Classic US Vintage Trans Am Racing
01-07-2010, 05:58 AM
#76
Here is what are going to be the "classic" Rules as far as what is the current rule set which will be eliminated in Sept 2010 for motors:
The track that I mainly run VTA at is going to run both sets of rules. So I may just pickup both and let my daughter run the slower stuff. Its a tight track, so it wouldn't shock me if I could get lap times close.
Motor Specifications:
Option 1: 27-turn ROAR stock motor: No FDR limit, bearings are not allowed.
Option 2: 17.5 brushless: Motor timing advance is allowed. 12.5 mm rotor diameter maximum (no "tuning" rotors are allowed).
Option 3: 21.5 brushless with 2C LiPo: Novak SS21.5 Pro brushless motor (pn:3421)or Ballistic 21.5 (pn:3621) ONLY combined with any ROAR-approved hard-cased 2C 7.4v LiPo pack up to and including 5000 mAh capacity. Novak motor is the ONLY motor allowed at this time. All house track rules regarding LiPo usage apply. Final drive ratio is to not exceed 4.2. Motor timing advance is allowed. 12.5 mm rotor diameter maximum (no "tuning" rotors are allowed).
Battery Specifications:
4 cell NiCd or NiMh batteries, 4600 mAh limit
2 cell ROAR-approved LiPo hard cased, 5000 mAh limit (21.5 brushless motor option ONLY)
Option 1: 27-turn ROAR stock motor: No FDR limit, bearings are not allowed.
Option 2: 17.5 brushless: Motor timing advance is allowed. 12.5 mm rotor diameter maximum (no "tuning" rotors are allowed).
Option 3: 21.5 brushless with 2C LiPo: Novak SS21.5 Pro brushless motor (pn:3421)or Ballistic 21.5 (pn:3621) ONLY combined with any ROAR-approved hard-cased 2C 7.4v LiPo pack up to and including 5000 mAh capacity. Novak motor is the ONLY motor allowed at this time. All house track rules regarding LiPo usage apply. Final drive ratio is to not exceed 4.2. Motor timing advance is allowed. 12.5 mm rotor diameter maximum (no "tuning" rotors are allowed).
Battery Specifications:
4 cell NiCd or NiMh batteries, 4600 mAh limit
2 cell ROAR-approved LiPo hard cased, 5000 mAh limit (21.5 brushless motor option ONLY)
01-07-2010, 09:33 PM
#78
Now I am absolutely no expert on this. I am new to VTA (I just built my car and am waiting on batteries to run). I have watched for several weeks and talked to a lot of my local clubs racers before deciding to purchase my equipment. Every one I talked too said go with the 21.5/lipo combo. The guys running 4 cell were saying that they were out powered by the lipo guys. Some have tried, with great success, 5 cell NiMH to help level off the playing field.
I believe the new rules are good and bad. Good part is for the new racer wanting in and has a lot of decisions made up for them. This in turn keeps the over all cost down. They also keep the racing close and the winners decided on by skill. Bad part is people like myself just spent lot of money on new equipment that can't be used next year thus making an affordable race class expensive. However it is almost too late for these kinds of limitations.
The easiest way to add rules and keep cost down would be to say no boost or timing adjusting via esc and up the NiMH cell count to 5 cells with no mah limit. That way people who want or need to run NiMH batteries can do so inexpensively. Also open the motor and esc option up to any manufacturer. As it sits right now it looks to be a class run by Novak disguised as an impartial sanctioning body, but thats just me.
LiPo batteries are cheaper to own and maintain then NiMH. Any experienced racer will tell you this. NiMH need lots of maintenance and TLC. I've seen thousands of dollars invested in NiMH batteries and their chargers, power supplies, discharges, battery conditioners and the shear volume of them needed to run on race day. Hell who says that the stock 27 turn motors are cheap. They can run upwards of $50 themselves. Add that to the cost of a good brushed esc.
These adjustments to the rules should keep more people happy then the new rules do. But we all know that we can't make everyone happy. Somebody is always going to complain.
I believe the new rules are good and bad. Good part is for the new racer wanting in and has a lot of decisions made up for them. This in turn keeps the over all cost down. They also keep the racing close and the winners decided on by skill. Bad part is people like myself just spent lot of money on new equipment that can't be used next year thus making an affordable race class expensive. However it is almost too late for these kinds of limitations.
The easiest way to add rules and keep cost down would be to say no boost or timing adjusting via esc and up the NiMH cell count to 5 cells with no mah limit. That way people who want or need to run NiMH batteries can do so inexpensively. Also open the motor and esc option up to any manufacturer. As it sits right now it looks to be a class run by Novak disguised as an impartial sanctioning body, but thats just me.
LiPo batteries are cheaper to own and maintain then NiMH. Any experienced racer will tell you this. NiMH need lots of maintenance and TLC. I've seen thousands of dollars invested in NiMH batteries and their chargers, power supplies, discharges, battery conditioners and the shear volume of them needed to run on race day. Hell who says that the stock 27 turn motors are cheap. They can run upwards of $50 themselves. Add that to the cost of a good brushed esc.
These adjustments to the rules should keep more people happy then the new rules do. But we all know that we can't make everyone happy. Somebody is always going to complain.
01-09-2010, 08:05 PM
#79
Also open the motor and esc option up to any manufacturer. As it sits right now it looks to be a class run by Novak disguised as an impartial sanctioning body, but thats just me.
LiPo batteries are cheaper to own and maintain then NiMH. Any experienced racer will tell you this. NiMH need lots of maintenance and TLC. I've seen thousands of dollars invested in NiMH batteries and their chargers, power supplies, discharges, battery conditioners and the shear volume of them needed to run on race day. Hell who says that the stock 27 turn motors are cheap. They can run upwards of $50 themselves. Add that to the cost of a good brushed esc.
These adjustments to the rules should keep more people happy then the new rules do. But we all know that we can't make everyone happy. Somebody is always going to complain.
LiPo batteries are cheaper to own and maintain then NiMH. Any experienced racer will tell you this. NiMH need lots of maintenance and TLC. I've seen thousands of dollars invested in NiMH batteries and their chargers, power supplies, discharges, battery conditioners and the shear volume of them needed to run on race day. Hell who says that the stock 27 turn motors are cheap. They can run upwards of $50 themselves. Add that to the cost of a good brushed esc.
These adjustments to the rules should keep more people happy then the new rules do. But we all know that we can't make everyone happy. Somebody is always going to complain.
There is truelly a small group running the masses. The Class could be slowed down - no arguements there.
There was a comparison to Nascar, one of the guys made. It was totally off base!! LMAO It was funny as hell!!
It wouldn't be as big today if they didn't have such a manufacture war in the earlier days. The Old saying used to be: "What wins on Sunday, sells on Monday."
Since the COT rules were implemented, There has been a drop in attendance by crowds. Restrictor plate racing has become a bore to watch and has been nothing but wrecks.
In addition, nothing about the newer cars make people want to buy that model of car since they can't buy it at the show room.
There was also a comparison to Indy car. Another joke!! The class has had nothing but problems since the late 70's/80's.
I like the class, but foresee it dying off and becoming a local class only with local rules.
01-09-2010, 08:23 PM
#80
The POINT to the comparison was that NASCAR doesn't take a vote on rules changes. Ever. And it is 100% THE biggest form of motorsport in the USA. And that Formula One is the biggest form of motorsport in the entire world, and they take exactly as many "votes" on rules changes. Yup, never.
The "comparison" was exactly your point...Indy Car/CART has been a disaster, largely because owners were making the rules, voting self-interest ahead of what was right for "the show", etc. Along with ONE track owner (Indy, go figure) making unreasonable demands.
01-10-2010, 07:43 AM
#81
1) Ferarri has been influencing FIA rules for 40 years - go ask David Hobbs about that.
2) Don't forget what happened last F1 season. Most of the major manufactures started their own organization and planned to quit the FIA over disagreements in new rules for 2010. The FIA backed down to keep the teams in Formula 1.
3) Who gives a damn - the business models are different. Comparing real race series to RC racing is like comparing the NFL to this:
2) Don't forget what happened last F1 season. Most of the major manufactures started their own organization and planned to quit the FIA over disagreements in new rules for 2010. The FIA backed down to keep the teams in Formula 1.
3) Who gives a damn - the business models are different. Comparing real race series to RC racing is like comparing the NFL to this:
01-10-2010, 07:57 AM
#82
LOL .. somewhat of a good point.
However, in restrictor plate racing, it was designed for everything is 'closer' & 'safer' racing. Now the racers complain about it and the fans now mainly watch those events waiting for the crashes. It really isn't a 'Good' race. There are a few similarities there.
All Hail, the 'VTA Ceaser'
However, in restrictor plate racing, it was designed for everything is 'closer' & 'safer' racing. Now the racers complain about it and the fans now mainly watch those events waiting for the crashes. It really isn't a 'Good' race. There are a few similarities there.
All Hail, the 'VTA Ceaser'
01-10-2010, 08:26 AM
#83
WHAT did the F-1 teams threaten to leave over? COST CONTAINMENT!! The F-1 wanted to create specific expenditure limits, the teams objected to those limits and felt it was important enough to bail over. Kind of exactly the opposite of what we have in USVTA (supposedly). The "teams" are whining that having to buy (MAYBE) a less fully-functioned esc and motor are going to break them and keep them out of racing.
That said, if your RC racing isn't any closer to "real" racing than "vibro-football" is to NFL then I'd suggest your group might be better suited to SINGLE cell / 25.5. I've seen those "vibro-football" folks race...most folks call it "Novice Class". Put 'em on the grid, sound the buzzer, and off they go in whatever direction they happen to be aimed in when the trigger is pulled.
01-10-2010, 09:06 AM
#84
That said, if your RC racing isn't any closer to "real" racing than "vibro-football" is to NFL then I'd suggest your group might be better suited to SINGLE cell / 25.5. I've seen those "vibro-football" folks race...most folks call it "Novice Class". Put 'em on the grid, sound the buzzer, and off they go in whatever direction they happen to be aimed in when the trigger is pulled.
01-10-2010, 09:38 AM
#85
I'm just providing an alternate viewpoint from your own - no reason to insult my club's collective driving skill. That was mean.
My point is that league authorities and participants in every successful activity (professional or amateur) work together to establish an effective rules system. If the rules package slants in one direction, you will hear complaints. Right now the complaints are about money, but in September they might increase to include racing quality from non-A main drivers.
This comes up because the USVTA only got A main drivers to test the proposed equipment. B and C main guys should have also been involved.
Most A main drivers are willing to spend cash on racing and are more likely to max out their car's potential. The other 75% or so drivers in the B and C mains aren't as likely to spend more money - they just want to have a bit of fun while staying within their means. And these changes might make them even less competitive if they do spend the additional cash. This leads to frustration and lost racers to other classes.
Somebody should have tapped into the perspectives of the novice VTA racer.* The lower skilled, less funded drivers should have gotten a "vote." Or a lobbyist.
* If they did, my apologies. What was their feedback and how did their lap times change with the 25.5 motor?
My point is that league authorities and participants in every successful activity (professional or amateur) work together to establish an effective rules system. If the rules package slants in one direction, you will hear complaints. Right now the complaints are about money, but in September they might increase to include racing quality from non-A main drivers.
This comes up because the USVTA only got A main drivers to test the proposed equipment. B and C main guys should have also been involved.
Most A main drivers are willing to spend cash on racing and are more likely to max out their car's potential. The other 75% or so drivers in the B and C mains aren't as likely to spend more money - they just want to have a bit of fun while staying within their means. And these changes might make them even less competitive if they do spend the additional cash. This leads to frustration and lost racers to other classes.
Somebody should have tapped into the perspectives of the novice VTA racer.* The lower skilled, less funded drivers should have gotten a "vote." Or a lobbyist.
* If they did, my apologies. What was their feedback and how did their lap times change with the 25.5 motor?
01-10-2010, 10:38 AM
#86
Tech Initiate
It dont pay to argue anymore with the USVTA. They are not a demorcratic group but run it more like a dictatorship. 
01-10-2010, 02:54 PM
#87
Ever notice how there is never a constructive conversation? It always ends up with a 'VTA Ceaser' trying to slam someone.
If people don't agree with a thread, then stay off of it. How simple is that?
Hopefully this thread will get back on track allowing, and organizing people and clubs the option to run a 'Classic' set of rules without further disruption.
Darkside, I wish we were closer to come race. The event sounds awesome!! Good luck!!
01-10-2010, 03:29 PM
#88
heh, u gotta have a vintage version of the vintage class. good grief.
no1 is allowed to have a pt? c'mon. Where were u guys when roar came in with its big ass falice and swung it around and knocked every1 outta the class with its 'version' of vintage?
R
no1 is allowed to have a pt? c'mon. Where were u guys when roar came in with its big ass falice and swung it around and knocked every1 outta the class with its 'version' of vintage?
R
01-10-2010, 04:24 PM
#89
Best of luck.
