Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Namba voting is open. Lets vote in sizes and get 2019 moving. Flame suite on :-)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,637

    Default Namba voting is open. Lets vote in sizes and get 2019 moving. Flame suite on :-)

    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    69

    Default

    Did someone give a reason why the bearing is included in the overall length

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Schweers View Post
    Did someone give a reason why the bearing is included in the overall length
    to me it would seem that the bearing being outside of the case, allows the rotor to be longer within the casing.
    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    69

    Default

    What good is a longer rotor if it’s sticking out of the stator?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ON
    Posts
    2,258

    Default

    Longer Rotor and longer Stator with bearings sticking out of the ends.

    Larry
    Past NAMBA- P Mono -1 Mile Race Record holder
    Past NAMBA- P Sport -1 Mile Race Record holder
    Bump & Grind Racing Props -We Like Em Smooth & Wet

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRUCKPULL View Post
    Longer Rotor and longer Stator with bearings sticking out of the ends.

    Larry
    Yes Sir!
    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Proposal #9
    Although I'm a FE guy, this proposed rule says in section 16 -Race Organization G -Inspections -2 that; for example "If a 1st place finisher is disqualified, the other positions do not move up in points.
    Then in section 6 -special class consideration Stock & G-Limited it says they would move up in points? Why is this class's an exception?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GixerGuy1978 View Post
    Proposal #9
    Although I'm a FE guy, this proposed rule says in section 16 -Race Organization G -Inspections -2 that; for example "If a 1st place finisher is disqualified, the other positions do not move up in points. [COLOR="#FF0000"]A position or points in a heat will not be change
    [/COLOR]
    Then in section 6 -special class consideration Stock & G-Limited it says they would move up in points? Why is this class's an exception?
    If second place(overall for the day) is found to be in violation and disqualified, the 3rd place finisher (over all for the day) moves up to second and the 4th moves up to 3rd. No points will be altered or changed do to any qualifications.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    5,696

    Default

    I have no horse in this race but I do have a question.

    What 60mm motors were being raced? Were they winning?
    Noisy person

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    OSE Raider 3660
    Leopard 3660
    SSS 3660
    GoolRC 3660
    And many others as 3660 is a popular size.

    "Were they winning" is not a qualifying factor into allowing a motor to be run within the class. I believe the idea was to be as inclusive as possible for both now and the future without going over board by allowing anything over 60mm. Anything between 56mm to 60mm long should be a good motor for the class.

    Could 58mm max work? Sure... today that size limit would add a couple popular motors into the class. But frankly those 2 motors are already allowed within the NAMBA rules with approval by the CD. They were allowed at the 2018 NAMBA Nats "Legally".
    But what happens if those manufactures discontinue those couple motors or they just get extended to 60mm long with the same guts for whatever reason? A 60mm max length will be inclusive for many years to come based on the rounded numbers of 3660 being popular among manufactures. IOW... Chances of 60mm max needing to change in the future is very minimal. While a 58mm max has a "higher" probability of needing to be extended someday to be more inclusive.

    At the club level... it's easy to change and I probably would have voted for that if I was a member of MMEU. The national organization they are involved with appears to be taking a different path. And that method of doing what works today with ease of changing is an "idea". An idea that could have different clubs running different rules and the host club for National Events may decide the rules being utilized that year. No one really knows... there is nothing in the rule book for any of what is going on there.

    But that's not how NAMBA is structured. In order for a class to run at a National Event for "National Championship" status the class rules need to be properly proposed, board approved and voted on by the entire membership. At the NAMBA National Level... it's not so easy to make rule changes and thus IMO this is the right move in consideration of a National Rule Set. This NAMBA rule proposal isn't just about today and getting those 2 popular motors in the class without CD approval. This rule proposal makes the rule tech-able and thinks past the end of this or next season and into the future so these debates don't need to happen again.

    I am so happy with NAMBA for stepping up and doing something. Thanks to all who have contributed to this process.
    Hopefully this process can stay positive and just let NAMBA members vote without non-members attempting to stir the pot.
    Last edited by dethow; 04-01-2019 at 10:17 AM.
    Have fun with that....

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    I have no horse in this race but I do have a question.

    What 60mm motors were being raced? Were they winning?
    I dont believe it matters at this point, but It would be nice if IMPBA adopted similar rules for cross organization racers.
    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    5,696

    Default

    Let me see if I understand. Cuz I want to.

    When we talked 60 to 62......the consensus was that a 62 was going to be next level faster. Nobody in the US raced them but we all just accepted this as fact. 2 mm of motor was a game a changer.

    The motors that are 60mm.......available today aren't winners. Would be legal but not that great. They aren't popular because they don't win. No offense. I have the chart so I knew what was available. Most of the winning motors are less than 58. These are the norm motor wise. What's going to stop a company from building a 60mm 6 pole motor that is a game changer. An additional 2mm of copper and watts. You guys know this is extremely possible right? Hell, its probable. Someone with connections could make this happen before summer. Surely we're not this naive.

    I'll try asking it different. What 60mm motors were raced for wins? Not "what is available"?
    Noisy person

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    5,696

    Default

    By the way. I wanted 60mm. Someone pointed out to me the 2mm power thing. Now sure why I couldn't think of it that way before. I may give that guy a hammer for the next time I can't grasp something.
    Noisy person

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    By the way. I wanted 60mm. Someone pointed out to me the 2mm power thing. Now sure why I couldn't think of it that way before. I may give that guy a hammer for the next time I can't grasp something.
    Terry a size was decided and proposal brought forth. the members of Namba will then decide on what "they" would like to do as an organization by voting. If someone comes up with a 60mm motor with 59mm of coil/stator and 6 poles, good luck to them. They will be the next "Aquacraft/Proboat" motor in p limited racing.
    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Vaccaro View Post
    Terry a size was decided and proposal brought forth. the members of Namba will then decide on what "they" would like to do as an organization by voting. If someone comes up with a 60mm motor with 59mm of coil/stator and 6 poles, good luck to them. They will be the next "Aquacraft/Proboat" motor in p limited racing.
    EXACTLY! Where is the like button?

    I was going to put it this way:
    If a company builds a 60mm 6-pole motor then racers will upgrade if they'd like to. That's it… That's what will happen. And then there will be 1 or 2 motors which win the most races… just like there is now.

    And BTW... The 2 most winning motors right now are 56mm 6-pole. So what IF someone makes a 58mm 6-pole motor? It will probably be better than the current winning motors. So why don’t we just make the rule 56mm?

    At some point a line has to be drawn and 60mm is enough of a limiter so that the class doesn't turn into full P speeds. Going too small could require more changes in the future along with the possibility that RTR or ARTR offerings could have a 59mm to 60mm motor which we'd be asking newbies to go spend more money and change out. Let them get on the water, have some fun and figure out through talking to mentors that soldering isn't that hard if they'd like to upgrade and make their boat more competitive. Ask a newbie to spend more and learn to solder before they even do one lap... And they're gone.

    A prime example of this is the Pursuit Mono which can be purchased from many suppliers ARTR with an SSS 3660 motor. There is a thread on this forum discussing the problem of lack of RTR and ARTR Monos to get Newbies started out. Going under a 60mm limit just blew that option out of the water. TFL Popeye is another example. It can be bought ARTR with an SSS 3660.
    Last edited by dethow; 04-01-2019 at 03:03 PM.
    Have fun with that....

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    5,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Vaccaro View Post
    what "they" would like to do as an organization by voting.
    I'm hearing what you're saying with "they" but you just called for "IMPBA adopt similar rules". Sooooo.....NAMBA votes and IMPBA gets in line. haha Uh huh.

    Steven, why 60? Why not 62? 63,64,65,55,50,42?

    58 offered a little bit of fudge factor for manufacturing from what is being proven on the pond. 62mm was apparently a ton of fudge factor. But 60......that's not too much. It's not too much......today......... based on the existing offerings. Ever see a Leopard with it's guts ripped out and re-wound for more power? Nice motor.

    I get that there needs to be some standard somewhere. At some point there has to be a max. That's what this proposal is. I'm not trying to just poop in the soup. I'm just not sure 60mm is the right max. I did think it was right. Totally believed we were on the path to enlightenment. haha Truth in lending or whatever. I'm no longer certain is all I'm saying.

    I still believe we should be able to have a guy buy something off the shelf and be in the ball park. I realize selection is limited at the moment. However, if Lehner spits out a 6 pole 36x60mm motor that's $400.......where does average new guy fit into racing? He doesn't.

    Oh, also.....some of our spec boats are right out on the ragged edge of drive-ability already with 57.5mm motors. If a hot new Dynamite 2200kv that was 60mm came along the boats will be even faster? Seems likely. Can we go faster? Should we? 65mph+ limited sport? Sheesh. I mean.....what the heck fir? At the risk of sounding like Smock......jump to P and get it over with.
    Noisy person

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    And what if Dynamite does comes out with that 2200kv that is 60mm long and discontinues the current 56mm motor? And let's say SSS does the same thing?
    What are we left with??? The TP which god only knows which length can that will come in.

    You're providing a lot of what ifs... but failing to look at the opposing what ifs.

    Let's put some questions on you.
    What motors are available at below 58mm if the Dynamite and SSS/Promarine 56mm long 6-poles go away?
    What are the chances that more future motors are developed under 58mm? Seems 60mm is the most popular threshold.
    Have fun with that....

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    However, if Lehner spits out a 6 pole 36x60mm motor that's $400.......where does average new guy fit into racing? He doesn't.
    Lehner doesn't make 6-pole motors. Niether does Neu.
    So chances of them spitting out a product to dominate NAMBA and/or IMPBA racing isn't likely.
    It's already been said many time that manufactures pay no attention to us.

    The most probable manufactures to come out with 60mm long 6-pole motors (if any were to do so) are Dynamite, SSS or TP. And all those options would be affordable to the average new guy.
    Have fun with that....

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    5,696

    Default

    Fine Plettenburg then. haha Plett likely has an 8 pole we haven't looked at now that I think about it. Lehner doesn't make a 6 pole...... today. Neither does TP, OSE, or Leopard. I've asked TP repeatedly. Not sure about SSS. Thought those were 4 pole. That's today of course.

    All fair points Dave.

    We screwed this up before. Don't want it to happen again.
    Noisy person

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    Fine Plettenburg then. haha Plett likely has an 8 pole we haven't looked at now that I think about it. Lehner doesn't make a 6 pole...... today. Neither does TP, OSE, or Leopard. I've asked TP repeatedly. Not sure about SSS. Thought those were 4 pole. That's today of course.

    All fair points Dave.

    We screwed this up before. Don't want it to happen again.
    Understood
    But FYI... the Promarine 3656 2030kv is a 6-pole motor and that is ultimately an SSS motor with Promarine branding on it.
    https://www.offshoreelectrics.com/pr...?prod=tfl-3656
    Have fun with that....

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    We screwed this up before. Don't want it to happen again.
    BTW... No one screwed this up before.
    The current P-Limited rules worked... Until they didn't. As someone once said to me.
    And this new rule proposal will work (if passed)... until IT doesn't.

    There is no perfect answer to any of this stuff.

    Those ARE legitimate concerns you bring up, BUT...
    I believe the biggest reason the current P-Limited rules don't work anymore is because of manufacturing changes and a lack of motor supply. Lack of tech-ability isn't the biggest problem. No one was ever caught cheating and no one ever dominated so much that the masses thought there was cheating going on.

    I personally believe anything less then 60mm will inevitably lead to the same demise of a new rule set if a couple manufactures stop making what they are now.
    While on the other hand... I don't see there being a lack of possible motors within a 60mm limit.

    Yes, there may be some room for innovation that MAY surpass the current winning motors. But that will all settle down, the new ceiling will be found and the new preferred motor will be used... until they're not. And someday someone may bring a $50 Leo motor to a Nats and win a National Championship with it. Turning laps with a proper setup and a little luck means more then anything else.

    In the end we will have:
    a.) motors which will be more limited then Open P Classes,
    b.) motors which will be more cost effective then Open P Classes,
    c.) more possibilities for RTR/ARTR boats to be purchased and raced without a motor swap, and
    d.) less possibility of legal motors no longer being available.

    If the 60mm limit passes in NAMBA and IMPBA leadership isn't comfortable with matching then they should do what they believe is right. NAMBA leadership and the members whom made this proposal have heard/seen all the debates and they've made the choice that they think is right for NAMBA. As discussed in Brian's article in Propwash... NAMBA wants something which should not have to be revisited over and over again. That cuts down on wasting resources and frankly... the drama.
    Last edited by dethow; 04-01-2019 at 09:59 PM. Reason: Spelling error
    Have fun with that....

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    az
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    Really terry.. u were all on board with this.. now you are bashing it?? I’m kinda at a loss for words here buddy..I know you hate NAMBA.. we came up with an idea.. tested it.. was too big.. so lowered the size.. tested so it would allow motors..it’s a simple thing to tech if needed.. period.. no weight.. just a simple go no go size.. it really baffles me how you were on board with this and now you aren’t..something had to be done as the notor availability was drying up.. so here we are in Namba with a proposal that went out to the membership for a vote..where have u gotten or have you even submitted anything for impba?? Sorry if we didn’t want to drag our feet here and have the biggest fe classes just go away..It would be great to have parity with impba..maybe you should work on that instead of bashing what we are trying to do to keep limited racing alive and well..just really baffles and kinda upsets me that all of the dudden you are against this

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    az
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dethow View Post
    BTW... No one screwed this up before.
    The current P-Limited rules worked... Until they didn't. As someone once said to me.
    And this new rule proposal will work (if passed)... until IT doesn't.

    There is no perfect answer to any of this stuff.

    Those ARE legitimate concerns you bring up, BUT...
    I believe the biggest reason the current P-Limited rules don't work anymore is because of manufacturing changes and a lack of motor supply. Lack of tech-ability isn't the biggest problem. No one was ever caught cheating and no one ever dominated so much that the masses thought there was cheating going on.

    I personally believe anything less then 60mm will inevitably lead to the same demise of a new rule set if a couple manufactures stop making what they are now.
    While on the other hand... I don't see there being a lack of possible motors within a 60mm limit.

    Yes, there may be some room for innovation that MAY sucrpass the current winning motors. But that will all settle down, the new ceiling will be found and the new preferred motor will be used... until they're not. And someday someone may bring a $50 Leo motor to a Nats and win a National Championship with it. Turning laps with a proper setup and a little luck means more then anything else.

    In the end we will have:
    a.) motors which will be more limited then Open P Classes,
    b.) motors which will be more cost effective then Open P Classes,
    c.) more possibilities for RTR/ARTR boats to be purchased and raced without a motor swap, and
    d.) less possibility of legal motors no longer being available.

    If the 60mm limit passes in NAMBA and IMPBA leadership isn't comfortable with matching then they should do what they believe is right. NAMBA leadership and the members whom made this proposal have heard/seen all the debates and they've made the choice that they think is right for NAMBA. As discussed in Brian's article in Propwash... NAMBA wants something which should not have to be revisited over and over again. That cuts down on wasting resources and frankly... the drama.
    Well stated!!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,637

    Default

    Again, lets not get into the debate all over again.
    the members of Namba will make a choice. Its the great thing about having voting rights. And we will see what happens from there.
    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Vaccaro View Post
    Again, lets not get into the debate all over again.
    the members of Namba will make a choice. Its the great thing about having voting rights. And we will see what happens from there.
    Agreed Steve...
    We've all debated it and those that haven't... have already read the debates.
    It's time to stop and let the vote take place with no last minute lobbying for points of view.

    The only reason I chimed into this thread was to answer some of Terry's questions regarding rational for the proposal and to offer counter points to his opinions on the matter. IMPBA guys need to let NAMBA members vote with no more opinions/debates. If the rule proposal is passed and they don't like it... they have every opportunity to do what they want to within their organization.

    Have a great weekend.
    Have fun with that....

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    az
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    The proposal passed.. the new namba size limit is 37x60 max size..not sure of effective date.. but after nationals.. thx to all that voted..hope to see everyone out racing sokn

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •