R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-29-2017, 05:35 PM   #16
Tech Champion
 
nexxus's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 8,015
Trader Rating: 301 (100%+)
Default

I think the rule setters need to step back and let the classes run as they are, over here there were some proposals to impliment control motors in 21.5 and 13.5 blinky TC which got a fair few noses out of joint, the proposals were voted down by the clubs but as the 21.5 proposal was only 'just' defeated there is chatter that it will resurface, and the feeling I have is that it will continue to do so until they push it through. I know from people I race with it's discouraged people from 21.5, 2 years ago we were at 10-15 cars at a major event for the class, now we're down to maybe 7 or 8 at best and for some the reason is these continually changing rules. Having tested the proposed control motors, dyno'd them against the usual motors we'd run, it'd make for a very depressing race. Lap times were 4-5 seconds a lap slower and with the enforced FDR the motor got hot as it was at max rpm 10 metres into a 200-300m straight. On the dyno, a Motiv 21.5 yields around 110W @ 2s, a basic Trackstar V1 21.5 is around 100W, the latest and greatest motors push 120W, the Justock 21.5 (which is the only real control motor option) is just on 80W. That's a lot of power to give up.

Let the guys race, let those that race the class make the rules, don't leave it to a modified driver to draft rules for sportsman etc. Encourage juniors / new entries, discourage sponsored drivers particularly in control or lower tier classes. Sorry but if you're good enough to be sponsored (and I mean sponsored in ANY sense where you are thanking a brand on your acceptance speach to having them on your rctech signature) then you should be running the top class period. Make it clear at drivers briefings what the rules and expectations are. But above all the emphasis should be on fun, this is a hobby but a hobby which seems to be becoming more and more commercially influenced on a daily basis, we need to have clubs run by members for members, If a member of committee A is sponsored by store B, then they should exclude themselves from any decision where said store can be seen to be making a gain (ie selection of control tyres for an event etc) Clubs need to have total transparency, any member should be able to request committee meeting minutes to educate themselves as to what goes on, it's not "secret business" if they feel included they may feel more likely to contribute.

Just my nonsensical ramblings, you may agree / disagree.
nexxus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 05:57 PM   #17
Tech Master
 
gigaplex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 1,301
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nexxus View Post
I think the rule setters need to step back and let the classes run as they are, over here there were some proposals to impliment control motors in 21.5 and 13.5 blinky TC which got a fair few noses out of joint, the proposals were voted down by the clubs but as the 21.5 proposal was only 'just' defeated there is chatter that it will resurface, and the feeling I have is that it will continue to do so until they push it through. I know from people I race with it's discouraged people from 21.5, 2 years ago we were at 10-15 cars at a major event for the class, now we're down to maybe 7 or 8 at best and for some the reason is these continually changing rules. Having tested the proposed control motors, dyno'd them against the usual motors we'd run, it'd make for a very depressing race. Lap times were 4-5 seconds a lap slower and with the enforced FDR the motor got hot as it was at max rpm 10 metres into a 200-300m straight.
<snip>
What were the proposed control motors? I thought the proposal just stated that there would be a control motor, they didn't get as far as specifying a particular motor. And what track has a 200-300m straight? I believe your local track (WCMRC) has a ~60m front straight and ~40m back straight according to the website.

Also, that proposal was only for AARCMCC events, not club racing which this thread is discussing. I don't think they considered (at least publicly) what impact it would have on club racing.
gigaplex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 06:02 PM   #18
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,995
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Fun environment
__________________
www.rccartips.com
www.f1rccars.com
www.f1rcclub.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/rccartips/
http://www.facebook.com/RCCarTipsFan
rccartips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 06:03 PM   #19
Tech Master
 
evochick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Sydney AU
Posts: 1,536
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nexxus View Post
I know from people I race with it's discouraged people from 21.5, 2 years ago we were at 10-15 cars at a major event for the class, now we're down to maybe 7 or 8 at best and for some the reason is these continually changing rules.

disagree.
seeing as the rules have actually been stable for a fair few years regarding motors that cant be the reason for the loss, so it might be that some people are put off at having the motor of the month to be competitive (not that this actually needs to be the case because the good drivers will win no matter what motor they are using)

dropping the whole FDR thing, the NSW club series will show everyone that a control motor will either work or not. Time will tell.
__________________
UnRetired
evochick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 06:05 PM   #20
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,080
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

200-300 feet maybe, but not meters....
bertrandsv87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 06:25 PM   #21
Tech Champion
 
nexxus's Avatar
R/C Tech Elite Subscriber
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 8,015
Trader Rating: 301 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gigaplex View Post
What were the proposed control motors? I thought the proposal just stated that there would be a control motor, they didn't get as far as specifying a particular motor. And what track has a 200-300m straight? I believe your local track (WCMRC) has a ~60m front straight and ~40m back straight according to the website.

Also, that proposal was only for AARCMCC events, not club racing which this thread is discussing. I don't think they considered (at least publicly) what impact it would have on club racing.
I get M and F muddled

Whoops!
nexxus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 07:09 PM   #22
Tech Master
 
gigaplex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 1,301
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nexxus View Post
I get M and F muddled

Whoops!
gigaplex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 07:34 PM   #23
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Far south suburbs of Chicago area
Posts: 1,618
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron P View Post
There is the team associated Apex series, and the Vaterra cars, but both are probably too fast for new racers
I used to think the Apex would be a good start. It's too fast. I did watch s brushed Vaterra run a USGT based class. Did better then most expected. But would only work running against itself.
I just stepped into TC racing last summer. Only once so far. We've been running a casual 1/18 racing for past 3 years. Simple 5 lap sprints. If you crash your out till next round. Only 5 laps.
Billy Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2017, 07:53 PM   #24
Tech Fanatic
 
MontanaMaxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 877
Trader Rating: 12 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outlandr91 View Post
An entry level car would help,the next step would be to keep the experienced drivers out of the class. Let the new guys compete with each other rather than against a guy with years of experince and who also runs 1/2th, mod ect.
classes.
If you run with fast guys it essentially forces you to be faster yes as new drivers you will get passed but try to follow the lines of faster drivers and you soon will make them work to get around you. If you are the faster slow guy are you really pushing the pace as if you were among faster drivers? If I didn't run with top drivers I doubt I would be doing any where as good as I am though I have a ways to go yet
MontanaMaxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 12:25 AM   #25
Tech Champion
 
TryHard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 5,254
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nexxus View Post
I think the rule setters need to step back and let the classes run as they are, over here there were some proposals to impliment control motors in 21.5 and 13.5 blinky TC which got a fair few noses out of joint, the proposals were voted down by the clubs but as the 21.5 proposal was only 'just' defeated there is chatter that it will resurface, and the feeling I have is that it will continue to do so until they push it through. I know from people I race with it's discouraged people from 21.5, 2 years ago we were at 10-15 cars at a major event for the class, now we're down to maybe 7 or 8 at best and for some the reason is these continually changing rules. Having tested the proposed control motors, dyno'd them against the usual motors we'd run, it'd make for a very depressing race. Lap times were 4-5 seconds a lap slower and with the enforced FDR the motor got hot as it was at max rpm 10 metres into a 200-300m straight. On the dyno, a Motiv 21.5 yields around 110W @ 2s, a basic Trackstar V1 21.5 is around 100W, the latest and greatest motors push 120W, the Justock 21.5 (which is the only real control motor option) is just on 80W. That's a lot of power to give up.
I'd love to know which proposed motors you ran... as the proposals had absolutely ZERO reference to any specific motor. So you've basically tested something on your own, as there was no way to test a control motor, as none had been specified.

And as Beth has said, the motor rules for the past three years plus have been stable across all classes. And given the control motor proposal only emerged in October last year, really doubt that is the cause for the decline in racers.

Quote:
Let the guys race, let those that race the class make the rules, don't leave it to a modified driver to draft rules for sportsman etc. Encourage juniors / new entries, discourage sponsored drivers particularly in control or lower tier classes. Sorry but if you're good enough to be sponsored (and I mean sponsored in ANY sense where you are thanking a brand on your acceptance speach to having them on your rctech signature) then you should be running the top class period. Make it clear at drivers briefings what the rules and expectations are. But above all the emphasis should be on fun, this is a hobby but a hobby which seems to be becoming more and more commercially influenced on a daily basis, we need to have clubs run by members for members, If a member of committee A is sponsored by store B, then they should exclude themselves from any decision where said store can be seen to be making a gain (ie selection of control tyres for an event etc) Clubs need to have total transparency, any member should be able to request committee meeting minutes to educate themselves as to what goes on, it's not "secret business" if they feel included they may feel more likely to contribute.

Just my nonsensical ramblings, you may agree / disagree.
So if a kid gets free bodyclips for his car from a store, he has to run mod, cause that's sponsered? riiiiiiight....

However I don't disagree with the transparency thing, and clubs do need to make more effort to engage with their racers, and potential racers. Certainly here in NSW there are moves afoot at many clubs to do this, and the XRS is also helping.
__________________
| THard.co.uk | Xray | Hobbywing |

Last edited by TryHard; 01-30-2017 at 12:42 AM.
TryHard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 12:35 AM   #26
Tech Champion
 
TryHard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 5,254
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gigaplex View Post
Also, that proposal was only for AARCMCC events, not club racing which this thread is discussing. I don't think they considered (at least publicly) what impact it would have on club racing.
Actually, it was considered. Part of the reason we proposed the model we did was because it would have had the least effect on club racing... let me explain, although this is going a little off topic...

With a control handout motor, your not forcing anyone to buy a motor to compete at an event. So racers can still use their invested motors at club days, non-sanctioned events etc. Now obviously over time there may be a move by some towards using the same motors at club races to prepare, but thats natural, and not a pre-requiste for a club to setup for. Guys who don't do sanctioned events wouldn't be affected, and clubs wouldn't have needed to run control motor classes, as people using the control motors could easily be incorporated into existing motor classes. (and the intention was to have selected motor and gearing that would have actually not been to far off existing performance... but that appeared to be lost in translation/ignored!)

With the buy your own model (one where you purchase a motor to run at events), racers have to invest up front, and then want to make sure they are getting the most from the motors. That would push clubs to running controlled classes faster than a handout... or split club classes down further.

Now that wasn't the only consideration for control.. but there was a depth of thought to the proposal that some didn't consider.
__________________
| THard.co.uk | Xray | Hobbywing |

Last edited by TryHard; 01-30-2017 at 01:01 AM.
TryHard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 12:47 AM   #27
Tech Master
 
gigaplex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 1,301
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TryHard View Post
Actually, it was considered. Part of the reason we proposed the model we did was because it would have had the least effect on club racing... let me explain, although this is going a little off topic...

With a control handout motor, your not forcing anyone to buy a motor to compete at an event. So racers can still use their invested motors at club days, non-sanctioned events etc. Now obviously over time there may be a move by some towards using the same motors at club races to prepare, but thats natural, and not a pre-requiste for a club to setup for. Guys who don't do sanctioned events wouldn't be affected, and clubs wouldn't have needed to run control motor classes, as people using the control motors could easily be incorporated into existing motor classes. (and the intention was to have selected motor and gearing that would have actually not been to far off existing performance... but that appeared to be lost in translation/ignored!)

With the buy your own model (one where you purchase a motor to run at events, but own it), racers have to invest up front, and then want to make sure they are getting the most from the motors. That would push clubs to running controlled classes faster than a handout... or split club classes down further.

Now that wasn't the only consideration for control.. but there was a depth of thought to the proposal that some didn't consider.
Fair point. I didn't hear that reasoning in the open debate, so either it wasn't made public or I just missed it.
gigaplex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 01:10 AM   #28
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SE Melbourne
Posts: 317
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

We have had some success with enticing racers from different categories to race a second class which we called "GT". The rules for GT were fairly basic but we used a control motor (muchmore 17.5 fixed timing) control tires (Volante 36) and fixed gearing. Chassis is any 4WD 1/10 touring ESC is open but must be blinky spec and the body had to be a late 90's/2000's two door GT style race car. So no LTCR etc allowed. This has turned out to be quite popular and sometimes even fun.

I'm personally for a control motor for events as the $ spent and the length people go to for the "fastest" legal motor can be too daunting for newer racers. That said though it does mean that companies may not support events where running their motor is not an option so works against us from that perspective.
__________________
SERCCC - The world's best RC track ;)

SERCCC, www.serccc.com
Space for rent!
luda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 02:22 AM   #29
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,226
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gigaplex View Post
Fair point. I didn't hear that reasoning in the open debate, so either it wasn't made public or I just missed it.
Easy to miss.

just like people jumping to conclusions over exactly what motors were possible.

Yeah, the HW Justock *is* an option. but there are many others, including custom builds.

there were comments, for example, about the ETS 13.5 Muchmore being "too slow" - but then we could easily fit a TypeS stator, stronger rotor and stick on the "zero timing" (it's actually more like 20deg) rear end on it. Dunno if it would be able to catch a well tuned $200 Fantom or R1 - but then thats not the actual point is it.
__________________
Adelaide RC Team Driver - www.adelaiderc.com.au
Support the Shops that Support the Racers
cplus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 07:10 AM   #30
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyRC_Racer View Post
To help club racing, people need to understand that some people will never want to race a nationally organized class. The people who race these classes never travel and usually show up each week and help support the local club/track. We need to make these people feel welcome during club racing. We also need to stop trying to force them into a "real" class. They are having fun and we should just let them.

----------

Some other advice is to design the track layouts so there are no long straights. While many might balk at this idea, it really minimizes the motor of the moment problems that often plague larger tracks.

----------

And finally, it is club racing not a national event. Help others, make friends, and make sure everyone is having a good time.

These are the most ridicules reasons I have ever head. I have never in my 30+ years of racing heard that long straights plague larger tracks. I have also never heard that a longer straight put motors at a premium.

I bet you think the new guy should go into TC, that has 4 rubber tires, 2 sway bars and 4 shocks and think he is going to understand what the heck is going on.

Steve
sdunnmcp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First impressions: Touring car coming from off-road. Razathorn Electric On-Road 20 12-07-2015 07:55 AM
West Coast RC Raceway Onroad Racing! charlie_b California Racing 6202 11-17-2015 03:49 PM
SVM SPEEDWAY.. Sun Valley, CA. RCRjuanabbe Racing Forum 5499 01-01-2015 12:03 AM
Revive onroad club racing...how about a nostalgia class?? Justinian Electric On-Road 63 12-10-2014 10:30 AM
On Road Club fees fung_kyle Nitro On-Road 46 08-19-2012 07:13 AM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 09:45 PM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net