62LikesLet's talk modified 1/12
09-12-2016, 10:58 AM
#361
Hopefully not a battery limit. I don't want to turn marshal a car with lipo fire.
Every thing else can be managed in some way.
We should not change it from un-drivable fast to un-drivable slow. We should try to find the middle way.
On the end the decision should be made by the manufacturers and the drivers. The governing body's should take the outcome of this discussion and review it every other year.
This will keep the class interesting and the racers will get a feeling that there thoughts are heared.
Every thing else can be managed in some way.
We should not change it from un-drivable fast to un-drivable slow. We should try to find the middle way.
On the end the decision should be made by the manufacturers and the drivers. The governing body's should take the outcome of this discussion and review it every other year.
This will keep the class interesting and the racers will get a feeling that there thoughts are heared.
09-12-2016, 11:14 AM
#363
17.5 = 8.6
13.5 = 8.1
6.5 = 7.6
The layout was a short straight and tight infield.
On a larger flowing layout I could see it being 1.1 to 1.2 seconds faster.
That seems to be a pretty good spread.
Maybe this week we could have a guy who's been testing 6.5 Blinky put his 3.5 back in and see the difference in lap times and driveability. I can't see it being more than .1 to .2 seconds faster.
09-12-2016, 11:40 AM
#366
Tech Regular
Steve
09-12-2016, 11:44 AM
#367
I would be very surprised if it's still around next season. Of course, I'm counting (hoping) on the grass roots movement spurring change from the bottom on up.
09-12-2016, 12:15 PM
#368
I spot checked different manufacture's motors and saw 3.5 was a pretty fair number.
In oval, TOUR did the same thing with 10.5 motors.
Minimum resistance is 7.7 and that's it.
Doesn't get much easier than that
09-12-2016, 12:27 PM
#369
Then there is this.....posted over at Redrc "Following the recent change to the BRCA National classes, the Shootout Series offers the same classes for LMP12 cars with 13.5 blinky as the Stock class and 6.5 blinky as the revised Modified category. The switch to 6.5 blinky in place of Open Modified appears to have bolstered entries for all events, with nearly 3-times more competitors signing up to race this class than when it was run as open motor and speedo previously."
Isn't this what we want at the end of the day.
Steve
Isn't this what we want at the end of the day.
Steve
09-13-2016, 06:31 AM
#371
Tech Rookie
Itīs not mod that need to be fixed, itīs the classes between 17.5 and mod.
Also, the first BRCA meeting with 6.5 was crowded. Thatīs normal for a new race format. After a few races drivers will realize the fast guys are still on top. I bet numbers will drop during the season.
09-13-2016, 07:58 AM
#372
Tech Master
iTrader: (17)
While I understand your point I think it would create serious issues with gapping that the current motor gap does not have. So while you may be trying to solve one problem it really doesn't solve anything. Isn't the ultimate goal of having faster classes to do faster lap times? Seems to me like a system that has almost uniform gaps from stock-mod is pretty good as is.
09-13-2016, 08:12 AM
#373
Interesting point, I wonder why you would suggest this? If you look at lap times most places that have ran 17.5/13.5/6.5 all on the same layout with the same(ish) driver it appears as if there is a nice gapping of times, somewhere between .4-.6 seconds per class. So now if you take out 13.5 and change it to open mod you go 17.5/6.5/3.5boosted you end up with laptimes that have a .8-1.2 second faster lap to the intermediate speed, and then to open mod I can only imagine most people would go no faster, and even the ones that do would be what .2-.4 faster?
While I understand your point I think it would create serious issues with gapping that the current motor gap does not have. So while you may be trying to solve one problem it really doesn't solve anything. Isn't the ultimate goal of having faster classes to do faster lap times? Seems to me like a system that has almost uniform gaps from stock-mod is pretty good as is.
While I understand your point I think it would create serious issues with gapping that the current motor gap does not have. So while you may be trying to solve one problem it really doesn't solve anything. Isn't the ultimate goal of having faster classes to do faster lap times? Seems to me like a system that has almost uniform gaps from stock-mod is pretty good as is.
09-13-2016, 08:12 AM
#374
Single fast laps in mod (while exhilarating) don't usually make for good racing
FEW club racers are faster in 8m running a 3.5, than with a 17. or 13.5
The gaps in classes over 8m should be more telling than a single fast lap
Fastest racers always going to win in any class, obviously, so ?
What's the point if there are less than a handfull who can stay on the lead lap in the country
And even less who will sign up to race mod locally
Does mod die, or get a face lift ?
The masses need to get together on a direction for the next few years at least
FEW club racers are faster in 8m running a 3.5, than with a 17. or 13.5
The gaps in classes over 8m should be more telling than a single fast lap
Fastest racers always going to win in any class, obviously, so ?
What's the point if there are less than a handfull who can stay on the lead lap in the country
And even less who will sign up to race mod locally
Does mod die, or get a face lift ?
The masses need to get together on a direction for the next few years at least
09-13-2016, 08:47 AM
#375
Suspended
Kinda bummed about the 6.5 movement. Just got my 3.5 in the mail. Was looking forward to racing it this winter.