52LikesEuropean 2wd 1/8th pan car on-road Classic class
11-10-2009, 07:24 PM
#211
Danny,
First of all, Welcome! As you and others have voiced their concerns about not letting this class get out of control and go the way of the sedan class. We have been discussing rather to have a "no mods" or not rule. I put together the first draft of a set of rules based on a collaboration of ideas hashed out on this thread. First, Our Mission statement says " To create and promote a simple economical class of racing with stable rules".
I agree with wingracer, We have limited the rules to "Flat top pistons, no
slug weighted cranks, max of 7 port sleeves and steel bearings". Most of the engines that meet these requirements are built by Novarossi (and rebranded Novas) and Siro. They are considered "budget engines". They have a street price of $149.95 to $244.00 compared to a street price for a Nova Flash 21 that sells for $650.00! I beleive if we limit the engines to the above criteria we will be ok. If things change as far as supply in the future, we may have to go to a approved engine list as some have mentioned on this thread.
Oh...the RC-300BD is a grat car!! Ran one for years.
Dale
First of all, Welcome! As you and others have voiced their concerns about not letting this class get out of control and go the way of the sedan class. We have been discussing rather to have a "no mods" or not rule. I put together the first draft of a set of rules based on a collaboration of ideas hashed out on this thread. First, Our Mission statement says " To create and promote a simple economical class of racing with stable rules".
I agree with wingracer, We have limited the rules to "Flat top pistons, no
slug weighted cranks, max of 7 port sleeves and steel bearings". Most of the engines that meet these requirements are built by Novarossi (and rebranded Novas) and Siro. They are considered "budget engines". They have a street price of $149.95 to $244.00 compared to a street price for a Nova Flash 21 that sells for $650.00! I beleive if we limit the engines to the above criteria we will be ok. If things change as far as supply in the future, we may have to go to a approved engine list as some have mentioned on this thread.
Oh...the RC-300BD is a grat car!! Ran one for years.
Dale
11-10-2009, 08:14 PM
#212
...how's about a claimer class???...if someone kicks your ass and you suspect they modded a budget motor.you claim it and they HAVE to sell it to you for a predetermined $$ amount???..say.150.00???.......who would put crazy bearings/extreme mods into a cheap motor then???.i know i wouldn't if the second place guy could "buy" it from me.......but then again i always finish last.......
I ran this concept up the flag pole a couple of years ago for local series races but no one really saluted it. I think claimer racing could be adapted to work very well for rc racing as it has worked very well for sanctioned 1:1 dirt track racing for decades. Taylor, another angle on claiming is "claim & swap". The claimer puts up a lower claim amount (say $50) and the involved parties swap engines.
11-10-2009, 09:00 PM
#213
I ran this concept up the flag pole a couple of years ago for local series races but no one really saluted it. I think claimer racing could be adapted to work very well for rc racing as it has worked very well for sanctioned 1:1 dirt track racing for decades. Taylor, another angle on claiming is "claim & swap". The claimer puts up a lower claim amount (say $50) and the involved parties swap engines.
11-11-2009, 04:33 AM
#214
Tech Regular
I want to race a pan car enduro
11-11-2009, 07:15 AM
#215
IC engines aren't my thing but I think if you want to get a new 2wd 1/8 class going then don't make the rules too complicated to start with.
Claiming rules in my eyes are way too complicated and i don't think anyone will agree on that. I buy a new motor and because i have my setup better or my rollout is more efficient on a specific track, my motor can be claimed because someone thinks it has been modded? How realistic is that?
Specially the first year you want to make sure you have as many cars on the track as possible. Make the rules more open and more attractive so more people can give it a try. You can restrict on engine types, clutch etc but the rest should be quite flexible. Don't get bogged down by too many rules. If someone wants to give it a try with an old 1/8 ic pancar with sliding kingpin suspension at the front or a 1/8 4wd which he has modded to 2wd then let them drive. Maybe the shocks at the back could be changed to turnbuckles so it has no suspension. For the front you could restrict the shock shaft so it only can travel for a few mm. (to represent the new t-bar like front suspension on the new cars. It i just an idea but would be an easy modification.)
Just so you can promote the class and that people see those cars on the track. Realisticly, drivers won't invest 1000's of dollars into something wich might not work out in the end. Once people see these cars go and more people get familar with them you could change the rules little by little. And by time the new 1/8 cars will be the norm.
The first year is a learning year as everyone needs to get familiar with driving a 2wd car and setting it up so it will not be a full blown competitive competition anyway.
Just my 2 cents
Claiming rules in my eyes are way too complicated and i don't think anyone will agree on that. I buy a new motor and because i have my setup better or my rollout is more efficient on a specific track, my motor can be claimed because someone thinks it has been modded? How realistic is that?
Specially the first year you want to make sure you have as many cars on the track as possible. Make the rules more open and more attractive so more people can give it a try. You can restrict on engine types, clutch etc but the rest should be quite flexible. Don't get bogged down by too many rules. If someone wants to give it a try with an old 1/8 ic pancar with sliding kingpin suspension at the front or a 1/8 4wd which he has modded to 2wd then let them drive. Maybe the shocks at the back could be changed to turnbuckles so it has no suspension. For the front you could restrict the shock shaft so it only can travel for a few mm. (to represent the new t-bar like front suspension on the new cars. It i just an idea but would be an easy modification.)
Just so you can promote the class and that people see those cars on the track. Realisticly, drivers won't invest 1000's of dollars into something wich might not work out in the end. Once people see these cars go and more people get familar with them you could change the rules little by little. And by time the new 1/8 cars will be the norm.
The first year is a learning year as everyone needs to get familiar with driving a 2wd car and setting it up so it will not be a full blown competitive competition anyway.
Just my 2 cents
11-11-2009, 08:00 AM
#216
IC engines aren't my thing but I think if you want to get a new 2wd 1/8 class going then don't make the rules too complicated to start with.
Claiming rules in my eyes are way too complicated and i don't think anyone will agree on that. I buy a new motor and because i have my setup better or my rollout is more efficient on a specific track, my motor can be claimed because someone thinks it has been modded? How realistic is that?
Specially the first year you want to make sure you have as many cars on the track as possible. Make the rules more open and more attractive so more people can give it a try. You can restrict on engine types, clutch etc but the rest should be quite flexible. Don't get bogged down by too many rules. If someone wants to give it a try with an old 1/8 ic pancar with sliding kingpin suspension at the front or a 1/8 4wd which he has modded to 2wd then let them drive. Maybe the shocks at the back could be changed to turnbuckles so it has no suspension. For the front you could restrict the shock shaft so it only can travel for a few mm. (to represent the new t-bar like front suspension on the new cars. It i just an idea but would be an easy modification.)
Just so you can promote the class and that people see those cars on the track. Realisticly, drivers won't invest 1000's of dollars into something wich might not work out in the end. Once people see these cars go and more people get familar with them you could change the rules little by little. And by time the new 1/8 cars will be the norm.
The first year is a learning year as everyone needs to get familiar with driving a 2wd car and setting it up so it will not be a full blown competitive competition anyway.
Just my 2 cents
Claiming rules in my eyes are way too complicated and i don't think anyone will agree on that. I buy a new motor and because i have my setup better or my rollout is more efficient on a specific track, my motor can be claimed because someone thinks it has been modded? How realistic is that?
Specially the first year you want to make sure you have as many cars on the track as possible. Make the rules more open and more attractive so more people can give it a try. You can restrict on engine types, clutch etc but the rest should be quite flexible. Don't get bogged down by too many rules. If someone wants to give it a try with an old 1/8 ic pancar with sliding kingpin suspension at the front or a 1/8 4wd which he has modded to 2wd then let them drive. Maybe the shocks at the back could be changed to turnbuckles so it has no suspension. For the front you could restrict the shock shaft so it only can travel for a few mm. (to represent the new t-bar like front suspension on the new cars. It i just an idea but would be an easy modification.)
Just so you can promote the class and that people see those cars on the track. Realisticly, drivers won't invest 1000's of dollars into something wich might not work out in the end. Once people see these cars go and more people get familar with them you could change the rules little by little. And by time the new 1/8 cars will be the norm.
The first year is a learning year as everyone needs to get familiar with driving a 2wd car and setting it up so it will not be a full blown competitive competition anyway.
Just my 2 cents
You have some good points, look at the earlier post with the rules, we are going to keep it simple. I'm am not for a claiming rule or anything else other than what is already in the rules about engines.
Dale
11-11-2009, 09:58 AM
#217
What is great about this thread is the sharing and exchange of ideas. Wingracer, thanks for the comment on the stock engine idea I proposed. I had not considered that angle of the argument.
On the engine claims idea, I would like to add that I was around my local dirt track when they had implemented the engine claim rule. I thought that guys would be claiming engines every weekend. I was surprised to learn that it was a very rare occurence if at all.
I still believe that with proper rules implemented from the begining with the flexibility to change or amend the rules and most importantly that the drivers, the participants of the class are given the authority to approve of disprove the rules through voting, that this class could grow and prosper. I like the idea of a no slug crank, no ceramic bearings, 13mm or 14mm crank, limiting the ports to 7, and a 7mm restrictor for the engine. These are things that can be easily checked. I also think that an engine teardown should be considered as a mandatory rule. I have two reasons for this:
The first is that if the top three know that they are going to be checked, there will be little to no incentive to try cheating.If this rule becomes the norm, if the checking of engines becomes a normal, expected thing, then the self policing of the class becomes part of how the races are run.
The second reason is that it takes 5 to 7 minutes to pull the engine out of the chassis and remove the backplate and head. It is not difficult or time comsuming.
Let me know what you think.
On the engine claims idea, I would like to add that I was around my local dirt track when they had implemented the engine claim rule. I thought that guys would be claiming engines every weekend. I was surprised to learn that it was a very rare occurence if at all.
I still believe that with proper rules implemented from the begining with the flexibility to change or amend the rules and most importantly that the drivers, the participants of the class are given the authority to approve of disprove the rules through voting, that this class could grow and prosper. I like the idea of a no slug crank, no ceramic bearings, 13mm or 14mm crank, limiting the ports to 7, and a 7mm restrictor for the engine. These are things that can be easily checked. I also think that an engine teardown should be considered as a mandatory rule. I have two reasons for this:
The first is that if the top three know that they are going to be checked, there will be little to no incentive to try cheating.If this rule becomes the norm, if the checking of engines becomes a normal, expected thing, then the self policing of the class becomes part of how the races are run.
The second reason is that it takes 5 to 7 minutes to pull the engine out of the chassis and remove the backplate and head. It is not difficult or time comsuming.
Let me know what you think.
Last edited by Danny A.; 11-11-2009 at 10:18 AM.
11-11-2009, 11:06 AM
#218
What happens when someone brings an electric powered Classic to the race? One of the pics of the DFX on a display case, had an electric powered chassis on the the next shelf down.
http://www.rctech.net/forum/6552863-post138.html
http://www.rctech.net/forum/6552863-post138.html
11-11-2009, 11:08 AM
#219
I just had a thought about an open motor policy. What would be better, a cheap motor unrestricted or something like a Flash with a 5 or 6mm restrictor? I bet the heavily restricted Flash would get better mileage, but maybe not.
11-11-2009, 12:09 PM
#220
Tech Adept
Claiming rules in my eyes are way too complicated and i don't think anyone will agree on that. I buy a new motor and because i have my setup better or my rollout is more efficient on a specific track, my motor can be claimed because someone thinks it has been modded? How realistic is that?
s
s
11-11-2009, 12:10 PM
#221
One note:
In the rules (rcretro) it says no independent suspension allowed but if an old skool 1/8 has a sliding kingpin suspension with tiny springs at the front it could be considerd "independent".
I gues you could see through it and allow them as the new cars are using better materials and better adjustments even camber/ toe in adjustments at the back and this will probably negate any possitive advantage that these old style suspensions could have. (if any)
11-11-2009, 12:13 PM
#222
The rules seem indeed quite open.
One note:
In the rules (rcretro) it says no independent suspension allowed but if an old skool 1/8 has a sliding kingpin suspension with tiny springs at the front it could be considerd "independent".
I gues you could see through it and allow them as the new cars are using better materials and better adjustments even camber/ toe in adjustments at the back and this will probably negate any possitive advantage that these old style suspensions could have. (if any)
One note:
In the rules (rcretro) it says no independent suspension allowed but if an old skool 1/8 has a sliding kingpin suspension with tiny springs at the front it could be considerd "independent".
I gues you could see through it and allow them as the new cars are using better materials and better adjustments even camber/ toe in adjustments at the back and this will probably negate any possitive advantage that these old style suspensions could have. (if any)
1. Replace the springs with spacers, problem solved.
2. Allow them on old cars to help them compete with the newer cars and their flexi fronts.
11-11-2009, 12:45 PM
#223
What happens when someone brings an electric powered Classic to the race? One of the pics of the DFX on a display case, had an electric powered chassis on the the next shelf down.
http://www.rctech.net/forum/6552863-post138.html
http://www.rctech.net/forum/6552863-post138.html
I would like to get my hand on that car, do you know anything more maybe?
11-11-2009, 01:05 PM
#224
but indeed i think the new flexi fronts with the new materials and design etc will absolutly negate any profit of an old sliding kingpin.About the claiming. I wasn't talking about a super engine but just about a cheap normal engine that is allowed by the rules. You might be a veteran ic driver, i don't know, but i think new ic drivers don't have loads of engine spares laying around. I don't see them tuning or tinkering with an old engine to let it stay running. Propably they are already happy when they can let the only engine they have run without shutting down for the first few months or years.
I am just looking through the eyes of a beginner and i think a beginner doesn't want to think about the fact that they can lose a relativly new engine that they bought. But i might be wrong.
11-11-2009, 02:55 PM
#225
.......just thinking..whats the most expensive 3 port motor around............could we set a street price on the motors used???............200.00???..............