timmay70

iTrader: (5)

Tamiya shocks are available everywhere in proper quantities, as are pistons that you can drill yourself. You don't even need piston blanks to drill your own... I think as long as the parts are available to the masses, it should be good to go. Who is going to complain about the pretty bevel washers people put under their screws for the bling factor.

The parts that really count are the one-off parts that nobody else has access to.

I think another thing that falls into the grey area if the drill your own piston do... What about drilling new shock or camber link locations in your stock shock towers? I know several other racers that race in the a-main at the national level that have done that in the past.

I can almost agree with the firmware in ESCs though.

DLS II

Please look at the car. ALL the parts are or were available at the LHS. I am NOT a manufacturer. There is nothing about the car that a normal hobbiest can't do. Please tell me how it is less costly to force me to buy a new speed control when the one on the car (CC Sidewinder)won't run a "stock" 17.5 motor properly. Delta wind motors of the same performance as a 17.5 should be allowed in "stock". The WYE wind nonsense was put into place by one manufacturer-resulting in more costly racing in "stock" class. Your statement that none of the parts are stock is superfluous. They can all be found to be from one manufacturer or another and are/were available. There are NO specialty parts on the car. As for whether or not I am a "tool"?, I have been playing with RC cars since before ROAR existed. I am happy to play by a GOOD set of rules. I am not an engineer-simply a hobbiest. As for whether or my car would compete at National levels, irrelevant. I simply want the chance to compete PERIOD. Don

flatspunout

iTrader: (38)

Run a 27T brushed, there is no rule that states you MUST run brushless

If cost is really an issue, then RC racing (like ANY form of racing) probably isn't for you...try stamp collecting.

While I certainly don't agree with everything ROAR does, I choose to abide by their rules because I do believe that they create a fair and level playing field for everyone. If you think ROAR should conform to the way YOU want to run just because you have been playing with RC cars longer than the organization has been around, you are just being a brat. If you want changes made to the rules, you can contact Dawn on this forum and request changes. The reduction in TC weight for 2009 came about from a discussion here, so don't say "oh that won't work they are all out to get us and our money"...or create your own sanctioning body and do your own thing if you think your ideas are so much better. Otherwise, if you want the chance to compete, you can run a class that ROAR recognizes just like everyone else does and compete by the same rules that everyone else does.

-rocky b

seaball

iTrader: (9)

indeed.

the current rules provide for just that, provided you don't limit yourself to the stock class. all they're trying to do, is keep a single class reserved for people who don't have the time, money, or handyman skills, to create new parts from scratch (and that's probably where to draw the line). if it comes from a raw material, it's not going to be legal. if it's a hacked up, commercially available part, it's probably fine.

let's not split hairs over the particulars. it's a sound rule. if you're curious to see how your designs do, and you can't wheel worth a d#*n, get someone who can, and put them in superstock or mod. the faster the car, the better the test.

fyi - (i used to think this was a stupid rule as well, until i looked beyond my own race program).

this one, i just couldn't pass up. (all in good fun)

niznai

Ahem.
Actually I think this kind of rule is just protecting the interests of companies. Otherwise they wouldn't specify "parts need to be readily available" which instead of allowing people with big money to battle it out allows companies with big money to battle it out. Oh, hang on, companies with big money are people with big money! Dang.

You need to be naive to believe rules are made to alllow little people to go racing with their own designs. They're there to level out the playing field for companies and the people they sponsor to the point that a lot of hobbyists themselves take headlines seriously these days and claim "Tamiya has won this and that" "Tekin has won this and that" which is just not true. Marc Reinhardt, Andy Moore, etc win, not Tamiya, HB or whatever. But so insidious is the corporate power, the person is faded in the background and subliminally we are convinced it is the company, and their product that wins rather than the driver skill.

Sure, without some rules you can imagine someone will put a pile of money into a car and win outright everything. (If they had the right driver that is). But I think controlling motors, batteries and tires is enough if you're really honest about levelling the field in the interest of racers and not companies. Anything above that is just companies battling it out behind us and it's a money war we get often sucked in without even knowing it.

Sure, we can look at the feedback loop which ensures big companies further develop the technology because they are interested in the results, and us all benefitting from that, spending our money which in turn creates profit for the big companies so they can further develop the hobby, etc. I agree, it's necessary, but it still doesn't validate the rules that basically keep the little innovator out or forces them to join an established company (or create one if they have the money) if they want to put their ideas into practice.

There are countries int he world and sports where honest regulating bodies have drawn rules that indeed keep costs at a bare minimum and attract people in sport in droves. And guess what? There's no companies making any profit or sponsoring anything.

DLS II

27T brushed is done. Cost is always an issue, if not let's have $2000 TC's. As for whether or not I'm being a "brat"-1. that's not up to you 2 please stick to the issue. As for "oh that won't work they are all out to get us and our money"-not my words thank you very much. I'm happy to play by the rules when they don't discriminate or stifle innovation by the hobbiest. I chose "stock" class because of the lower speeds and the ability to make a FWD car hook up without excessive wheelspin. Yes, finding someone to drive is probably a good idea. And yes I would enjoy Dawn's perspective! Don

Scott B

iTrader: (47)

DLS II, you keep bringing up "cost" of racing. Why would you spend money to go to a ROAR race spending the money on a fight, hotel, rental car, food, entry fee, spec tires, and time away from work when you are most likely going to get your a$$ handed to you since your car is only FWD and you would be racing against 4WD cars?? That dosen't some to "cost" effective to me.

The rules are there weather you agree with them or not, if you don't like them maybe you can go race in a Tamiya TCS race they have a FWD class I think, oh wait sorry more rules that won't allow that, SORRY.

niznai

Don't we already?

DLS II

Scott, you're right-because it's a relevant point! Even if I go to a local club race they are likely to run under some form of ROAR rules(even if they aren't associated with ROAR) and some weisenhiemer is going to protest my car! As for a FWD competing against a 4WD, it would definitely be a challenge! As for TCS-none close enough to go. Don

seaball

iTrader: (9)

stock - over the counter
superstock - innovate as desired
modified - innovate as desired

wouldn't logic have it that the group that gets the majority of class options be the one that's catered to?

why is everyone locking onto this stock thing?

btw - if you can't drive superstock, you're not going to be any good in stock either. plain and simple. if you don't get it, the motor doesn't really matter. (the exception being for someone who's early in the learning curve, and just needs little time first).

this discussion is so stupidly out of control. guess what, nobody is going to complain over the car that was posted, i promise.

niznai

I am not sure I understand what you mean.

I think viceversa is true as well, therefore I would say if there's a motor you can't drive, then you can not drive at all, or as you said, the motor doesn't count if you have the ability to drive. The motor however is a limiting factor on performance, that's all. That's why I suggested it is a good criteria to divide and control classes by its specs (but not other specs to do with availability or originality of parts used in car construction).

seaball

iTrader: (9)

i was hoping this would have garnered more attention.

HellTriX

iTrader: (1)

I just had to reply to this when I read it.
You see to already know me well
I had all these ideas in my head when I decided to get into touring and some guys trying to talk me into pan cars when the main reason I was wanting to do touring is because there are much more variables to work with. Using my experience in scientific method and iterations of small steps in variables I could not only test what works on the track, but I could also test individual variables. As an example, as you implied, I could take a given motor for instance, set it up with a known gear ratio and test acceleration of the car on a single stretch of track and I could make timed acceleration runs. This could then be compared with another motor of the same class to identify which motor might be best for instantaneous acceleration of either low,mid, or high speed runs. Not only this, you could use a simple min/max formula to add up the degree of turns and straights to identify the best way to gear the car given how long you need full speed vs acceleration out of corners.

So in this respect I could use my experience in physics to work through every variable of the car one or two at a time for motors, gearing, suspension, etc. Could write some simple formulas to use as baseline setups for new tracks by calculating the degree of the turns, how many, how long the straights are, etc.

One reason I wanted to make my own chassis, is that I have been working on full scale project cars all my life. And one major project I was going to undertake soon was to build my very own full size car. I planned to make it electric drive with a massive battery tray that could be unpinned and slid out from under the car for swapping between charge packs. I also have a 600hp 1966 Impala that I have done 100% of the work on including the 387ci small block chevy motor pushing almost 600hp and over 550ft-lbs of torque. Its so powerful it is even a bit too powerful for drag racing since I haven't addressed the suspension yet. I was going to design my own upper/lower A-arms and adjustable caster/camber brackets for the front suspension. So I thought it might be nice to start on a 1/10th scale to make sure all my knowledge in geometry, physics, and real world experience is at least close to what I think it is.

At this point I have purchased a TC5R used from someone on the forum so I guess I will start there. If I really enjoy the hobby, there is a good possibility I will go ahead with my own scratch build. And if its comparable to today's cars I will consider building a few prototypes for people to test out. If it gets good reviews, maybe I can start another company and try to drop the prices to make this hobby a bit cheaper for the new guys As you said, you don't see the value in these radios and ESC's let me tell you this. I totally agree.

An example of this: A 2000 amp motor controller for an electric vehicle is around $3500 bucks. A 500 amp motor controller in the 96-144volt range is about $1475.00.... I built my own 1500amp motor controller for $130-140 in parts. It was my own design from scratch. It has a few safety futures and even a current limiter. Now I do realize I have probably $4000-5000 in design/prototype build labor, but that's basicly all done now. If I started selling these in a new startup company. I don't see any problem with selling them at like $450-500. For this price I could probably afford to rent a corner of someones office building hit hard by the economy and even higher Americans to assemble them and pay for the materials and the lights. And still probably manage enough profits to expand to other things. Our 1/10th ESC's have about $17-22 in parts in them. Everything from casing, heat sinks, mosfets, programmable chips. If they are completely hand assembled and soldered. With experience, I would estimate you can do one every 3-5 minutes. At $6 bucks an hr wages (just throwing out a random number) this is 40 cents labor per ESC? So yes, someone is putting $100+ in profits into their bank per unit. I guess we can see why there are still quite a few different ESCs and manufactures on the market.

I got a bit winded so I will end here. And go read the posts after this one that I replyed too :P

Thanks again for all the good discussion.