VS-1 with Scorpion outrunner

[Doug Smock]

Its kind of a catch 22.. we (speaking from a MFG standpoint) one can not just barf out lots of extra motors in hopes organized racing of the product takes hold.. we are here for the long haul but like all types of business its balance.. balance the best we can.

Grim

I agree and completely understand. I wasn't trying to toss one over the fence. LOL
This will all work itself out in time, that's why I have been in no hurry to propose a ruleset to district members.

Keep up the good work!!
Doug

PS Tony,

[Chris Harris]

Mike,
That's cool that there's more choices on the way, good to hear. I wasn't trying to stir things up. I guess I'm a little geeked over the whole SPEC thing. Afterall it's getting me back into oval racing, albeit in a limited way, it's something I said I wouldn't do again. I'm a total SAWS guy but I want to run more than twice a year.

As for the difference between SAWS and Ovals I like Darin's analogy. SAWS is the Bonneville type of racing for model boats and lets one be very creative just like those guys out here on the salt flats. For me, this is what I love the most about SAW.

As for there being too many classes in SAW I don't think this is the case. Look how many different classes there are for the guys who run on the salt, it's endless. Does that diminish the spectacle and the coolness of setting a record?
NO WAY. Besides that there's something for everyone and all the classes seem to be well supported with 15 to 25 racers at every SAW I've been to in the last 4 years.

Chris

[Ub Hauled]

Chris maybe you guys from the East side can share some of the ways you keep the SAWs alive in your neck of the woods, our all FE SAW was cancelled this year and last year it was pretty low in attendance... we need more people to show up.
I am a SAW geek guy myself, although fresh into it I have got the bug... although I have to say that the 2 lap events are looking really good, it's something worth looking into Chris.

[sailr]

Direct from the IMPBA Rule book, page J3. I don't see anything about VOLTS. If the rules have been changed, please try to get IMPBA to update the website. Also looked through the proposed changes in the current Roostertail and didn't see it. Maybe I'm going blind in my other eye!

Class Motors Bearing Magnets Number of Cells
L 1.05 Any Any 4
N-1 1.05* Plain Ferrite Only 6
N-2 Any Any Any 6 or 2S
O-1 1.05** Any Ferrite Only 7-8
O-2 Any Any Any 7-8
P Any Any Any 9-12 or 4S
Q Any Any Any 13-18 or 6S
S Any Any Any 19-24 or 8S
T Any Any Any 25-32 or 10S


Do you see a place for 3S in there? Remember Herb yelling for 3S, 5S, etc? I remember him being peeved because IMPBA just wouldn't listen. Look at your own rule book, 4S, 6S, 8S, 10S!

If I am missing something somewhere please correct me! Wouldn't be the first time and I am open to elucidation.



[QUOTE=D.Smock;129865]

Some of the actions of IMPBA totally escaped logic, like omitting 3S lipos completely, keeping out a lot of RTR boats from competition and thus keeping a lot of new blood from entering the sport.
QUOTE]

No sir, that's incorrect!
Remember the classes are based on voltage not cell count.
3s voltage fits perfectly in the "P" class 8.4 to 14.8 volts, hulls up to 34" in length.
If ya got em race em.

Too many classes?? I don't disagree but as long as oval racing rules spill over into SAWs, the classes need to stay as they are IMHO.

I'm all for allowing additional motors into the P Spec. rules that don't formally exist.
Every year there is a dry spell with the SV, BJ??, and UL-1 motors. We need another option or two that will fit.

Looking forward to a video Tony!

Doug

[sailr]

Darin and Grim's comments are right on target! Thanks! I would bet, however, if AQ or Proboat came out with a 3S boat that 3S would be allowed.

[Darin Jordan]

Direct from the IMPBA Rule book, page J3. I don't see anything about VOLTS.

That stuff you posted is old, Old, OLD...

[sailr]

Darin,

I don't doubt it but it's all I have reference to. It is from 2007 and the latest 1 year proposals don't mention any change either. As I said, I would be happy to stand corrected but need something more up to date to refer to.

Thanks!

That stuff you posted is old, Old, OLD...

[longballlumber]

Rather than continuing to destroy Tony thread about an OPC powered by a scorpion outrunner... I posted where to find the IMPBA rules in a separate thread.

Mike

I ment to add the link...

http://forums.offshoreelectrics.com/...ad.php?t=10736

[Darin Jordan]

Back to Tony's discussion then...

In my opinion, these motors would have to be limited to the 1500-1600KV range to even be considered a fair inclussion into the current P-Spec power limits... They simply make too much additional power, so matching them up, KV wise, is not going to equate to equivalent performance.

[rockwerks]

Back to Tony's discussion then...

In my opinion, these motors would have to be limited to the 1500-1600KV range to even be considered a fair inclussion into the current P-Spec power limits... They simply make too much additional power, so matching them up, KV wise, is not going to equate to equivalent performance.

Actually the discussion was about putting a outrunner on the VS-1 hull if Im not mistaken

[sailr]

At a lower KV they will have even more torque and can swing an even bigger prop. I really think we need to stick with the AQ and Proboat motors in SPEC. The Outrunners present a totally different dynamic.

Back to Tony's discussion then...

In my opinion, these motors would have to be limited to the 1500-1600KV range to even be considered a fair inclussion into the current P-Spec power limits... They simply make too much additional power, so matching them up, KV wise, is not going to equate to equivalent performance.

[sailr]

Thanks Mike. I appreciate it. No wonder I couldn't find the current rules. They're kinda buried on the IMPBA site.

Rather than continuing to destroy Tony thread about an OPC powered by a scorpion outrunner... I posted where to find the IMPBA rules in a separate thread.

Mike

[Darin Jordan]

Actually the discussion was about putting a outrunner on the VS-1 hull if Im not mistaken

Starting at post #11... the topic strayed a little, then...

The Outrunners present a totally different dynamic.

Yup.... that's kind of my point... The one being discussed here is good for over 1100watts, compared to the 800 watts the UL1 and others are rated at... That's just way too much additional power for any addition to the currently accepted "spec" motors...

HOWEVER, nothing is keeping people from using these in standard, legal, NAMBA applications! Go for it and let us know how it works out!

[properchopper]

The only reason I installed the 1900 KV motor was just to experiment within the realm of fun/cool. I actually held off switching out the UL-1 motor because I was going to go to AZ to race with David & his guys and kept the boat in agreement with the current "spec" convention. Since my plans changed, I popped in the Scorp just to try it out .
Darin, interestling enough, the 1600 KV motor specs at 1470 max continuous watts vs. 1140 for the 1900 KV motor. I agree with your previous observation that to take maximum advantage of the increased torque these motors have, big props could be called for and handling likely will suffer.
Tomorrow is test day, I'll post results. Know that I'm not trying to change any rules here, just havin' fun ! Good discussion, 'tho.

[sailr]

Still can't wait for the video! The "COOL FACTOR" is off the charts!