this is something that i've been waiting for all the internet jagoffs to screw up the perception of the situation on, and hence, my decision to offer a comment on these usually, brutal threads.
here's the deal: if you don't race competitively, don't comment on the rules that govern those who do.
seriously. we know you're bored, but that's just dumb. offer some insight, and then go away. if you vote for "no rules" you have no business discussing organized
racing. this doesn't pertain to you, and it's not likely to. ever.
the problem is that these forums are a lazy way for people (even governing bodies) to get answers/trends.. and they are (from what i can see) not very accurate to those who actually will be governed by them (roar racers do NOT make up much of the 8-billion rctech users). i know. surprise.
it is too early to know how much (if any) to lower the weight. and there's no real harm in running a year with mixed sticks to see how it goes.
the lower coupla grams isn't going to save parts or tires. a big (easily acheivable limit) will allow mfr's to put material back into the suspension and other brittle areas that have given touring car a black eye. that will go much further than shaving 1-200g off a chassis. go ahead, argue the physics. your rdx arms are going to break at 5mph i don't care if you're running lipo.
additionally, we might not all be running carbon copies of the original 415 if we had more room to move balast around to use as a tuning aid. as it is, that's pretty much all we have to work with...
as the batteries pack more energy in them, they get (what?) heavier. it used to be somewhat easy to make weight (especially on foam tires). now? with 4500's, b/l esc's, RW bodies, it's almost not happening no matter what chassis you run. awesome. so, now that plays into what chassis you get for the season. do you logically expect that a change in battery technology will not be subject to the same type of improvements over time (and the corresponding side effects)? come on, guys. where there's a will.. (and a market)
you want to buy $100 titanium screws that strip out to make weight? then you're an idiot and your vote should be weighted as such. (you probably already have aluminum screws holding your bulkheads into the chassis).
here's a dremel to get the studs back out, kid. and by the way, that's why you didn't finish a single qualifier at the roar nats
look, it's going lipo and it has nothing to do with weight. they are at the beginning of their development in our application, and they will be the thing to race by the end of the season (is my guess). so, don't make it an alterior motive by using some other parameter to act as a catalyst in the process.
remember, the rules are for those who want to race. and the consensus is that racing needs to be cheaper to keep people into this. going low on the weight only encourages exotic materials ($), cnc designs ($), and brittle cars ($) to be used on the track. we got rid of the "brittle" bodies with the GBS rules, let's not do the opposite when it comes to the chassis.
consider this: this whole issue shouldn't expose anyone's personal agenda. it's about what will make the future of racing more able to be done at a higher level by more people. keep people on the track, with cheaper kits. leave the high $ parts to the concours guys or those who just like the attention.
let your club modify the rules for the backyard stuff. as for roar, treat your racers as what they are (paying members): focused guys that want a ruleset that will provide some room (stability) as the equipment itself sees constant changes.
man, don't screw this up because you're bored or you you have some personal hatred for soldering (take that out on intellect or their loyal supporters).
i see no need to jump in with both feet on this whole issue. so let's all repeat the same things over and over in hopes that someone is keeping a tally of which side you personally are on....
oh and let's also digress to whatever else you want to complain about.
- gerry ashford -