NAMBA's P Limited Rules.

[Doug Smock]

Someone said we need to learn from the gas guys. There is a reason they don't have Super Sport Cat, Rigger, Sport Hydro, and O/B Tunnel.

Write a proposal on a FE Super Sport (or whatever) mono, assign it a motor dimension (or whatever) and see how fast that gets the thunbs up and goes out for a one year trial.

[Doug Smock]

Edited for the highly sensitive, sorry fellas.
While your talking about can size... Why not limit all the heat racing classes with can sizes!?!?

More boats will finish, the retrieve boat will go out less, and the races will be closer. What's not to like?

Later...

[Darin Jordan]

Ridiculous and condescending response, but whatever.

I have a better idea. Why not do away with the power structure completely? No limits on anything, just run what you brung?

Good Grief.

[don ferrette]

For the resident experts...

Really Doug?

Hey since you brought up experts.......... did you read Darin Jordan's rather extensive and in depth study/testing of the very motor sizes we are discussing?? Good stuff right there. Since data collection is/has been used as a "talking point" I don't think there's much better than what Darin published last April regardless of which side of this topic one is on.

[Doug Smock]

Really Doug?

I wasn't being condescending. There are some experts here right?

it's a shame that there are some who can't see the forest for the trees............ SMH once again.

I'll take "resident experts" for $200 Alex.. TOY BOATS fellas, lighten up.

BTW I wasn't kidding about limits for all heat racing classes. Some are already promoting Q Limited. Is that next? If so there is time to get ahead of it. Besides folks will need something to discuss this winter since the 10th. annual P Limited discussion started so early.

I didn't say a word about P Limited motors Don. And don't intend to. Why? Makes zero sense at this point, minds are made up. If anyone was going to change their position I imagine they would have done so by now.
You and I already agreed to disagree, and I'm fine with that, and let's leave it at that.

D13 is racing 36.5 X 56.5 because that's what THEY want! They have about 10 years of success and have no idea it won't work.

I'm done with the nonsense guys! Like a buddy of mine said. "I got 99 problems, model boating ain't one of them".

See you at the pond!

[dethow]

In the interest squashing the IMPBA FE TOY BOAT RACING Deep State conspiracy theories and keeping it real.. The BOD is doing it's job.

The meeting minutes you copied in are from February of 2018 which was 1 year and 8 months ago. Sorry, but you can't copy in minutes from almost 2 years ago and claim the BODs are doing it's job. What is currently being done?

And let's look at a few things from those minutes.

"Pres. Chris noted that NAMBA is currently proposing to change the P-Ltd. class to this very "can size" rule, and suggest we table this proposal to see what issues shake out this season, then revisit."
NAMBA has collected data, completed testing, and took in a new proposal with necessary changes made. And membership has already voted and the new rule is in the book. That's a lot of work completed in 1 year, 6 months. Job well done NAMBA. And we now know how that shook out? What's IMPBA doing?

"MOTION by Chris Harris to table this motion. SECOND by D4 George Albrecht. No vote. Members felt further discussion was needed"
Chris wanted to table the issue, NOT terminate. I wonder which members wanted further discussion? Maybe the one that ended up motioning to terminate the proposal all together?

"MOTION by Doug Smock to terminate this proposal. SECOND by D4 George Albrecht. None opposed. Proposal terminated."
Ummm...

"Mike Ball will begin collecting data on motors to see if the weight idea is viable for teching."
Been done and determined that the weight idea can not be tech'd and most agree a simple 60mm length limit works.

Doug you are 100% right that's it's "TOY BOAT RACING".
So why all the concern over letting the most popular FE classes for those Toy Boats into the rule book?
Seems that You and Mr. Ball are the only ones acting like the sky would fall if that happened. It's TOY BOAT RACING.

You say "I got 99 problems, model boating ain't one of them".
Well you sure do have a lot of problems whenever a proposal for P-Limited/Spec gets closer to being in the rule books.
Please do... be "done with the nonsense" and stop obstructing.

[Doug Smock]

The meeting minutes you copied in are from February of 2018 which was 1 year and 8 months ago. Sorry, but you can't copy in minutes from almost 2 years ago and claim the BODs are doing it's job. What is currently being done?

Uh yes I can. And I did. That's when the ''Spec" proposal went before the board. And believe me when I tell you, I have no problem with the motion to terminate that proposal. NONE.

BTW I am absolutely certain that the BOD has a much better idea of what the membership wants, and more importantly what's best for the organization than you do.

I will ignore any further by you on this subject. Know that.

Have a world class evening.

[dethow]

BTW I am absolutely certain that the BOD has a much better idea of what the membership wants, and more importantly what's best for the organization than you do.

And there it is people... one of your IMPBA leadership/BOD members speaking for the entire leadership/BOD.

Doug... it's not about knowing more then "I" do. That's not a difficult task.
It's about you and maybe the rest of the BODs (if you truly reflect their beliefs), thinking your small group are the only ones who know anything and you're the only voices who matter.

Hate to start up any name calling again... your statements really make it hard. SMFH...But I will not do that.

I have no intention of furthering a discussion with you on this matter Doug. You are a waste of time.
I think people might finally be seeing your true colors.

This is the reason I will not be part of IMPBA and continue to suggest FE Clubs should be with NAMBA. The organization that actually wants to promote FE Racing.

Meanwhile, like Terry Davis "I'm tired. Let somebody else handle it."

[don ferrette]

Gang, let's take it down a notch............

Perhaps the simplest approach might be for the IMPBA BOD to vote to send this proposal directly to membership vote, let the members decide what's best. That is one of 4 options the BOD has in dealing with proposals and regardless of what some may think the BOD does in general a damn good job in handling proposals and determining the most important Q- will it benefit the organization as a whole. I spent over a decade serving the membership on the BOD and am still doing so but now in a non voting role (national hydro director) and will say this- we all too often get remembered for that one issue some don't agree with rather than all the good that gets done...............

[Terry Keeley]

If I was on the Board now hearing conflicting information from the very people that run FE I'd do exactly that. Let the membership decide. It doesn't get more grass roots or democratic than that.

From pg. B-3: https://nebula.wsimg.com/efb2b176fad...&alloworigin=1

c) Option #3 - All rule proposals not supported and not terminated under option #2 by the
Board, will be distributed to IMPBA membership in December for vote by a ballot that will
require a head count for or against the proposal. The membership vote will determine the
implementation of said proposal and, if passed, will be effective as of the beginning of the
next racing season. Results will also be published in the next Roostertail newsletter.

BTW, I had NO IDEA you guys were so passionate about this subject, had I have known I would never have brought it up. But now that I have maybe something good will come of it for model boating.

From what I see as an outsider the NAMBA rule is a good one, they have done their homework and have adopted a simple, easy to tech rule for their membership. I hope IMPBA will follow suit otherwise they will surely lose members...

[Darin Jordan]

You are wasting your time, FE'ers. It's abundantly clear where the IMPBA leadership stands. This will never be in the hands of the members, and your leadership has taken their stand. Doesn't fit their paradigm.

Their choice is clear. Next moves are up to you. I'm assuming you can all reason out as to WHO pays the bills??

[Doug Smock]

Hey guys. First off I don't want to start a $hit storm here but.....

BTW, I had NO IDEA you guys were so passionate about this subject, had I have known I would never have brought it up

No you didn't just type that! Better check your sent messages from the 22nd.

SMDH

[jaike5]

This is hurting my head …… again. Just can't wait for the Q discussions on motor ,esc, and Batteries.
Jay.

[Terry Keeley]

No you didn't just type that! Better check your sent messages from the 22nd.

SMDH

Ya, I knew it was a "hot topic" but I had no idea it was THAT hot and there was so much history and such opposing views on the subject.

Again, it seems this thread is doing some good, to re-cap:



It seems the majority want National P Limited rules in the IMPBA.

It sounds like the the issue of re-winds and weight is pretty inconsequential and difficult to tech.

It seems like can size is the major limiting factor to KV output and cost.

It looks like the majority of the low cost motors would have a 37 x 58-59 mm or smaller can.

It seems NAMBA has done their homework and adopted a 37 x 60 mm rule for simplicity and to allow for any current and future can size deviations.



So am I right here that the current debate is about 1 mm in can length?

[longballlumber]

Mike Ball have you read this in depth research from Darin??

Don Ferrette - I find it funny you're asking me if I read the PropWash article. I have read the PropWash article and lived in this world for awhile now. Quite frankly, I have been elbows deep in this steaming pile of volcano crap since it started. The question is; have YOU read the article? Questioning me and my comprehension level without imparting us with YOUR wisdom seems a little one sided.

I suspect you and I have digested the data very similarly. If we didn't, you wouldn't' have been looking under rocks for the 1500kv ProBoat on FaceBook awhile back for your district 1/10 scale class. Mind you this motor has been out of production for several years. Oh and by the way, it' only 56mm long. If you were so hell bent on 60mm being a solution why would you be looking for a motor that has been out of production for multiple years? Just go buy one of those 60mm motors that is readily available on OSE?

Data is what the data is and the data doesn't lie. However, how the data is interpeptide and used to establish rules is something different. Simply having more motor options isn't the entire solution. We need to have motor options AND we need to have a narrow range of performance swing.

Here is what I take away from the data

*Our baseline motors (Aquacraft and Proboat/Dynamite all 56mm long) were much higher performing that we gave them credit for. On the water testing still supports this today.
*Pretty much all of motors tested (regardless of length) were inferior to the baseline. MORE (speaking of length) isn't better! Some will say this contradicts my argument.
*I don't know about others, but there is NO WAY I, in good conscious, would recommend any motor other than a current ProBoat (2000kv), one of the AquaCraft motors (2030 or 1800), or maybe the SSS (I haven't seen many of these run). Nothing even comes close to the performance of these motors. We are talking about new boaters here. Seasoned racers, already know what motors to buy. THAT?S WHY THEY KEEP BUYING THE 56mm MOTORS!
*I keep getting the $50-$60 Leopard example thrown at me? Anyone that would recommend that motor should be force to race with it as well. Darin?s data and others who have commented clearly state that motor just isn't comparable (performance wise).
*Why wouldn't a rule be written to set potential new comers up for success AND PERFORMANCE?
*What the data doesn't tell us - How well will an "optimized" 60mm motor will perform when compared to the baseline. This is regardless if it's a Frankensteined homemade/wound motor or a special order, purpose built from a reputable manufacturer. Why do we need to wait and find out when we have perfectly good 56mm motors that have been used for the last how many years? MORE IS NOT THE ANSWER.


Proboat UL-19 has a 56mm motor - https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...od=hh-prb08028

Proboat Veles has a 56mm motor - https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...od=hh-prb08029

ProMarine RC - sells boats with a 56mm (2030KV) option ? (can?t seem to get the website to work)

I am sure there is some NEW old stock of the Revolt, Lucas, Motley Crew, and UL-1 floating around

AquaCraft 1800 is STILL in stock - https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...od=hh-aqug7002

AquaCraft 2030 is STILL in stock - https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...od=hh-aqug7001

SSS 2030 is available (same as ProMarineRC) - https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...?prod=tfl-3656

ProBoat/Dynamite 2000kv is available - https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...od=hh-dynm3831

Later,
Ball