Printable View
On the subject of NAMBA, via a "Tech Committee" putting a list of motors together, many of the same "Cons" listed above come to mind. Essentially that's what we have now. People just want more, or their own pet motors, added to the list.
I fear that conversation like just went on above will continue were we to continue with this formula.
there will always be discussion darin..but great points..i have no problem with the current selection of p limited motors
On the subject of the original suggestion of simply providing a fixed set of specifications and opening up the allowance to anything that fits the spec, isn't this type of spec essentially how both of the other motor allowance options (single source and list by comittee) are being done in the first place?
Think about that for a moment.
Ray... like you, I've had great success running the other-than-AQ allowances. I ran a 1500 today in my new IM31 today and I don't think anyone would suggest it's slow.Quote:
Originally Posted by rayzerdesigns
But... I can assure you that the list is rapidly drying up. The Dynamite 1800 is no more and when existing supplies of 1500s are sold, that's it.
This list is rapidly running it's course and I think we, as NAMBA members, need to be proactive in getting a more permanent solution.
P-LTD has been a good thing for FE racing and I think we can keep it going if we can address this subject, perhaps more permanently.
I've given this some thought over the last couple days. Maybe P-ltd has run it's course.
We've had a good 8 year run with it up here in the PNW. I think the rest of the country has done pretty well too. We could just let it die and return to open motor racing nationally and let the local clubs run what they want. With the historical experience of LSH and P-ltd, another option is flush this rule set and come up with something a bit more stable/flexible using that past experience. What stable/flexible means is certainly open to interpretation.
Having watched and participated in these discussions for years now, it might be the most healthy move for the hobby. As a recipient of some of the mud slinging, it certainly makes me wonder if it's worth the continued effort to keep it alive.
Until someone sits down and writes up a rule proposal and it passes, it is what it is in NAMBA. At this point, I really don't care if the class continues or not. I will say that the manner in which these discussions carry on isn't good for the hobby in general.
I totally understand this sentiment, however, I think for the sake of the actual NAMBA members that are involved in this discussion, those who actually have a stake in this game, as well as the 90+ % of participants in the class that may read these discussions but choose not to participate, I'm willing to stick with it. I'm sticking to the subject, and will continue to press forward with open discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by raptor347
If that means I need to take the majority of that mud, so be it. I know the truth, and so do those friends you and I have in this hobby, so I'm not worried about it.
I think the class has merit, so would like to see it continue it's already long run of participation.
Thank You, Fred. That would be helpful.Quote:
Originally Posted by fas
No worries there, Fred. I kind of suck at diplomacy. We all have our crutches... :biggrin:Quote:
Originally Posted by fas
Although I am totally okay with the motors on the list..The only one that seems to still be in production us the aq 2030..maybe Darin or someone at pro boat/dynamite can talk them into continuing to produce the 1500..or even bring back the 1800..I have no problem with a single motor approved if we do go that route..though I can see the side as why people would..I also agree that at every race I have attended..p limited are the biggest classes. .why would we want to change it to open?? I do like the idea of a single size motor..maybe different kvs..but I also think it would have to be a single manufacturer. .but that's my opinion..stock..or limited is supposed to create a tighter racing enviroment..better racing..look at car side..There are very strict rules that involve motor approval..and truth be told..it makes them pretty much all equal..I do think it needs to be addressed..but please guys..until it is..let's follow the rules we have in place and enjoy this fun hobby..
I can assure you that isn't going to happen. I already begged. Those motors are not coming back, and the 1500's days are limited to inventory/stock on hand. Pro Boat is in the business of selling RTRs, and they have moved on from this size motor.Quote:
Originally Posted by rayzerdesigns
Ok I have read 50% of this thread, When mud slinging happens it turns me off,.... I just skip it. Just as in everything else take the 25% of the cream off the top and forget the rest.
I was racing this weekend in NAMBA district 9 sanctioned races. The three class we run in P LTD are well represented by the members of D9 and some members D19 do come up to race us too. It is strong in D9 and will they be permanent classes this year due to the strength and care of the new District FE Chairman Joe Slaney. We did have problems with the motors this weekend and as allways I found my self in the middle of it. The current UL-1 motor in my boats IMO is a wimp that can run good in light setups with much care. If you put any stress on it the wires burn up and take the controller with it. The way the new rules are written the new Pro Boat motors would appear to be legal, at least that what Joe and Wilmer say. I have nothing to or no way of refuting that. If the class is not restructured as it stands it will always have problems. That is life anyway.
The basic idea of a speck class is to have fun, allow creativity. To have people with high skills help and encourage beginners to succeed.
I thought there was no such thing as a stupid question but, I'm known for some, I'll admit that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPeterson
I haven't bothered with a SF esc with data logging since I've heard they aren't so hot. I'm still modding a Castle esc that has logging. Other than esc datalogging there is the Eagle Tree, kinda out of my budget. Besides, I rarely get much pond time in the last couple years, life...
I will not get into this other then to say whats the big problem? I don't have any problem getting all ready approved spec motors...is there a shortage where where u guys are>??
Again, moving past the noise...
I need some information from people. Could you please measure the diameter of as many "36mm" motors as you have access to and report back to me either here or via IM what those measurements are? Need the Data.
For example, the AQ motor I have here is 36.25mm. The Dynamite 1500 is 36.3mm.
Need to find out what encompasses our current motors.
Thanks.
Darin:
From my spare motor pile....
Original AQ blue motor...36.4mm
AQ 2030 gold generation 1:olleyes:...36.3mm
AQ 2030 gold generation 3:olleyes:...36.1mm
AQ 1800 gold generation whatever...36.2mm
PB 1800 grey motor...36.3mm
TP 1950 cheese-head special...36.1mm
Turnigy EDF 1900kv silver motor, 35.8mm like a Feigao can. Not currently on the list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin Jordan
We could just use the motors the guys running 1/10th scale use and close the book.
... that won't work because over half that list are no longer available, or very soon won't be.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray schrauwen
Im looking at the option that defines the spec once and and that doesn't need constant revision.
We define "spec" motors based loosely on a spec. Why not just make that spec the rule and have at it? Boom. Done.
Thanks for the diameter onfo. It's looking like 36.5mm might need to be the allowance do to variations in what manufacturers consider a "36mm" motor.
So, everyone please take note of the path of this conversation to this point.
The aim of my involvement in this subject would be to have a set of motor rules that don't have to be revisited frequently, or, ideally, ever again.
Basic and 19 series Lehners and Castle 14 measure 16mm exactly. Neu 14 series measure 36.5mm
Thanks, Tyler. Are the Basic and 19-series 2 or 4-pole?Quote:
Originally Posted by RaceMechaniX
Thanks, Terry.Quote:
Originally Posted by T.S.Davis
It's looking like 36mm isn't going to cut it. Most are 36.3-36.5mm... Easy to adjust.
Go too large in diameter and the Suppo out runners might try to climb aboard the list, lol....
They can take a beating!
Usually, Outrunners likely have too many poles... Scorpions, for example, are 12-pole motors, I believe. Outside of the scope of the class in my opinion. "Keep it simple, stupid"...Quote:
Originally Posted by ray schrauwen
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayzerdesigns
I too have no problem with the current motors on he list.
I run pretty quick set-ups and have not had motor P-Ltd failures at any Nat's since 2011.
No Michigan Cup P-Ltd motor failures either.
Pretty much have only blown P-Ltd motors while testing or not listening to Jason....lol.
KV.... 1800's are faster and more reliable than the 2030's.
Because of this experience in my equipment I am not worried too much about the KV limits.
I am however worried that allowing other motors could ruin club racing by pressuring
guys into added expenses. Must club racers do not have the means that I do and
especially with our club numbers down this year.....I worry about telling a newbie
that all he has to do is buy this RTR boat, lipo batteries, charger, and Btw and
bit better motor if he really wants to win. My point is that It will be very difficult to
find a different list of motors exactly equal to our current motors, So the topic really scares me.
As far as continuing the P-Ltd classes.....they are the most participated classes at
all events so it would be sad to see this end. I race almost everything, and enjoy
the variety. Please realize the P-Ltd connection to the local club racing is the key to
races working and directly effects the size of the events and attract new interest.
I commented yesterday that
"if its not broke...don't fix it"
This may have been better said ...Until it is broke.....don't fix it.
Would it make sense to get a proposal ready to go and then wait until we have word
that the current list is being discontinued ?
Just some of my thoughts today. I just finished up a long week of a Ryder Cup Style
golf tournament that ended Sunday and just heard about the topic yesterday.
We all need to keep our heads about this stuff. It has been many years since we had
all the major controversies and arguments. Lets make this constructive to our little hobby
and not destructive. I want to continue this for a long time and bring my new step-son
into the hobby too. Fred's son Landon and my Step-son Fede had great fun racing in the kids
classes at the last Michigan Cup maybe we should all be thinking of how we make things
better for their racing and the future which certainly includes the club level racing more so
than the big races and the Nat's.
Like Doug Smock said let's stay on topic take a breather if need be.
Just my 2 cents,
Reverend Ken :bounce:
Ken, I follow and am concerned also. What, if, and when we make a change is still not fixed.
I personally don't want to see a proposal that makes everyone think they have to run out and buy new motors. A "motor of the day" trend has stung us before. That's bad for participation IMO.
Currently there are 3 of the 8 motors available from the approved list. The Himax at 1500kv. Very few run that. The source for the other two is 1 company. Aquacraft has nobody in house (as far as we know) that has much knowledge or even any interest in racing. Their decision making process will be based solely on the bottom line. Which is how it has to be really. If they want to stay in business at least. I'm not bagging on any company for catering to it's primary customers. Some of us want to be prepared for it though.
So if Aquacraft makes a change based on the numbers like PB has then we will be done with limited in the blink of an eye.
The inspiration for even having the conversation is an effort to be proactive instead of reactive. It's not based on dissatisfaction with the motors we're running.
Just for reference, here is the current Approved Motor List. Items struck out and in red are those that are no longer available.
Attachment 136035
I'm checking now to confirm that the DYNM3835 is indeed discontinued, as the 1800 has been. That's what I was told originally. They are currently in stock, but the price was dropped down quite a bit, further indicating that Horizon is selling them out.
Based on this list, can we not agree that it's definitely time to be proactive on addressing this topic?
Oh gawd… My brain keeps telling me to stay out of these conversations, but my desire to RACE boats AND HAVE FUN keeps me engaged. I haven’t been able to do both simultaneously for a while now, but that’s my problem not everyone else’s.
I have suggested this approach in the past, but it hasn’t gained much traction. We need to establish a problem statement, list pros – cons, the actual intent of a spec boat classes, and this will lead us to a NEW set of requirements for the class. Once requirements are established we need to prioritize those listed requirements. This will allow us to provided weighted scores to the suggested options.
#1 – I think we all have agreed in no uncertain terms that the Spec Motor Rules need discussing. However, there is still plenty of argument on WHY we are reacting: I only bring this up because this will be the root of many requirements.
• Lack of options based on the current written rules (one manufacturer)
• Lack of quality of current approved motors perceived by some, but not all (burnt motors)
• Cost – motor prices of approved motors have gone up since its inception ($60 to $80)
• One motor having more performance than others (2030 vs. the others)
• Sustainability – writing in rules that will allow technology advancements, unannounced manufacturing changes/updates, and obsolescence out of our control.
#2 – I also think we need to come to a common understanding what the ACTUAL INTENT of a spec motor class is for the organization as a whole. What was the original intent starting with LSH and LSO? What was the original intent with P-Limited? What is the intent now? Has it changed or stayed the same?
• Cost? (demands on motors , controllers, and batteries)
• Performance equality?
• Flatter learning curve for newcomers (building membership across the Org)?
• Easily accessible parts (RTR’s from the LHS)?
• Compatibility – does motor “A” work with controller “B” (adjustable timing)
#3 – Several answers from the above will help drive a set of technical requirements (again weighted) for the motors that fit inside of the weighted responses above.
This is only a suggested start of the process. There are many more bullet points that could be added in each category. There has also been a good start on filling in SOME of the blanks in this and other threads. However, I think there are still some tough questions that will need to be answered before we can move forward with a viable solution. Of these tough questions, many of them will end up being compromises.
So lets ask; What was/is the intent of P-Limited (previously LSH/O)? Certainly we can come to a common ground on that; right?
Some positive news.
I just had it confirmed that the DYNM3835 1500KV Marine Motor WILL continue to be available, at least for the near future. Directly from Horizon:
"At this point in time, there is nothing in place that says that the motor is going to be discontinued.
We will continue to order when the current stock is running short.
Once we see demand drop to a certain threshold, we would then consider discontinuing and no re-orders."
So, we actually still have 4 motors available for now, in theory.
Attachment 136036
I have to agree with you on these points..... I also like the idea of a dollar cap though it should be more in the $100.rangeQuote:
Originally Posted by raptor347
This also is a good path.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin Jordan
My cut at that question:Quote:
Originally Posted by longballlumber
The intent of the P-Limited class is to provide a lower powered and lower cost alternative to the regular "P" class by restricting the number of motors allowed to a single motor and restricting the allowable motor size to a specific maximum set of dimensions and RPM. This class will provide a place for amateurs to gain experience, and for everyone to enjoy a lower cost, more evenly balanced competitive class of racing.
That's my simple take on it, at least at this evolution of the game.