Namba oval racing class changes ***

[rayzerdesigns]

I'm going to implement the p lite motor thing this new year here in az .. We really don't have a big enough course for t yet.. But soon.. I'm not in favor of combining all the classes.. Just no way a smaller say q or p can compete in the waves created by a t boat

[T.S.Davis]

Hey... watch it!

Hahahaha... Actually, that class is SAW/2-LAP only. This discussion is only for OVAL racing classes.

NO need to get crazy here.

And, I'd suggest that the Time-Trial stuff just get left alone. Doesn't affect overall participation anyhow, and the more the merrier there, in my opinion.

Sadly there are guys that will read that as yet another conspiracy theory.

[Darin Jordan]

Sadly there are guys that will read that as yet another conspiracy theory.

Whatever... all guys who don't show up in the first place, so they don't really know what they are referring too... SAW isn't "broke"... Oval, well, sort of is...

[Darin Jordan]

I'm going to implement the p lite motor thing this new year here in az ..

I'm going to propose we implement it here in Washington next year as well. Some of the club I've talked to seems to be on board to try it.

Sweet deal is that it ELIMINATES NOTHING... just opens up the motor allowances to other similarly sized motors.

These are the drafts I put together to present to our club. Only two sections that need revision. This only addresses P-Limited. 1/10th Scale is going to have to deal with their motor rules separately.

Again, PLEASE NOTE: this is ONLY FOR OUR LOCAL CLUB, and ONLY a PROPOSAL for them, at the moment. The membership of our club has yet to vote/decide, or even really discuss this yet. That will happen in November/December at our Winter meeting. So, please just relax. Has nothing to do with NATIONAL rules...

P_LTD_MOTOR_PROPOSAL_DRAFT_01.jpg P_LTD_MOTOR_PROPOSAL_DRAFT_02.jpg

[properchopper]

Hey... watch it!

Hahahaha... Actually, that class is SAW/2-LAP only. This discussion is only for OVAL racing classes.

NO need to get crazy here.

And, I'd suggest that the Time-Trial stuff just get left alone. Doesn't affect overall participation anyhow, and the more the merrier there, in my opinion.

[T.S.Davis]

Not saying we do or don't but does there need to be a dollar MSRP cap on this? I don't have a feel either way but is there a risk of someone going all Lehner at the club levels? I'm not sure there's a real advantage to doing that. There are so many great cheap options right now it's almost giggle worthy. Leopard, TP, HET, Turnigy all on the cheap.

Some of us talked about it informally after our race Sunday. I haven't found anyone saying they thought it was a bad idea. Not sure what to make of it. Maybe we're headed down the right path.

Brings me to my earlier observation.....let's not wait. What we have is working (limited) but I think we all want to open the flood gates to more options. Why are we clinging to this old school notion that we have to prove the concept for a year? I read it again........it ain't in the book. That "one year proof" thing isn't in there. It's been perpetuated by dinosaurs (myself included) when it's simply not in there.

It's not like we're deleting anyone's gear or making them run out for new stuff over night. We'll also no longer be catering to any particular manufacturer which was a major sticking point for some way back when Dave wrote it and I proposed it.

If we could make this fly I would be willing to bet its finally a spec that IMPBA could get behind too. Easy to tech and wold hold up for years. If we could get it on the books for both orgs it would get us all on a similar page. More of us doing the same things makes for more potential racers regardless of geography. More goodder....ness.

Am I being too optimistic?

For ovals and offshore

Get rid of N1,N2, cracker, ECO
Get rid of the min voltage for P
Make T 7s+
Change the limited spec to just motor size

Done?

[Darin Jordan]

Not saying we do or don't but does there need to be a dollar MSRP cap on this?

Simple Question: CAN IT BE TECH'D??

ANSWER: NOPE....

Problem addressed and solved.

Seriously, if someone thinks they need to spend $300.00 to compete in a LTD class, then let them have at it... won't change the balance of competition...

[longballlumber]

cheap vs. expensive.... You guys don't think manufacturing quality and tolerances will come into play? Isn't/wasn't that one of the major complaints that got us to this point?

[T.S.Davis]

There were a number of complaints. In no particular order:
No choices
Poor quality/inconsistent quality
Catering to two manufacturers (conspiracy theorists)
"We weren't consulted"
My favorite "the rules were written to protect certain racers"

With the quality and tolerance potential this would be different in that if a manufacturers quality slipped we as racers can choose something else. The old way, if a motor batch was off say 5% resulting in failures we had few options. We ordered more motors that couldn't run the setups they were replacing.

I think Mike's point is that quality gets better as you lay out more cash. This is an undeniable truth. Is it a big enough truth to muddy the water? IDK

[longballlumber]

With the quality and tolerance potential this would be different in that if a manufacturers quality slipped we as racers can choose something else. The old way, if a motor batch was off say 5% resulting in failures we had few options. We ordered more motors that couldn't run the setups they were replacing.

I understand you point, that scenario wasn't immediately in the forefront of my brain but it makes sense.

I think Mike's point is that quality gets better as you lay out more cash. This is an undeniable truth. Is it a big enough truth to muddy the water? IDK

I guess I am not sold that a $300 motor is going to perform "the same" as a $80 motor. I don't think the performance difference will be large, but it will be there. In the right hands/boat it can skew the perception that a Leopard can keep up with a Lehner. Perception is what I am trying to protect, for the new boaters; i guess. Rules/Classes that help get new racers involved is my motivation.

Performance in these classes are SO close already, that any improvement in the right hands is going to upset the apple cart. It's inevitable, i guess.

[Darin Jordan]

1) CAN IT BE TECH'D??

2) Nobody is worrying about the cost of motors in ANY OTHER CLASS...

3) Are we trying to limit cost, or performance? JUST like the other classes, there is going to be a balance point that is reached.

4) The physical size limitations will ultimately determine the power available.

5) CAN IT BE TECH'D??

[Doby]

1 & 5...you're repeating yourself.

[Darin Jordan]

1 & 5...you're repeating yourself.

PRECISELY!

[Doby]

Go Tech yourself!!!!

[longballlumber]

Then i am still confused what the INTENT is... The "goal" of reconfiguring P-Limited the class still escapes me. I think we all know how we got here, but I am not sure everyone agrees where we are going.


There's been too many iterations of these discussions; Does this new 36X61 motor have a KV restriction?

Another question; Other than time trials, When was the last time ANYONE set up and followed through a FORMAL tech process at an FE race? Other than Terry checking voltages at the MI Cup 2 years ago (which was very informal), I have never been "TECH'D"