ROAR to 4 cell....
11-28-2006, 05:43 PM
#661
Originally Posted by BullFrog
Just catching up on my reading since lunch time.I also hand a phone conversation explaining there side.I'm just one guy on the on-road committee. Now as an X region director I'm just a racer on this committee. The committee and region directors can only make suggestions the Excomm makes the big decisions.
One thing that goes with this discussion that is not mentioned is the brushless motors.This is the new motor and we are in the transittion stage from brushed to brushless. The Brushless will work better in the newer format with less cells.At least that's the way I see it. Try -yes alot of racers in Mod down here in Florida want to try 4 cell mod. That's what I've been told. I'm a big fan of the 13.5 brushless stock class.If I had some others wanting to try it I'm game.If not I guess we'll try it with 6 cells.
I can tell you my personnel feelings about slowing the cars down and new racers. Pan cars got to be too fast but they were 100% easier to work on- even for a new racer. Now you add The new TC and the speed most drivers can't handle plus they spend a lot of money and don't win- there gone in a very short time.The attention span of the new racers now a days is very short especially if they don't win.
Now if people will sit or stand in line for several days to get the new and improved PS3 for 600.00 and what 50.00 plus for games to play on it.People in turn complain about how expensive our hobby is.Get a game and stay inside all day by yourself or get into this hobby get outdoors met others and race .I hate video games don't play them and don't own any. No matter what is decided I'm still a hard core r/c racer and we are getting smaller every day.We need more new racers coming to the tracks and racing.That's the ultimate question here how to get more racers getting into this hobby and moving up the ranks to modifiied.
One thing that goes with this discussion that is not mentioned is the brushless motors.This is the new motor and we are in the transittion stage from brushed to brushless. The Brushless will work better in the newer format with less cells.At least that's the way I see it. Try -yes alot of racers in Mod down here in Florida want to try 4 cell mod. That's what I've been told. I'm a big fan of the 13.5 brushless stock class.If I had some others wanting to try it I'm game.If not I guess we'll try it with 6 cells.
I can tell you my personnel feelings about slowing the cars down and new racers. Pan cars got to be too fast but they were 100% easier to work on- even for a new racer. Now you add The new TC and the speed most drivers can't handle plus they spend a lot of money and don't win- there gone in a very short time.The attention span of the new racers now a days is very short especially if they don't win.
Now if people will sit or stand in line for several days to get the new and improved PS3 for 600.00 and what 50.00 plus for games to play on it.People in turn complain about how expensive our hobby is.Get a game and stay inside all day by yourself or get into this hobby get outdoors met others and race .I hate video games don't play them and don't own any. No matter what is decided I'm still a hard core r/c racer and we are getting smaller every day.We need more new racers coming to the tracks and racing.That's the ultimate question here how to get more racers getting into this hobby and moving up the ranks to modifiied.
11-28-2006, 05:48 PM
#662
Originally Posted by HarshGuy
So along with the 4 cell change they are talking about approving brushless for all classes?
11-28-2006, 06:06 PM
#664
Why should the existing class change to help BL manufacturers have an easier time making their equipment work with existing cells, loads, etc...
Brushless alrady has been provided extra 'wiggle room' within the current rules and is allowed advances that have been held out of brushed motors...how much more of a competitive advantage from a rules standpoint do they need to be provided?
Brushless alrady has been provided extra 'wiggle room' within the current rules and is allowed advances that have been held out of brushed motors...how much more of a competitive advantage from a rules standpoint do they need to be provided?
11-28-2006, 06:39 PM
#665
Tech Elite
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Land of the Free, Home of the Brave
Posts: 2,928
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Originally Posted by Bob-Stormer
Not a valid argument. Why would the average club racer come to a site that has no affiliation with ROAR to read up on ROAR decisions? How would they even know to do that in the first place?
I'm here a LOT, and I didn't even notice Eddie-o's thing until after the election.
Had ballots been collected at the track, WHERE THE RACERS ARE, would have been a good start and would have changed things considerably. To late to change that now though. Although I think for a fair check of the system, perhaps there should be a box you could check that says, "I have no idea who these people are", and did not pick one.
Different debate for a different thread.
I'm here a LOT, and I didn't even notice Eddie-o's thing until after the election.
Had ballots been collected at the track, WHERE THE RACERS ARE, would have been a good start and would have changed things considerably. To late to change that now though. Although I think for a fair check of the system, perhaps there should be a box you could check that says, "I have no idea who these people are", and did not pick one.
Different debate for a different thread.
The statements by the candidates were listed in the Rev up prior to the ballot due date.
11-28-2006, 06:52 PM
#666
If one of the objectives of this discussion is to move people up a class and make room for beginners, I don't understand why the pro/factory guys are allowed to race in the intermediate 19T class. In my opinion if you boot the factory guys to modified where they belong, that frees up 19T for some of the stock masters to move on up - and thereby creating room in stock for less experienced racers.
Where parallel stock, 19t and mod classes exist for both TC and 1/12th, one option is to only allow people to enter one class in 1/12 and one in TC - and they must be the same motor class. With all due respect, when the A final of the intermediate 19T class is mostly the same factory guys driving in the Modified A final, what's the incentive for stock drivers to move to 19T?
As an aside, the rules for modified in Australia now allow 4/5/6 cells to run at 1375/1450/1525 grams respectively. On smaller tracks 5 or even 4 cells will be competitive with 6 cells at the appropriate weight. This decision gives some wiggle room while the ifmar rules take shape, and the brushless manufacturers work out how to deal with the extra voltage. That's an option ROAR could seriously consider for 2007 only...
Where parallel stock, 19t and mod classes exist for both TC and 1/12th, one option is to only allow people to enter one class in 1/12 and one in TC - and they must be the same motor class. With all due respect, when the A final of the intermediate 19T class is mostly the same factory guys driving in the Modified A final, what's the incentive for stock drivers to move to 19T?
As an aside, the rules for modified in Australia now allow 4/5/6 cells to run at 1375/1450/1525 grams respectively. On smaller tracks 5 or even 4 cells will be competitive with 6 cells at the appropriate weight. This decision gives some wiggle room while the ifmar rules take shape, and the brushless manufacturers work out how to deal with the extra voltage. That's an option ROAR could seriously consider for 2007 only...
11-28-2006, 06:56 PM
#667
Originally Posted by scott_g
If one of the objectives of this discussion is to move people up a class and make room for beginners, I don't understand why the pro/factory guys are allowed to race in the intermediate 19T class. In my opinion if you boot the factory guys to modified where they belong, that frees up 19T for some of the stock masters to move on up - and thereby creating room in stock for less experienced racers.
Where parallel stock, 19t and mod classes exist for both TC and 1/12th, one option is to only allow people to enter one class in 1/12 and one in TC - and they must be the same motor class. With all due respect, when the A final of the intermediate 19T class is mostly the same factory guys driving in the Modified A final, what's the incentive for stock drivers to move to 19T?
As an aside, the rules for modified in Australia now allow 4/5/6 cells to run at 1375/1450/1525 grams respectively. On smaller tracks 5 or even 4 cells will be competitive with 6 cells at the appropriate weight. This decision gives some wiggle room while the ifmar rules take shape, and the brushless manufacturers work out how to deal with the extra voltage. That's an option ROAR could seriously consider for 2007 only...
Where parallel stock, 19t and mod classes exist for both TC and 1/12th, one option is to only allow people to enter one class in 1/12 and one in TC - and they must be the same motor class. With all due respect, when the A final of the intermediate 19T class is mostly the same factory guys driving in the Modified A final, what's the incentive for stock drivers to move to 19T?
As an aside, the rules for modified in Australia now allow 4/5/6 cells to run at 1375/1450/1525 grams respectively. On smaller tracks 5 or even 4 cells will be competitive with 6 cells at the appropriate weight. This decision gives some wiggle room while the ifmar rules take shape, and the brushless manufacturers work out how to deal with the extra voltage. That's an option ROAR could seriously consider for 2007 only...
11-28-2006, 07:02 PM
#668
From reading the posts both from here and the EFRA thread, the conclusion I came to is that this rule change is being pushed by one or more Excom members.
The Electric committee members have not reached a conclusion as to the 4 or 5 cell rule change.
Now we need to hear from the Excom people that want this change as to thier reasoning.
So far no definate point has been given. Has this proposed rule change been tested under different conditions, such as carpet with foam and rubber tires. Outdoors with different length tracks, differing weather conditions, different areas of the US, north, south, east, west.
So far the push seems to come only from Florida and only outdoor racing.
What is the time frame for this proposed rule change? Will other areas be given the oportunity to conduct testing also. In the Seattle area its snowing, a more solid form of our normal rainfall,
and we race indoors during the winter months. It will be quite a while for us to be able to test the change outdoors.
This IS a major rule change, we should all be given the oportunity to test before we give you our opinions, for or against.
Fred
The Electric committee members have not reached a conclusion as to the 4 or 5 cell rule change.
Now we need to hear from the Excom people that want this change as to thier reasoning.
So far no definate point has been given. Has this proposed rule change been tested under different conditions, such as carpet with foam and rubber tires. Outdoors with different length tracks, differing weather conditions, different areas of the US, north, south, east, west.
So far the push seems to come only from Florida and only outdoor racing.
What is the time frame for this proposed rule change? Will other areas be given the oportunity to conduct testing also. In the Seattle area its snowing, a more solid form of our normal rainfall,
and we race indoors during the winter months. It will be quite a while for us to be able to test the change outdoors.This IS a major rule change, we should all be given the oportunity to test before we give you our opinions, for or against.
Fred
11-28-2006, 07:08 PM
#669
Originally Posted by C_O_jones
From reading the posts both from here and the EFRA thread, the conclusion I came to is that this rule change is being pushed by one or more Excom members.
The Electric committee members have not reached a conclusion as to the 4 or 5 cell rule change.
Now we need to hear from the Excom people that want this change as to thier reasoning.
So far no definate point has been given. Has this proposed rule change been tested under different conditions, such as carpet with foam and rubber tires. Outdoors with different length tracks, differing weather conditions, different areas of the US, north, south, east, west.
So far the push seems to come only from Florida and only outdoor racing.
What is the time frame for this proposed rule change? Will other areas be given the oportunity to conduct testing also. In the Seattle area its snowing, a more solid form of our normal rainfall, and we race indoors during the winter months. It will be quite a while for us to be able to test the change outdoors.
This IS a major rule change, we should all be given the oportunity to test before we give you our opinions, for or against.
Fred
The Electric committee members have not reached a conclusion as to the 4 or 5 cell rule change.
Now we need to hear from the Excom people that want this change as to thier reasoning.
So far no definate point has been given. Has this proposed rule change been tested under different conditions, such as carpet with foam and rubber tires. Outdoors with different length tracks, differing weather conditions, different areas of the US, north, south, east, west.
So far the push seems to come only from Florida and only outdoor racing.
What is the time frame for this proposed rule change? Will other areas be given the oportunity to conduct testing also. In the Seattle area its snowing, a more solid form of our normal rainfall,
and we race indoors during the winter months. It will be quite a while for us to be able to test the change outdoors.This IS a major rule change, we should all be given the oportunity to test before we give you our opinions, for or against.
Fred
11-28-2006, 07:21 PM
#670
Originally Posted by HarshGuy
FYI, when I went out to Speedworld to test the 6 cell --> 4 cell 19T and stock ..I was going to also test brushless (a 4300 i.e. 19T equivalent), but I didn't have a pinion big enough to get 25% more FDR out of my standard gearing ..I needed a 57 tooth pinion ...which even if I ha I don't think I could have fit in my MRE ...the other optino would have been to change spur to like an 83 with a 46 tooth pinion (biggest pinion I own) ...but then again I don't know that it would be physcally posible on my MRE??
11-28-2006, 07:31 PM
#671
Originally Posted by vtl1180ny
I don't think we'll be seeing 4 cell stock.... It's just painfully slow....
Where you corner marshal a guy and he blips the throttle, and before he can even turn hes' back in the wall, again and again... and again... Smash, smash, smash, break. Anybody that's ever corned a rookie qualifier knows what "marshalcising" is. It's like excercising that's done at the track... Run get a car, and then back to your position and most of the time, before you even get back to your position, it's your turn to run and get a car again, over and over and over...
I might add that 4 cell stock might be to slow for a seasoned racer, but a seasoned racer shouldn't be running 4-cell stock with the noobs.
11-28-2006, 07:44 PM
#672
Originally Posted by Marcos.J
a few of us ran the 4 cell mod on small tracks and ran pretty well, i ran mine at KRaceway during practice at the Region 4 race and in that large track i didnt feel that it ran that well. my .02 (6 cell stock was just as fast)
I'm waiting for a reason for the change, this debate has been all over the place, from blow-ups to bringing in new racers,to sandbaging factory drivers
.
Please give us the courtesy of an explanation towards the rule change.
ROAR is a membership driven organization, get the members involved.
Fred
11-28-2006, 07:46 PM
#673
Pro's in the 19 class is the result of not having enough classes. Before we had 19t, if I wanted to run 2 touring car classes to maximize my race day fun, I had to run stock and mod. Now, with 19, I can run 19 and mod, and free up stock a bit and give others a chance. That's more or less a step in the right direction.
At Cleveland for example, If Paulie want's to run 2 touring car classes, that's the 2 fastest classes there are. Not much can be done about that, yet anyway. He's not sandbaggin' in 19, he's in the 2 fastest classes we have.
We just need to figure out how to open up the gap between the classes, they are to tight and to close. Only 1 lap to be gained by going to the faster class. need to figure out how to get 2-3 laps of gap between the classes.
At Cleveland for example, If Paulie want's to run 2 touring car classes, that's the 2 fastest classes there are. Not much can be done about that, yet anyway. He's not sandbaggin' in 19, he's in the 2 fastest classes we have.
We just need to figure out how to open up the gap between the classes, they are to tight and to close. Only 1 lap to be gained by going to the faster class. need to figure out how to get 2-3 laps of gap between the classes.
11-28-2006, 08:17 PM
#675
Here are some actual race results from touring stock at a club race of ours. Our rookies also run on rubber tires. How do you write a class rule to solve any problems that exist here? When you see the results from a major event like Cleveland, it's easy, as you're running with people of similar speeds and skills. There are not enough people to classify everything and totally make it "fair" at club events. Nobody wants to race by themselves either.
Racer-a just wanted to run 2 touring classes all we had were stock and mod, so wasn't "sandbagging". Racer-e is a seasoned racer, just not turning fast laps.
How about the guy that won the second heat of pro-stock, had to make 37 passes in 5 minutes. And had to pass Racer-j every other lap for 5 minutes.
And even in the rookie class, don't think there wasn't some griping about racer-n being a MAJOR rolling road block... But what can you do? Racer a, b,c, f are generally pretty consistent. The rest can be a bit dicey at times.
How can you make a rule to fit a scenario like this? We've added 19t, and 4-5 of these guys have moved forward, and that's been a big help.
Pro-stock, heat 1
35 5:06.17 Racer-a
32 5:03.08 Racer-b
30 5:08.60 Racer-c
28 5:03.64 Racer-d
26 5:06.95 Racer-e
Pro-stock, heat 2
31 5:02.56 Racer-f
25 5:02.61 Racer-g
25 5:12.28 Racer-h
21 5:05.63 Racer-i
16 2:51.04 Racer-j
Stock-rookie class.
30 5:02.52 Racer-k
26 5:10.27 Racer-l
22 5:05.34 Racer-m
12 5:13.32 Racer-n
Racer-a just wanted to run 2 touring classes all we had were stock and mod, so wasn't "sandbagging". Racer-e is a seasoned racer, just not turning fast laps.
How about the guy that won the second heat of pro-stock, had to make 37 passes in 5 minutes. And had to pass Racer-j every other lap for 5 minutes.
And even in the rookie class, don't think there wasn't some griping about racer-n being a MAJOR rolling road block... But what can you do? Racer a, b,c, f are generally pretty consistent. The rest can be a bit dicey at times.
How can you make a rule to fit a scenario like this? We've added 19t, and 4-5 of these guys have moved forward, and that's been a big help.
Pro-stock, heat 1
35 5:06.17 Racer-a
32 5:03.08 Racer-b
30 5:08.60 Racer-c
28 5:03.64 Racer-d
26 5:06.95 Racer-e
Pro-stock, heat 2
31 5:02.56 Racer-f
25 5:02.61 Racer-g
25 5:12.28 Racer-h
21 5:05.63 Racer-i
16 2:51.04 Racer-j
Stock-rookie class.
30 5:02.52 Racer-k
26 5:10.27 Racer-l
22 5:05.34 Racer-m
12 5:13.32 Racer-n