1/10 scale motor options... so now what?

[Doug Smock]

Just trying to find a good and simple path my brutha, you know I value your input no matter what.

I know my friend.
I was actually posting for the guys that are reading and may not know that there is a difference. It's out there, I'm done for now.
Someone recently said "I got 99 problems, model boating ain't one of them." That's where I am.

Have a good weekend fellas!

[don ferrette]

This is part of what Mike posted the other day-

ProMarine RTR’s SSS (w/3656) is under 57mm
The Aquacraft motors are under 57mm
The old proboat motors are under 57mm (don’t include the bearing protrusion)
The new proboat motors (UL-19 and Veles) are under 57mm
NEU 1412’s are under 57mm
TP Power 3630’s are under 58mm
HET Typhoon’s are under 58mm
Lepoards are over 60 – but don’t perform
OSE Raiders are right at the 60mm limit so depending on the allowance may or may not be legal. Secondly, (no offense to Steven or OSE) but they are not the first choice of racers. In fairness I have never ran one, but that has been communicated to me indirectly and based on my own observations.
Turnigy – don’t know the exact length, but it’s weak based on comments on OSE

I keep finding myself gravitating back to it and thinking really hard on it. With that being said I reached out to Doug to see if his D13 folks would consider a mere 2mm bump in length (from 56.5 to 58.5mm) With that we pick up the very affordable SSS, HET and TP motors for more options. And if we go with the 36.5 x 58.5mm (the .5mm is just a "fudge factor" for measuring) then we could have two neighboring districts with the same rules and no list. OMG!! What are we doing??? Fire and brimstone!! Cats and dogs sleeping together!!

Seriously though this could be a start. Maybe... just maybe we can see a migration toward some common ground.

[Doug Smock]

Ds 12 & 13 have been on the same page since 2010 and the P Shootout. Chili & I worked together to keep us going a similar direction.

The district membership makes any rule/class changes at our annual meeting. The racers rule the roost, what the majority wants they get. I don't even vote as to make it clear that I don't interfere with that. I simply make sure they have a place & time to be heard.

The District is set for the 2019 season. Any changes will be made in Nov. 2019.
I'll be watching to see what you guys are doing, and how it works out. Thanks for keeping us in mind.

[don ferrette]

Ds 12 & 13 have been on the same page since 2010 and the P Shootout. Chili & I worked together to keep us going a similar direction.

The district membership makes any rule/class changes at our annual meeting. The racers rule the roost, what the majority wants they get. I don't even vote as to make it clear that I don't interfere with that. I simply make sure they have a place & time to be heard.

The District is set for the 2019 season. Any changes will be made in Nov. 2019.
I'll be watching to see what you guys are doing, and how it works out. Thanks for keeping us in mind.

Wish I would have found out sooner about the motors being discontinued and got this moving before your meeting, looks like I was a couple weeks too late. All good my friend as we can still plant the seeds of progress and see where we are during the 2019 season.

[Doug Smock]

Yes sir..

[Greg Schweers]

There was a reason why the pro boat 1500 work so well because of the KV. Big boats like big props.I’m not sure the pro boat 2000 would work in 34+” boat. This is something that needs to be tested. My 8255 runs a 2” prop.

[Greg Schweers]

Plus I think you’re gonna need a six poll motor. Technically you’re have a year to figure it out

[don ferrette]

While I could spend time and a good number of keystrokes disproving the "big boats like big props" analogy let's just agree to disagree.

But to stay on point I forgot that NAMBA D19 is voting on this today-
https://forums.offshoreelectrics.com...947#post728947
If they pass this it sounds like it will head right up the line for consideration nationally so I'm gonna watch for the results of the D19 vote.

[Peter A]

I have been watching these discussions on 'spec' motors for some time. While we do not have classes as such here in NZ, I have a peaking interest in 1/10 scale and one or two others have shown a mild interest. Any which way it seems to be a hard road to get a full class of anything, or even a class of anything that doesn't burn fossils round here.

Anyways, just to throw a thought out there. What if instead of limiting the motor, there was a limit on the fuel? From what I understand you guys run a 10000 mah limit for bats. If you reduced that to 5000mah then it would not matter what motor was used, there would be a limited amount of watt/hours to be used - a restricted amount of fuel. It would change the way you set up boats as you would have to get the best use of what is in the tank for speed and runtime. Ultimately it has an immediate effect of levelling the playing field and keeping the budgets reasonable.

Just a thort!

[Ken Haines]

This is part of what Mike posted the other day-
ProMarine RTR’s SSS (w/3656) is under 57mm
The Aquacraft motors are under 57mm
The old proboat motors are under 57mm (don’t include the bearing protrusion)
The new proboat motors (UL-19 and Veles) are under 57mm
NEU 1412’s are under 57mm
TP Power 3630’s are under 58mm
HET Typhoon’s are under 58mm
Lepoards are over 60 – but don’t perform
OSE Raiders are right at the 60mm limit so depending on the allowance may or may not be legal. Secondly, (no offense to Steven or OSE) but they are not the first choice of racers. In fairness I have never ran one, but that has been communicated to me indirectly and based on my own observations.
Turnigy – don’t know the exact length, but it’s weak based on comments on OSE

Hi Don, I like these ongoing constructive discussions.
Just for additional information, I have only really used that Turnigy motor
at 1 race...the 2017 Michigan Cup, I won LSH with it. I would agreed that
they will smoke if over propped, but it was pretty fast. I switched to the
Pro-Boat 2000 this year, similar speed, just a bit more durable. Some of
us had been hoping that due to the approximate $45 price that it would
survive the length changes. Actually that motor was the only issue to me
that made some of us question the 37 x 60mm rule change as it measures
approximately 60.24mm.
Just information, I will keep reading as what I
think is good positive debate continues.
Thx, Ken

[properchopper]

While I could spend time and a good number of keystrokes disproving the "big boats like big props" analogy let's just agree to disagree.

But to stay on point I forgot that NAMBA D19 is voting on this today-
https://forums.offshoreelectrics.com...947#post728947
If they pass this it sounds like it will head right up the line for consideration nationally so I'm gonna watch for the results of the D19 vote.

It passed. I'm ready to research some " motor upgrades" in the spirit of No More AS MANUFACTURED stipulation. First must dress properly before motor mod testing...

suit2.jpg

[T.S.Davis]

What does everyone think of some kind of "must be in a can" verbiage?

I think Greg was spying on our meeting over the weekend. I said the same thing about scales and bigger blades. Probably not fair to say "all" scales like the larger blades but most of the boats on our pond seem to. Dan's Pay n' Pak can run any blade but it's a rigger. Legal but still a rigger. Don't think SAW Don. These tend to be lumbering hogs in the turns. The fat blade seems to get them back out of the turn a little better. Again, not all of them. 6 poles are yer friend.

We talked about a number of things at our meeting Saturday. Totally informally though. We were primarily there to enjoy each others company. Did that gobs. Is 9 hours too long to stay at a bar?........anywho. We talked a bit about the lengths. Didn't vote on anything. It's just not that important in truth. We'll probably ask the club to approve 60mm instead of 62 for 2019. If at some point IMPBA has a trial set that's different we'll comply with that if it's different. Any major events we should happen to host would need to include any such limitation on the flier. Much like we did for the 2018 nats. We submitted a bid to IMPBA to host that include our desired format and any deviations from the book.

Some of us dig traveling to share the joy. If yer gonna go to Rome.........better find out what the Romans er' doing before you go. If we're heading out to race, it's incumbent on us to make sure our boats comply with our hosts rule set. Atlanta having a shorter limit than us would impact the half dozen of us willing to travel. That's okay for now I think. Every area has the freedom to define it's rules even if there is an official IMPBA rule set. Pretty sure NAMBA works the same way. How else would they have trialed the set they are planning to propose. To do that, they have to ignore the rule book and race what they plan to propose. This sounds familiar.............hmmm. Don't get me wrong, I would prefer a standard but I still need to check if I'm planning to play with others.

[rayzerdesigns]

It did pass with the amnendment that any bearing protrusion be included in dimension..now off to the BOD for approval

[Coug90]

I agree that we would always be chasing our tails with motor lists simply because we don't control enough clout in the industry to make a difference in manufacturing. I like this discussion about letting motor size limitations dictate our selections. It's simple and liberating. It would then be up to us to find out how reliable different motors are and to let the cream rise to the top, so to speak. Reliability may depend as much on quality of choices as it does on equipment used. I like that we have to work to find the right prop/motor/boat combo and do the little things that make them go faster in competition, but embrace compromise to keep them from melting down. It's just like the real boats, right? Run too close to the screws and you eventually pay the price. I like where this looks to be going and am interested to see feedback on how 2019 goes for those districts trying out this new rule set in 1:10 scale. Question: Has anyone asked whether outrunner motors are considered in the rule? They would certainly open up your motor selection exponentially. Our club has run them exclusively in one class and along side inrunner motors in our other two classes of 1:10 scale with good, competitive results. Number crunchers would need to decide whether the same dimensions would apply to all motors or if outrunners would have to have their own range of size limits for some reason. I like the idea of addressing both types of motors while we're looking at what could lead to a significant change in how we look at motor selection for this and other classes of racing for area clubs, NAMBA or IMPBA. This is the most open-minded discussion I've seen, toward finding a long term solution to this ongoing problem. It's safe to say that most of us are fed up with trying to establish and maintain viable motor lists. Nothing's going to be perfect, but we might at least be able to come up with something frustrating for old and new racers to figure out so we're not left out in the cold at the whim of a few manufacturers every year or two. I'd certainly support dimension limitations even if it came with other specs if needed (watts or whatever). FREEDOM!! (Sorry, I had a little Braveheart moment there.) Let's keep the discussion going, thanks.

[ray schrauwen]

Using watts to compare motors isn’t telling the whole story and I would argue it gives you a false positive of its capabilities. You really need to know the voltage and current being used to establish the watts value; or vise verse, if you want to estimate current limits. I only make this comment in caution because ALL of these motors are being pushed beyond their rated capacities.

16.0 volts X 95amp (average) = 1520 watts  for perspective the NEU 1515 is rated at 1250 continuous watts. However, the same questions need to be applied to the NEU ratings.

The only reason I question 60mm as a limit and not a shorter limit is the mythical beast we think fits in the 60mm range but not 58mm. Sure 60mm give us more options, but are they QUALITY options. There are SEVERAL posts about motors that simply don’t cut the mustard when compared to the 56mm motors that started all of this (turnigy, leopard come to mind). Also the longer you leave the limit the more room for innovation (we thought 62mm was OK).

I know many of you hold up burnt up motors/controllers as a badge of honor, I don’t subscribe to that mentality. If I am ever engaged by newer boater whether it be a cross over boater or a new boater, I am going tell him what BRAND and KV works for me or one that I know is a quality motor. I am not going to tell him 36X60 “go nuts” That way when he comes back and tells me the motor burnt up in 2min of runtime, I have already eliminated the motor as being the root cause. I am going to immediately look elsewhere.

ProMarine RTR’s SSS (w/3656) is under 57mm
The Aquacraft motors are under 57mm
The old proboat motors are under 57mm (don’t include the bearing protrusion)
The new proboat motors (UL-19 and Veles) are under 57mm
NEU 1412’s are under 57mm
TP Power 3630’s are under 58mm
HET Typhoon’s are under 58mm
Lepoards are over 60 – but don’t perform
OSE Raiders are right at the 60mm limit so depending on the allowance may or may not be legal. Secondly, (no offense to Steven or OSE) but they are not the first choice of racers. In fairness I have never ran one, but that has been communicated to me indirectly and based on my own observations.
Turnigy – don’t know the exact length, but it’s weak based on comments on OSE

It seems to be a forgone conclusion that we NEED to keep lengthening our limit; why not make the limit shorter? Easy, "perception" - long is better/faster.

SSS $65, nice 6 pole unit.