fulcrum2

How about Futaba. Is the 4PK-R the latest and greatest?

MRX4XXXX

=)

Maybe, but this is wrong thread for it.

-X-

kmh

Redrc shows KM coming out with new 1/8th ONROAD.

daleepp

stefan;
There is not truth at all to the rumour you heard. I sometimes wonder who starts these things. There is currently no rule in place for cockpit height - and this is how silly looking bodies (like the one pictured below) were legalized - and are still legal in 2013. The Protoform P909 has not expired as an "EFRA APPROVED" body.

The officials at EFRA have been talking for years about formulating a "Global Body Spec" (GBS) for the 1/8th IC On-Road cars. I believe they are working on it these days - in hopes that it will be the new standard beginning in 2014. Their goal is to make the cars quieter, harder to drive, and a bit more realistic.

Dale Epp - Protoform

stefan

Dale,

I did not say that the 909 seitzed to be EFRA legal.

I thought your authorized distributor would know what he talks about:

"Also on show is a newly designed 1/8th on-road body. There seems to be a bit of a story around the body in question as it is understood that the new design did not meet with recently updated EFRA regulations. The body is modelled after the 2012 EFRA rules but did not pass the '13 test as, from what we understand, the '2013 cockpit/canopy' has to be 'much higher to allow a fictive driver to be able to lurk over the fenders', according to a source. Therefore Protoform's latest design will not make it onto the 2013 body list while pre-2013 shells (made to the same specs as the new PF body) are still allowed to race ..."

See here (scroll down) http://www.area52.cc/news/3307-toy-f...13--hoeco.html

daleepp

Stephan;
I don't think that there was any bad intentions on the part of the writer. However, there's just not very much accuracy in what was written there. There is no such thing as a "2012 specs" or "2013 specifications" regarding bodies. There are only specifications that were written many years ago - specifications that are going to be in place until the proposed "GBS" rules are written and implemented. Simple as that.

There was one EFRA official in particular who "wants" body shells to look differently (now) - however what he "wants" and what is "in the rules" are two totally different things.
All the more reason for them to get busy and get the rules written clearly and concisely. It's long overdue in my opinion.

Dale - Protoform

nitrodude

iTrader: (8)

I think they should leave the rules in this class alone, its one of the most stable classes these days. The only problem it has had in the last 4-5 years is the tire saucing problem, more rules give it more areas for people to cheat on. Its simple, a .21cc engine with a Le-Mans prototype style body and foam tires. And despite the cost of the engines, theres no battery war or tire war. Sure, they come out with new engines almost every year, but most of us dont need the newst engines, we can barely handle the power of 4 year old desing.

Just leave the rules alone...

stefan

Hi Daile,

so what's the EFRA number of the new body?

Roelof

I do think a lot of people (for sure the spectators arround the track) do want to see more realistic bodies than the wigs we do drive now.. I would love to see a P909 with a sepperate wing and am planning to create such a car, a friend has a carbon full wing shape 1/5 touring rear spoiler which should make a nice look.

daleepp

Stefan;
Check out RedRC.

Roelof;
If drivers didn't crash with the frequency that they do, a separate wing would be feasable. However, when the wing supports get bent in even a relatively light crash or rollover, the race is pretty much over for that car. A lexan body will spring back into shape almost every time. A bent wing will render a car extremely difficult to drive at a competitive pace. Separate wings also tend to raise the center of gravity of the car - even when made of c.fiber or lexan.

It's too bad really - I think they look cool.

Dale - Protoform

SMcpot

iTrader: (22)

I might be in the minority here, but I would prefer it if the shells were more realistic in their proportions, especially in regard to the size of the cockpit; the current crop of shells are looking too much like slot cars. But since aesthetics take a back seat to performance in this class, that's not likely to happen, unfortunately.

daleepp

SMcpot;

"Realism" is a relative term. 1/8th IC on-road bodies, just like 1/12th on-road bodies simply cannot be made to be like the current crop of LMP racers. The bodywork in the rear is as low as the half-shafts (Approx 14 inches off the ground. See attached photo #1) on the 1:1 LMP cars. RC cars have massive motors, diffs, engines, spur gears etc that will not allow these kind of proportions.

I will agree that things are a bit out of hand, but it all comes down to "rules - rules-rules". Aerodynamics are a huge part of the performance equation in all these classes, and if the santioning bodies like EFRA/IFMAR/ROAR do not write definitive rules, it's only natural that things will devolve in the way they have. Racers and manufacturers race to win - pure and simple. They will do what they need to do within the rules that are given them.

If NASCAR did not have stringent body rules - the modern NASCAR stock car would look like the ones in the other photos below.

Dale - Protoform

wingracer

iTrader: (24)

I'd be happy if they just looked more like 1/12th bodies. Same as we have, just a bit lower. Kinda like the PF Lola of a few years past. Sure, even more realistic bodies would be cool but as Dale said, we can't go all the way.

As for EFRA, I like the idea of slightly slower, quieter cars. I disagree that less downforce makes them harder to drive though. I find it easier to drive, just slower.

Pooh2

They should just leave 1/8 class ALONE!!!! Their new rules will not bring in more racers. It's just going to kill what's left of those whom are still willing to run the class.

azcau

iTrader: (1)

Where's the 'like' button?