More limited motor discussion

[dethow]

Agreed. There are many variations to what the manufactures specs say and what they deliver.
Example being TP3630. Their spec says 58mm, OSE website says 61mm, I had several at 57.5mm and I heard there were some floating around which were over 62mm long.

And that's why I wrote earlier that we should go 60mm long but allow some sort of CD discretion to allow obvious well know motors which had a minor manufacturing difference. I don't think we should open the door to a 1415 sized motor to accommodate manufactures who can't get their sh*t together and build a consistent size that meets their own published specs.

[raptor347]

Just to throw fuel on the fire. There will be a significant performance advantage to the 1415 and shortened tp3640. That P hydro I ran at the 2014 nats was running a 2400kV 1415, and we remember how that ended up.

I measured the bits and pieces. A 1415 and a TP3640 can be made to fit the dimensions. Let the arms race begin.

One advantage to the 1415 and 3640 motors, they are seriously robust. Going to need a real 200 amp esc (think 200 continuous) to get the most out of them.

[dethow]

I measured the bits and pieces. A 1415 and a TP3640 can be made to fit the dimensions.

Hey Brian, thanks for adding your experience on the subject.

I know nothing of the TP3640. Do you think that and/or the 1415 could be made to fit a 60mm can?

From what I see out of the 1415s I have in hand... they are jammed at the rear end. Maybe a little room up front to move everything more forward, but I don't know. I'm not a motor builder or machinist. I just asked the question of a manufacture and they pulled it off.

[Darin Jordan]

Went out a measured.

The existing motors all fit under 60mm.

I believe the 61.2 was for 1 version of the DYNAMITE 2000, and also to fit the TP3630-1950 that Wisconsin was using.

[raptor347]

The 3640 won't fit in a 60mm can. 1515 maybe, you'd might have to sacrifice some copper to shorten up the end windings. Neu is a master of maxing out what can be stuffed in a limited space.

Keeping parity in Spec classes is never easy to pull off.

[Darin Jordan]

Should be noted that the 1 version of Dynamite 2000 is no longer made, and was never on the list anyhow.

[jaike5]

Well that was uptight .... lets move on to something else like the rocket powered ejector seat on the drivers stand for Ray, just a heads up for Darin who will be pitting for Ray!!
Cheers, Jay.

[photohoward1]

How about we all concentrate on building better boats and specifically driving better. Motors don't win races.

[T.S.Davis]

Dave, I think Darin is actually sharing with people that don't get it. Dims......done. He and I both get hand wringing texts and such from outside of this thread. I've even gotten the typical "Did you read the rules before going IMPBA?!?! Maybe you shoulda before hand. What gives you the right? Why wasn't I consulted?" Not all at once of course and not from a single source. Same kind of thing we got back in 2002 with NAMBA. Then it was "who do you think you are?" Can be frustrating.

Along that line, I just gotta share a text I got on this from I guy I think of as a legend. He was a legend before I owned a decent boat IMO. Not naming him. He reads but isn't willing to debate on here. Sometimes I get the funniest damned texts from him. "I could give everybody in your Club a 1415 and the same guys are still going to win. 1415 isn't going to make a so-so driver a winner"

Hitting a start, holding a line, staying out of wash, recognizing when to let off the trigger because yer out of shape, not putting yourself in harms way, setting a guy up to pass him coming out of 4 on the last lap, not letting a guy set you up to BE passed coming out of 4. Motor can't do any of that for us.

Like I said, none of this is going to be etched in stone any time soon. We have time to find out if we blew it. I don't think we have BTW.

Okay, now Todd said something to me Sunday that cracked me up. "A peanut is neither a pea nor a nut. Discuss" Racers will get it.

[T.S.Davis]

BTW Until Steve starts building a good 6 pole motor it wont matter how big it is.

[longballlumber]

I would like to collect some weight data associated to the 37X62 motor limits. Anyone willing to weigh the motors they have (minus cooling jacket and collet) would be appreciated. The following is what I would be looking for;

Manufacturer
Model and KV
Actual Measured Weight noting if the value includes connectors or not

The more data points the better even if it’s the exact same motor multiple times.

In an effort to keep this thread clean, please send me a PM with this information.

Thanks
Mike

[rayzerdesigns]

These motors have been run in MMEU for a season and no speed advantage was observed. The main reason to buy a motor like this is reliability. One of our members burned a couple $80 motors this season while in the same boat these motors are still going.

But yes... Darin is 100% right. The sky is not falling and based on our club's examination, there are other motors which showed some slight dominance in terms of speed. But those racers/boats have always been some of our fastest so maybe that's not even true that it was the motors.

Size limits has proven itself out to be good as far as what we've seen and what I've heard from other clubs doing some testing.
Things will continue to get tested out this year and we'll see where it goes.

But people... the only way to see if there is a problem is to explore the limits and see what happens. Please stop making assumptions just because a motor costs more. The $55 Dynamite 1500kv has been doing some domination for years if you know how to setup a boat for it.

I’ve been running the dynamite 1500s for over 2 years now without a single failure and anyone that has raced with me will say my boats aren’t slow.. I just don’t like the idea of spending 200$ on a spec motor.. in my eyes defeats the purpose..

[rayzerdesigns]

Hey Brian, thanks for adding your experience on the subject.

I know nothing of the TP3640. Do you think that and/or the 1415 could be made to fit a 60mm can?

From what I see out of the 1415s I have in hand... they are jammed at the rear end. Maybe a little room up front to move everything more forward, but I don't know. I'm not a motor builder or machinist. I just asked the question of a manufacture and they pulled it off.

There are already 1415s out there that have been made and are being used just so u knoe

[dethow]

"I could give everybody in your Club a 1415 and the same guys are still going to win. 1415 isn't going to make a so-so driver a winner"

Don't disagree with that at all Terry.

Problem with the statement thou is that no one is just going to hand EVERYBODY in our club a 1415 motor to race. There will be 3 or 4 guys willing to spend the money and the rest will stop racing if they can't compete. Besides the fact that there will no longer be any off the shelf boats with a motor to compete with a 1415. You've now lost many existing racers and forget getting anyone new getting involved. Is that where we want to go?

I really don't get the big deal being made here. You and Darin have been fighting this like I'm proposing that the idea of dims just be completely taken off the table. That's not the case. I'm only suggesting that IF these 1415s turn out then we should pull the dims back to 37mm x 60mm.

From what Brian Buass says these 1415s are robust motors which he has used and won with in full P at 2014 Nationals. Sounds like something to be concerned about, coming from a well respected racer.

[Darin Jordan]

David, after yesterday, and my IMs to you, I think you should be clear on my position here and what I was trying to relay. I think it also should be clear now that we basically agree regarding the proposed dimensions.

It's clear that 62mm takes things too far, or at least "out of the intended scope" of the class.

The reason we determined 60mm may not work is because there simply aren't many motors out there, OTHER than the current spec motors, that fit.

The ones that did were the 36x50 sized, which are a substantial DECREASE in performance.

Motors like the TP3630-1950 were all slightly over the 60mm.

So where do you draw that line? I measured, I recommended, I tried. Two big clubs, lots of ideas, compromises were had, here we are.

Where do we go now? The proposal is already in the NAMBA pipeline, but can be pulled. Probably wise at this point. Perhaps hit the brakes at take another look? Won't affect the clubs. They can continue to run what the want. Probably better to do that than to blow the class out of scope.

Heard suggestions to add a weight component. Uuugh... back to awkward, difficult and impractical to tech rules. Dimensions are enough, I'd think, if they are the right ones. Seems we're just discussing a few tenths of mm here. I'll bet we can refine it and get it right.