Eddie, Carl, and Mike....finally a polarizing issue
11-09-2006, 02:05 PM
#106
Originally Posted by DerekB
ATHere is a reason why the RC demographic goes from 8-15 and then picks up at about 22-23. Girls and other "regular activities' that take money (aka hormones) take over.
I killl myself sometimes...just had to go there.
11-09-2006, 02:11 PM
#107
Tech Master
iTrader: (19)
Originally Posted by Carl Giordano
I actually just noticed this forum. I guess the title had changed since I believe it started as a discussion topic regarding EFRA’s decision to run 5-cell?
Just for the record, my opinion on this topic or any other critical topic is not the deciding factor with respect to changes at ROAR. In this case, it is the responsibility of the electric committee to make suggestions to the excom for consideration. The same is true with other forms of racing. ROAR has various committees which make suggestions for the excom to consider. The goal is to work with others, not rule from one seat.
However, to be consistent with what I’ve posted on other forums. IMO, the “stock” class of racing needs to become the ideal class for novices. I’ve always looked for ways to discourage experienced / factory racers from participating in the “stock” class. I thought the 19T class would have help, but all it has done is reduce the number of drives racing modified.
The reality of racing, especially electric has changed in the past 15+ years since I’ve been racing. Because of the limitation with battery technologies (we all remember SCE’s) modified use to be a class that was manageable / drivable and sort the average to highest talent. Stock at the time, was a true novice class.
Today, battery technology has advanced so far that racing modified is only fun for the extremely talented (or those who like rebuilding). Stock racing speeds are relatively fast, so many of us enjoy the pace. This has attracted a lot of highly experienced racers signing up for stock.
19T was supposed to cure this. Problem is now, the same “experienced / factory” racer signs up for stock and 19T. IMO this discourages novice from participating. What’s the point of a newbie registering for stock when he has pull over 9 times for a factory racer?
We should encourage “Stock” to be the accessible class for novices, to do so you need to get rid of the attraction for top drivers to race in “stock”. The only was to do this is to reduce the speeds.
Therefore, I support the concept of a 4-cell stock sedan class (as an example). Why EFRA decided to go with 5-cells, you have to ask them?
Sidebar: What I’d really like to see is 10 minute racing for 1/12th scale and 8 minutes for 1/10th scale (on-road and off-road), especially at club / regional events. The length of the race will force drivers to plan a race strategy, reduce the turn “one” wonders and will slow the cars down to more manageable speeds, which will spark more interest in modified racing.
Just for the record, my opinion on this topic or any other critical topic is not the deciding factor with respect to changes at ROAR. In this case, it is the responsibility of the electric committee to make suggestions to the excom for consideration. The same is true with other forms of racing. ROAR has various committees which make suggestions for the excom to consider. The goal is to work with others, not rule from one seat.
However, to be consistent with what I’ve posted on other forums. IMO, the “stock” class of racing needs to become the ideal class for novices. I’ve always looked for ways to discourage experienced / factory racers from participating in the “stock” class. I thought the 19T class would have help, but all it has done is reduce the number of drives racing modified.
The reality of racing, especially electric has changed in the past 15+ years since I’ve been racing. Because of the limitation with battery technologies (we all remember SCE’s) modified use to be a class that was manageable / drivable and sort the average to highest talent. Stock at the time, was a true novice class.
Today, battery technology has advanced so far that racing modified is only fun for the extremely talented (or those who like rebuilding). Stock racing speeds are relatively fast, so many of us enjoy the pace. This has attracted a lot of highly experienced racers signing up for stock.
19T was supposed to cure this. Problem is now, the same “experienced / factory” racer signs up for stock and 19T. IMO this discourages novice from participating. What’s the point of a newbie registering for stock when he has pull over 9 times for a factory racer?
We should encourage “Stock” to be the accessible class for novices, to do so you need to get rid of the attraction for top drivers to race in “stock”. The only was to do this is to reduce the speeds.
Therefore, I support the concept of a 4-cell stock sedan class (as an example). Why EFRA decided to go with 5-cells, you have to ask them?
Sidebar: What I’d really like to see is 10 minute racing for 1/12th scale and 8 minutes for 1/10th scale (on-road and off-road), especially at club / regional events. The length of the race will force drivers to plan a race strategy, reduce the turn “one” wonders and will slow the cars down to more manageable speeds, which will spark more interest in modified racing.
Novices don't go to the Nationals to compete for a title.
Novices go the the local club and race in the "Novice Class". When they progress upwards they join the Sportsman Stock Class. When they have a REALLY good grip on the car they progress to the Expert Stock Class. Locally this has worked for us for many years and there are no ROAR rules about this structure. The Nationals are the Nationals and you are just not going to see 100 Novices show up to race. Why try to formulate rules around that???
11-09-2006, 02:14 PM
#108
Originally Posted by DerekB
A few points that people need to realize. Racing anything isn't cheap, there is no law that it has to be affordable, but realistically it will never be.
THere is a reason why the RC demographic goes from 8-15 and then picks up at about 22-23. Girls and other "regular activities' that take money (aka hormones) take over. You can do a lot of things with money other than what you spend it on. My real car has a ton of money that I could have done other things with, but that's why it's a hobby..where we waste money on crap we don't need.
THere is a reason why the RC demographic goes from 8-15 and then picks up at about 22-23. Girls and other "regular activities' that take money (aka hormones) take over. You can do a lot of things with money other than what you spend it on. My real car has a ton of money that I could have done other things with, but that's why it's a hobby..where we waste money on crap we don't need.
The window ends at 22-23? Hopefully I die before then (j/k)
11-09-2006, 02:14 PM
#109
Originally Posted by Carl Giordano
So what, does this mean we all lose our hormones after 23. I'm hornier than ever and I'm older than dirt.....
I killl myself sometimes...just had to go there.
I killl myself sometimes...just had to go there.
11-09-2006, 02:52 PM
#110
Originally Posted by Advil
Just to point something out.....
Novices don't go to the Nationals to compete for a title.
Novices go the the local club and race in the "Novice Class". When they progress upwards they join the Sportsman Stock Class. When they have a REALLY good grip on the car they progress to the Expert Stock Class. Locally this has worked for us for many years and there are no ROAR rules about this structure. The Nationals are the Nationals and you are just not going to see 100 Novices show up to race. Why try to formulate rules around that???
Novices don't go to the Nationals to compete for a title.
Novices go the the local club and race in the "Novice Class". When they progress upwards they join the Sportsman Stock Class. When they have a REALLY good grip on the car they progress to the Expert Stock Class. Locally this has worked for us for many years and there are no ROAR rules about this structure. The Nationals are the Nationals and you are just not going to see 100 Novices show up to race. Why try to formulate rules around that???
you guys in CA always seem to have $hit together when it comes to racing. A few of our clubs required everyone to start in stock and prove themselves before moving to modified...this is now long and gone. Not enough racers in our area for this format.
If "stock" (ie: 27t 4-cell) became a true novice class, it would not be offered at a national event. Qualifiers from regional participation would have the option to race 19T or modified at the nationals.
11-09-2006, 02:56 PM
#111
Originally Posted by Advil
Just to point something out.....
Novices don't go to the Nationals to compete for a title.
Novices go the the local club and race in the "Novice Class". When they progress upwards they join the Sportsman Stock Class. When they have a REALLY good grip on the car they progress to the Expert Stock Class. Locally this has worked for us for many years and there are no ROAR rules about this structure. The Nationals are the Nationals and you are just not going to see 100 Novices show up to race. Why try to formulate rules around that???
Novices don't go to the Nationals to compete for a title.
Novices go the the local club and race in the "Novice Class". When they progress upwards they join the Sportsman Stock Class. When they have a REALLY good grip on the car they progress to the Expert Stock Class. Locally this has worked for us for many years and there are no ROAR rules about this structure. The Nationals are the Nationals and you are just not going to see 100 Novices show up to race. Why try to formulate rules around that???
Are you guys filling up the heats with having so many classes for stock?
Most places I go to with novice stock, sportsman stock, expert stock has 8 max.
11-09-2006, 03:16 PM
#112
Originally Posted by DerekB
This does NOT happen at club races or in any other main than the A or B at a big race. This is where things are pushed. Most people who race mod never can drive well enough to push the limits...
Take off a cell and we'll figure out how to regain the speed lost. We run endurance races and the racers are very saavy engineering their cars to run efficiently for hours of racing time. We (all racers) are a smart geeky bunch that can adapt to any form of racing. That much has been proven to me time and again.
I'm wondering how bad 5 cells would throw off all the manufacturing surrounding the shape and size of 6 cells and all things battery related. 5 cells wouldn't work that well in the cars I run now.
Perhaps Lipo really has shaken things up. Could this be an anti-lipo move? Maybe I'm naive. Seems like 4 cell is a nice even number but that's probably asking too much. As if all racers are going to up a quit over one cell... please. Change is good.
11-09-2006, 04:17 PM
#115
Originally Posted by Marcos.J
Well as far as the cell issue instead of having the ROAR officials (EXCOMM) decide the amount of cells, how about letting all the ROAR members decide, have an on-line ballot and have them download them and vote . 
On-line voting for officials will be a priority. Voting for critical changes within the racing format...good suggestion.
11-09-2006, 04:25 PM
#116
Advil brings to mind an area that has been talked about in our area and dropped because we either didn't want to take a chance that we would loose some of the drivers we had and it would be a political and time consuming job to do it. Having been a dirt track and speedway rider for many years, I felt that the old way the AMA ranked the riders worked. They used novice,junoir and expert in dirt track and division 3,2 and 1 in speedway. The ranking system could be maintained by ROAR, with the inputs for ranking supplied by the ROAR tracks. If a driver wanted a ranking,ROAR would be required and you would have to run at ROAR tracks to get a ranking. Sounds involved but if "importance " is to be put on racing and our sanctioning body,this could be an option. I could go on. Has anyone else talked of this type of system?
Mike
Mike
11-09-2006, 04:26 PM
#117
Originally Posted by slcf1
Not true. You've related a lot of wisdom Derek but this statement is false. In fact I just witnessed 2 thermal shut downs and some smoking motors/batteries in between. Club racers are mimicking what they see at the national races. A small percentage are chasing the golden ring but that means anybody who wants to run with them has to step it up.
Take off a cell and we'll figure out how to regain the speed lost. We run endurance races and the racers are very saavy engineering their cars to run efficiently for hours of racing time. We (all racers) are a smart geeky bunch that can adapt to any form of racing. That much has been proven to me time and again.
I'm wondering how bad 5 cells would throw off all the manufacturing surrounding the shape and size of 6 cells and all things battery related. 5 cells wouldn't work that well in the cars I run now.
Perhaps Lipo really has shaken things up. Could this be an anti-lipo move? Maybe I'm naive. Seems like 4 cell is a nice even number but that's probably asking too much. As if all racers are going to up a quit over one cell... please. Change is good.
Take off a cell and we'll figure out how to regain the speed lost. We run endurance races and the racers are very saavy engineering their cars to run efficiently for hours of racing time. We (all racers) are a smart geeky bunch that can adapt to any form of racing. That much has been proven to me time and again.
I'm wondering how bad 5 cells would throw off all the manufacturing surrounding the shape and size of 6 cells and all things battery related. 5 cells wouldn't work that well in the cars I run now.
Perhaps Lipo really has shaken things up. Could this be an anti-lipo move? Maybe I'm naive. Seems like 4 cell is a nice even number but that's probably asking too much. As if all racers are going to up a quit over one cell... please. Change is good.
I know you're not disagreeing with my, but the MAJORITY Of people don't really have this issue. And if they do it's probably because they had something wrong, setup, gearing, worn brushes, something.
I've raced at lots of place, and raced mod, and I don't see it has a huge problem.
11-09-2006, 04:28 PM
#118
Originally Posted by MIKE ELLIS
Advil brings to mind an area that has been talked about in our area and dropped because we either didn't want to take a chance that we would loose some of the drivers we had and it would be a political and time consuming job to do it. Having been a dirt track and speedway rider for many years, I felt that the old way the AMA ranked the riders worked. They used novice,junoir and expert in dirt track and division 3,2 and 1 in speedway. The ranking system could be maintained by ROAR, with the inputs for ranking supplied by the ROAR tracks. If a driver wanted a ranking,ROAR would be required and you would have to run at ROAR tracks to get a ranking. Sounds involved but if "importance " is to be put on racing and our sanctioning body,this could be an option. I could go on. Has anyone else talked of this type of system?
Mike
Mike
Go to a real go-kart track. They have a system setup for ranking right now. First time I went I was entered into the system and immediatly was ranked in the country, the system gave points..and points shifted to the quality of the people you raced. You got "pro points" and depending how your race was it went up or down.
THAT is the system that can help fix the ranking system without much thought or effort.
11-09-2006, 04:36 PM
#119
Originally Posted by MIKE ELLIS
Advil brings to mind an area that has been talked about in our area and dropped because we either didn't want to take a chance that we would loose some of the drivers we had and it would be a political and time consuming job to do it. Having been a dirt track and speedway rider for many years, I felt that the old way the AMA ranked the riders worked. They used novice,junoir and expert in dirt track and division 3,2 and 1 in speedway. The ranking system could be maintained by ROAR, with the inputs for ranking supplied by the ROAR tracks. If a driver wanted a ranking,ROAR would be required and you would have to run at ROAR tracks to get a ranking. Sounds involved but if "importance " is to be put on racing and our sanctioning body,this could be an option. I could go on. Has anyone else talked of this type of system?
Mike
Mike
Originally Posted by DerekB
Ranking is a huge problem. Sure it's great to run with Factory guys, but then you blow everything up thinking it's the equipment.
Go to a real go-kart track. They have a system setup for ranking right now. First time I went I was entered into the system and immediatly was ranked in the country, the system gave points..and points shifted to the quality of the people you raced. You got "pro points" and depending how your race was it went up or down.
THAT is the system that can help fix the ranking system without much thought or effort.
Go to a real go-kart track. They have a system setup for ranking right now. First time I went I was entered into the system and immediatly was ranked in the country, the system gave points..and points shifted to the quality of the people you raced. You got "pro points" and depending how your race was it went up or down.
THAT is the system that can help fix the ranking system without much thought or effort.
This program would also allow each region to assign a ranking number for the year, as motocross does. It also tries to account for the size of the fields, but something like "pro points" would have to wait for the first year so the rankings could be added to the mix.
"Increased regional activity:
A regional points system, letting racers all over the region compete & gain points for a championship from their home tracks. This has already been proposed to ROAR. If the major scoring software producers could add a option to markup the results for internet transmission, it could all be handled via database. Tony (SKipGear) Hines had a complete proposal, including a programmer willing to create the software for the points calculations.
Qualifying into the nationals from regionals also would create a greater aura of prestige to the nationals. Even if the nationals became slightly smaller, it would allow longer range planning by both the track operator and the racer.
Both of these ideas create greater value in the ROAR membership for the racer. ROAR becomes more than just insurance. Many racers never attend a national race. Many do attend races close to home. Regionals which become an "event" will increase membership. Local racing for a championship that includes a large group of tracks increases local excitement. The ROAR product becomes something that is wanted, vs. something that is a a requirement to race at one event a year."
Regional points thread:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthread.php?t=51216
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<"
11-09-2006, 10:34 PM
#120
Tech Regular
This is a tough thread to reply to, as it covers too many issues. I have read nearly all the posts, and find interesting, and valid points from nearly everyone.
I have been fortunate enough to be involved with R/C car racing for many, many years. I have competatively run nearly every class, and have always seen and had to deal with these same issues. After nearly 20 years, I feel that I have an excellent idea about what does and does not benefit and individual class, and in turn our hobby. I remember what it was like to go to club races on saturday and have 29 or 30 heats full of 10 cars! When nearly everyone ran several classes, and the cars and equipment weren't significantly cheaper than they are now (anyone remember how expensive an original rc10 was?).
I could reply to all the issues I have read in this post, but for time sake I am going to reply to the issues regarding competative modified touring specifically, but these ideas can easily be appplied to other classes.
Unfortunatelly (and this has been pointed out by several others in this forum) limiting motors, batteries, # of cells, electronics, chassis, # of minutes in a race, will not work to solve our problems. These are not solutions, but merely "patches" for another problem(s). It is the true nature of electric racing to try and squeeze every watt out of your car for however long a specific race is. So we will always overuse those things that determine our over all speed. When we were forced to use 10 turn motors, we blew those up just as easily as the 7 turns we use now. And we damaged our batteries just as easily with them. We needed to rebuild them every run, just as we do now, and I am sure they got just as hot as our current motors.
Making the cars "slower" by reducing the cell count (as adopted overseas) will only keep the cars slower for a short time, and the side effects that go with it (heat, wear, etc) will soon come back.
Making our race durations longer will also provide similar issues. True racers are going to de-tune motors to just last 8 min (for example) instead of 5min. Does nobody remember the reasons we changed to 5 min instead of 4 min? Obviosly the issues have only gotten worse even though 5 min was supposed to save everything, make our motors last longer, not be as hard on our batteries and electronics-BS!
The only way to control all of these issues is to effectively limit something that determines the limits of all of these other aspects- FRICTION.
No I am not talking about the belts or gears in your TC, I am talking about the fundamental property that allows us to "race" in the first place. The friction between our tires, and the surfaces we race on-usually refered to as traction. We all love it, but just like a speed freak (no pun intended) it is slowly killing us. The only reason that we can use the amount of power available to us today, the only reason we can run 7 turn motors, the only reason we can dump 4ah batteries, the only reason we can overheat our electronics, is because we have tires and surfaces that allow us to. This may be a hard pill to swallow, but it is the truth. If we controll the amount of traction that we use during racing (e.g. reducing it), all other things will fall into place.
We won't be able to burn up those 7 turn motors (you can try
, and we won't be able to dump those 4ah batteries, we won't be overheating our electronics, and we will never have to worry about run time. You can still run fast motors, but you will only be able to use it on the straightaways as the surface won't support the low end power. You won't have to worry about having alot of great batteries, as run time/ internal resistance won't be a determining factor in your racing. this means that a racer can opt for more durable lower mah rated cells, and possibly have fewer of them and truly be able to use them several times in a day (remember 1400 scr's).
I propose that someone (ROAR maybe) assemble a commitie to develop a "hard" solid rubber tire (without insert to simplify things) to be used as a spec tire/rim combo for all modified classes. I am thinking that a solid tire may wear, but hopefully will have many runs before its performance is significantly affected. This type of spec tire will enable a racer to actually only carry one or two sets of tires for an entire season. It will also effectivelly limit all the power related issues that were previously discussed.
The other thing that will need to be addresed is surface preperation. Although this is much harder to police, I believe a little brainstorming could develop a few good strategies as to keep traction to a useable minimum.
I am tired now, so I will stop writing. To those who took the time to read this- Thankyou, to those who did not- keep playing your video games (they are killing you.-Jeff
I have been fortunate enough to be involved with R/C car racing for many, many years. I have competatively run nearly every class, and have always seen and had to deal with these same issues. After nearly 20 years, I feel that I have an excellent idea about what does and does not benefit and individual class, and in turn our hobby. I remember what it was like to go to club races on saturday and have 29 or 30 heats full of 10 cars! When nearly everyone ran several classes, and the cars and equipment weren't significantly cheaper than they are now (anyone remember how expensive an original rc10 was?).
I could reply to all the issues I have read in this post, but for time sake I am going to reply to the issues regarding competative modified touring specifically, but these ideas can easily be appplied to other classes.
Unfortunatelly (and this has been pointed out by several others in this forum) limiting motors, batteries, # of cells, electronics, chassis, # of minutes in a race, will not work to solve our problems. These are not solutions, but merely "patches" for another problem(s). It is the true nature of electric racing to try and squeeze every watt out of your car for however long a specific race is. So we will always overuse those things that determine our over all speed. When we were forced to use 10 turn motors, we blew those up just as easily as the 7 turns we use now. And we damaged our batteries just as easily with them. We needed to rebuild them every run, just as we do now, and I am sure they got just as hot as our current motors.
Making the cars "slower" by reducing the cell count (as adopted overseas) will only keep the cars slower for a short time, and the side effects that go with it (heat, wear, etc) will soon come back.
Making our race durations longer will also provide similar issues. True racers are going to de-tune motors to just last 8 min (for example) instead of 5min. Does nobody remember the reasons we changed to 5 min instead of 4 min? Obviosly the issues have only gotten worse even though 5 min was supposed to save everything, make our motors last longer, not be as hard on our batteries and electronics-BS!
The only way to control all of these issues is to effectively limit something that determines the limits of all of these other aspects- FRICTION.
No I am not talking about the belts or gears in your TC, I am talking about the fundamental property that allows us to "race" in the first place. The friction between our tires, and the surfaces we race on-usually refered to as traction. We all love it, but just like a speed freak (no pun intended) it is slowly killing us. The only reason that we can use the amount of power available to us today, the only reason we can run 7 turn motors, the only reason we can dump 4ah batteries, the only reason we can overheat our electronics, is because we have tires and surfaces that allow us to. This may be a hard pill to swallow, but it is the truth. If we controll the amount of traction that we use during racing (e.g. reducing it), all other things will fall into place.
We won't be able to burn up those 7 turn motors (you can try
, and we won't be able to dump those 4ah batteries, we won't be overheating our electronics, and we will never have to worry about run time. You can still run fast motors, but you will only be able to use it on the straightaways as the surface won't support the low end power. You won't have to worry about having alot of great batteries, as run time/ internal resistance won't be a determining factor in your racing. this means that a racer can opt for more durable lower mah rated cells, and possibly have fewer of them and truly be able to use them several times in a day (remember 1400 scr's).I propose that someone (ROAR maybe) assemble a commitie to develop a "hard" solid rubber tire (without insert to simplify things) to be used as a spec tire/rim combo for all modified classes. I am thinking that a solid tire may wear, but hopefully will have many runs before its performance is significantly affected. This type of spec tire will enable a racer to actually only carry one or two sets of tires for an entire season. It will also effectivelly limit all the power related issues that were previously discussed.
The other thing that will need to be addresed is surface preperation. Although this is much harder to police, I believe a little brainstorming could develop a few good strategies as to keep traction to a useable minimum.
I am tired now, so I will stop writing. To those who took the time to read this- Thankyou, to those who did not- keep playing your video games (they are killing you
.-Jeff