal we’ve all been looking for. A long lasting national rule set that provides cost effectiveness, motor inclusiveness, motor parity and participation.

I hope (and I think we all do) that both organizations come to a similar or even exact same rule set. I’d propose we just move on from P-Limited and have both organizations call it P-Spec. As I’ve heard from several… this is like a whole new thing and lets just leave P-Limited in the past.

As for the seemingly end result after years of debate…
37-mm diameter x 62-mm length x 268-grams weight is the motor rule which will be utilized at the 2018 IMPBA FE Nationals in Michigan. Kudos to the IMPBA FE Director (Mike Ball) and the Core Members of MMEU (Terry Davis and Tom Castellani) for working through the issues put in front of you. Sorry I was the one which caused those issues and caused you more work and debate. My intent was for the better good.

With that said… I’m glad I did. I think we would have had a disaster on our hands if we first went with the “As Manufactured” thing or just did the diameter x length only.
The “As Manufactured” thing brings a lot of questions and gets really muddy with how its interpreted. I believe those questions have been faced and Terry Davis already agreed in this thread that was a bad idea.
“Diameter x Length Only” leaves the door wide open for expensive custom motors that would dominate the class. I will be putting my 62mm long Neu 1415 motors in my boats and running them at MMEU practices to prove this out to Terry. We’ll see what happens. Brian Buaas chimed in on the issue and believes these 1415s will be a problem for the class based on experience with these motors. I spoke out on the issue because once I had them in my hands, saw how stuffed they are with copper and felt how heavy they were… I knew these motors would be very bad for the class. They’d been good for me (for one season) but had a rule actually passed it would have created a disaster and the Naysayers of a P-Limited rule change would have been saying “TOLD YOU SO”.

As for the current Naysayers that adding the weight is bad because we want to make this easy to tech… I think Terry Davis did a good job in post #83 to cover this thought. Weight is not hard to tech and without it we have no rule. There is no other SIMPLE way to keep “insane” out of the class.

P-Spec Motor Rule of 37-mm diameter x 62-mm length x 268-grams weight will get everything we want out of the class.
- It will include all motors currently on the NAMBA P-Limited motor list.
- It will include many new motor choices which have been proving out to not be ridiculous (in terms of speed or price) compared to current P-Limited motors. Some new motors are even more cost effective. Race testing will continue.
- It will block out “insane” motors that can be custom made by manufactured, made in someone’s basement, or may even come along someday in a RTR boat.
- (Most of all) It will provide years upon years of racing with no rule changes needed. Just cannot see a world where we won’t have many choices available. From old motors no longer made, to existing/new motors coming in some RTR, and to existing/new motors not from any RTR.

My hope is that we can tamp down the naysaying on the weight addition and let’s see how it proves out at race events. The question of not being easy to tech is just plain wrong. As Terry pointed out, this is vastly easier to tech than the current P-Limited rules and easier to tech then several of the gas/nitro classes.
I think the bigger thing to be proven out is lack of protests and thus even a need to tech. BUT… IF there EVER is a protest… at least we’ll have something to tech that WILL shut down ANY and ALL debate. That is what makes this a good rule proposal.

I hope and beg NAMBA and IMPBA to keep an open mind and I ask clubs to adopt these P-Spec Motor Rules so we can start to see results.

Sorry again… :sorry:
and I’m really not the A-hole I may have come across as being in the other thread. Passionate and wanting results… YES! Wanting results so that this debate can end once and for all.

T.S.Davis
03-19-2018, 01:09 PM
I kinda mentioned it earlier there. On race days...............there just is no debate. Nobody is wringing their hands about it at all. It's only on line that minds are lost. It's truly bizarre. It's like a different group of humans. Once we stop bickering about it like teenage girls, the BOD's form each organization will look at the results instead of the rhetoric.

Couple guys asked me the same question about the timing on a national set of rules. "What's the difference really?" If we had a rule set today, next month, or next year. Makes no danged difference. Venues (like a NATs, spring nats, MCup) will cater to what puts butts on the drivers stand...............until it doesn't. Tougher for NAMBA because they're already saddled to the old set. It will require monumental effort to get a trial set run at a national event. Heck, some of them believe that if it aint in the book it's not insured.

Jerry, if yer racing NAMBA you would need to swap out the motor for one on the list to be legal. Worth checking with the guys you plan to run with though. Many locale have opted for a revised version of "limited" based on dimensional data. That being 37mm x 62mm x 268 grams max. The 268 grams thing is something we only recently added. Motors that weigh in more than that are typically custom made. Possible of course. Hence the rule but rarely seen.

Doug Smock
03-19-2018, 07:15 PM
Couple guys asked me the same question about the timing on a national set of rules. "What's the difference really?" If we had a rule set today, next month, or next year. Makes no danged difference. Venues (like a NATs, spring nats, MCup) will cater to what puts butts on the drivers stand...............until it doesn't. Tougher for NAMBA because they're already saddled to the old set. It will require monumental effort to get a trial set run at a national event. Heck, some of them believe that if it aint in the book it's not insured.



:stupid::hug1: He's right!

For those that are wondering, Limited boats are P Class boats and won't jeopardize a site.

TheShaughnessy
04-19-2018, 01:18 PM
Just wanted to update this with some info regarding motor size. I recently found a 36x58 size motor that had some solid looking numbers as listed by the manufacturer. I ordered one up to see how it would do in my new p-ltd cat. Before installing the motor I ran several times and at different ponds located in Southern CA with the gps speed consistently reading 50 mph ( 49.8, 50.3, 50.1, 49.7, etc) for my set up which is/was a AQ1800 kv motor and a stock prop from a ProBoat Zeles 29 that I sharpened and balanced. Then, changing nothing but the motor I ran again. To my delight my boat was now running 5 mph faster, on one run I hit 56 and change. The kv on the new motor was slightly higher, what was surprising is the amp draw was very close to the same. This motor retails for $99.99 usd and is available to anyone willing to place the order. I didn't have to call the manufacturer to have it specially made or anything. My AQ cooler was a direct fit.

I think we are trying to eliminate cases where a simple motor swap would yield a 5+ mph gain but how do we do that? To put that in perspective I was prop testing with the AQ 1800 and saw a 4 mph increase going from a m445 to the 1716. So how much of this is to blame on the motor and how much is to blame on the prop?

TRUCKPULL
04-19-2018, 01:32 PM
Michael

Can you give me some more information on the motor and where to get it?

Larry

rayzerdesigns
04-19-2018, 01:45 PM
I kinda mentioned it earlier there. On race days...............there just is no debate. Nobody is wringing their hands about it at all. It's only on line that minds are lost. It's truly bizarre. It's like a different group of humans. Once we stop bickering about it like teenage girls, the BOD's form each organization will look at the results instead of the rhetoric.

Couple guys asked me the same question about the timing on a national set of rules. "What's the difference really?" If we had a rule set today, next month, or next year. Makes no danged difference. Venues (like a NATs, spring nats, MCup) will cater to what puts butts on the drivers stand...............until it doesn't. Tougher for NAMBA because they're already saddled to the old set. It will require monumental effort to get a trial set run at a national event. Heck, some of them believe that if it aint in the book it's not insured.

Jerry, if yer racing NAMBA you would need to swap out the motor for one on the list to be legal. Worth checking with the guys you plan to run with though. Many locale have opted for a revised version of "limited" based on dimensional data. That being 37mm x 62mm x 268 grams max. The 268 grams thing is something we only recently added. Motors that weigh in more than that are typically custom made. Possible of course. Hence the rule but rarely seen.
268 is way to heavy in my opinion..and I think the size needs to be smaller.. 37x60 max.. but that’s my opinion.. I applaud you guys in impba for trying to right the ship.. and am keeping s close eye on how ur nats work out.. I actually don’t like the weight thing for ease of tech.. I will be writing a proposal not far after the nationals there terry.. please keep me updated..

rayzerdesigns
04-19-2018, 01:47 PM
Just wanted to update this with some info regarding motor size. I recently found a 36x58 size motor that had some solid looking numbers as listed by the manufacturer. I ordered one up to see how it would do in my new p-ltd cat. Before installing the motor I ran several times and at different ponds located in Southern CA with the gps speed consistently reading 50 mph ( 49.8, 50.3, 50.1, 49.7, etc) for my set up which is/was a AQ1800 kv motor and a stock prop from a ProBoat Zeles 29 that I sharpened and balanced. Then, changing nothing but the motor I ran again. To my delight my boat was now running 5 mph faster, on one run I hit 56 and change. The kv on the new motor was slightly higher, what was surprising is the amp draw was very close to the same. This motor retails for $99.99 usd and is available to anyone willing to place the order. I didn't have to call the manufacturer to have it specially made or anything. My AQ cooler was a direct fit.

I think we are trying to eliminate cases where a simple motor swap would yield a 5+ mph gain but how do we do that? To put that in perspective I was prop testing with the AQ 1800 and saw a 4 mph increase going from a m445 to the 1716. So how much of this is to blame on the motor and how much is to blame on the prop?
Prop being the key! Used to be a 445 was great on just about every boat.. but the abc line of props are amazing..I knocked 10 seconds off of mono record by changing to an abc prop..

rayzerdesigns
04-19-2018, 01:54 PM
Yeah maybe. That might eliminate a couple TP's but if that keeps someone from inventing something insane it may be worth it.

Interesting to me is the fact that the motor list was and still is virtually un-techable.

The weight thing is not that big of a deal Ray. Think about every other class that has some form of limitation. Nitro and gas have limitations. You have to actually disassemble the motors to know with certainty they are correct. A weight limit for us is drop it on a scale. Dropping it on a scale - would only happen if there was some clearly obscene fast motor that raised suspicion of other racers. Like a "hmmmmmmmmm?" moment.

We need to take a minute and give ourselves some credit I think. For all the on-line hand wringing over it, on race day there was never any discourse. Maybe a level of trust exists that we don't give ourselves credit for. With the list, you could have rewound them to look factory. You could have swapped bearings. No way to prove that really either. Heck, from outside the can you would never know if the rotor was factory. Can you modify that somehow? I have no clue on that. All these things could maybe have been done (not to my knowledge BTW) and were impossible to prove or disprove. To tech the motor list you would have had to take them completely apart and check them against the original manufacturers specifications. Two AQ 2030's from different lots had different wires. "Unmodified" is right in the text. So.....prove it's "unmodified". Yet, no protests.........ever. 9 years or so.......and not a single motor protest anywhere. Not at a Cup. Not at a nationals.

I predict that with any new guidelines this will still be the case. L x W x W. Simple. Most guys would look inside someones boat. See motor x,y,z. Recognize it. Know what it was and a protest doesn't come. If it ever did, it will still be less intrusive than the procedure for a B hydro protest. Perspective.

Is there going to be a NAMBA FE nats this year Ray? I would be concerned that the motor list would hinder participation since most/some (how bout many?) of the country is moving away from that. A NAMBA nats might be a good place to establish proof of concept since there are fewer NAMBA clubs of late to use for reference. Of those I'm not sure there is consensus. I'm no NAMBA expert though.
Yes terry there will be nats in namba this year.. just like last year it’s a combined event.. I’m ok with that because I enjoy all the fuel types.. we can go back and forth on the weight thing terry.. I do think the 268 is on the heavy side and the 62mm is on the long side..as for weight.. is that with connectors?? Without?? A certain length of wire?? It leaves it open to debate.. unless u word it properly.. which I don’t see in your rule set.. you know me I’m not trying to start drama.. in fact want it to go away.. limited is the backbone of fe racing period.. I will be writing a proposal after your nationals in Michigan..but in all reality I’m looking at making max length 60mm..keep me informed.. as I would like to see both organizations have same rule set for limited

Darin Jordan
04-19-2018, 02:32 PM
37x60 max..

I wouldn't allow 37mm... I would make the max 36.3mm. That covers about everything you'd want, at least based on my data gathered back when. Nothing out there is exactly 36mm, and 37mm will get people having custom cans made, etc..

158750


As for length, it's all over the board with our current list. If you include some of the popular proposed replacements over the years (TFL SSS3660, Pro Marine, etc.), then the limit would need to be around 61.2mm.

I still don't think that the "goal" is to NOT see an increase in overall performance. I think that may be impossible to restrict.

I think the goal should be SIMPLE and ENFORCEABLE. It does not matter WHAT you set the length/width at, people are going to try to MAX IT OUT. That's a given. That's fine. Let them. There WILL be an ultimate cap on the performance and then the class will stabilize and run... forever... without having to address these rules again.

I feel the weight limit is an unnecessary "feel good" complication that is, frankly, unenforceable. You can try, but there will ALWAYS be a problem with it (wires?, connectors?, cooling jackets?, someone making a custom carbon outer can, etc.)... Plus, it's VERY invasive. You can tell me it's not all you want, but if I have to remove the power system from the boat for you to tech it, especially if I have to remove contacts, water jackets, etc., then it's intrusive and unnecessarily complicated. to enforce.

The truth is that NAMBA WOULD have had this vote already had we stuck with my original suggested dimensions of 36.3mm x 61.2mm. Unless Mike Ball comes up with better data from his research that suggests that stuff is available in smaller lengths, which is the other key to trying to make a rule... motors actually have to be AVAILABLE that fit the rules... then 36.3mm x 61.2mm is where I'd put the limits and it'd be out for a vote.

dethow
04-19-2018, 02:38 PM
I do think the 268 is on the heavy side and the 62mm is on the long side..as for weight.. is that with connectors?? Without?? A certain length of wire?? It leaves it open to debate.. unless u word it properly.. which I don’t see in your rule set.. you know me I’m not trying to start drama.. in fact want it to go away..

Ray,
Terry is out of town until next week so I just want to step in here and let you know that there is NO DEBATE on the rule set. An exact rule has not been detailed and fully written at this point but the weight limit is for the motor, plain and simple. Most motors do not come with connectors, collets or cooling jackets attached. These items can have varying weights and do not affect the performance of the motor. Thus, are being taken out of the equation.

So the motor has to be under 268 grams. If your motor can be under that with connectors, collet and/or cooling jacket still attached then your good. If you have to remove those to get under the 268 then your have to remove them. Period.

If someone wants to push the limits and cut wires and/or shaft down, then so be it. As long as the motor is 37mm x 62mm x 268g or less, it will be legal. Again... PERIOD. No debate. EASY to tech if necessary. There will be no... "Yeah, but the wires are only an inch long." If its 268g or less its legal. PERIOD.

And just to make sure no one jumps into this thread and misunderstands by thinking all motors will be weighed... NO.
There will only be a tech completed if there is a challenge made by another racer. Likelihood of a challenge is slim to non unless a boat is just hauling balls and the motor doesn't appear to be one of the standards that everyone knows.

And BTW, Ray... if you go less than 268 grams you will knock out the TP 3630 and may knock out the Leopard 3660. Those motors are of no threat to others and should be allowed. Anything under 253g and you'll knock out the SSS 3656 and the Dynamite 3831.
268 grams is a specific number that I'd prefer to see rounded up to 270 grams, but whatever. It's inclusive for everything guys have been using and not showing dominance. It also allows for future motors to come out and leave room to be included without allowing them to get crazy. As long as the motors are within the dims and weight the parity should be feasible and the favorite motors will come to the surface over time.

dethow
04-19-2018, 02:48 PM
I wouldn't allow 37mm... I would make the max 36.3mm. That covers about everything you'd want, at least based on my data gathered back when. Nothing out there is exactly 36mm, and 37mm will get people having custom cans made, etc..

Darin... we've had this discussion already.
Your Neu 1409 measured 36.3mm while every Neu 1409, 1410 and 1412 I have measured is 36.5mm. The 37mm limit is there to leave some room for slight variations in manufacturing. Same thing on the length... nice rounded number to allow for some slight variations in manufacturing.

The weight thing will play out. I really don't want to get back into that debate. And I personally think it should be left alone for a while and lets see how it goes this season. This stuff has been talked and talked... lets take some time to race and test.

But Darin... as long as you will bend a little to let it be 36.5mm diameter so the Neu 1412s can be used... You've got a problem.
My 1415s are 61.5mm long. I'm sure they could be made to knock another 0.3mm off the length to fit the 61.2mm you propose.
So without a weight limit the 1415s and other over powered motors would be allowed. NOT GOOD.
Or even you leave it 36.3mm x 61.2mm. Without a weight limit... over powered motors could be made to fit.
Own it or chase it... and it costs $300 to own it. NOT GOOD.
Beside the fact that there would be very little difference in speed between limited/spec and open p. NOT GOOD.

No matter how you play it out... without a weight limit and class is doomed.

Don't worry... no one wants to pull your Dynamite 3831. We all see that's what it is and we all know that motor is well under the limits. But if your boat is running 5mph faster then everyone else AND we can see there is more copper in that Dynamite 3831 can then stock. Yes, you may get challenged and tech'd.

rayzerdesigns
04-19-2018, 07:13 PM
I’m with darin on the weight thing for sure.. just like he stated..ease of tech.. but I’m the side of the fence with going down to a 60mm max length.. sure that willl knock some off the list.. but still plenty of options..I get your side of debate Ray.. but as always there is 2 sides.. we are trying to make it simple.. no need to pull motor out.. simple gauge.. we will just have to see how it plays out for now.. but I’m thinking 36.3x60 is where I might write the proposal..

rayzerdesigns
04-19-2018, 07:21 PM
As for ur not teching even at nats.. the last 2 nats have had battery tech and motor tech and haven’t slowed down anything.. we want it to be easy.. not to have to pull motor out..

dethow
04-19-2018, 09:12 PM
I’m with darin on the weight thing for sure.. just like he stated..ease of tech.. but I’m the side of the fence with going down to a 60mm max length.. sure that willl knock some off the list.. but still plenty of options..I get your side of debate Ray.. but as always there is 2 sides.. we are trying to make it simple.. no need to pull motor out.. simple gauge.. we will just have to see how it plays out for now.. but I’m thinking 36.3x60 is where I might write the proposal..

Your attempts at "ease of tech" and "trying to make it simple" will come at the expensive of parity and cost effectiveness.
Expensive overpowered motors that weigh 290g will be built in 36.3x60 cans. They will destroy the other motors (speed wise) and will cost double the price at least.

You'd be knocking out the Leopard 3660, SSS 3660, maybe the OSE Raider, and some of the TP 3630s have been manufactured over 60mm long.
Oh, and you'd be knocking out the Neu 1409, 1410 and 1412s.

But whatever.... you can write whatever you want and the members will vote. NAMBA can do what they're going to do, and IMPBA will do what they are going to do. The victor in winning over clubs and memberships will most likely be the most inclusive rules while still keeping parity and cost effectiveness. Democracy and time will tell who got it right.

dethow
04-19-2018, 10:50 PM
Moving forward... why don't you guys keep your NAMBA rule proposal discussions out of IMPBA threads???
No body wants the drama you are trying to bring.

rayzerdesigns
04-19-2018, 11:16 PM
That’s a great attitude..

TheShaughnessy
04-20-2018, 01:10 AM
I only posted here because the NAMBA p ltd threads are closed. This seemed to be the best place for it. I think whether a person decides to join NAMBA or IMPBA depends more on location than the rule set governing p-ltd racing. I agree with weight being invasive, depending on your motor mount it can be pretty annoying to have to pull a motor.

rayzerdesigns
04-20-2018, 01:32 AM
I only posted here because the NAMBA p ltd threads are closed. This seemed to be the best place for it. I think whether a person decides to join NAMBA or IMPBA depends more on location than the rule set governing p-ltd racing. I agree with weight being invasive, depending on your motor mount it can be pretty annoying to have to pull a motor.

Mikey don’t worry about this guy we all in namba are just causing drama obviously.. funny how everyone knows what drama he has caused in impba also..try to be nice but obviously he resorts to the same person he has been all along.. read his posts.... shows exactly what kind of person he is.. thx for the heads up Terry.. next time I will listen.. glue sniffer.. lolol..

MarkF
04-20-2018, 02:21 AM
These seems like the perfect place to discuss this stuff since IMPBA and NAMBA should adopt the same rules. Good discussions so far except for the drama dethow is trying to stir up.

Mark

Doug Smock
04-20-2018, 04:13 AM
Moderator hat on:spy:


I only posted here because the NAMBA p ltd threads are closed.

Will this one have the same fate? It's up to you fellas.

If you'd like, this thread is still open. And look, it's only 27 pages!!:smile: https://forums.offshoreelectrics.com/showthread.php?52649-P-Limited-Motors-Im-going-to-jump-on-the-hot-seat/page27

Please keep it on the surface guys!

Going to race toy boats with some friends. Have a good weekend!!

Thanks!

dethow
04-20-2018, 08:47 AM
PM from Ray (rayzerdesigns) "And again.. you are very one sided.. delusional at best.."

I'm no more one sided than you. You've come here and keep going at it until everyone agrees with your weight issues. All we want is this season to look at things and you are pushing the issue and already talking about what’s going to be written up in a proposal for NAMBA. You seem to be here to try and prematurely win IMPBA guys over to your side of no weight limit.
Per you, you have 2 guys in district 19 whom will be running 1415s (37mmx62mm) this season and you are looking to be the third. You also say you want to prove you can get a 1415 under 268 grams. Great! I applaud all of you for offering some testing to see what can be done and what happens. So why don’t we just see what comes from all that before we start all this “this IS the proposal I’m writing” stuff? Very unnecessary at this point.

Michael (TheShaughnessy),
I don’t think there was any problem with your post #89. You were trying to bring something that you found. No issue. I was talking about the NAMBA rule proposals and how they want to write proposal right away. Sorry to make you feel like you were included in that.


Good discussions so far except for the drama dethow is trying to stir up.
I agree this WILL be a good discussion once there has actually been some racing and testing. To come here and start telling us what they think is right and that's what WILL be in the next NAMBA proposal. That's just an effort to influence and bully. Stirring the pot is all they are doing. If they think they have it right and are ready to write NAMBA proposals, then go do it. The IMPBA guys have been pretty clear that we want this season to race and test. So why is there an effort trying convince everyone of their opinions before the first big race of the season has even had its first heat?


And last...Doug,
Sorry... have a good event. I promise I will not post another thing here in an effort to not cause you reading time or further drama to guys trying to enjoy the event down there.

dethow
04-20-2018, 01:19 PM
Michael

Can you give me some more information on the motor and where to get it?

Larry

Here you go Larry. I'm 99% sure this is what he (Mike) found.
High End Technology (HET), Typhoon 650-58. Dims are 36mm x 57.5mm x 250 grams

http://highendrc.com/index_ecat.php?cPath=53_56

TheShaughnessy
04-20-2018, 02:13 PM
i guess the cat is out of the bag. Those are the motors I was talking about. I'm running the 1970 kv option. I know it's only a 4 pole but it doesn't seem to be lacking power. I will say that another member had this motor in his boat which is the same as mine just a little bit different layout and hardware. He runs a seaking 160 pro which has a boost feature. I think we had his timing at 15 (from use with another motor) and the boost timing was set to 18.75 if i recall. I'm not 100 percent certain if it was the timing or a possible cooling issue with the motor can nipples being threaded in to far but his motor ran HOT. I wasn't there for his first run with an abc 1716 (I've been told the proboat 1716 is slightly less agressive) but I guess it got pretty hot ( unconfirmed temp). We ran again later in the day and i disabled the boost function and turned down the timing to 7. Motor still ran hot and we propped down to a x440/3 that Darin Jordin did some work on. Boat ran great but when we pulled the tape and took a temp reading ( another member had one of the fancy laser temp guns) I was shocked to see 190 *f at the bearing/ shaft. I almost thought the temp gun was faulty but when we pulled mine , the same area of the motor was only 90f which is fairly consistent with the temps I was seeing while data logging. I also run a little fan i pulled from a car esc i burned up getting wet. It is powered by the BEC, I also tried running without the BEC and used a LiFe pack but didn't notice any significant changes. I haven't tried running without the fan to know for sure if it's making a difference in the temps but it sure makes me feel good.

rayzerdesigns
04-20-2018, 02:56 PM
PM from Ray (rayzerdesigns) "And again.. you are very one sided.. delusional at best.."

I'm no more one sided than you. You've come here and keep going at it until everyone agrees with your weight issues. All we want is this season to look at things and you are pushing the issue and already talking about what’s going to be written up in a proposal for NAMBA. You seem to be here to try and prematurely win IMPBA guys over to your side of no weight limit.
Per you, you have 2 guys in district 19 whom will be running 1415s (37mmx62mm) this season and you are looking to be the third. You also say you want to prove you can get a 1415 under 268 grams. Great! I applaud all of you for offering some testing to see what can be done and what happens. So why don’t we just see what comes from all that before we start all this “this IS the proposal I’m writing” stuff? Very unnecessary at this point.

Michael (TheShaughnessy),
I don’t think there was any problem with your post #89. You were trying to bring something that you found. No issue. I was talking about the NAMBA rule proposals and how they want to write proposal right away. Sorry to make you feel like you were included in that.


I agree this WILL be a good discussion once there has actually been some racing and testing. To come here and start telling us what they think is right and that's what WILL be in the next NAMBA proposal. That's just an effort to influence and bully. Stirring the pot is all they are doing. If they think they have it right and are ready to write NAMBA proposals, then go do it. The IMPBA guys have been pretty clear that we want this season to race and test. So why is there an effort trying convince everyone of their opinions before the first big race of the season has even had its first heat?


And last...Doug,
Sorry... have a good event. I promise I will not post another thing here in an effort to not cause you reading time or further drama to guys trying to enjoy the event down there.

I guess we should all bow to you the expert... lol..
and if you read my posts or my pms you should recall I also stated waiting to see how the impba nats turn out..
Some may like the weight some may not..like you said let’s seee where this goes

Fluid
04-20-2018, 03:59 PM
PM from Ray....

It is considered bad form to post a PM from another member without permission. There is a reason they are called Private Messages. Please refrain from this behavior in the future.

.

ray schrauwen
04-20-2018, 09:01 PM
i guess the cat is out of the bag. Those are the motors I was talking about. I'm running the 1970 kv option. I know it's only a 4 pole but it doesn't seem to be lacking power. I will say that another member had this motor in his boat which is the same as mine just a little bit different layout and hardware. He runs a seaking 160 pro which has a boost feature. I think we had his timing at 15 (from use with another motor) and the boost timing was set to 18.75 if i recall. I'm not 100 percent certain if it was the timing or a possible cooling issue with the motor can nipples being threaded in to far but his motor ran HOT. I wasn't there for his first run with an abc 1716 (I've been told the proboat 1716 is slightly less agressive) but I guess it got pretty hot ( unconfirmed temp). We ran again later in the day and i disabled the boost function and turned down the timing to 7. Motor still ran hot and we propped down to a x440/3 that Darin Jordin did some work on. Boat ran great but when we pulled the tape and took a temp reading ( another member had one of the fancy laser temp guns) I was shocked to see 190 *f at the bearing/ shaft. I almost thought the temp gun was faulty but when we pulled mine , the same area of the motor was only 90f which is fairly consistent with the temps I was seeing while data logging. I also run a little fan i pulled from a car esc i burned up getting wet. It is powered by the BEC, I also tried running without the BEC and used a LiFe pack but didn't notice any significant changes. I haven't tried running without the fan to know for sure if it's making a difference in the temps but it sure makes me feel good.

Running a thrust bearing? They are ducted fan motors and really do need one.

dethow
04-20-2018, 09:50 PM
It is considered bad form to post a PM from another member without permission. There is a reason they are called Private Messages. Please refrain from this behavior in the future.

.

No rules on that Fluid. If in individuals don't want their PMs shared then don't PM me. Have conversations in the open. Don't try and be sneaky and say things behind a PM and then get mad at me when I get testy on the thread. Same crap Doug Smock pulled on me back on the other thread... I'm sick of it. Say it in the open or know that it may get shared. Otherwise... don't say it at all.

Doug Smock
04-20-2018, 10:56 PM
Smh....

TRUCKPULL
04-20-2018, 10:57 PM
Dave let things go for now.

We will see how the Nat's go in MI.

Things here are getting heated, and don't need to be.

Larry

Doby
04-20-2018, 11:25 PM
Smh....

I thought I heard something rattling!

Doby
04-20-2018, 11:28 PM
Dave let things go for now.

We will see how the Nat's go in MI.

Things here are getting heated, and don't need to be.

Larry

Good advice Larry, pretty sure this is going to turn into a non-issue just like Y2K was!

dethow
04-21-2018, 09:24 AM
Dave let things go for now.

We will see how the Nat's go in MI.

Things here are getting heated, and don't need to be.

Larry

Guys, If you read the thread I have been the one saying this is not a conversation to be had right now. If the NAMBA guys fee the need to discuss things now because they want to write a new proposal in the next couple months... go on a NAMBA thread and discuss it.

I didn't start this thread back up and what did wasn't bad info by Mike. But Ray and Darin used that opportunity to push their no weight limit agenda.

Don't see anyone getting on Ray for talking about something personal Terry said to him in private... that Terry probably really didn't want shared.
Don't see anyone asking Ray or Darin to let things go for now. Why should they be allowed to spread their views unchallenged?

I have no problem letting this go and already did. Yesterday. Fliud stepped in regarding PMs and I responded.

rayzerdesigns
04-21-2018, 01:05 PM
No one said my thoughts were unchallenged.. it’s slways up for debate..maybe if you opened your eyes you would see that waitingbin seeing how nats go in Michigan..it’s no secret your hate for darin or myself.. obviously because we don’t agree 100% with your idea.. is what it is..everyone sees it for what it is.. and how you act.. have a great day.. and maybe from now on keep my name out of your discussions... on that not hope that all goes well in Michigan.. terry and his crew put on a great race.. and I’m sure this one will not dissapoint.. looking fwd to hearing and seeing the results .. and continuing this discussion and trying to bring the two organizations closer to a limited agreement

dethow
04-21-2018, 02:13 PM
Ray, I don't hate you or Darin. You are both probably very nice people.

Yes... it IS true I don't like your lack of understanding that without a weight limit there is no rule that will work. The facts on that will play out as we see what these 1415s can do. And thus, what other copper heavy custom motors cramed into even a 36.3mm a 60mm can will do. A weight limit will stop that from hapening.
Brian Baaus gave enough of an opinion of that subject already that resulted in the size only proposals being pulled. So I think there may be something there. It's not just MY ignorant beliefs.

And I don't understand the thing of waiting to see how the nats go in Michigan. Same motors that were run in last years MI Cup will be at the nats. No changes. There's nothing new happening at the nats that will change anything. The only thing that changes anything is getting some actual water time with the 1415s.
They will not be at the nats.


Look... I AM sorry things got out of hand. :hug1:

Between what was being said here and what was being said in our PMs... it appeared to me that you were basically pushing a no weight limit agenda before we even had done anything with the 1415s.
And then to top it off you were saying you WILL be writing a proposal after the nats but in ALL REALITY you are looking to make a max length of 60mm.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you are doing everything possible to try and get the NAMBA proposal in first and before the IMPBA guys have had this season (that they want) to test and mule things over.
You state that you want both organizations to have the same rules... as I think all of us do.
So I feel your statements are an attempt to rush a proposal that fits your desires and then try to bully the IMPBA guys into following suit so we can have the same rules. That's what I see and that's why I got frustrated.


I will be writing a proposal after your nationals in Michigan..but in all reality I’m looking at making max length 60mm..keep me informed.. as I would like to see both organizations have same rule set for limited

I wanted to respond to to your statements Ray because I thought it necessary to try and calmly describe why am frustrated. As others are requesting... I'd like to just let this go for now. If you feel the need to defend yourself regarding my feelings on your intentions then so be it.
I've explained my feelings on the matter and I'd just like to get some testing and facts before any of this is discussed further.

MarkF
04-21-2018, 10:34 PM
Wow you guys are thinking 1415s? You know Brian B set a fast time at the nats 2 years ago in P sport hydro with a castle 1415 2400kv and an Insane sport hydro. I have the same set up in my insane hydro and it's over 70 mph. That's night and day difference between a stock class and full on P. If you allow 1415 motors you might as well not call it spec. The original spec motors had like 1410 stators in them and now people are trying to shove 1412s and 1415s in the can. This is my problem with the class and I am one for weight limits. And thats weight with the water jacket on. The only people who need to be checked are 1st 2nd and 3rd place at the nats. I think clubs should just run what they like, but at a national event, you need to have rules that can be enforced. Taking your motor out of the boat and collet off takes 5 minutes. It's not rocket science and questions like what about wire length and bullets, well guess what, there part of the motor package. Since most motors come with short wire anyways, I don't see the point of worrying about it.

Mark

TRUCKPULL
04-21-2018, 11:59 PM
To all that only want size limits and NO weight limit,
Read Marks post above about the 1415 Neu Motors - They meet the size limits-- NOW WHAT DO YOU DO- how many years would it take to make another change to the rule set? by that time all Spec classes would be dead.

Weight limits are NO big deal if you do some research on what things weigh first, Or ask nice a I bet Mike would post a copy on here.

Mike Ball has been building a list of all the motor weights.
Plug weights with solder.
Cooler can weights.

With a motor weight MAX set for the IMPBA Nat's

The custom made NEU motors are OUT.
Basically all that will need to be done is look at the motor - OK it is a UL-1- 2030 - 2Y
You know it is under the size limit and the weight limit.--GOOD to GO

Now if you see a motor that is stuffed with copper (Could be the same 2030 custom wound) - you can weigh it.

With the above list you subtract the cooler, plug and solder weight. to see if the motor is legal.

I will bet that less then 3% of motors will ever be taken out of a boat at the Nat.s

Larry

rayzerdesigns
04-22-2018, 09:37 AM
Ray, I don't hate you or Darin. You are both probably very nice people.

Yes... it IS true I don't like your lack of understanding that without a weight limit there is no rule that will work. The facts on that will play out as we see what these 1415s can do. And thus, what other copper heavy custom motors cramed into even a 36.3mm a 60mm can will do. A weight limit will stop that from hapening.
Brian Baaus gave enough of an opinion of that subject already that resulted in the size only proposals being pulled. So I think there may be something there. It's not just MY ignorant beliefs.

And I don't understand the thing of waiting to see how the nats go in Michigan. Same motors that were run in last years MI Cup will be at the nats. No changes. There's nothing new happening at the nats that will change anything. The only thing that changes anything is getting some actual water time with the 1415s.
They will not be at the nats.


Look... I AM sorry things got out of hand. :hug1:

Between what was being said here and what was being said in our PMs... it appeared to me that you were basically pushing a no weight limit agenda before we even had done anything with the 1415s.
And then to top it off you were saying you WILL be writing a proposal after the nats but in ALL REALITY you are looking to make a max length of 60mm.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you are doing everything possible to try and get the NAMBA proposal in first and before the IMPBA guys have had this season (that they want) to test and mule things over.
You state that you want both organizations to have the same rules... as I think all of us do.
So I feel your statements are an attempt to rush a proposal that fits your desires and then try to bully the IMPBA guys into following suit so we can have the same rules. That's what I see and that's why I got frustrated.



I wanted to respond to to your statements Ray because I thought it necessary to try and calmly describe why am frustrated. As others are requesting... I'd like to just let this go for now. If you feel the need to defend yourself regarding my feelings on your intentions then so be it.
I've explained my feelings on the matter and I'd just like to get some testing and facts before any of this is discussed further.

Well ray yes things got out of hand.. and like I said before.. there are always 2 sides..u may like the weight thing I may not.. that’s why there needs to be s discussion.. and testing.. as for writing a proposal and pushing it through that’s not how it works.. first a person makes a proposal usually s district will then vote on it and test it..then it can go to the bod for approval then out to a membership vote.. it just can’t be pushed through..I would again like to see both organizations be in same page or at least close..I get both sides of the weight limit.. but I lean towards more of s size restriction.. but that’s my opinion.. and really the only time this would come up would be st a national event.. or bigger races.. I do think the size limit was a great idea to keep limited racing alive.. and the biggest classes.. people are always going to push the limits.. that’s just the nature..I’m not sure there is the perfect snswer to spec racing..unless u choose one motor and prop..but then u run the risk of having said motor be discontinued.. and or people crying bias....

dethow
04-22-2018, 11:46 AM
Ray, just want to make sure you know that my name is Dave. You appear to have addressed me as Ray several times. Ray is your name.

And YES, things did get out of hand. I suggested you take your NAMBA rule proposal talk over to a NAMBA thread and then I was forced to take a barrage of personal attacks from you. I specifically said we didn't want your drama here and I foolishly opened the door for you to bring it. Lesson learned.

Even you admitted in a post before I got involved that what you were saying/doing COULD be viewed as starting drama. From Post #93:

.. you know me I’m not trying to start drama.. in fact want it to go away..

Whereas from my second post on the matter #96:

The weight thing will play out. I really don't want to get back into that debate. And I personally think it should be left alone for a while and lets see how it goes this season. This stuff has been talked and talked... lets take some time to race and test.

I woke up this morning and I suddenly remembered a phone call I got several months back. The specific reason for the call was to warn me not to pay any attention to you. I know that person is setting back and saying "Dave, I told you". And to that person... I'm sorry! I forgot that you warned me about this. :doh:

__________________________________________________ _____

But moving past all that... I'm really glad to hear that it sounds like it is NOT your intention to RUSH a proposal. I never said you were going to PUSH one through. I am aware of the process and know one individual can not push anything. But you could RUSH to submitting a proposal and get the process started which would put more pressure on IMPBA to follow suit.

But again... I'm glad that it sounds like you don't want to do that and that you want to work with IMPBA to try and have a same or very similar proposal submitted. So with that I trust you will have no problem waiting for our IMPBA FE director, Mike Ball, to come to a resolution on the issue. It'd be great if he could have until the end of the 2018 race season to make a recommendation. That may be for a size limit only, or a size limit with a weight limit included, or that no national rule set at all is recommended for IMPBA. At that time I think it'd be completely appropriate for NAMBA to move forward with whatever they want to do. And at that time NAMBA may choose to split ways and not have a similar rule proposal. And maybe Mike will have his recommendation prior to the end of the season. Who knows?

I'm going to check in with Mike and see if he'd like to have (For Free) one of my 1415 motors for his own personal testing. I want to GIVE him a 1415 2D 2050kv motor which measures 36.55mm x 61.65mm with weight of 294g. I believe this would be the best kv to test against some of the other big players.
This is not to borrow. I want him to have the freedom to push it to the limits without having to worry about having to buy it if he breaks it. A little bit of an olive branch after my barrage of insults directed at him and the BODs for trying to move away from a national rule set. I now realize that the only way we will move forward on this is with some good testing by an experienced and trusted person. I hope Mike will take me up on the offer. But who knows... maybe he already ordered one for himself.

There's nothing that's going to come from the Nats in Michigan that's going to provide information on what rule set should be written. And no offense to Terry, but he's not the decision maker for IMPBA. The BODs is, and Mike Ball's opinion on the matter is the one that matters, if you will. Terry has every right to submit a proposal and so do you, but like last time... the BODs will just pull them and not let them proceed if they don't like them.

So in the end... you have your opinion and I, along with others have a difference of opinion on the matter. Lets take some time do some testing and see where this all goes at the end of 2018. I don't see the need to rush into writing proposals in the next couple months. The only point I see coming from that is the belief that the first one submitted should try to be followed by the other organization.

It sounds like you want to work with IMPBA to come up with a similar rule set. So I thank you for your patients.

dethow
04-25-2018, 11:28 AM
Hey everyone,
I had a thought this morning and wanted to throw it out there for thoughts.

But before I do, I want it to be known that I will not be participating in this thread beyond throwing out this initial starter on the idea. Furthermore, I’d like to suggest that everyone simply comment with an agree or disagree with maybe a small reason why or a brief addition to better the idea or process.

Please try and refrain from attempting to tell another person why they are wrong. IOW… let’s try to be civil and not turn this into another “dust up”.
We’re on the right path right out of the gate simply by me not being involved, right?



Here it is: Approved MOTOR LIST for IMPBA Spec Motor Classes.

1.) The list would start with the inclusion of all motors which are on the current NAMBA P-Limited Motor List and there would be a process to add motors to the list.

2.) There would be the creation of a “Technical Committee” that would do bench and on water testing/data logging to provide an opinion on a motor’s performance in comparison to those already on the list. This committee could be assembled by the BODs or maybe could be one individual from each district which would be elected/voted in by the club members.

3.) Each committee member would provide their own results/conclusions/opinions/recommendations to the BODs whom would make the final determination on if a particular motor would be added to the list. Some factors of approval would be ease of availability, price, and performance. I brief statement on reason for approval or disapproval with how each member of BODs voted would be made public.

4.) All IMPBA members would have the availability to submit a proposal for a motor to be reviewed by the committee for approval. The first immediate requirement in order to even be qualified for review would be the that the motor must have maximum dimensions of 37mm x 62mm.

5.) Once a motor is put on the list, it stays on the list. This way no one is ever forced to change over their fleet of motors.


And Go…. :zip-up:
.
.

photohoward1
04-25-2018, 02:40 PM
This discussion should just die for a while. Summer is eventually coming let's have fun.

Fluid
04-25-2018, 02:48 PM
Howard is correct, for now let clubs decide what they want to run, far easier than all the @#?*! drama.



.

TRUCKPULL
04-25-2018, 03:00 PM
This discussion should just die for a while. Summer is eventually coming let's have fun.

I agree with Howard on this.

David give it a rest.

Or even better . DOUG S. can you delete this thread??

Larry

Doug Smock
04-25-2018, 04:33 PM
Howard, Jay, Larry, I agree, as do many others.
Since I had multiple requests over the weekend on into Monday to close this thread, I just merged them (don't want to be accused of censorship again) and will shut it down.

See you at the pond!