rcterp

iTrader: (35)

Apex - it looks like the sarcasm fell on deaf ears..... nice try though.

snoopyrc

iTrader: (2)

I agree with you on all counts, but adding that powerplant wasnt what Doug mentioned. He was talking about making it the only option. Your choices would be take it or leave it. It doesnt matter since I think he was joking.
Does a 23.5 even exist? It shouldnt be to hard to come up with if you had some mfr support. Just build a Novak 21.5 and go around two more times.
If the motor really existed and was readily available, I would actually think it was a good idea. However the class has a lot of momentum as it is and 21.5 lipo will likely be the standard if the rules are just left the way they are.

BIG JIM WOODMAN

iTrader: (86)

I know Doug was just joking but his comment hit a nerve. I read this thread every day and it's almost always about the motor options. I'd like to hear some "how to's" about vta tire mounting, body painting or maybe even start a Concourse section.

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

Jim.

There's a VTA tuning thread and a VTA paint and body thread around here somewhere. I'd like to see the tuning one get used some more myself.

StoneMan

I agree. I have just completed this for the TA class at the Novak Race.
I believe this to be the "spirit" of the class as I interpret it.
The chassis is a 415 MSX that my son campaigned before the 416
Battery is an Orion 3400 Lipo from this years TCS NA finals
21.5 Novak Brushless with a GTB
Valvoline scheme is what I think it would look like if Valvoline raced in this series in the early 70's
As soon as I get sticker sheets from Wallstreet it will be finished
You don't have to be Vintage to know Vintage................but it helps

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

Beautiful paint and sticker work! I see no sign of flames, bubbles or drips. Very nice indeed.

reenmachine

iTrader: (26)

Careful -- ask too many tuning questions and you'll be accused of caring about your car's performance, and there's a segment of the population here that considers that to be against the "spirit" of VTA...

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

Um... what's timing? (pours oil on fire)

BIG JIM WOODMAN

iTrader: (86)

Thanks, I know those threads exist. However, there is very little "how to" in those. I think I was just trying to change the subject at the time. Big Jim

sterling moss

iTrader: (25)

Rushing to create equivalents as we given new technology has always been a problem. I experienced this when brushless was new to the hobby...the club I raced at had 13.5 running in 1/12 stock..unless you had the "new stuff" you were just trying to keep out of the way. Later on ROAR announced 17.5 as the equivalent...that worked better and everyone in the class now has a reasonable chance to "compete".
The 21.5 Lipo spec is just a repeat of trying to fit "new stuff" into a class.
I would expect that ROAR has more resources and done more testing than anyone. I'm satisfied with ROAR's eqivalence spec of 17.5 and 27T..both using 4 cells. The fact that ROAR does not endorse 21.5 Lipo/2S as an equivalent to 27T and 17.5 4 cell should be reason enough to not paint outside the lines. When a 4 cell replacement comes available, I'll run 'em...untill then I can wait.
-To be clear... I'm not "anti-lipo" I'm for class parity.
Yes, I race TA...It's easily my favorite class. I don't need blinding speed to have a fun race and I don't mind working on my car. (I'm running 4 cell 17.5) I just want to put a race car down that's "apples to apples" with my competition. Maybe you guys just need a category 2 class to appease the Lipo folks...It'd be cool to run a Vintage Vette or Porsche!

ammdrew

iTrader: (25)

That is not entirly acurate.

ROAR's provisional rule package for VTA is identical to USVTA with exception to specing the size of the tire instead of stating its manufacturer.

They do not state they are equal just allowed to run in the class.

sterling moss

iTrader: (25)

I stand corrected ...I guess.
Honestly it's a bit of a letdown knowing that ROAR would have unequal cars competing. Isn't it much of their purpose to write rules and test equipment to keep racing competitive? Seems to go directly against that line of thinking.

Add: I can't agree with the FDR method of equating equivalents. Anyone with some exposure to science can see the flaws in such a method. A weight(grams) to power(Watts) ratio is the proper approach. I can see all the problems that would create too, run time, setup, room for ballast on a crowded chassis.
-
square peg round hole.
-

IndyRC_Racer

iTrader: (9)

Not sure how everyone else has been mounting their tires, but I take a few extra minutes to remove the plating on the wheel where I'm going to glue. I've found that the tires stay glued to the wheel much better by getting down to the plastic. I've noticed otherwise that the plating gets glued to the tire and pulls off from the wheel. I normally use the 5-spoke matte finish wheels and they seem to hold up really well.

I'd be interested to hear how the other plastic (non-plated) vintage wheels hold up to racing.

liljohn1064

iTrader: (17)

Read back a few pages or from the beginning. Its been gone over many times. I think ROAR will be running ONLY the 21.5 Lipo combo at Regional and National levels. I may be wrong, but probably not. ROAR's rules are adopted from the USVTA standards. There are 3 motors each having approved power sources. If you read the rules section of the USVTA website you will see what you can and cannot run. Local rules can override that, but don't expect someone with a 21.5 to grace your track and don't cry foul when you go race at another track who does use that spec. And seriously, what your stating has been gone over every few pages from the beginning.

Happy reading!

sterling moss

iTrader: (25)

Thanks for the clairification. I'll research more. We have a couple local racers that want us to run 21.5, currently we only run the 4 cell combos. Running seperate- no problem. If I'm gonna travel I find out what their running first.
Thanks, Mike